This is an excellent, well balanced, summary of GS - not just new features and where the AI is still disappointing but also pointing out that things like annoyances of some of the agenda system being less of an impact than before. Well worth watching through the whole video for anyone undecided about whether to buy this DLC.
i like how you have preveiwed this DLC. the single serving introductions of the civs have been far more entertaining and useful than the playthroughs that i have seen on other channels. this video is useful as simply your general opinion of this game, which we do not get often either. it seems as if you are very happy with this and i am looking forward to seeing more from you. :)
I'm actually really happy about the resource upkeep, I like to play with an extended eras mod, and after a while the AI just spam units and it gets quite laggy and the turns take a long time. And it just makes more sense from a strategic standpoint, I'm looking forward to bombing oil fields to starve my enemies armies of supplies >:)
The whole AIs still not using air units is a big negative imo. There are mods for that, but it still sucks that it's not fixed the base game itself! Hope that it gets ironed out in a future patch, but future content is a given. I mean c'mon, all the other civs still need their alternate leaders :p
Maybe I have not played enough/ do not understand the optimal strategies (276 hours) but AI does use aircraft and has not so far spammed support units. Then again I have only played up to Immortal (only finished Emperor), so maybe it is different higher up. But yeah, the AI needs to be more competent managing units and we need more alternate leaders.
I have seen the ai use fighters occasionally, but only during my peaceful games. Although they do build way too many sipport units. I think it just depends on what game it is.
I've seen the AI use bombers occasionally, but its not common. It will build both fighters and bombers but rarely do more with them that shuttle around various bases. My last game did have the Mongols using a single bomber in their constant war on the Dutch, but thats the only time I recall seeing one being used to attack.
Thank you for answering my question Marbozir!! Really appreciate it! I really hope they fix the AI because the game has so much potential to be a really hard complex strategy game but looses it luster when all you need to do is build ancient walls and the AI will never be able to take any of your cities. The AI doesn't have to be able to play like a human, but any improvement would the game that much better, and that much more suspenseful! Thanks again!
@@PandoraKin564 Wait what? I can agree that America is not the best Civ in the game but definitely not the worst. But Aztecs and Gorgo? 2 of the strongest Civs in the game. In my opotion only Hungary and maybe Maori or Mali (though it's difficult to say at this point how strong they really are without having played them) could rival them.
@@PandoraKin564 There is no way in hell that Gorgo is a bad civ. Aztecs too. Both are amazing and benefit from early war, which even at higher ranks, is useful for plenty of other reasons other than the benefits Gorgo and Montezuma provide. Also that's not even mentioning the extra wildcard policy in Greece.
@@Mika-vr4bt The Maori outpace both the policy and the acropolis culture gain by owning 3 forests and constantly grow that bonus. The Pa is much better than a standard Fort and 2 or 3 ToS beats out a aztec rush and phalanx and they keep their promotion through the game. Hungary's levy is just overpowering anything the aztec can throw against them. Phonecia on the water is likely better than Brazil and America due to their harbour district. There's now less insentive to play the older civs and they are designed weaker. $60 for 8 civs, 3 overpowered, and environmental disaster that barely effect anything. It is clear the feedback for the Maori by almost all revenue copy holders was not implimented.
Marbozir could you make a video about the changes made to previous civs? Im quite curious about what they did with weak civs like the mapuche. Love your vids! Keep up the good work!
There doesn't seem to be that many tbh. I went through the old leaders, but only saw a few obvious changes. (though I might have missed some small adjustments)
Marbozir oh, thats such a shame. I remember in one of the livestreams they said they did some changes to balance the civs. They missed the chance to buffer weak civs like the Mapuche or Georgia. The gap between the good ones and the weak ones is gonna be even bigger now with the OP Gathering Storm civs. Thank you for your comment!
As far as I've seen looking at the various streams they didn't buff many civs. Not that I would count Mapuche among the really weak ones. England got a direct buff with Workshop of the world and the devs claim on many occasions that Norway will be less awful due to pillaging scaling with ages in GS. Absolutely terrible civs like Spain or Georgia get no changes. France gets a new leader but the leader ability isn't really what makes France so weak.
I just bought it yesterday, but I was happy to see something like this to confirm my purchase! I've always been a low-end Civ player in terms of PC specs, so I'm a bit worried about the performance, but I keep things minimum anyway, so hopefully there won't be troubles. Also - I really hope this isn't the last expansion. I assume it's not. Civ VI hasn't surpassed V in terms of how many Civs are in-game yet (42 vs 43) and a few fan favorites are still absent (Babylon, Portugal, The Maya, and Byzantium). I just hope the older Civs get buffed or the new ones get nerfed a bit. I like America's new Diplomatic Favor bonus for example, but I still think the others need something.
Good summary of the essentials.. new(er) players will certainly know what they need to take a solid purchasing decision. Most "experienced" players could always get inspired to verify such conclusions by comparing notes along the way. I really like your publishing pattern too, btw. Gameplay is fun to "watch" at times.. but receiving valid(ated) comments on various other aspects beyond what we should witness ourselves is a welcomed input on the general state (AI-hem!) of Civ6 and specially its newest features.
The problem with the AI is 2 fold. The more complex game mechanics are, the more that has to be taken into account each move. And the more units there are, the more that has to be evaluated. In Civ we are usually playing against 7 AI's, which increases everything by a factor of 7. Civ 6 keeps adding more mechanics with each release, which add's lots of complexity to the decision process. To have a good AI that is worthy of playing at human level on the average hardware we have, we need to be playing only one, with fairly simple rules. In Civ 6, we would be waiting like 15 minutes or more per turn late game and nobody would play it. The problem with Air units is similar. A one unit attack only has to evaluate 6 tile if attacking, or maybe 18 if it decides to move first, then attack. A two unit ranged unit, needs to evaluate 18. A 10 tile air units need to evaluate about 5,000 tiles (rough of the top of my head estimate). Evaluating just one air unit takes as much processing as 250 ranged units. To have the AI play a great air game, you are going to have to get very used to waiting between turns.
I think it's about time that someone dedicates their time and resources in making an AI hosting service with a general AI system which would then learn to play Civ (among other things), and would play against you (and anyone else) personally over the multiplayer session. I mean, if an AI can beat Dota2 champions in real time, why wouldn't it be able to play Civ, which is more like chess. So the only issues with this is how to tone it down, and of course, the actual business model and online distribution of this service, which likely doesn't even have to be endorsed by Firaxis -- from their perspective it's just an online player, like anyone else.
