If you're playing as Queen Seondeok of Korea and Alexander the Great is a Curmudgeon, he'll start out disliking you no matter what (and being disliked by Alexander normally means being conquered by him, so it really doesn't help). Normally you can play around them - if you find out someone is Nuke Happy, for example, then you know they'll like it if you build nuclear weapons yourself, and so you can curry favour by doing so, and so on.īut with Flirtatious and Curmudgeon, you can't. In-game, Hidden Agendas also affect that leader's opinion of you, which could in turn affect alliances, trading, and even warfare. The first complaint, which is frankly a little curmudgeonly itself, is concerned with how it impacts gameplay. Many fans see these new traits as a bit of fun - and, more importantly, historically accurate fun, given how much the romantic whims of leaders have already shaped the world - but others have noted a couple of problems. They come in two forms: fixed agendas that generally suit that leader's overall theme, like Queen Victoria's desire for imperialistic expansion with "Sun Never Sets" and Hidden Agendas, which are randomly assigned and a bit more light-hearted about adding personality - maybe a leader is "Fun Loving" and wants to keep their citizens well entertained, or "Nuke Happy" and won't hesitate to pelt you with a few ICBMs when the mood takes them. If you're not familiar, Agendas are basically the goals, or playstyles, that are given to for each AI-controlled civilization's leader in a game. Here's Tomyris, of Scythia, showing her distaste for me just because I'm playing as South Korea's Queen Seondeok. The latter the opposite: disliking the opposite sex and liking those the same as their own. The former means a leader will like other civilizations that have leaders of the opposite sex, and dislike those of the same sex. The issue centres around Firaxis' addition of more Hidden Agendas for its various leaders, and a couple of those new Agendas in particular: "Flirtatious" and "Curmudgeon". But it also brought some smaller, under-the-radar changes - one of which in particular has had a mixed reaction from fans. It comes with all the usual new features - some new mechanics, buildings, several more historically significant leaders, and so on. So I cannot get my head around these reviews in here.Last week, Firaxis released Rise and Fall, the first major expansion pack for Civilization 6. And I really always otherwise always love strategy games. Just feels very dull, unnecessary complicated, the parameters and stats illogical and just generally unrewarding and confusing. There is no red thread, no overview, or general purpose of anything. In each turn it just feels like: “hmm I can move my scout a few spots, hmm okay still 14 turns until the next unit it ready, move my scout a bit again, oh it’s my turn again.” Seriously I have never been so frustrated on a strategy game. The gameplay seems incredible messy with various parameters that just does not seem logical in any way. But after several hours of really trying to get into this game, I just never got that feeling of excitement. After finally getting through the dreadful and confusing tutorial, I thought okay, I just need to learn this before it will get fun. Opening the game for first time was quite a thrill, and I really liked the intro and especially the music composition. I stumbled upon the various reviews in here, and everyone is yay-9/10 positive – so I thought yes this must be it! A little pricy but what the hell if it is fun. I recently bought and Xbox one X, and naturally started searching for a strategy game to play.
#Civilization 6 multiplayer lag Pc#
I played every single age of empires game on pc for hundred and hundreds of hours, red alert, tower defence games – you name it.
I played every single age of empires game on pc for hundred and hundreds of I would describe myself as quite a strategy game enthusiast. I would describe myself as quite a strategy game enthusiast.