WHY CIVILIZATION VI SUCKS 

Well....glad I haven't played it yet

This is why I go for domination most of the time since it will be worth it

walter with hat worst feel 😂

Good thing grievances was added

They declare war? Conquer Their whole empire! Of course in self defense!

My biggest gripe about this game is how barbarians get tanks before everyone else does.

I declare war on you because you have not spread your religion to me! [Since there is a religious victory condition, that's like saying I declare war on you because you haven't attacked me yet].

woman moment

shit man... kinda sounds like my ex girlfriend

No, they can't they won't denounce you unless you have bad relations with them, this could only happen to say you were friends/allies then right after you declare friendship you go on a warmongering spree and then the friendship ends

Try playing eu4. Allies for fifty years, when suddenly they rival you.

@@romegypt5675 "Prussia, you and we the Polish have been friends for over 100 years. We've had royal marriages to the point where we are all the same family. Our economies are so intertwined that we basically share it. If I didn't know any better I'd say we were almost one country our own!" *PROTESTANT WARS BEGIN*

What do you mean? That's just like real life lol

@@processedgrain8685 Some will denounce you for no reason whatsoever. For example, Cleopatra and Queen Gorgo will denounce you for having such a puny military. Others, such as Gilgamesh, are just completely paranoid and will denounce you regardless. Which is why I unleashed my nuclear arsenal on Sumeria because poke the bear enough and see what happens. Other civs claimed I declared war without provocation but if that were the case then explain why a brute like Gilgamesh is constantly taunting me.

If you hadn't said that, I would have

Bump

INCONCEIVABLE

This guy right here's on to something.

Thats an edgy statement

+Zantic Trant The game is on mobile lol

it is not

therodolfool yes it is

it is...

Is it free if u have it on Steam ?

And that's why the UI sucked all along...they planned for this. Just like that Peter Molyneux game that flopped, Godus. Ruined by mobile.

IOS/2 Was the greatest os ever.

And the switch...

Because iOS devices are becoming far more powerful and are now actually very capable of running full pc games

@@Benjamin-bj6xj thank you. I know theres a stigma, but more and more full games are released for mobiles and are great.

You can ask for them to promise to not settle near you (pretty much the same thing they do with you when you settle near them). lf they choose not to listen to you then you get grievances towards them for an eventual war

Well Germany did that in real life, too

@@gefitrop3496 really?

It was trash too

Thats kinda awesome tho

Didn't he found Firaxis?

He's creative director at Firaxis IIRC, so he definitely has some input, though it of course isn't the same as in the beginning. I don't think the series ever had the same lead designer twice (including spin-offs), so over the years there were tons of non-sid influences, although that may have gotten down with 5 and how it scrapped a lot of the things that just kept piling up over time.

@@klobiforpresident2254 he lost any say after Civ3, now he is practically a Consultant.

The great people are "era-specific" even though technically you're right, you can earn more than one great person type per era.

I think he meant that there is only one great person per type per era, not that civs selectively have that limit.

Flazzorb Even that is not true, there can be more If i remember correctly, every general is more than once per era

There are several great persons of each type per era besides prophets: you just dont see them all because players/ai choose them when you are not looking

Im fairly certain there is a list of great people just like the list of city states. depending on how many civs are included changes the number of great people available in that game. it then chooses from the list which great people show up that game. If to want to see lots of great people from the same era try maxing out the number of players.

"Districts also mean you can’t just have one overpowered city that becomes more and more overpowered with each wonder." You say this like it's a good thing

Nukestarmaster What are you telling me that you enjoy Egypt’s one high production city stealing every wonder in the world just because they can? You still can build tall in this game, it is just that you can’t reach such truly ridiculous levels like in Civ V.

I don’t build wonders because they take up a tile and they take too much time. There pretty useless anyway, and if you decide to go for a culture victory just take over every city of the Civ that is about to win in culture.

