Remove ads

Civilization VI: AKA: Screw you and your Aztec musketmen, Montezuma!

horngeek said:
I mean, I'd love a proper post-apocalyptic 'rebuild in the desolated world' instead of it being CIV VI BATTLE ROYALE but I imagine the tools are now there for modding that I guess.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Maybe an endless legend style mode where after a nuclear disaster you lose access to parts of your civ and it is up to you to rebuild long enough to find some permanent solution let it be slaughtering at that stands in your way. Become the big diplomatic or uncover technology beneath the ruins that can get you out of here (hint it involves XCOM)

Of course the big issue is the red death approache each major phase with growing intensity that breaks the already fragile economic system post great mistake made worse by the fact the red death spawns hard to kill threats that roams the wastes ranging from hardy mutons. Vipers that spawns rapidly. Sectoids to the infamous city killing Sectopods. Defeating them yields valuable resources to survive the red death but it is ultimately a trade of attrition as you must decide if sacrificing your city's defenders is worth killing the city killing sectopod
 
Does anyone remember, which leaders prioritise going for a Prophet? Or some way to find this info?

I'm trying to be the first to establish a religion. If there's a different way to do it, I'd be glad for any tips.
 
Obviously anyone with a religious bias will go for it, otherwise I think that the AI kind of decides amongst themselves who will ruin your attempt at establishing your faith and the rest just hang back and watch it happen.
 
Not in Person said:
Does anyone remember, which leaders prioritise going for a Prophet? Or some way to find this info?

I'm trying to be the first to establish a religion. If there's a different way to do it, I'd be glad for any tips.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Original China (not Kublai) could theoretically "guarantee" a religion if they get a stone and then push Stonehenge with builders, but I believe the civ is otherwise considered weaksauce with that leader.

Hammurabi/Babylon is a good contender as well. As long as they find a natural wonder, they are just gifted the Holy Site tech. Meaning that even if they weren't planning for it or aiming their research time to set it up, they can still suddenly shift to it. Further Hammurabi gets the first building for each specialty district for free - in this case, the shrine.

I believe Mali is one of the nations that always tries for a religion, thanks to their Suguba/Holy Site synergy, and their starting bias leading to much early game faith.
 
Thank you for the advice!

Dream Logic said:
I think that the AI kind of decides amongst themselves who will ruin your attempt at establishing your faith
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Right, their second agenda is randomized. And they have one from the start, don't they?

Somebodynobody10 said:
Original China (not Kublai) could theoretically "guarantee" a religion if they get a stone and then push Stonehenge with builders, but I believe the civ is otherwise considered weaksauce with that leader.

Hammurabi/Babylon is a good contender as well. As long as they find a natural wonder, they are just gifted the Holy Site tech. Meaning that even if they weren't planning for it or aiming their research time to set it up, they can still suddenly shift to it. Further Hammurabi gets the first building for each specialty district for free - in this case, the shrine.

I believe Mali is one of the nations that always tries for a religion, thanks to their Suguba/Holy Site synergy, and their starting bias leading to much early game faith.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
In that case, I'll try: 1. Starting a game without any of those civs; 2. If that won't work, starting a game as one.

Meanwhile, is it me, or are tile improvements (especially from city-states) massively situational, to the point of not being practical? Or is it because my civving skills are bad?
 
Not in Person said:
Thank you for the advice!

Right, their second agenda is randomized. And they have one from the start, don't they?

In that case, I'll try: 1. Starting a game without any of those civs; 2. If that won't work, starting a game as one.

Meanwhile, is it me, or are tile improvements (especially from city-states) massively situational, to the point of not being practical? Or is it because my civving skills are bad?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
If you want to go to that point, you would be better off banning Byzantium and Spain as well, maybe also Arabia. Since their agendas and/or civ bonuses want a religion and in Arabia's case, guarantee the last Prophet for them.
 
Not in Person said:
Thank you for the advice!

Right, their second agenda is randomized. And they have one from the start, don't they?

In that case, I'll try: 1. Starting a game without any of those civs; 2. If that won't work, starting a game as one.

Meanwhile, is it me, or are tile improvements (especially from city-states) massively situational, to the point of not being practical? Or is it because my civving skills are bad?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
City state improvements are situational, and usually there to help you produce culture, faith, or science instead of food or production. Useful when going for a specific victory type.

The generic improvements like mines or farms though? They're always good to have.
 
Not in Person said:
Meanwhile, is it me, or are tile improvements (especially from city-states) massively situational, to the point of not being practical? Or is it because my civving skills are bad?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
There is a niche build for Civs like America or Maori focussed on using Preserves to buff the yield of your high appeal unimproved tiles, but even then you'll want to improve your luxuries and strategics.

In 95%+ games though you'll want every tile that your citizens work to be improved by the end of the mid-game. You're just missing out on free yields otherwise.

The city state improvements do tend to be pretty situational though yeah. Although in those situations they can come in clutch.
 