@@milanstevic8424 I would not agree with you, that Civ is like Chess. In chess, the AI has all the necessary information to make the best decision. It knows everything, he sees what moves the other player makes and can react acording to that. In Civ there is the fog of war, the unment Civs and city states. It first has to scout the map and meet everyone, and then it still doesn't know what other Civs are up to. Are they gonig to forwardsettle, are they going to attack? So I think it's much more difficult to make the right decision. I would argue, that an AI is much better in real time strategy games, since it has to process power to calculate the right decision much faster than any human player. It can retreat units just in time before they die, make multiple actions at the same time, make upgrades the moment they are available or when it has enough resources. Though I do agree that I would be very interesting to see how machine learning engines (like Alpha Zero) would tackle a game like Civ and see how they could handle the top players.
@@Sammy-gs9hl I won't argue with you, what I said isn't arguable. Civ is systemically like chess, as almost any other turn-based game. If you thought I was comparing its problem-space to the one of chess's, I was not. Civ is clearly more complex and practically impossible to play deterministically, and that will hold true, mathematically-speaking, even in the far far future. That said, Dota2 is an order of magnitude harder to solve, and not just because it isn't exactly shallow in terms of various layers of strategy, but also because the AI needs to combine the overarching strategy with tactics and critically maneuver an avatar in real time. Now that's really hard, and that's something that AGI neural network already does, and it's not even uncanny in appearance, if we ignore the superhuman reflexes. So I haven't really read the rest of what you said, and I might, but right off the bat I'm standing on a pretty solid ground with my understanding of how AI systems work, and haven't said any of that to spur a fruitless debate. In other words, that's not just my opinion, but partly an objective statement of the state of the game, and the course it should take. And such an infrastructure will happen simply because it'd be silly to live in a world where it's normal for the cars to drive themselves and talk to you along the way, yet we still have crappy game AIs that don't know how to play the game they're built for.
@@Sammy-gs9hl Ok I read it, and I agree with the multitasking aspect and reaction speed in general, but it is normal to expect some delay time, or processing time, in turn-based games, so that should be enough to offset the eventual insufficiency. What I'm saying is that a well-designed AI network is already at a level that could surpass a very competent Civ player (what you said about imperfect information applies to the humans as well, yet we're able to play it just fine), and it's already able to play the game, simply by acting as a player in a multiplayer session, so it's just a matter of time until someone recognizes this as a viable online business.
@@milanstevic8424 I'm not too familiar with Dota2, so I can't say much about that, but I still stand by my assessment that real time strategy games are much easier to handle for an AI than turn based ones. I don't think we can know for sure how a machine learning engine would do against top human civ players. I would be very interested in seeing such a game, but I still think the top human multiplayers have the upper hand. Imperfect information is a big disadvantage, that humans can better deal with. Also there are some many possible options in the late game: All your unit movements, city placement, build order, how to spend your resources, what tech, civic order, what civis to use. I would say it's far more complex than go (for an AI and all the possible options), which AlphaGo only recently was able to beat.
Great review. I wish they would have at least fixed it so AI would use air units. I avoid air units myself because they give such a huge advantage over AI.
I cannot understand what's so hard about making an AI that uses air units, especially so long after the original release. It pretty much kills the late game for me, every time I give it a chance. The management of air units has to be the easiest thing for the AI to do, but I'm guessing the support of districts is so sloppily done, that they cannot address the positioning and dedication to the Aerodrome districts. It's like the entire game was designed by a divorced couple, while communicating over a Yahoo email.
The AI will eventually be improved but it won't be by Firaxis. It will be modders who will do the bulk of the AI fixes, as was the case in Civ IV and V.
Isn't it too early to tell how much the AI has improved, since the developers said, that this is a prebuld version that is several weeks behind the final product? They also specifically mentioned that the AI will focus a lot more an air combat, which we could see in one of their live stream.
I mean, it's the press review build, same one all the big sites are writing their reviews from - so I can only judge it based on what's in it now, not what might get patched in the future. If they make AI better later on, that's fantastic.
@@Marbozir Fair enough. I really love the game even as it is now. So any further improvement on the Ai is a very welcomed edition. Are you plannin to do more civ 6 contend after release?
Not really. It's not like this is a build from half a year ago where things may change drastically. Release build will be pretty much the same as this preview build. At most they'll just fix some bugs and possible performance issues. I wish they'd just release mod tools so people can make proper AI mods.
Its most likely what you'll get, all other is PR. The AI was and probably is a disgrace to this game. Good that they fixed at least some of the worst issues. But i never bought even rise and fall and i never regretted it. I watch quite often Marbs videos, and i personally still see a lot problems with the current Civ. Too linear.. once you reached a certain point you can stop playing, as the AI won't be able to put up a real fight about winning the game. It don't even try.
You always manage to give me the "Civ Bug". Then I play and realize I suck, and it's much more fun to just watch you kick ass and do the thinking for me. Lol. Thanks Marbs!
thanks Marbs i fear the power creep is a short sighted AI fix; making it more likely the AIs you face have broken mechanics they can lean on to overcome woeful play. this, like extra resources at higher difficulty is not a very satisfying fix.
i dont think the new civs are any attempt at AI balance - its just power creep. the new civs compared to an old, already weak civ like France under Medici or even Georgia from R&F is night and day just on abilities and buildings alone
It looks worth picking up since I am more about the narration and empire building than a hardcore challenge in my Civ games. That is not to say I do not like it completely easy, but the AI is decent enough for me. My major issues have always been about the lack of depth and choices in Civ 6. Now it looks like there is a lot more to do and a lot of interesting civilizations to pick from. Thanks for the review. I look forward to picking this up when it comes out. Plus, I actually like the vibrant art style. I know a lot of people hated it, calling it cartoonish or that it looked like a mobile game. However, it reminds me of the art style from Civilization 4, which I loved.
Marb, would be great if you could do a detailed video on various approaches for winning on Deity *without* cities spam. late game gets really tedious with dozens of cities (once you capture or build them), and natural disasters in GS add extra micro-management with builders.
I noticed a major uptick in performance with the GS (free) patch. At least, I ran the GPU benchmark before and after. Jumped up about 20% in DX12. CPU performance (turn time) didn't seem to change though.
Personally I believe this is the best DLC and well worth the money. One large gripe I have had with the Civilization series was how they managed strategic resources. One Iron should not allow me to produce 20 swordsmen, the stockpile revision is a godsend. Secondly the world congress has changed how the game is played, b y even adding a new victory type.
Great, I’m glad you like this expansion. I have been looking forward to it since I preordered it in December. Look forward to the rest of your play as the Inca!
I'm very much looking forward to this expansion. It certainly offers a ton of options and the micromanage types are really going to love this. It is kind of sad that the AI hasn't been tweaked.
