I don't usually play games, but I used to like to play Civ. This game appears to be on sale, and I was curious about thoughts on it. Can I make stalin liberate the world?
I don't usually play games, but I used to like to play Civ. This game appears to be on sale, and I was curious about thoughts on it. Can I make stalin liberate the world?
I would recommend Civ VI over HOI4. HOI4 is real big on giving you the illusion of choice, but in fact the choices are limited to your "focus trees'", national projects that substantively change your country. I wanted to love HOI4 like I did HOI2, but honestly HOI4 is an exercise in frustration, and you really need to watch a bunch of videos to gain a decent understanding of how to make the game work.
Civ 6 was the worst though. Your choices are build granary or build barracks. +1 food or +1 soldier exp. Wait 20 turns to finish.
HOI4 has some amazing mods like Kaiserreich and TNO, which offer very satisfying simulations.
Completely disagree on Civ VI. It's far better than V, and almost as good as IV. HOI4 has some good mods, but they're still stuck with the same flawed base game.
deleted by creator
Sure!
Civ VI does require you to adjust your thinking a bit from what long time players are used to. The district system really is brand new to the series, and you have to plan ahead far more than in previous games. Like, not only what bonuses are already there, but what bonuses will be there after you've built your districts, particularly if your Civ has specific adjacency bonuses. Wonders are now much more "nice to have" rather than "throw everything at wonders" (although there are exceptions, Petra being the most swingy in the early/mid game). The AI is ok, better than V, I'd say. If you're struggling with VI, try Maori. They're the equivalent of Civ V Venice, I'd say, where their mechanic is fundamentally different than any other Civ. They feel like a kind of sub-game to the main game, and are lots of fun.
In addition, the game now has a lot of functions built in to the base game that would traditionally have been mods. Randomized tech trees, secret societies, alternate game modes (Pirates! being the most recent), disasters, etc. are all just a checkmark away.
Civ IV was the purest iteration of the original civilization series, with doomstacks, OP wonders, etc. Civ VI has better combat than V, although I prefer air units from IV, and in general has a lot lower power level than IV (which is a good thing). More victory conditions are available (although the religious one is an exercise in frustration the more civs there are), and all are pretty attainable. IV was a very granular game, V was very much not, and VI feels like a nice balance, with the granularity moved to district location and worker action pools.
Now, there are things I'm not a huge fan of in VI, with Great People being probably my least favorite portion. Not sure who was begging for that system, that really has some distinct winners & losers plus the silliness of the military ones generally only affecting units from a certain era. Generic great people were good enough.
I really, really dislike how the game clearly wants you to micromanage and hyper-specialize everything by giving you a lot of flexibility in some areas (change cards whenever you want), but also arbitrarily forcing you to commit some of your most powerful resources forever (districts are permanent). Playing tall basically isn't viable, when it was reasonably strong in Civ V. It does a lot of things new, and interesting and right (workers, districts writ large, combat), but fundamentally it's a tough row to hoe when you want to do anything but paint the map.
I've never been a build it tall fan, but yes, if you are, VI has nothing for you, not even a Civ that tries to go tall.
Thanks for the info. It seems like there might be too much of an investment in time required for me.