Last edited:
Here's something that folks here might not know/be certain about:



You can get adjacency bonuses from other civilisations, I for one didn't know that that was a thing.
 
Last edited:
In my experience that's only a problem when they are unfriendly which itself can be avoided by rushing early empire and selling open borders to everyone that you first meet.

Unless you start next to evil India you can forge friendly relations with the AI very regularly ...if... you manage to get yourself through the early game "first impressions" bullshit.

Like don't get me wrong I once started next to Alexander, so I know that the AI can pull some shit if you don't butter them up fast enough.
 
Somebodynobody10 said:
If you want to go to that point, you would be better off banning Byzantium and Spain as well, maybe also Arabia. Since their agendas and/or civ bonuses want a religion and in Arabia's case, guarantee the last Prophet for them.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I ended up playing as Arabia. Also, I've learned that one Holy Site district can't have more than one worship building. Mechanically, it makes sense, but I'm still annoyed by this fact.

aledeth said:
City state improvements are situational, and usually there to help you produce culture, faith, or science instead of food or production. Useful when going for a specific victory type.

The generic improvements like mines or farms though? They're always good to have.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
FriedIce said:
In 95%+ games though you'll want every tile that your citizens work to be improved by the end of the mid-game. You're just missing out on free yields otherwise.

The city state improvements do tend to be pretty situational though yeah. Although in those situations they can come in clutch.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Er, yes, I was talking about "Nation-specific" and "City-state bonus" improvements. Any tile that has no districts (or wonders) must have a farm, a lumbermill, a mine, etc.

Although, I suppose I might need some tips about how to build the improvements. If there are any resources, those get a farm/plantation/whatever ASAP. Then go generic mines and lumbermills, especially if I can get a bonus to an industrial district from them. And if I can make a triangle out of farms, then I put them in a triangle. But I strongly suspect that the spots where I plan to put a district shouldn't be left unimproved. And that some bonus resources are better harvested than improved. I just have trouble putting that in practice.

Let me put it as a question: do y'all have any tips about when it's better to harvest a resource than to improve it? Also, if I have a situation where "I'll put a district/wonder here in X turns, building an improvement would be just a waste of a builder charge", what are the approximate limits of X?
 
Not in Person said:
I ended up playing as Arabia. Also, I've learned that one Holy Site district can't have more than one worship building. Mechanically, it makes sense, but I'm still annoyed by this fact.

Er, yes, I was talking about "Nation-specific" and "City-state bonus" improvements. Any tile that has no districts (or wonders) must have a farm, a lumbermill, a mine, etc.

Although, I suppose I might need some tips about how to build the improvements. If there are any resources, those get a farm/plantation/whatever ASAP. Then go generic mines and lumbermills, especially if I can get a bonus to an industrial district from them. And if I can make a triangle out of farms, then I put them in a triangle. But I strongly suspect that the spots where I plan to put a district shouldn't be left unimproved. And that some bonus resources are better harvested than improved. I just have trouble putting that in practice.

Let me put it as a question: do y'all have any tips about when it's better to harvest a resource than to improve it? Also, if I have a situation where "I'll put a district/wonder here in X turns, building an improvement would be just a waste of a builder charge", what are the approximate limits of X?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I tend to improve every resource I can (aside from stone, since stone on grassland with a quarry is no better than a mine on a hill, and gets better yields slower), but will harvest before I put a new district on top of it. Unless it's a situation where I know exactly how some districts will be placed, then I will harvest what's there immediately. I won't improve a tile I know will get a district later since there's usually enough tiles I can improve that I don't have citizens working unimproved tiles anyway.

If you have the new Preserve District from the current DLC pack, that changes a lot of calculations about what tiles you can leave alone since all its benefits rely on the appeal of surrounding unimproved terrain.
 
Not in Person said:
I ended up playing as Arabia. Also, I've learned that one Holy Site district can't have more than one worship building. Mechanically, it makes sense, but I'm still annoyed by this fact.

Er, yes, I was talking about "Nation-specific" and "City-state bonus" improvements. Any tile that has no districts (or wonders) must have a farm, a lumbermill, a mine, etc.

Although, I suppose I might need some tips about how to build the improvements. If there are any resources, those get a farm/plantation/whatever ASAP. Then go generic mines and lumbermills, especially if I can get a bonus to an industrial district from them. And if I can make a triangle out of farms, then I put them in a triangle. But I strongly suspect that the spots where I plan to put a district shouldn't be left unimproved. And that some bonus resources are better harvested than improved. I just have trouble putting that in practice.

Let me put it as a question: do y'all have any tips about when it's better to harvest a resource than to improve it? Also, if I have a situation where "I'll put a district/wonder here in X turns, building an improvement would be just a waste of a builder charge", what are the approximate limits of X?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Nation specific tile improvements tend to be absurdly powerful and you should almost always use them.

