3 ms·

The newer victory options, such as "cultural victory" always felt a little artificial to me. Did they improve that in civilization VI? Also, I watched part of t

by Hermel 10y ago

The newer victory options, such as "cultural victory" always felt a little artificial to me. Did they improve that in civilization VI? Also, I watched part of the AI battle royale this week, and one of the developers commented that domination victories in such battles among AI players would be very rare. That's a pity, because IMHO this is the most fun way to win.

thaumasiotes 10y ago
I played a lot of Civ I and III, but kind of stopped after that. Culture was present in III while being almost useless except as a way to prevent you from founding cities near other players. But I personally love the idea of cultural victory. Military victories are an easy way to win, but they feel unsatisfying to me because you never develop high technology. Advancing your civilization needs to have some payoff. A lot of games lean heavily on having you judge a "guns or butter" tradeoff, where if you don't produce enough otherwise worthless guns, someone else will come in and take all your nice stuff. I prefer to play in an all butter style, where you're competing over how well you develop yourself rather than how well you can balance an unfun military tax against fun development.
- Paul_S 10y ago
  That's akin to racing in time trials instead of a race with other cars beside you. It's more challenging when you engage with the enemy because then instead of just developing your own economy you have to second guess your opponents in the race for the nuke. I was so sad when they nerfed the nukes in 5. Try playing against humans and see how far culture&religion will get you.
  - thaumasiotes 10y ago
    > Try playing against humans and see how far culture&religion will get you. That's a fact about the design of the game, not a fact about what would be fun. > That's akin to racing in time trials instead of a race with other cars beside you. I guess you changed this from "that's akin to playing on a deserted island" after realizing that plenty of games, and novels, are all about surviving and establishing yourself on a deserted island? It's only akin to racing in time trials rather than against other cars if your model of "racing with other cars beside you" is Mario Kart. It's precisely analogous to racing against other cars on the fairly reasonable assumption that you're not supposed to run into the other cars in the race. > instead of just developing your own economy you have to second guess your opponents in the race for the nuke There's no "race for the nuke" in Civ. If you're going for military, you'll win or lose long before you develop nukes.
    - Paul_S 10y ago
      Racing for the nuke does work. You turtle yourself, get the nuke and cripple your neighbour. You won't be able to take anything from him (not because of radiation but because you don't have any offensive units) but he won't recover either.
- duncanawoods 10y ago
  Yep, culture victories as an "all-butter" way of playing. I like a single-city challenge going for either diplomacy or culture. No spending hours walking units across the map, just focus on your own business in one simple city. Religion can be important for culture though and I find it too similar to the war mechanics i.e. churn our religious units, march them across the map, fight for control...
- zelias 10y ago
  If you're looking for a "butter only" game centered around economic competition, I highly recommend Offworld Trading Company (http://www.offworldgame.com/ http://www.offworldgame.com/).
  - nylonstrung 10y ago
    Coincidentally designed by the lead designer of Civ 4
duncanawoods 10y ago
You can just turn off the other victory conditions. I typically choose the victory condition first and just allow that otherwise it can feel like you are playing chess when others are playing chequers. There are times when the multiple conditions makes for a better game e.g. having to keep cultural powerhouse in check during a domination attempt with a couple of nukes on their culture producing cities.

by Hermel 10y ago

thaumasiotes 10y ago

I played a lot of Civ I and III, but kind of stopped after that. Culture was present in III while being almost useless except as a way to prevent you from founding cities near other players. But I personally love the idea of cultural victory. Military victories are an easy way to win, but they feel unsatisfying to me because you never develop high technology. Advancing your civilization needs to have some payoff. A lot of games lean heavily on having you judge a "guns or butter" tradeoff, where if you don't produce enough otherwise worthless guns, someone else will come in and take all your nice stuff. I prefer to play in an all butter style, where you're competing over how well you develop yourself rather than how well you can balance an unfun military tax against fun development.

Paul_S 10y ago
That's akin to racing in time trials instead of a race with other cars beside you. It's more challenging when you engage with the enemy because then instead of just developing your own economy you have to second guess your opponents in the race for the nuke. I was so sad when they nerfed the nukes in 5. Try playing against humans and see how far culture&religion will get you.
- thaumasiotes 10y ago
  > Try playing against humans and see how far culture&religion will get you. That's a fact about the design of the game, not a fact about what would be fun. > That's akin to racing in time trials instead of a race with other cars beside you. I guess you changed this from "that's akin to playing on a deserted island" after realizing that plenty of games, and novels, are all about surviving and establishing yourself on a deserted island? It's only akin to racing in time trials rather than against other cars if your model of "racing with other cars beside you" is Mario Kart. It's precisely analogous to racing against other cars on the fairly reasonable assumption that you're not supposed to run into the other cars in the race. > instead of just developing your own economy you have to second guess your opponents in the race for the nuke There's no "race for the nuke" in Civ. If you're going for military, you'll win or lose long before you develop nukes.
  - Paul_S 10y ago
    Racing for the nuke does work. You turtle yourself, get the nuke and cripple your neighbour. You won't be able to take anything from him (not because of radiation but because you don't have any offensive units) but he won't recover either.
duncanawoods 10y ago
Yep, culture victories as an "all-butter" way of playing. I like a single-city challenge going for either diplomacy or culture. No spending hours walking units across the map, just focus on your own business in one simple city. Religion can be important for culture though and I find it too similar to the war mechanics i.e. churn our religious units, march them across the map, fight for control...
zelias 10y ago
If you're looking for a "butter only" game centered around economic competition, I highly recommend Offworld Trading Company (http://www.offworldgame.com/ http://www.offworldgame.com/).
- nylonstrung 10y ago
  Coincidentally designed by the lead designer of Civ 4

duncanawoods 10y ago

You can just turn off the other victory conditions. I typically choose the victory condition first and just allow that otherwise it can feel like you are playing chess when others are playing chequers. There are times when the multiple conditions makes for a better game e.g. having to keep cultural powerhouse in check during a domination attempt with a couple of nukes on their culture producing cities.