I just looked it up, it was actually part of the 2018 update (released few months after Rise & Fall - but it wasn't part of R&F originally), not Gathering Storm. So that was my mistake.
I think it would be cool if they allowed you to follow a pantheon that allows you to be a certain percent immune or a limited affect of natural disasters or a lower a chance of natural disasters happening. Like if you're playing as China or the Mali. Mines and tiles are very important and crucial to your empires success. So if you're able to avoid disasters as much as you can that would be a huge plus.
Someone should sent this video to Sid. It covers a lot of little aspects that may have been overlooked by the developers that could easily be fixed in a post release update. Good video.
@@Marbozir Do you often get to the point of game at which the AI can build them? it sounds you're just crushing the games so quickly it's over before AI even researches planes let alone actuly build them.
Marbozir After playing Civ VI for 1000+ hours, I had one game where Nubia developed Nuclear weapons and Stealth bombers. They nuked Mapuche and me before my SAM support units and Missile Cruiser armadas decimated their airforce. Still, I was so shocked that the AI used air power that I thought it was a bug.
Marbozir In my last game (last month) For the first time I’ve seen the ai using fighters to defend against my bombers, and bombers to attack my units. I assumed the ai had been adjusted in a recent patch as I hadn’t played for a while prior to that.
Correction: Civ III had volcanic eruptions, and Civ IV had all sorts of natural disasters like fires, floods, hurricanes and so on, although they didn't appear visually on the map.
While the powercreep scenario is a major issue I trust civ 6 more in looking into them in the future than civ 5 ever did. They have done a decent job on their spring updates to tune up some of the Vanilla civs (America comes to mind)
I'm pretty much sure I could ask other AIs to join my war before... And I'm pretty much sure they did join. Maybe you meant something else or I understood something wrong?
Thank you for the review! It's the best by far, quite descriptive and in depth just what I was looking for, installing the game with the purchased DLC right now. :) The price has also dropped considerably to about 22Euro on cdkeys for steam ofc.
Thank you for addressing the AI situation straight up. It's a fundamental problem. There's no sense in adding a feature like the Congress when the AI can't cope with it. The actual strategy game feels like an afterthought, it feels more like a management game like Tropico, except you've got neighbours that commit apparently random acts. A far cry from the civ of old.
The AI in Civ V had some flaws too, but it still regularly surprises me by doing unpredictable things. The AI in Civ VI never surprises me. For that reason alone I've switched back to Civ V. I'm even considering not getting this expansion, just because I want to play against an opponent, not various game mechanics.
Exactly the AI don't become smarter with higher difficulty, it just gets everything cheaper, And start out at emperor with one settler and 3 units, at divine even 2 settlers and 5 units... so its like 30 or more turns advantage. That's why the AI love early war declarations ... after that is done it fall usually into passivity...
Thanks for thet video, realy worth seeing. And I feel a little bit upset with the fact that they reworked only one side (it looks like from all streams I have seen) of loyalty. Now it's much easier to loose a city and almost no options to keep loyalty high. I mean that if you add to the game some mechanicas that can put a 10-15 pressure to a players city, than you must add something for counterplay. Because with addition of disasters and that system the game recieves a lot of semi-random stuff that player cannot influence on.
It's good to see that GS is good, but hearing how the base games flaws are still very prominent, makes me wish they took the Paradox approach to game development. Which is the concept that you constantly are tweaking and updating your base game, and when you have big changes to implement (like a lot of AI improvements, mechanic changes to make tall play more viable, or a lot of civ rebalancing) then you release those in a free patch along side your big expansion. That encourages new players to try the game, old players to come back, and with all those new and old eyes on the game, it naturally brings more attention to your new expansion as well. I don't think Firaxis will ever go down that route, but watching this really makes me wish they would.
According to the Steam Achievements statistics, only 14% of players have ever even won a game on King difficulty, only 8% have won on Emperor difficulty, only 4% on deity (and that could be cheesed with Gilgamesh 1:1 on tiny map in the early days). I really, really doubt the AI is a huge issue for the vast majority of players. I realize that Marbz wins on Deity very easily, but playing hard games is his JOB. The average Joe plays this when exhausted after dinner with a beer, and the AI is sufficiently challenging for that I think. And for anyone who approaches this with a Dark Souls mindset: for you guys there is multiplayer!! All the challenge you could possibly want.
The big question is how do _you_ feel about Civ VI post-Gathering Storm? Do you think the game has improved enough that you'll feel better about making more content for it, or does Civ V still have the edge for you?
I absolutely agree, world congress should've been in from the start. It's absurd that they take some of these core features (whether it's world congress, religion or anything else) and strip it out with each new iteration only to add it back in as a major feature with an expansion DLC. Occasionally slightly tweaked. I'd much prefer they keep the core features around and actually seek to innovate and add new things.
It's sad to see you can't bring up issues to the diplomacy as in Civ 5. I always felt it was a good element of strategy selecting the right proposal for the right time.
I think this is a balancing based decision. They want to avoid that the top player can use the world congress even more for their advantage. In Civ 5 the player with the most votes was most likely the top player already and could use the world congress to increase his lead even further.
@@Sammy-gs9hl Ah this might be an answer. However I had theimpression this was solved by the diplomatic favours (or how ever these points are called) since you get refunded if your vote failed. Isn't it that only successful votes cost you points?
Thank You such an open and candid explanation of gathering strorm. While I mostily quit do to the stupid AI, there were many other issues combined that made me throw my hands up in dispare, and those seem fixed or made mute by this upgrade. So I will come back and give it a chance. However I still believe that Civ 5 is the better game and hope to see You still playing it on Twitch n You Tube. For those that don't know Google and several others have been working on a better AI for Starcraft 2, which was recently unvailed , and it beat several of the worlds best players, perhaps they will look into a mod for civ 6 soon
Nice to see that you have maintained your independence despite being given early access. And nice to see too that Firaxis have not strong armed you in terms of your opinions. There is always a danger, but it is best for all concerned if things continue in the vein they are. The minute i get a whiff of corporate bullshit is the minute i start to lose faith in what i watch. On Civ GS, i will be giving it a miss. Civ VI just doesnt do it for me. I will remain a Civ IV player - which is still by far the best Civ out there for strategy fans IMO. Civ V is also good with all expansions. But i just dont think the AI can play with 1UPT. And my main gripe in Civ VI is that there was no (real) limiting factor on what has always been a problem in civ, which is infinite city spam - more cities = better. Civ V went too far the other direction (IMO). And Civ IV had the best balance - generally bigger was better, but get bigger too quick and you crash your economy.
@Marbozir I played mostly Civ 5 and Civ 5 with Vox Populi. I have not played a lot Civ 6 yet. Do you think Civ 6 is better than Vox Populi? Or better stick with VP?
