Sid Meier's Civilization

Though I mod it pretty extensively, I actually enjoy 6 a great deal. I liked 5 quite a lot, and I'm really looking forward to picking up 7 after some time passes when the game has more stuff and modders have had a chance to take a crack at it. I gotta have those UI mods. I've not looked at much to do with 7, so I've got no expectations one way or the other apart from being happy to try another Civ.
 
Though I mod it pretty extensively, I actually enjoy 6 a great deal.
6 is my favorite, though I do mod it the infrastructure mechanics and building out city's scratches an autistic itch for me. Art wise it's hideous, but I was always more concerned with mechanics than graphics. It does make the game drag on and take way longer managing it though.

I play Unciv as a pocket game since it has most all the features of 5+ more. Before that I did like Civ Rev, but it's just inferior mechanically.

7 I don't plan to get, even if it wasn't pozzed I hate the mechanic of your civ changing in eras. Seems annoying as hell to me.
 
Why the fuck has CIV SIX won out in all of this?
Your comment inspired me to look up the numbers again.

VII is currently being mogged by V of all Civs now. :story:

2025-04-02 21_08_03-Comparing charts for 4 apps · SteamDB - Brave.png2025-04-02 21_08_11-Comparing charts for 4 apps · SteamDB - Brave.png
(It's also interesting to note how steady Civ 6's numbers are. Which I assume is where most of the playerbase fucked off back to.)
 
Why the fuck has CIV SIX won out in all of this?
I put a bit more thought into this, and I think the actual reason is unironically due to V. I've noticed that people who were old Civ fans, even those who eventually liked V, seemed to never take to VI as much, while those who did get in at V were much more well-disposed. VI is a continuation of V, and while a longtime player will correctly identify it as a sidegrade (at best) of V, the things that VI does improve on over V are the stuff that people who like V either like the most about it, or were asking for the most in a sequel. Casuals remember that VI has superficially more than V, and naturally go back to it.
 
I put a bit more thought into this, and I think the actual reason is unironically due to V. I've noticed that people who were old Civ fans, even those who eventually liked V, seemed to never take to VI as much, while those who did get in at V were much more well-disposed. VI is a continuation of V, and while a longtime player will correctly identify it as a sidegrade (at best) of V, the things that VI does improve on over V are the stuff that people who like V either like the most about it, or were asking for the most in a sequel. Casuals remember that VI has superficially more than V, and naturally go back to it.
I'm a fan of 6 that's been trying out 4 recently. My first Civ was 5 but 5 fucking sucks. It got rid of cool shit like tech trading and whipping pops then replaced it with shit like that godawful happiness mechanic where having an actual substantial empire makes everyone hate you until the modern era, and even then your pops can get mad at you for having a different ideology from the AI and try to get you to wipe half your civics. 4's AI seems to be actually competent in wars too (although that might just be me being bad at the combat system), whereas in 5 they struggle to take your cities and in 6 they can't even kill each other. This is probably controversial for this thread but I think 6's districts are a fun mechanic and would be really good if the AI players actually knew how to use them properly. And 7 looks and plays like ass and is $70 and has Denuvo so I guess I won't be playing that one for a while, if ever.
 
one city IRL: like in Civ 1

a city in VI: urban sprawl that can take up at least the area of France
 
I lost my first game of Old World today. Persia spawned right on Carthage's border and overran them early, so I basically had to deal with a double-empire constantly outpacing me in cities. What probably guaranteed my defeat was that I suckered myself into fighting two fruitless wars with Egypt. They shared this steppe-like open area across a small sea from me, so I went after them once thinking it was a rotten house that would collapse and then again thinking that it was my last ditch effort to grab cities, scrape together points to try and eke out a victory. It didn't work. I think it definitely cost me the game in that if I hadn't done that I could have continued all my efforts against barbarians. There was a cluster of islands in the sea that I was rolling over fast. When the war with Egypt broke out it became a black hole of resources and ultimately cost me my fleet and tied my army up in a fruitless war to defend one city I founded. I wind up taking a single shitty city (not even the main target) off of Egypt, and I think they were slowly winning the attrition war. I'd slaughter wave after wave of them but feel ground down by their spam.