My rule of thumb for harvesting is 'do I need whatever this will give me badly enough to give up future increased yields?' If I'm competing for a wonder or religion that answer is normally 'yes'. Likewise if I'm going to stick a district on top of it or it's a crap resource (e.g. stone on hill). Remember to keep in mind that there's an opportunity cost to harvesting though because you're using builder charges that could be spent elsewhere. Harvesting production is always worth, but it's a lot less clear cut for the other resources.

For chops it's a bit more complicated. Basically - are you playing a culture game? If you're not then chop hills and lumber mill flatland. If you are then you need to look at your appeal map mode, figure out where your national parks and preserves are going and then work out if you can do the chops and still maintain breathtaking appeal.

The big caveat to all of the above is that I only play on Emperor. I'd guess that chops and harvesting would be more attractive in the early game at Diety to get you the production you badly need to compete with the hyper-aggressive AI which starts with three cities and a bunch of military.
 
Use tags to plan things out, after you get vision on an area you can already tell where you will put cities and where you will put your industrial zone networks among other multi-district projects.
 
aledeth said:
I tend to improve every resource I can (aside from stone, since stone on grassland with a quarry is no better than a mine on a hill, and gets better yields slower), but will harvest before I put a new district on top of it. Unless it's a situation where I know exactly how some districts will be placed, then I will harvest what's there immediately. I won't improve a tile I know will get a district later since there's usually enough tiles I can improve that I don't have citizens working unimproved tiles anyway.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
FriedIce said:
My rule of thumb for harvesting is 'do I need whatever this will give me badly enough to give up future increased yields?' If I'm competing for a wonder or religion that answer is normally 'yes'. Likewise if I'm going to stick a district on top of it or it's a crap resource (e.g. stone on hill). Remember to keep in mind that there's an opportunity cost to harvesting though because you're using builder charges that could be spent elsewhere. Harvesting production is always worth, but it's a lot less clear cut for the other resources.

For chops it's a bit more complicated. Basically - are you playing a culture game? If you're not then chop hills and lumber mill flatland. If you are then you need to look at your appeal map mode, figure out where your national parks and preserves are going and then work out if you can do the chops and still maintain breathtaking appeal.

The big caveat to all of the above is that I only play on Emperor. I'd guess that chops and harvesting would be more attractive in the early game at Diety to get you the production you badly need to compete with the hyper-aggressive AI which starts with three cities and a bunch of military.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Septentrion said:
Use tags to plan things out, after you get vision on an area you can already tell where you will put cities and where you will put your industrial zone networks among other multi-district projects.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Thank you, this is some good advice.

FriedIce said:
Nation specific tile improvements tend to be absurdly powerful and you should almost always use them.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Dutch Polders absolutely were. But Kurgans were kind of underwhelming. Maybe I'm not getting something?
 
Not in Person said:
Thank you, this is some good advice.

Dutch Polders absolutely were. But Kurgans were kind of underwhelming. Maybe I'm not getting something?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
It's not universally true, sadly. Some of the improvements for the civs in vanilla can be very underwhelming compared to civs added in later expansions. The Cree mekewap and Inca terrace farm are amazing and should be spammed, but the kurgan is pretty meh in comparison as you saw. I think it's because the unique improvements used to focus on giving special yields like faith, culture, or science, so they can be situational to slap down. A lot of them now just give more food or production than normal, which is never a bad thing.
 
Not in Person said:
Dutch Polders absolutely were. But Kurgans were kind of underwhelming. Maybe I'm not getting something?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Kurgans are pretty meh, but they do two really important things. Firstly, they massively increase your chances of getting the first pantheon for access to the free settler pantheon. Secondly, they give you 4 free era score in the Ancient era, which should help guarantee a Golden Age.

But yeah, you probably shouldn't build more than two of them lol
 
Last edited:
A pity we don't have a Cravers style civ for civ 6. Basically a military civ that gains diplo cap for every couple of kills and being a scourge of God and looks down on wealthy civs. Meanwhile they cannot engage in non military alliances and auto declare war on first contact.
 
Eh, that's fine for a race of space bugs, but having a real culture that has/had real people in it be always evil rampaging orcs doesn't seem like a good idea. Even the Huns must have had something to them besides pillage and killing.
 
WestOrEast said:
Eh, that's fine for a race of space bugs, but having a real culture that has/had real people in it be always evil rampaging orcs doesn't seem like a good idea. Even the Huns must have had something to them besides pillage and killing.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Indeed they did - they were well known for religious tolerance within their empire and promotion of trade and freedom of movement between conquered territories - not in service to conquest, as the gameplay implies, but after the conquest and even with territories they had no intent to conquer, trade being the goal rather than the means. Its no coincidence that Marco Polo was the first European to visit the orient and return to tell the tale and that the China he visited was the one run by Kublai Khan.
 
Last edited:
You must login or register to reply here.
Remove ads
Back
Top