I like the new mechanics, but the power creep with the new civs is ridiculous . The vanilla civs need some major buffs to be competitive with the new civs.
I don't mind the bad AI since I mostly just want to build as many cities and buildings and wonders as I can on my way to a science victory. My joy comes from building stuff, not the competition, so the bad AI is fine. Unfortunately, most of the changes sound like things that would annoy me. I never liked global warming mechanics because in past games, it was nearly impossible to stop the AI civilizations from making it worse. Diplomacy is just a whole lot of sucking up to AI civs that just isn't fun (you never feel like you're outmaneuvering another civ while doing it). I remember disaster mechanics from a previous civilization game and remember being annoyed by it. I still haven't bought this game years later, but I'm still considering getting it just for the giant death robots.
Interesting how Civ III and V have a more realistic looking character art style, while IV and VI are more cartoonish. I guess they'll go back to realistic for VII?
I don't understand how AI is bad. Deity is impossible for me to win on unless I make like 0 mistakes or cheat by loading previous save to fix mistakes. Even then some AI just win off early game adv and unit adv
Jun-jae Moon People use guides and build lots od slingers and warriors right away, then rush attack a city state or civ and take their stuff and their settlers. As long as you keep being at war, it's not terribly hard because that's the AI's main weak spot. For peaceful players, I also think the game has enough challenge as it is.
@@Maren617 Okay, I'll try a Germany game or Korea game then. I just always lose to tech or culture victory. I usually can't catch up to other civs. Also I like Norway which if I make 3-4 bad decisions on builds, tech tree or civics tree or bad decision on city planning I can get pretty much set back permanently I feel. But maybe it's changed cuz pillaging helps you in mid and late game now
@@jun-jaemoon5760 Also, only 14% of players have ever even beaten the game on King difficulty, 8% on Emperor, 4% on Deity, according to the steam statistics. So really, don't let people tell you anythimg different, the statistics don't lie. The vast majority of people prefer playing ot at lower difficulties because they don't have all day to learn strategies, and it's totally cool to just do what everyone else does, as well. Hell, I don't play on deity - I want to have fun, not watch overpowered AI who are given unfair advantages take all the nice city spots while I'm struggling to survive, lol.
@@jun-jaemoon5760 If you go to Civ 6's store page and then click on achievements, you can see the percentages. If you click on achievement in yoit own game library, you'll see your own. 🙂
It´s really sad that they still havent fixed the AI, after all these patches and expansions. Naval warfare, air crafts, upgrading units...yeah we wont see the AI pull that off. I hope some other company will pick up the torch, because the future looks very bleak for this franchise.
1 Oil upkeep for Artillery and infantry ? How i am suppose to make an army and maintain it without a reliable source of oil ? And that's without the navy (which strangely carriers doesn't need oil upkeep wtf).
I will get this, soon enough. Personally I think Civ 5 BNW was much more balanced. Diplomatic victory my favorite for sure, this sounds like my kind off game. The Ai is crap at war espcially, any victory that doe snot require lot's of war is more fun. Religion needs a boost in my opinion. I assume it helps diplomatically?
I can play Civ 5 fine on my PC, but Civ 6 never really performed well and it prevented me from getting into the game. I'm sad they haven't made improvements in what seems like a good expansion.
I have been playing Civ since the first game back in 1991. I have loved them all, except Gathering Storm. The global warming mechanic is broken. Let me turn it off or I will not play.
You are capped at 50 of each resource, you can't stockpile beyond that as i understood..But you can sell excess horses as example. And you capture nothing of that i think, just if the city has horses it will add +2 or so each turn to the stockpile.
This is an excellent, well balanced, summary of GS - not just new features and where the AI is still disappointing but also pointing out that things like annoyances of some of the agenda system being less of an impact than before. Well worth watching through the whole video for anyone undecided about whether to buy this DLC.
Shinobu Tsurubushi u make $120 a month?? The US average income is $45,000 a year Jesus Christ
Hey Marbs. Do you mean to release any more Xcom 2 content?
TechnoVision he said non-western markets, did you read the comment?
I dunno, the 40€ price tag is a pretty heavy thing for a DLC.
I agree but in my case I like the changes enough and I just got everything else for $40.
@adolf hitler or buy it on greenmangaming and its 22% off right now
In Canada it's 55$ on steam
An expansion is not the same as DLC though.
Just looked the price tag up, damn! You were not kidding.
Good job Marbs, I love what you have done about Gathering Storm: both civs introductions and this rewiew is a great way to start of an expansion
i like how you have preveiwed this DLC. the single serving introductions of the civs have been far more entertaining and useful than the playthroughs that i have seen on other channels. this video is useful as simply your general opinion of this game, which we do not get often either. it seems as if you are very happy with this and i am looking forward to seeing more from you. :)
I'm actually really happy about the resource upkeep, I like to play with an extended eras mod, and after a while the AI just spam units and it gets quite laggy and the turns take a long time. And it just makes more sense from a strategic standpoint, I'm looking forward to bombing oil fields to starve my enemies armies of supplies >:)
The whole AIs still not using air units is a big negative imo. There are mods for that, but it still sucks that it's not fixed the base game itself! Hope that it gets ironed out in a future patch, but future content is a given. I mean c'mon, all the other civs still need their alternate leaders :p
Maybe I have not played enough/ do not understand the optimal strategies (276 hours) but AI does use aircraft and has not so far spammed support units. Then again I have only played up to Immortal (only finished Emperor), so maybe it is different higher up. But yeah, the AI needs to be more competent managing units and we need more alternate leaders.
I remember the devs saying that they fixed that in one of the livestreams. Maybe it's not in this specific build, or it's a bug. Fingers crossed.
Yeah. I hope to see either Alexander nevsky rurik or Catherine the great for Russia. Alfred the great for Scotland. Kublai khan for China and mongols.
I have seen the ai use fighters occasionally, but only during my peaceful games. Although they do build way too many sipport units. I think it just depends on what game it is.
I've seen the AI use bombers occasionally, but its not common. It will build both fighters and bombers but rarely do more with them that shuttle around various bases. My last game did have the Mongols using a single bomber in their constant war on the Dutch, but thats the only time I recall seeing one being used to attack.
Really good overview. This is better than a news channel.
Thank you for answering my question Marbozir!! Really appreciate it! I really hope they fix the AI because the game has so much potential to be a really hard complex strategy game but looses it luster when all you need to do is build ancient walls and the AI will never be able to take any of your cities. The AI doesn't have to be able to play like a human, but any improvement would the game that much better, and that much more suspenseful! Thanks again!
