So after eight years since VI’s release, it decided to get into Civilization VI. People were often talking about how innovative this game was, and it knew the Civilization Players League had a ton of cool balancing tools to make the game really engaging.

And obviously, the fact that there’s a league for competing at all means a lot of people have found a lot of meaning in competing in the game.

The main worry it had was that 4X games are often all about knowledge checks, and you can often win with next to no experience against people who’ve played the game for years by just looking up strategies that dominate the meta if they haven’t already done so. For those who are used to competing with strategy board games that throw you into a new, random situation every game and understanding principles is more important than knowing all the knowledge checks, it can be very frustrating to play strategy video games that add a ton of complexity just to make it hard to know all the things you’re “supposed” to know.

Unfortunately, despite all the talk of innovations, Civilization VI was not much different. Just like how you had to know to Radio->Ideology in Civilization V, or that Great Scientists, Engineers, and Merchants are pooled together and so Merchants harm your science and production, you have to “just know” all kinds of things in Civilization VI and it makes for a very unpleasant experience with friends, competing over who knows more specific facts rather than whose intuition is better calibrated to the game’s underlying patterns.

Not every game needs to be almost entirely principled like Spirit Island, Sidereal Confluence, or Go, but as an example, you can make up for a lack of knowledge in games like Twilight Imperium in all kinds of ways. It’s just a very frustrating experience to know that to get to that point of making clever decisions, you and your friends are going to have to commit to like a year of doing homework so that you’re not just one-upping one another on the basis of who happened to find the best resource for understanding the game.

And then if you want to play competitively, the main competitive leagues harbor tons of abusers who regularly try and drive vulnerable members in the league out, and refuse to do anything about harassment campaigns against minorities in their community because “this is just for gaming, we won’t pick political sides” or whatever.

After playing with friends for about six months and feeling like any victories were awarded to whoever found the better tutorial for how to play the game, like it was rarely a matter of who found the insight necessary at a critical point to win, it was hard to keep going. The innovations of Civilization VI didn’t make a meaningful difference between its experience of VI and V.

If you don’t like dealing with abusers who face no consequences in CPL while those who call them out get punished, if you want to very quickly get up to date on all of the mechanics of a game and how they tie together and start just seeing who can outpace who in terms of decision-making, then Civilization VI is largely going to be a big waste of time. Obviously there are plenty of people outside of that demographic.

But for it and its friends, well, back to trying out new strategy board games. Been meaning to try out Brass: Birmingham from six years back.


One alternative strategy video game that’s really fun is Red Alert 2 (Mental Omega mod) with a fairly low required APM much like 4X games, a thriving community and easy to get friends into, and a fairly low knowledge check barrier with a lot of room for experimenting and sharpening one’s intuition.

  • BilboBargains@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    22
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    The best way to overcome all the toxic elements of adversarial gaming is to play cooperative games. This style previously did not exist but has become popular in recent years. It’s nicer to work together and interesting to see how people (mostly men) adapt to this style of play by continuing to compete in an environment where that causes the team to lose. Much like the English national football team of eleven adversaries Vs the German team.

    • SolOrion@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      I’ve sort of generally moved over to coop games in general nowadays.

      Or even if I’m playing something that’s a versus sort of multiplayer- like Civ- I just try not to focus too much on winning. I’m there for the journey, not the destination. If I end up winning, cool. If I don’t, that’s also cool as long as I had fun along the way.

      • AdNecrias
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        You can play a lot of PvE games without competition. Deep rock galactic, space engineers, Minecraft mods, left 4 dead, divinity original sin (or baldurs gate 3 these days).

        I think there’s AoE and starcraft co-op these days.

        You can also okay grand strategy games in a peace with players war with cpu only game.

          • SolOrion@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            2 months ago

            To elaborate further on grand strategy games, pretty much all Paradox games can be played… sort of cooperatively?

            Generally the maps are large enough that you can kind of just pick your corners and only rarely interact.

            In a single game of Europa Universalis 4 one player might conquer all of Asia, while another consolidates Europe and a third player is in Africa. You can’t generally actually disable PvP, you can just not go to war. Same is true for Crusader Kings 2/3, and Stellaris. You can coexist and mutually stay out of each others way while possibly helping each other out.

            All the Total War titles that support multiplayer (so everything past Shogun 2 in 2011) are coop friendly afaik. I’m particularly fond of the Total War: Warhammer games.

            Also, I’d add some of the survival crafting/sandbox titles to the list of stuff you can play cooperatively. They don’t all work for it, but some of them are definitely friendly to a coop group play style. 7 Days To Die works brilliantly like that, though it will be absolutely trivial with multiple players unless you turn the difficulty up. Ark: Survival Evolved can be pretty fun coop (especially with the Primal Fear mod- you will need friends.)

    • ViolentSwine[it/its]@vegantheoryclub.orgOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      2 months ago

      If you think that’s the worst of it, you’re in for a surprise! But yeah, people do lose out on a shitton of science and production because they think generating Great Merchants doesn’t come with a completely random opportunity cost to their science and production. Nonsense game design decision.

  • ViolentSwine[it/its]@vegantheoryclub.orgOP
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    Also, one thing not included here is the AI problem. The 4X games with the best and most challenging, clever AIs, perfect for training competitively when you can’t get together with all your friends, are also single-player. Ditto for 4X games that randomize tech trees and policy trees and the like to make the game more principled.

    • archonet@lemy.lol
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      If you want a really good 4X game, try Stellaris. It’s where I went after 1000+ hours of Civ 5 (and coming to Civ 6 to be disappointed by it, played only like 80 hours), and I’ve been ̶t̶e̶r̶r̶o̶r̶i̶z̶i̶n̶g̶ liberating the galaxy ever since. I especially like the additional nuances to diplomacy, which are further enhanced by mods – Civ’s AI has always been a bit ham-fisted.

