EPTSid Meier's Civilization VI - Page 10
| Forum Index > General Games |
|
andrewlt
United States7702 Posts
| ||
|
WindWolf
Sweden11767 Posts
| ||
|
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
| ||
|
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
| ||
|
Titusmaster6
United States5937 Posts
| ||
|
WindWolf
Sweden11767 Posts
Norway looks good for military victory Awesome leader background with the aurora borealis | ||
|
Arnstein
Norway3381 Posts
 | ||
|
WindWolf
Sweden11767 Posts
I am also glad that Ed Beach is the lead designer for the game. | ||
|
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
| ||
|
Superbanana
2369 Posts
Religious combat looks stupid, but nitpicking here. The city state bonuses are very interesting. It seens like everyone gets some envoys and its really hard to have half of the city states or more. So unique and stronger bonuses can be done. | ||
|
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
| ||
|
Acrofales
Spain18259 Posts
On September 12 2016 00:04 Superbanana wrote: Pantanal is an interesting choice for a natural wonder, its awesome (i visited it), but for South America Iguazu falls is a no brainer. I don't think it was in the game before. Religious combat looks stupid, but nitpicking here. The city state bonuses are very interesting. It seens like everyone gets some envoys and its really hard to have half of the city states or more. So unique and stronger bonuses can be done. Honestly, they should just have both. The continent is more than big enough. Also, the Galapagos? | ||
|
WindWolf
Sweden11767 Posts
Greece is also looking interesting. I am glad that they aren't just re-using the leaders from Civ5 | ||
|
farvacola
United States18856 Posts
| ||
|
Acrofales
Spain18259 Posts
On September 14 2016 23:08 farvacola wrote: I will buy this no matter what lol I thought that before the space one, but then they invited third parties to play it, and it suddenly sounded iffy. So I waited for the reviews. Insofar as I know, it is still (2 years and a full expansion later) not as fun as Civ 5. This looks like they learned from their mistakes, and I have to say that I like everything I have seen so far. It really looks like this time they took what worked from Civ 5 and turned it into a better game (kinda like Civ 3 -> Civ 4 evolution). But I will play it safe and wait for the reviews. I still enjoy Civ 5  | ||
zatic
Zurich15365 Posts
| ||
|
xDaunt
United States17988 Posts
| ||
Excalibur_Z
United States12241 Posts
On September 15 2016 01:27 xDaunt wrote: Civ 5 had some legitimate depth problems at release, particularly when compared to Civ 4. Yeah it did. I still had fun with it, and you could tell that the bones were there to craft a really outstanding game, which they did over the two expansions. City-state stuff felt limited and unbalanced, diplomacy options were also limited, and the AI had a more obvious "everybody-band-together-to-stop-the-human-player-that's-about-to-win" desperation mode. | ||
|
andrewlt
United States7702 Posts
For diplomacy, I would rather have an easier game that felt alive than a more challenging game that is so obviously player vs all AIs. | ||
|
xDaunt
United States17988 Posts
On September 15 2016 02:20 Excalibur_Z wrote: Yeah it did. I still had fun with it, and you could tell that the bones were there to craft a really outstanding game, which they did over the two expansions. City-state stuff felt limited and unbalanced, diplomacy options were also limited, and the AI had a more obvious "everybody-band-together-to-stop-the-human-player-that's-about-to-win" desperation mode. Yeah, I had fun with vanilla Civ 5 and never wanted to go back to Civ 4. I loved all of the streamlining that Civ 5 did, getting rid of much of what could make Civ games a chore. And it looks like Civ 6 may strike a better balance in that regard. | ||
| ||