JBBrickman I have no idea what you are talking about, a wonder is much more useful then a random unused plains tile, hell I’d find it useful to destroy even some more productive tiles for later wonders. Also couldn’t you apply the logic of destroying every other civ that is about to win to every victory? And that really defeats the point of trying to go for a victory like the Tourism Victory in the first place. I mean, the reason wonders take up so much time is because they are so incredibly useful. I mean I’ve pulled ahead in some pretty bleak situations thanks to wonders before

Bobby Ferg do we play the same game? Have you ever played another civ game? Wonders are absolute shit In terms of cost/benefit minus like literally 2 of them. I have won so many games in the hardest difficulty without getting one single wonder easily and quicker then someone who would waist their time building them. I’m really not tryna be rude but ur absolutely objectively wrong. Civ 5 was a different story however.

And trading post

Just like this point, many of his other criticisms show a lack of experience and knowledge of the game. That or just not being able to adapt to change.

Delegations, to be exact

I know

@@SherbertLomon almost like he was talking about it a year ago so they probably changed a lot of the things that he complained about.

gandhi go home

ayy lmao

He did look like ET IRL Even more than in the game

Better that than the bronze dildo in civ 5

@@davo_ i like how you only responded to this comment. Edit:actually not only this one

these assholes now selling it for $27 in black friday

Oh yeah well I got Civ 6 and no DLCs on epic store for $0

Well I got both of them with all DLC for free from Fitgirl lol.

@@flashpunk7333 ZEAHAHAHAH SAME

@Shlomo Bergenstein Nah game is amazing

@@dkm4338 That's what he's saying "Aged poorly" means it doesn't apply anymore.

@@clownemoji2153 yeah didnt read it correctly

Idk, whenever I play Civ 6 and then play Civ 5 I always have more fun in Civ 5. I can’t point my finger at it, but somehow Civ 5 is better.

@@JBBrickman might be you who just prefers the other game

Oh God, I remember the 10 HP, your Giant Death Robot was fearsome, but 10 Archers? Unstoppable

Civ5 was terrible on release, I remember starting it up and doing my first domination victory was sorta fun but took to long to get to the war parts... and that was tedious due to the happiness system. Tried out a cultural victory, and that was pretty boring too, not much too it just spammed out landmarks everywhere and won as Russia for reasons. Then I played a Science victory, that was fun as I understood the game better. Then I realized from reading later that mathematically you don't even want more than 4 cities, a problem they never fixed and that was terrible. So the game pigeon holed you into building tall and then gave very few options for choice or even systems to manage while being tall. Civ5 was terrible on release for the player, Civ 6's main issue was it's AI which was horrendous on release.