      • SolOrion@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        OP seems to want a very competitively focused tightly balanced experience, and Stellaris is absolutely anything but that. I enjoy the game, it’s fun, but I can’t imagine anyone considering it to be particularly balanced or enjoyable as a PvP/Versus experience.

        • ViolentSwine[it/its]@vegantheoryclub.orgOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 months ago

          Thank you to both you and @db0@db0@lemmy.dbzer0.com for discussing this. This does match with what others have said. That said, it’s okay with roleplaying too, it often hosts roleplaying-only Twilight Imperium IV games, or one-shot TTRPGs (D&D is banned, Pathfinder is banned, any other system is okay).

          But yes, a much bigger hole in its heart is competition. Girls just like to have fun, and for some girls, that means merciless (but trauma-informed and respect towards boundaries around competition) competition.

          There are some multiplayer roleplaying video games. Baldur’s Gate 3 has been quite engaging. Sometimes just one of us watching the other play Disco Elysium is enough. But competing strategically without it becoming unpleasant…that’s a harder find outside of board games.

      • ViolentSwine[it/its]@vegantheoryclub.orgOP
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        26
        ·
        2 months ago

        Use it/its and not you/your, please. its heard Stellaris has great narrative elements but it’s very hard to play in a reasonable amount of time and there’s some balance issues that can make competition feel really unfair. Maybe will still get around to it some day.

        • iAmTheTot@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          2 months ago

          I consider myself pretty progressive and am friends with nothing but progressives. And lots of people in the LGBTQ+ community. This is the first time I’ve ever seen someone want to have their second-person pronouns changed… It does not make communication easy.

        • Shizrak@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          2 months ago

          Was going to say how absurd and difficult to understand those pronouns are, and how they make communication very unclear.

          But fuck it

          • SolOrion@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            16
            ·
            edit-2
            2 months ago

            I’ve never seen some specify that they want different second person pronouns, but hey new things every day. Man that is confusing to read, though.

            • Peruvian_Skies@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              17
              ·
              2 months ago

              It doesn’t really make any sense since first and second person pronouns aren’t gendered. When I refer to “you” it means “whoever I’m talking to” without implying anything about the person or persons other than that I intend my message for them. There’s just no reason to change that. Not “no good reason” but “no reason”.

            • AwesomeLowlander@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              9
              ·
              2 months ago

              They even refer to themselves as ‘it’ in the first person, which just breaks comprehensibility entirely if you don’t already know what they’re talking about.

          • archonet@lemy.lol
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            10
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            2 months ago

            y’know, whenever people started getting snippy about pronouns, I often said I was just going to start calling them an “it”.

            I never thought ̶s̶o̶m̶e̶o̶n̶e̶ something would want that.

  • Zagorath@aussie.zone
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    2 months ago

    I never played Civ VI. Stuck with V instead. Though to be honest, what I really wish they would do is return to the cool alternate game modes that Civ II: Test of Time added. Being able to keep playing with a second playing arena after completing the ship to Alpha Centauri, or play an entirely different game of fantasy or science-fiction flavoured civ was really cool.

    • lewdian69@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      2 months ago

      I stick with Civ IV for the soundtrack.
      And gameplay but apparently I’m not smart enough to understand any of the things you all are talking about in this thread. I just play single player games that take months

      • lemonmelon@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        2 months ago

        Civ IV was peak Civ for me. The changes made going into V just didn’t feel like Civ.

        Yes, that includes the loss of doomstacks.

    • ViolentSwine[it/its]@vegantheoryclub.orgOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      Civ 5 was fun but despite its harsh review Civ 6 is kind of better in every way. The lekmod for Civ 5 is so pervasive and totally changes the game, which is necessary for balance and so the game is a bit more reasonable. Civ 6 on the other hand has the BBG mod which changes far less and remains basically the same game. Civ 6 also makes certain things more intuitive, like movement. Initially, moving from 5 to 6, it had a lot of trouble with the movement but once it understood it it loved how intuitive it was. You can only move if you have enough movement points left. Simple as that. No “ending on a hill” or other counter-intuitive tricks you have to remember and do in Civ 5 every single turn.

      Civ 6’s big big flaws are that on release it was broken due to infinite production exploits they wouldn’t fix, and it came with spyware which they did not apologize for so you shouldn’t buy it or anything from Firaxis from that matter.

      Civ 5 was fun though. it wrote a huge, one hundred page document on how to play it well to catch its friends up. A lot of it was just detailing random counter-intuitive bullshit. That’s the big issue. Both games are fun, but their limitations require just so much patience it isn’t really sustainable and pretty soon, competition becomes more frustrating and a chore than fun.

  • db0@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    You sound like you will like the mechabellum video game. Even provides a 4pl ffa mode that you can play with your bg group.

    But if you’re into low apm rts, I can’t suggest Beyond All Reason enough.

    Also, thoughts about Arcs?

    • Shialac@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      I am so confused about the latest Update in Mechabellum. Somehow the game feels very different suddenly and I dont really get why

    • ViolentSwine[it/its]@vegantheoryclub.orgOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      12
      ·
      2 months ago

      Use it/its, please!

      Arcs is too new! Not appealing to the tastes of a patient gamer! But also, it is a bit biased against Cole Wehrle :)

      Will check out those two games some time, thanks for the recs!

      • Feathercrown@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        2 months ago

        I’m confused, are you asking to replace “you”/“your” with “it”/“its”? That’s the only pronoun there but I’ve never seen it be replaced and it’s not really gramatically equivalent.