Civ 6 needs to focus on ai difficulty also. But nice review i was wondering how the older civs are comparing by the newer ones.
Their worse. America, Aztects and Gorgo's Greece are the worse of them now. Pretty clear power creep.
@@PandoraKin564 Wait what? I can agree that America is not the best Civ in the game but definitely not the worst. But Aztecs and Gorgo? 2 of the strongest Civs in the game. In my opotion only Hungary and maybe Maori or Mali (though it's difficult to say at this point how strong they really are without having played them) could rival them.
@@PandoraKin564 There is no way in hell that Gorgo is a bad civ. Aztecs too. Both are amazing and benefit from early war, which even at higher ranks, is useful for plenty of other reasons other than the benefits Gorgo and Montezuma provide.
Also that's not even mentioning the extra wildcard policy in Greece.
@@Mika-vr4bt The Maori outpace both the policy and the acropolis culture gain by owning 3 forests and constantly grow that bonus. The Pa is much better than a standard Fort and 2 or 3 ToS beats out a aztec rush and phalanx and they keep their promotion through the game. Hungary's levy is just overpowering anything the aztec can throw against them. Phonecia on the water is likely better than Brazil and America due to their harbour district. There's now less insentive to play the older civs and they are designed weaker. $60 for 8 civs, 3 overpowered, and environmental disaster that barely effect anything. It is clear the feedback for the Maori by almost all revenue copy holders was not implimented.
Marbozir could you make a video about the changes made to previous civs? Im quite curious about what they did with weak civs like the mapuche.
Love your vids! Keep up the good work!
There doesn't seem to be that many tbh. I went through the old leaders, but only saw a few obvious changes. (though I might have missed some small adjustments)
Marbozir oh, thats such a shame. I remember in one of the livestreams they said they did some changes to balance the civs. They missed the chance to buffer weak civs like the Mapuche or Georgia. The gap between the good ones and the weak ones is gonna be even bigger now with the OP Gathering Storm civs.
Thank you for your comment!
As far as I've seen looking at the various streams they didn't buff many civs. Not that I would count Mapuche among the really weak ones. England got a direct buff with Workshop of the world and the devs claim on many occasions that Norway will be less awful due to pillaging scaling with ages in GS. Absolutely terrible civs like Spain or Georgia get no changes. France gets a new leader but the leader ability isn't really what makes France so weak.
@@Marbozir Ed has said that England, China, Zulu, Indonesia, Australia and Russia are getting changed a bit. I'm wondering if Tamar's getting a buff.
thank u so much for your review, u are the only one who has said anything about the AI, and thank u for the review overall it was a really good review
Another great vid, Marbs - I look forward to episode 2 of your inca game!
I just bought it yesterday, but I was happy to see something like this to confirm my purchase! I've always been a low-end Civ player in terms of PC specs, so I'm a bit worried about the performance, but I keep things minimum anyway, so hopefully there won't be troubles.
Also - I really hope this isn't the last expansion. I assume it's not. Civ VI hasn't surpassed V in terms of how many Civs are in-game yet (42 vs 43) and a few fan favorites are still absent (Babylon, Portugal, The Maya, and Byzantium). I just hope the older Civs get buffed or the new ones get nerfed a bit. I like America's new Diplomatic Favor bonus for example, but I still think the others need something.
I thought this was the Inca playthrough but this is fine too
Good summary of the essentials.. new(er) players will certainly know what they need to take a solid purchasing decision. Most "experienced" players could always get inspired to verify such conclusions by comparing notes along the way.
I really like your publishing pattern too, btw. Gameplay is fun to "watch" at times.. but receiving valid(ated) comments on various other aspects beyond what we should witness ourselves is a welcomed input on the general state (AI-hem!) of Civ6 and specially its newest features.
The problem with the AI is 2 fold. The more complex game mechanics are, the more that has to be taken into account each move. And the more units there are, the more that has to be evaluated. In Civ we are usually playing against 7 AI's, which increases everything by a factor of 7. Civ 6 keeps adding more mechanics with each release, which add's lots of complexity to the decision process. To have a good AI that is worthy of playing at human level on the average hardware we have, we need to be playing only one, with fairly simple rules. In Civ 6, we would be waiting like 15 minutes or more per turn late game and nobody would play it. The problem with Air units is similar. A one unit attack only has to evaluate 6 tile if attacking, or maybe 18 if it decides to move first, then attack. A two unit ranged unit, needs to evaluate 18. A 10 tile air units need to evaluate about 5,000 tiles (rough of the top of my head estimate). Evaluating just one air unit takes as much processing as 250 ranged units. To have the AI play a great air game, you are going to have to get very used to waiting between turns.
I think it's about time that someone dedicates their time and resources in making an AI hosting service with a general AI system which would then learn to play Civ (among other things), and would play against you (and anyone else) personally over the multiplayer session. I mean, if an AI can beat Dota2 champions in real time, why wouldn't it be able to play Civ, which is more like chess. So the only issues with this is how to tone it down, and of course, the actual business model and online distribution of this service, which likely doesn't even have to be endorsed by Firaxis -- from their perspective it's just an online player, like anyone else.
@@milanstevic8424 I would not agree with you, that Civ is like Chess. In chess, the AI has all the necessary information to make the best decision. It knows everything, he sees what moves the other player makes and can react acording to that. In Civ there is the fog of war, the unment Civs and city states. It first has to scout the map and meet everyone, and then it still doesn't know what other Civs are up to. Are they gonig to forwardsettle, are they going to attack? So I think it's much more difficult to make the right decision.
I would argue, that an AI is much better in real time strategy games, since it has to process power to calculate the right decision much faster than any human player. It can retreat units just in time before they die, make multiple actions at the same time, make upgrades the moment they are available or when it has enough resources.
Though I do agree that I would be very interesting to see how machine learning engines (like Alpha Zero) would tackle a game like Civ and see how they could handle the top players.
@@Sammy-gs9hl I won't argue with you, what I said isn't arguable.
Civ is systemically like chess, as almost any other turn-based game. If you thought I was comparing its problem-space to the one of chess's, I was not. Civ is clearly more complex and practically impossible to play deterministically, and that will hold true, mathematically-speaking, even in the far far future.
That said, Dota2 is an order of magnitude harder to solve, and not just because it isn't exactly shallow in terms of various layers of strategy, but also because the AI needs to combine the overarching strategy with tactics and critically maneuver an avatar in real time. Now that's really hard, and that's something that AGI neural network already does, and it's not even uncanny in appearance, if we ignore the superhuman reflexes.
So I haven't really read the rest of what you said, and I might, but right off the bat I'm standing on a pretty solid ground with my understanding of how AI systems work, and haven't said any of that to spur a fruitless debate. In other words, that's not just my opinion, but partly an objective statement of the state of the game, and the course it should take.