Heck yeah, @@alecshockowitz8385! Civ 5: God and Kings didn't help much in this area too. Going full warmonger you were forced to destroy cities that got too close to 0 Happiness. Then Razing Cities took as many turns as there were surviving Population. So if you took over a 10 Population City and razed it it would take ten effin' turns for you to burn them down to the ground and move onto the next enemy City to conquer. At least in Civ 6: Rise and Fall, the one I've been frequently playing for over a year now, you can go full warmonger without any serious Happiness penalties. Instead of Happiness issues it's Loyalty issues and that's an entirely different hellhole of a problem. The only two serious problems with going full warmonger in Civ 6: Rise and Fall are politics and Loyalty sides. Davo does have some legitimate complaints about the game's terrible AI, but at the same time Davo apparently hasn't heard of deliberately causing a War or critical Loyalty issue in the "offending" City or Civilization. This way you can go to war without such crippling warmongering penalties with other Civilizations by going full bully on people. The Loyalty issue is so you can turn them into a Free City and hopefully sooner or later they'll willingly join your Civilization. This if you don't want to go over and conquer them while the City is a Free City. Other than this, Civilization VI: Rise and Fall actually gets alot of things better than Civ V: Gods and Kings to me. Sure, the graphical upgrades are wonderful, but Hill tiles are treated differently than Civ 5. You only get 2 Food and Production each with all Hill tiles in 5. All Hill tiles are treated identically. This is great if you happen to settle one or more cities particularly your Capital in a hilly area. In Civ 6: Of Rise and Fall you're forced to choose between high Production with Plains Hills and a balance of Food and Production with Grassland Hills. Civ 6: Rise and Fall to me is so much more balanced and strategic to me than 5 could ever. For example, you settle a City in an area that has a number of Hills within one and two tiles of your City, but within three or four tiles of one or more other Civs' Cities. This can spell certain doom for your City should either one or both of them declare a Surprise or Formal War on you. However, using an Encampment District on the most optimal Hill tile that is as close to in middle the opposing Civs or their Cities will help ensure to give you up to four attacks without that defensive Governor, but with him up to five attacks since one of his Promotions enables an additional City attack. If you build at least Ancient Walls in your city and you have an Encampment District it'll gain those Walls immediately. It'll gain the same level of Walls your City has as well. However, both Walls are independent of each other so your Encampment can take a pounding and have seriously damaged Walls but your City Walls are barely touched, if that. This you an opportunity for some very serious strategic District placement(s) such as an Encampment District. This truly can make and break an enemy's run on your City. Davo apparently never heard of District Adjacency bonuses as well. This also pairs well with strategic District placements as well. Campuses go best adjacent to Mountains while the money district goes best river adjacent tiles, and the Theater Districts go best adjacent to multiple built Wonders. I also love how every Wonder has a set of prerequisites for you to even be able to build them in the first place. If you don't meet all of them you're SOL on that Wonder til you meet the criteria, assuming you can meet their build criteria. This way you can't literally queue Wonder after Wonder within the confines of your chosen Government system. Otherwise if you set things up correctly you could theoretically build literally every Wonder in the game in one City in Civilization V: Gods and Kings like I used to do fairly often. In Civ 6: Rise and Fall you have alot of conditions and other things to think about before you plop down your Cities. I'm surprised Davo didn't whine about how OP the Barbarians are in Civ 6: Rise and Fall's Early Game. Oh my effin' God... I thought they were very close to 5's Rampaging Barbarian setting when I first started to play Civ 6. NOPE! In 6 they're relatively easily beaten *if* their fricken Scout doesn't find your Capital, another Civ's Capital, and/or a City-State and come back to their originating Barbarian Encampment. If this happens unless if you have a bunch of strong Military units already you're completely effed to venture far from your Capital. Sure, you can use this strategy: "Use a Slinger to get within one or two tiles away from said Barbarian Encampment while you have your own Scout or Warrior sneak up from behind or adjacent to said Barbarian Encampment. The Barbarian *usually* goes after your Slinger apparently in high hopes of easily killing them. Use your adjacent unit to clear out the Encampment.". This permanently stops that specific Encampment from spawning more insane numbers of Horseman units. In Civ 6: Rise and Fall Early Games Barbarian Horseman units are incredibly OP. They can wipe out your entire measly Military if you're not careful. Otherwise Civilization 6: Rise and Fall offers a far more balanced and incredibly strategic Civilization experience than 5 ever did. As a side note in 4 I really hated how Barbarians could easily take over your Cities by just walking over onto them should your Stack of Doom not be there or be too weak to fend them off. As another side note, I really love how City Wall Bombardments are no longer omni-directional. You can no longer fire over Mountain tiles. If you want a chance at omni-directional firing settle your City on a Hill tile, but Mountain tiles are automatically impossible to fire over.

@@adamgray1753so your saying that civ 6 is way to easy and are made for kids?

BNW fixed all of that tho

As for the art, I really agree on his point about the maps though. It looks really cool, but I would greatly prefer that the FOW on already explored areas stayed looking like visible areas instead of reverting into the drawn style

Except that kills off the fun of screwing over the other players with Wonder Rushing. I am someone who loves to build wonders that other players are building, even if it wastes my Great Engineer. Civ VI doesn't give that to me. And even then, building more wonders just means more people are tempted to attack that one city.

Even Civ 4 had the options where you can toggle fog of war(it just brightens it, not really showing what's there)

There's nothing wrong with that.

same. All of his other points I agreed with but the districts are what make the game worth playing.

district mechanics are terrible becuse you cant play tall play tall on cov 5 and you will like it

I agree with everything else he says, District Mechanics made the game different for me, but thats just my opinion.

I never really liked the district mechanics. It makes you have to be really decisive on where you settle cities, which could be a good thing, but I still prefer the way Civ V dealt with city management.