I like how the game portrays pluralist society with religions. Way more detailed than even a Paradox game, that you can actually have multiple religions coexisting even if they're not all the state religion (as is accurate). My Rome was more or less a free society and I cruised as Zoroastrianism until I invented Christianity and then switched to it, but it was polytheistic, tolerant Christianity with me propagating every religion as much as I could.

The way ships work - as a bridge - is odd.


Edit: What are the historical doctrines for each faith?
I'd say:
Zoroastrianism = ?, Dualism, Redemption
Judaism = Legalism, Revelation, no third tier
Christianity = Veneration, Revelation, Redemption
Manichaeism = Veneration, Gnosticism, Enlightenment (more guess work)

Double edit: I interpret Mythology as referring to a very rich body of lore, demonology and angels, saints, etc. Orthodoxy has that, but I’m not convinced it has it right from the get go. Buddhism would be a Mythology - Revelation - Enlightenment religion.

Do you all think that the tree logo of Old World is meant to also be suggestive of the Burning Bush?
 
Last edited:
Remember Test of Time?
oh hey I saw that video too

It's also sorta wat that the vidya was released by Hasbro. Also, he left out the glitch preventing an extended game from getting that "extended tech tree" without cheating.

In Civilization 2: Test of Time, there is an "extended game" mode where there's a 2nd map of "Alpha Centauri" once the ship reaches there. Unlike the other game, there are only the civilizations from "Earth", and the "Alpha Centauri" natives. Also, there is a bug where the voyage there is supposed to unlock a new part of the "tech tree", but doesn't. That part of the "tech tree" eventually leads to "transcendence" -- that is, becoming "energy beings" (like Organians or Q from Star Trek): a new Science Victory.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: Kane Lives
6 is my favorite, though I do mod it the infrastructure mechanics and building out city's scratches an autistic itch for me. Art wise it's hideous, but I was always more concerned with mechanics than graphics. It does make the game drag on and take way longer managing it though.

I play Unciv as a pocket game since it has most all the features of 5+ more. Before that I did like Civ Rev, but it's just inferior mechanically.

7 I don't plan to get, even if it wasn't pozzed I hate the mechanic of your civ changing in eras. Seems annoying as hell to me.
6 is my second favorite behind 4, but sadly all my friends only want to play 5 and they utterly hate any other civ game, i try to show them civ 4 or 3 and they call it "too old/dated". and i never got the utter hype 5 gets, its fine, just i think its overrated
 
  • Lunacy
Reactions: Computer God Autism
People are still ranting about Civ 7.

Screenshot_20250403-051050_Brave.jpg

I've never heard of the middle reviewer, Kilian Experience with almost 800k subs.

Also couldn't place the accent. Maybe Irish or Scottish based on the name? He did make a Welsh joke in the vid.

Joke review was nice because it moved along and was only 12 mins, even with all the references to that other JRPG Fantasio game.

I thought Kilian might be quietly based, as I heard some passing LGBT jokes in the vid.

Screenshot_20250403-050825_Brave.jpg

But then his comment section is full of leftists only half-joking that Luigi Mangione worked for Firaxis, supposedly worked on the UI team (I'm very skeptical) and complaining about greedy American healthcare.
 
i try to show them civ 4 or 3 and they call it "too old/dated".
I've seen this mentality with younger zoomers and I can't comprehend it. Had some friends who got into Total War through Rome 2, try to introduce them to Medieval 2 and they won't get it because it looks old despite being far better (eventually had to compromise on Shogun 2). Part of me thinks it's a consequence of the console wars and their obsession with graphics to the detriment of everything else.
 
old-fashioned boardgames vaguely like the Civilization vidya:

Chess: sorta vaguely so (with those different kinds of units)

Go: moreso (with territory and stones of different strengths)
 
  • Like
Reactions: I_Lurk_Here
Back