And such an infrastructure will happen simply because it'd be silly to live in a world where it's normal for the cars to drive themselves and talk to you along the way, yet we still have crappy game AIs that don't know how to play the game they're built for.
@@Sammy-gs9hl Ok I read it, and I agree with the multitasking aspect and reaction speed in general, but it is normal to expect some delay time, or processing time, in turn-based games, so that should be enough to offset the eventual insufficiency.
What I'm saying is that a well-designed AI network is already at a level that could surpass a very competent Civ player (what you said about imperfect information applies to the humans as well, yet we're able to play it just fine), and it's already able to play the game, simply by acting as a player in a multiplayer session, so it's just a matter of time until someone recognizes this as a viable online business.
@@milanstevic8424 I'm not too familiar with Dota2, so I can't say much about that, but I still stand by my assessment that real time strategy games are much easier to handle for an AI than turn based ones.
I don't think we can know for sure how a machine learning engine would do against top human civ players. I would be very interested in seeing such a game, but I still think the top human multiplayers have the upper hand. Imperfect information is a big disadvantage, that humans can better deal with. Also there are some many possible options in the late game: All your unit movements, city placement, build order, how to spend your resources, what tech, civic order, what civis to use. I would say it's far more complex than go (for an AI and all the possible options), which AlphaGo only recently was able to beat.
Great review. I wish they would have at least fixed it so AI would use air units. I avoid air units myself because they give such a huge advantage over AI.
I cannot understand what's so hard about making an AI that uses air units, especially so long after the original release. It pretty much kills the late game for me, every time I give it a chance. The management of air units has to be the easiest thing for the AI to do, but I'm guessing the support of districts is so sloppily done, that they cannot address the positioning and dedication to the Aerodrome districts. It's like the entire game was designed by a divorced couple, while communicating over a Yahoo email.
The AI will eventually be improved but it won't be by Firaxis. It will be modders who will do the bulk of the AI fixes, as was the case in Civ IV and V.
I think it looks good but are just a bit to expensive, will wait for a sale.
Well, you can't see a title like that from marbz and NOT watch the video. Thanks for the upload!
“There’s a production queue”
I’m sold
Isn't it too early to tell how much the AI has improved, since the developers said, that this is a prebuld version that is several weeks behind the final product? They also specifically mentioned that the AI will focus a lot more an air combat, which we could see in one of their live stream.
I mean, it's the press review build, same one all the big sites are writing their reviews from - so I can only judge it based on what's in it now, not what might get patched in the future. If they make AI better later on, that's fantastic.
@@Marbozir Fair enough. I really love the game even as it is now. So any further improvement on the Ai is a very welcomed edition. Are you plannin to do more civ 6 contend after release?
Not really. It's not like this is a build from half a year ago where things may change drastically. Release build will be pretty much the same as this preview build. At most they'll just fix some bugs and possible performance issues.
I wish they'd just release mod tools so people can make proper AI mods.
@@Sammy-gs9hl Better AI...I wouldn't bet on it.
Its most likely what you'll get, all other is PR. The AI was and probably is a disgrace to this game. Good that they fixed at least some of the worst issues. But i never bought even rise and fall and i never regretted it. I watch quite often Marbs videos, and i personally still see a lot problems with the current Civ.
Too linear.. once you reached a certain point you can stop playing, as the AI won't be able to put up a real fight about winning the game. It don't even try.
You always manage to give me the "Civ Bug". Then I play and realize I suck, and it's much more fun to just watch you kick ass and do the thinking for me. Lol. Thanks Marbs!
thanks Marbs
i fear the power creep is a short sighted AI fix; making it more likely the AIs you face have broken mechanics they can lean on to overcome woeful play. this, like extra resources at higher difficulty is not a very satisfying fix.
i dont think the new civs are any attempt at AI balance - its just power creep. the new civs compared to an old, already weak civ like France under Medici or even Georgia from R&F is night and day just on abilities and buildings alone
@@Waggabagaboo why make them OP though? there is no need as it doesn't help PvP. the only reason i'm suspect is Hungary basicly enabling AI levy
Thanks for your info, looking forward to play it
It looks worth picking up since I am more about the narration and empire building than a hardcore challenge in my Civ games. That is not to say I do not like it completely easy, but the AI is decent enough for me. My major issues have always been about the lack of depth and choices in Civ 6. Now it looks like there is a lot more to do and a lot of interesting civilizations to pick from.
Thanks for the review. I look forward to picking this up when it comes out.
Plus, I actually like the vibrant art style. I know a lot of people hated it, calling it cartoonish or that it looked like a mobile game. However, it reminds me of the art style from Civilization 4, which I loved.
more videos like this would be great, love to hear your opinions on civ!
Marbs, your recent videos seem so much more personal. Absolutely loving them .
Hey Marbozir. Thank you very much for this video. I know this type of videos isn't what you normally put out, but I appreciate that you still did.
Marb, would be great if you could do a detailed video on various approaches for winning on Deity *without* cities spam. late game gets really tedious with dozens of cities (once you capture or build them), and natural disasters in GS add extra micro-management with builders.
I'm pretty sure joint wars is something that was added in Rise and Fall.
Their in base game after diplomatic service civic.
Shouldn't infantry be 1 coca cola per turn?
You mean Pepsi cola? As in the Kendall Jenner Pepsi ad?
I noticed a major uptick in performance with the GS (free) patch. At least, I ran the GPU benchmark before and after. Jumped up about 20% in DX12. CPU performance (turn time) didn't seem to change though.
I quite liked this style of transition and look forward to more improvements.
Personally I believe this is the best DLC and well worth the money. One large gripe I have had with the Civilization series was how they managed strategic resources. One Iron should not allow me to produce 20 swordsmen, the stockpile revision is a godsend. Secondly the world congress has changed how the game is played, b y even adding a new victory type.
Great review of new expansion! It was informative and entertaining. You should do more stuff like that :)
Great, I’m glad you like this expansion. I have been looking forward to it since I preordered it in December. Look forward to the rest of your play as the Inca!
I'm very much looking forward to this expansion. It certainly offers a ton of options and the micromanage types are really going to love this. It is kind of sad that the AI hasn't been tweaked.
Not just a review..Literally packed with tips and tricks ..
Dude the join ongoing war has been there since rise and fall. It’s why I never train an army. I just buy my defense
Same, I just used it in my game a couple days ago. Maybe he meant something else.
I just looked it up, it was actually part of the 2018 update (released few months after Rise & Fall - but it wasn't part of R&F originally), not Gathering Storm. So that was my mistake.