CrumBoons for me they are aids because i hate playing wide. I always like play tall. + Gandhis ability is shit nowadays civ 5 ability was better.

Seems like a lot of his complaints come from a core misunderstanding of various mechanics

Same

Tbh I don't but they've chucked in leaders who don't make as much historical sense for that position. Cleopatra for example may have been highly intelligent but she was a poor leader. The medici's (Catherine was one) were from Florence NOT France. Like he said, she was a regent for a couple of months. Some of the Female leaders are clearly token choices, in the case of Egypt it's even more silly because one of their greatest leaders was a woman (i always forhet her name! I believe she was king tuts mother) and they chose Cleopatra, their very last leader - until they got owned by the Romans who had the excuse given to them by Cleopatra that the Egyptian empire was a clear threat by that point.

The should choose respectable and rare women leaders.

@@magicbuns4868 Napoleon wasn't from France either and nobody complained.

@@Adventure_fuel Yeah. Why isn't Adolf Hitler in the game!?

@@josgretf2800 He was from Corsica and guess what Corsica was French, go back learning history

*Straya

Digiridont do this to me

NOT "MATE" BUT "MITE"

Maaaaaaate

Edgy: (informal) at the forefront of a trend; experimental or avant-garde. Definition straight from the dictionary. Seems right to me.

Oh, sorry I guess I wasn't very correct in my statement. Thx

There’s now mods for tha

​@@pigio9033 The mods bugged my game

Brewilde I’ve installed 20 mods in my game including the demographics mod and my game runs smooth

CEO of Vibe checks I have a bunch of mods barely any difference

make sure you have eaten a dish 50 times before reviewing food

are you serious about this? Because if you are, I have to call you an Idiot.

nonsense, you can't compare a dish and a game who takes years to be released

Billy Bob 123 only 50 hours ? That is like 1 game in marathon....

Nick ootes who plays marathon?

ya Catherine doesn't like "Spys" she just likes people who have diplomatic visibility with civs

thanks for the feedback my dude! looking back, i do realise that some things i said may have been a little general. i did say that the ai has been terrible throughout the civ series, and i agree it's pretty terrible in civ 5, but i did find civ 6's to be much worse in my playthroughs. and the part where i said civ 4 sucks was just a joke to provoke civ 4 fans. good to see it worked though!

He didnt say anything about civ 4 in this comment mate

think 4 was my favorite though...

it's not "spy's", it's "spies"

Maybe it's time to make a redo of this video, cause it's really confusing. Either you don't get the mechanics of the game or all of the issues are pre-rise and fall. For example the war declarations... ofcourse you can't be neighbouring Mongolia and the Zulu and think they won't attack you if you don't have army, despite having done nothing to them. Such civs are programmed to go for domination, others you can just justify their agendas and nothing will happen like Scotland - be peaceful with your neightbours and they won't touch you. Start wars with neighbours they are gonna curse you till the end of the game. I enjoy the district mechanics, for me Civ 5 was weird when you can have in any city research labs and get 354359834 science per turn. In Civ 6 with the addition of governers from Rise and Fall, cities can be so to say specialised in high bonuses from commerce/ culture etc, rather than just build everything. This is how in real life an empire would work, not every city having everything. The fresh water and food distribution are also way more interesting and the fact you can grow a city, which has a purely key defensive location for your empire. Despite the fact I always played tall in Civ 5, I rather enjoy the new way the game works in Civ 6, you can't be the size of Slovakia and bum science victory, this is not how it should work. Anyway I guess it's a matter of preference, but I wouldn't say 5 or 6 suck if I like better the other one.

Civ 3 was where it's at!

I wouldn't know. Civ 4 had so horrible terrain graphics that I turned it off after a few turns and never tried again (although I always was a civ fanatic!). After Civ 3 I was used to uncovering pretty, colourful landscape, it was a pleasure on its own to reveal the map. Civ 4 offered grayish terrain that made you wanna puke looking at it. Civ 5 rules, especially with Vox Populi.