On GTX 1060 6GB, I actually experienced quite an improvement in terms of performance compared to R&F.
Jakub Hrubý Me too!!
Am I missing something or the join ongoing war thing he is talking about is in the game for a long time?
I think it would be cool if they allowed you to follow a pantheon that allows you to be a certain percent immune or a limited affect of natural disasters or a lower a chance of natural disasters happening. Like if you're playing as China or the Mali. Mines and tiles are very important and crucial to your empires success. So if you're able to avoid disasters as much as you can that would be a huge plus.
Someone should sent this video to Sid. It covers a lot of little aspects that may have been overlooked by the developers that could easily be fixed in a post release update.
Good video.
Great video! Very concise, organized and to the point
Question - does the Global Warming mechanic affect non-shoreline tiles? As in - do the tundra tiles warm up and become non-tundra? What else happens?
It does not affect any other tiles, no.
@@Marbozir that's kind of silly you'd expect tundra to have some impact. Tbh global warming would have a huge impact since most humans live on coasts
@@Kefkaownsall I think they have said that the ice melts, allowing you potentially to access areas with your boats where you could not go before.
@@Marbozir Well, that's silly. Thank you for the answer!
it also does increase drought likeliness and other natural disasters, so indirectly?
I've seen the AI use air units. Hell they sent 10 bombers against me and took half my empire.
In Civ 6? I've seen them do it plenty of times in Civ 5, but so far, not in Civ 6.
@@Marbozir Do you often get to the point of game at which the AI can build them? it sounds you're just crushing the games so quickly it's over before AI even researches planes let alone actuly build them.
@@Marbozir Yeah it was before The Rise and Fall expansion, but since nothing.
Marbozir After playing Civ VI for 1000+ hours, I had one game where Nubia developed Nuclear weapons and Stealth bombers. They nuked Mapuche and me before my SAM support units and Missile Cruiser armadas decimated their airforce. Still, I was so shocked that the AI used air power that I thought it was a bug.
Marbozir In my last game (last month) For the first time I’ve seen the ai using fighters to defend against my bombers, and bombers to attack my units. I assumed the ai had been adjusted in a recent patch as I hadn’t played for a while prior to that.
Correction: Civ III had volcanic eruptions, and Civ IV had all sorts of natural disasters like fires, floods, hurricanes and so on, although they didn't appear visually on the map.
While the powercreep scenario is a major issue I trust civ 6 more in looking into them in the future than civ 5 ever did. They have done a decent job on their spring updates to tune up some of the Vanilla civs (America comes to mind)
Excellent overview!
I'm pretty much sure I could ask other AIs to join my war before... And I'm pretty much sure they did join. Maybe you meant something else or I understood something wrong?
Thank you for the review! It's the best by far, quite descriptive and in depth just what I was looking for, installing the game with the purchased DLC right now. :) The price has also dropped considerably to about 22Euro on cdkeys for steam ofc.
Thank you for addressing the AI situation straight up. It's a fundamental problem. There's no sense in adding a feature like the Congress when the AI can't cope with it. The actual strategy game feels like an afterthought, it feels more like a management game like Tropico, except you've got neighbours that commit apparently random acts. A far cry from the civ of old.
Speaking on performance, I think I've found that Directx12 noticeably worsens performance compared to Directx11.
The AI in Civ V had some flaws too, but it still regularly surprises me by doing unpredictable things. The AI in Civ VI never surprises me. For that reason alone I've switched back to Civ V. I'm even considering not getting this expansion, just because I want to play against an opponent, not various game mechanics.
Exactly the AI don't become smarter with higher difficulty, it just gets everything cheaper, And start out at emperor with one settler and 3 units, at divine even 2 settlers and 5 units... so its like 30 or more turns advantage. That's why the AI love early war declarations ... after that is done it fall usually into passivity...
1:09 “I have yet to see the AI use [air units]”
my land units, having been victimized by Teddy’s P-51s: 👁👄👁
The most solid review I've found so far. Subscribed.
Thanks for thet video, realy worth seeing. And I feel a little bit upset with the fact that they reworked only one side (it looks like from all streams I have seen) of loyalty. Now it's much easier to loose a city and almost no options to keep loyalty high. I mean that if you add to the game some mechanicas that can put a 10-15 pressure to a players city, than you must add something for counterplay. Because with addition of disasters and that system the game recieves a lot of semi-random stuff that player cannot influence on.
It's good to see that GS is good, but hearing how the base games flaws are still very prominent, makes me wish they took the Paradox approach to game development.
Which is the concept that you constantly are tweaking and updating your base game, and when you have big changes to implement (like a lot of AI improvements, mechanic changes to make tall play more viable, or a lot of civ rebalancing) then you release those in a free patch along side your big expansion. That encourages new players to try the game, old players to come back, and with all those new and old eyes on the game, it naturally brings more attention to your new expansion as well.
I don't think Firaxis will ever go down that route, but watching this really makes me wish they would.
According to the Steam Achievements statistics, only 14% of players have ever even won a game on King difficulty, only 8% have won on Emperor difficulty, only 4% on deity (and that could be cheesed with Gilgamesh 1:1 on tiny map in the early days). I really, really doubt the AI is a huge issue for the vast majority of players. I realize that Marbz wins on Deity very easily, but playing hard games is his JOB. The average Joe plays this when exhausted after dinner with a beer, and the AI is sufficiently challenging for that I think. And for anyone who approaches this with a Dark Souls mindset: for you guys there is multiplayer!! All the challenge you could possibly want.
The big question is how do _you_ feel about Civ VI post-Gathering Storm? Do you think the game has improved enough that you'll feel better about making more content for it, or does Civ V still have the edge for you?
Glad to hear there are survivors from the Galactic Trade Federation and that they enjoy sharing their insights on Civ VI.
Still waiting for your france or England gameplay with loyalty
I absolutely agree, world congress should've been in from the start. It's absurd that they take some of these core features (whether it's world congress, religion or anything else) and strip it out with each new iteration only to add it back in as a major feature with an expansion DLC. Occasionally slightly tweaked.
I'd much prefer they keep the core features around and actually seek to innovate and add new things.
It's sad to see you can't bring up issues to the diplomacy as in Civ 5. I always felt it was a good element of strategy selecting the right proposal for the right time.
I think this is a balancing based decision. They want to avoid that the top player can use the world congress even more for their advantage. In Civ 5 the player with the most votes was most likely the top player already and could use the world congress to increase his lead even further.
@@Sammy-gs9hl Ah this might be an answer. However I had theimpression this was solved by the diplomatic favours (or how ever these points are called) since you get refunded if your vote failed. Isn't it that only successful votes cost you points?