CIV 2

Pavel the Fabulous i have to problems in civ 3 the combat and artillery are good(you can use the artillery vs others units) but the planes are broken and the corruption are bad literaly i cant play whit islands because this colonies dont produce sorry my inglis is bad

Civ 4 Got me into the Civ series, never tried 3. But, yeah, 4 is like, very annoying with it's like "end turning" where it positions the map on the last selected unit in the last turn. I remember i stopped playing, because I got so annoyed, when I checked out thing on the map, have to end turn, and i forgot what was i doing. Also, the animations are so broken in that game, I remember. that I had to do "improve tiles" for all of my workers, because I couldn't tell wheter they were working, or not, because the working animations start on that turn where you start building it, but the ending animation would stop on the turn WHERE IT WOULD END. Still, I love that game.

BS civ 4 vanilla was excellent and civ 2 was fine as well even though i like Test of time's fantasy and science campaign and that was not really a DLC.

And Brazil invented airplanes =) was key ally on WW2 on Italy. Brazil has so much more history than people think lol, if they'd just search they would see.

@@BryanStreet66 Indeed! Brazil's history is quite underrated.

Homme eveillé I don't think so lol. You have to deal with lots of enemies and often have to find the right allies depending on the situation, and not having them can mean your defeat. There are also marriages, vassals, personnal unions etc etc. In civ, you can be friend or enemies. That's it. The system is not even made so you can ally someone for real. You just get insulted by every civ unless you're loosing hard. There is not even a comparison, if eu4 diplomacy is simplistic, The civ 6 diplo is nonexistent.

Alvin Choquet victoria 2 is the best

Doktor Skeletor Too many liberals :/

J O I mean in Victoria 2. In the game liberalism tends to weaken your position. IRL you can say that both liberals (if you disagree with them you're a Nazi) and conservatives (if you do anything you'll go to hell) are ruining the country.

alt left and alt right both have really stupid ideas that ruin the country.

Georgia is such an interesting civ but it seems nobody gives a fuck about georgia

Yeah because ur country is irrelevant asf no offense

Very true about France, I don't think it was an "oversight" like davo suggested but I think it was intentional.

She is much more reasonable than someone like the Aztecs. XD Me: builds plantation on chocolate Montezuma: ITS SLAVERY TIME!!!

The least reasonable is Norway. Why would they hate inland states that have no ports and ships to compete them or even to raid...

@@cauhscrymdorn2132 *_YOuR SeAs aRe unpRoTeCtEd, My fRiENd. alL ToO eAsY To rAid._*

That would have improved things, it’s really hard to play tall in 6 because you run out of things to build.

Yeah, that's my biggest gripe with the district mechanic. Playing tall is just not an option in 6, the districts just restrict your playstyle and room for creativity. It was pretty much my favourite strat to tradition turtle in Civ 5.

I mean to be fair that kinda emulates real life as well, i mean you don't see Liechtensteinian culture overtaking the world or anything

i mean it's almost like video games often have to sacrifice perfect reality for game balance or something

davo_ bur it does have game balance, i've sunken 100 hours into civ 6 and it's really easy to perform, even when i was playing in the beginning and in lower difficulties. Districts allow for your empire to feel larger and more busy while still having good land for working (because you don't need every district in every city), the city-state changes allow for more involvement, and playing tall with 4 or 5 cities is still very do-able as long as you keep diplomacy on your side which isn't really that hard to do just pay attention to their wants and don't try to purposely screw up. (Of course there will be civs who don't like you but i've still been able to get quite a few alliances and friendships in the game despite this). The game is still playable, still fun, and still slightly realistic. Just don't be an idiot and you'll be fine

archingelus its amazing

Civ 6 is all the same with slight variations

@June Hyun except the Japanese one during the atomic Era.

100% agree on this!

Yep, archingelus. Civ 6's music is pretty good.

lil bit of elbow grease n dedication ;)))))))))))))))

also i have nothing else to do with my life when im not at work ;-;

play final fantasy 14 :)

NO

Play Donkey Kong Country: Tropical Freeze & Knuckles Featuring Dante from the Devil May Cry series and with a new Funky mode!