Thank You such an open and candid explanation of gathering strorm. While I mostily quit do to the stupid AI, there were many other issues combined that made me throw my hands up in dispare, and those seem fixed or made mute by this upgrade. So I will come back and give it a chance. However I still believe that Civ 5 is the better game and hope to see You still playing it on Twitch n You Tube. For those that don't know Google and several others have been working on a better AI for Starcraft 2, which was recently unvailed , and it beat several of the worlds best players, perhaps they will look into a mod for civ 6 soon
Nice to see that you have maintained your independence despite being given early access. And nice to see too that Firaxis have not strong armed you in terms of your opinions. There is always a danger, but it is best for all concerned if things continue in the vein they are. The minute i get a whiff of corporate bullshit is the minute i start to lose faith in what i watch.
On Civ GS, i will be giving it a miss. Civ VI just doesnt do it for me. I will remain a Civ IV player - which is still by far the best Civ out there for strategy fans IMO. Civ V is also good with all expansions. But i just dont think the AI can play with 1UPT. And my main gripe in Civ VI is that there was no (real) limiting factor on what has always been a problem in civ, which is infinite city spam - more cities = better. Civ V went too far the other direction (IMO). And Civ IV had the best balance - generally bigger was better, but get bigger too quick and you crash your economy.
I'd like to see a video on changes to existing civs; I know England has been overhauled, but are there any other big changes?
Excellent review!! Kudos, Marbs.
@Marbozir I played mostly Civ 5 and Civ 5 with Vox Populi. I have not played a lot Civ 6 yet. Do you think Civ 6 is better than Vox Populi? Or better stick with VP?
The play by cloud option also sounds very interesting.
Wait you could already ask the AI to join a war you're in, couldn't you? Or was that a mod I didn't realise I'd enabled or something?
This is good content. Keep it up, skubaniec! :)
I like the new mechanics, but the power creep with the new civs is ridiculous . The vanilla civs need some major buffs to be competitive with the new civs.
I don't mind the bad AI since I mostly just want to build as many cities and buildings and wonders as I can on my way to a science victory. My joy comes from building stuff, not the competition, so the bad AI is fine.
Unfortunately, most of the changes sound like things that would annoy me.
I never liked global warming mechanics because in past games, it was nearly impossible to stop the AI civilizations from making it worse. Diplomacy is just a whole lot of sucking up to AI civs that just isn't fun (you never feel like you're outmaneuvering another civ while doing it). I remember disaster mechanics from a previous civilization game and remember being annoyed by it.
I still haven't bought this game years later, but I'm still considering getting it just for the giant death robots.
When's a Deity Recording coming up? How are we supposed to evaluate AI improvements if you are playing a difficulty down?
If you want to fix the ai just download a mod
Interesting how Civ III and V have a more realistic looking character art style, while IV and VI are more cartoonish. I guess they'll go back to realistic for VII?
I don't understand how AI is bad. Deity is impossible for me to win on unless I make like 0 mistakes or cheat by loading previous save to fix mistakes. Even then some AI just win off early game adv and unit adv
Jun-jae Moon People use guides and build lots od slingers and warriors right away, then rush attack a city state or civ and take their stuff and their settlers. As long as you keep being at war, it's not terribly hard because that's the AI's main weak spot. For peaceful players, I also think the game has enough challenge as it is.
@@Maren617 Okay, I'll try a Germany game or Korea game then. I just always lose to tech or culture victory. I usually can't catch up to other civs. Also I like Norway which if I make 3-4 bad decisions on builds, tech tree or civics tree or bad decision on city planning I can get pretty much set back permanently I feel. But maybe it's changed cuz pillaging helps you in mid and late game now
@@jun-jaemoon5760 Also, only 14% of players have ever even beaten the game on King difficulty, 8% on Emperor, 4% on Deity, according to the steam statistics. So really, don't let people tell you anythimg different, the statistics don't lie. The vast majority of people prefer playing ot at lower difficulties because they don't have all day to learn strategies, and it's totally cool to just do what everyone else does, as well. Hell, I don't play on deity - I want to have fun, not watch overpowered AI who are given unfair advantages take all the nice city spots while I'm struggling to survive, lol.
@@Maren617 Where do I find the statistics? Also is there personal stats also?
@@jun-jaemoon5760 If you go to Civ 6's store page and then click on achievements, you can see the percentages. If you click on achievement in yoit own game library, you'll see your own. 🙂
It´s really sad that they still havent fixed the AI, after all these patches and expansions. Naval warfare, air crafts, upgrading units...yeah we wont see the AI pull that off. I hope some other company will pick up the torch, because the future looks very bleak for this franchise.
Very informative, and helpful. Thank you
1 Oil upkeep for Artillery and infantry ? How i am suppose to make an army and maintain it without a reliable source of oil ? And that's without the navy (which strangely carriers doesn't need oil upkeep wtf).
thanks for the summary, excellent stuff!
Joining an ongoing war has been there for a few patches. I've got it in my game at the moment.
Awesome review. You're the best Marbs!
I will get this, soon enough. Personally I think Civ 5 BNW was much more balanced. Diplomatic victory my favorite for sure, this sounds like my kind off game. The Ai is crap at war espcially, any victory that doe snot require lot's of war is more fun. Religion needs a boost in my opinion. I assume it helps diplomatically?
The rivers have names now? COOL!
Great Synopsis Marbozir! If they released an expansion that improved the AI to a noticeable degree I would be all over it.
You should do more videos like this. It's really good 👍👍
Will they ever implement the ability to continue playing games even after a victory? Because I would like that.
Brandon Edwards that’s always been there _just...one...more...turn_
For those that like to go for research or domination victories, is this expansion worth it?
I can play Civ 5 fine on my PC, but Civ 6 never really performed well and it prevented me from getting into the game. I'm sad they haven't made improvements in what seems like a good expansion.
Hey, Marb ...for how much would you say ,,Captain on the bridge."
My previous post maybe my desire to play, but the eula ends any chance in hell I will buy and install this expansion of the game.
I'm so bad that the AI is not a problem at all for me
Super nice review Marbs!
Disasters existed in Civ 4 as well
I have been playing Civ since the first game back in 1991. I have loved them all, except Gathering Storm. The global warming mechanic is broken. Let me turn it off or I will not play.
that sucks? so no nuclear ghandi on gathering storm?
Do the strategic resource stockpiles exist anywhere? If I sack a city will I capture some of the stockpile?
You are capped at 50 of each resource, you can't stockpile beyond that as i understood..But you can sell excess horses as example. And you capture nothing of that i think, just if the city has horses it will add +2 or so each turn to the stockpile.
Are there many historical scenarios built into the game?