CIV 4 > CIV 5

CIV Bored game > civ 4, 5, 6

I like civ 6 auto roads but for everything else civ5 is better

REAL LIFE > Civ board game civ 1 2 3 4 5 6

Star Wars: Empire at War > CIV Games

Yeah the units graphics and animations took a big step back from civ 5 and that was disappointing

Isnt thw whole series like that 😂 its called (turn-based) for a reason

202 hours on civ5, 800 on civ6

I think the problem some people may be having is that Civ 6 isn't really designed to play the same way the older civ games are. This one seems to be tailored towards creating your own scenario type games instead of just choosing random civs on the big map and rushing through the tech tree every time. If you get creative with the options and civs available you can create a very different gaming experience each time. That seems like what the designers are at least hoping you'll do. I've noticed the AI plays smarter when you pay closer attention to how you set up the game. If the AI civs are thrown onto a map that doesn't play to their skills with a bunch of other civs that didn't exist when they did in real life it's like the AI doesn't know what to do with them. If you set up a game that plays to the AIs strengths it gets more challenging, interesting, and different. If you choose a civ that's strong in the Ancient era, try slowing the game down to marathon and pick AI civs that are also strong in that era. Set the map to a world that best benefits you and them. Make the game about enjoying the early eras and fully experiencing the benefits your civ gets, and try to beat it before the game advances to the later eras when your civ is long gone in real history. Choose a water or island map and use the civs that have unique ships to create a navy game. The navy is always underrated IMO, if you set it up right you can have a fun and challenging experience. Make a modern era game using the "newer" civs like USA, Canada, Australia and civs that get later era bonuses. What if only women ruled the world? How well would they get along with each other? How quickly would they destroy it? Would they be better or worse than an all male civ world? Those are just a few ideas, to fully experience what Civ 6 has to offers you have to think outside the box and create your own experience, it's not designed or set up very well for the computer to randomly pick everything for you and isn't smart enough to get creative on its own. A bunch of mismatched civs on a mismatched map seems to make the AI a lot dumber.

If you don’t like a civ game because the ai is bad I got some news for you...

@@uncomfortablyclose8481 *other reasons included of course

Lel

Lel

مرحبا

True, that chop mechanic can be super useful. But overall this video had some great points. You're right about districts though, I see what Davo means that it kind of sucks they take up a tile, but overall it's a great addition.

Yeah!

He is dumb 😂

Yeah well I have to disagree with your comment bro. And dislike even tho it won't show up lol. He makes great points about the AI and the warmonger bullshit

i mean if you actually watched the video you'd know that i acknowledged that they can't just rehash older titles and that my issue was that the new stuff just doesn't work anywhere near as well, not to mention some things like unit movement were changed when they really didnt need to be at all

davo_ Regarding unit movement, I found it logical and therefore kind of acceptable that you can't enter tiles that take 2 movement points with only 1 movement point left, but I agree with your point about tactics. Pretty annoying to try and chase barbarians into rough terrain when you can't even attack them with only 1 movement point. Then again, this finally puts some shine on having cavalry or other high mobility units

The difference is civ 5 was actually fun. Civ 6 loses me before I can even start a game.

harrythebarry now that simply is a blatant lie

harrythebarry your opinion is worthless to me. Objectively, there are asstons of worse games made every single day even so saying Civ VI is one of the worst possible is nothing else than a lie no matter how you put it. And I've never seen a Civ game with a good AI

I guess it's because the country isn't even old, but then there is also Australia

@Claudia’s Atelier Should have stayed a monarchy.

@Claudia’s Atelier Well, besides the average knowledge of non-brazilians (and brazilians) about Brazil, Brazil was actually an empire for almost all XIX century, so it fits the 'needs' to be in the game... it also conquered major territories in South America that are now part of the country, so for me wasnt weird at all. If the game was to include only the major known empires by a average human it would have like 10 civs...

I think it's because pedro/joão (I can't remember)'s agenda is annoying as hell, and he's very arrogant

@Claudia’s Atelier não sei se nos anteriores tinha também, mas no 4 e 5 tem o brasil tbm

Eric Chen yes, it does. Also unit movement requires more thinking. Builders are not something you just keep around forever but actually have to continuously train in the end, although less frequently, but they actually make sense now. Civ VI fixed a lot of things that bugged me about V. Some people are just butt hurt that they can't become OP as easily.