New Civilization VI Trailer Introduces the Newest Unit: Builders

[ffronw]

New Civilization VI Trailer Introduces the Newest Unit: Builders

//cdn.themis-media.com/media/global/images/library/deriv/1333/1333546.jpgCivilization VI will replace Workers with Builders, and this video gives you a first look at how they work.

If you've played any of the previous Civilization games, you're familiar with how improvements were made to your cities. You set them up, and workers built them over a number of turns. That's going to change in Civilization VI. In place of the workers will be a new unit called Builders.

Builders are built in the city, and they will have a limited number of charges. Most will have three charges, meaning they can be used three times to build an improvement before they disband.

While the charge system will require players to think strategically about where to use their Builders, there is an upside. Instead of waiting multiple turns for an improvement to complete, Builders will now complete them instantly. You can get a first look at builders in the video below.

You can read more about the Builders, and the ideas behind automation, in this post [http://civilization.com/#news/en-civilization-vi-the-state-of-automation] on the game's official site.

The addition of Builders, combined with the changes coming to cities [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/167767-Get-a-First-Look-at-Cities-and-America-in-Two-New-Civilization-6-Videos], means that Civ VI will have some new elements that everyone will need to master when it launches worldwide on October 21.


Permalink

 

[Saelune]

I don't care so much about the look, since I started with Civ Revolution on 360, but this is one change I'm not to keen on. Monitoring workers in V is tedious, that after most anything I want built is done, auto is turned on. But this would require more attention to them even in late eras.

 

[The Artificially Prolonged]

A welcome change. Having workers set up road networks is my least favourite part of any civ game. Plus now they're limited use there won't be idle workers waiting for railroads and late game resources to be improved.

 

[Cartographer]

It was always a little "gamey" that it took multiple decades to build a farm, especially when you founded a settlement instantly.

 

[Laughing Man]

You know what I am sold their seems to be just enough changes to the game core mechanics that I am interested to see how this plays out, stuff like workers (builders) have been fundamentally unchanged since I started playing way back with Civ 2. Fuck if it means that my end game isn't a map covered in workers that no longer have any real purpose I am happy.

 

[warmachine]

Strikes me as a bad compromise. Instant build eliminates automation, involving the player in the build decision, which is good, but why bother with a unit if it's not meant to stick around? I'd prefer what Call to Power did where a proportion of production was diverted to infrastructure points. As points accumulated, they could be spent on a specific improvement on a tile. They weren't instant build but the player was deciding himself without worker micromanagement.

 

[Zenja]

Strikes me as a bad compromise. Instant build eliminates automation, involving the player in the build decision, which is good, but why bother with a unit if it's not meant to stick around? I'd prefer what Call to Power did where a proportion of production was diverted to infrastructure points. As points accumulated, they could be spent on a specific improvement on a tile. They weren't instant build but the player was deciding himself without worker micromanagement.

This is basically the same idea. CtP's system was more complex for no net gain. This system is more accessible for new players. As a long time strategy fan I think ideas like this are ideal for Civ. When you build a builder unit, you are essentially investing production into 3 terrain upgrades you may use at your leisure. This allows improving infrastructure to cost city production just as CtP offered, but with easier math you can do in your head. It eliminates many problems the core franchise has held with the worker unit since Civ 3.

Kudos for giving CtP some praise though. Not many other civ fans seem to have cared for its different flavor.

Automation in a strategy title is a red flag for short sighted underdevelopment of the game's design. It has always plagued the worker unit alongside the idle workers problem. This solution fixes both nicely and in addition ties infrastructure to city production directly. If a builder unit takes 90 hammers, then every improvement costs 30 hammers. I also want to mention the idea of districts, which I think is a big improvement for the series. (As well as wonders taking tiles.) Expansion and map placement could easily become even more important this time than any Civ before.

The only thing I don't care for about Civ 6 that I have seen so far is inspiration tying science to piddly questing instead of economics. At best these little quests should only offer like 10-20% of the science cost for the tech, not 50+%. It has already been hinted at that this makes research and expansion go hand in hand which discourages building up instead of building out. Now this also does rely on what the tech tree looks like but by the sounds of it, city sprawl tactics will be rewarded with advanced technology. While city focus tactics will suffer from no research benefits.

 

[Bob_McMillan]

I have a friend who is really into Civ, but was incredibly turned off by the aesthetic. I wonder if they made it look like Clash of Clans on purpose.

 

[Mangod]

I have a friend who is really into Civ, but was incredibly turned off by the aesthetic. I wonder if they made it look like Clash of Clans on purpose.

It looks like a more cartoonish version of Endless Legend, to be honest. And Endless Legend has dragon-men, two-headed gnolls, bug-zombies, space vikings, and Terry Gilliam-robots.

 

[Thyunda]

The only thing I don't care for about Civ 6 that I have seen so far is inspiration tying science to piddly questing instead of economics. At best these little quests should only offer like 10-20% of the science cost for the tech, not 50+%. It has already been hinted at that this makes research and expansion go hand in hand which discourages building up instead of building out. Now this also does rely on what the tech tree looks like but by the sounds of it, city sprawl tactics will be rewarded with advanced technology. While city focus tactics will suffer from no research benefits.

I don't think 'questing' is quite the word for it - it just seems like a more rational way of dealing with technology and research, because the current system allows a totally landlocked empire to develop sailing at the same rate as an archipelago, depending on the player's priorities. At least this might stop the demoralising effect of all the other players charging through the eras.

 

[The Great JT]

So they're a one-turn build version of Missionaries? If I'm next door to the Netherlands, should I be concerned of their builders coming into my lands and building polders?

 

[Zenja]

The only thing I don't care for about Civ 6 that I have seen so far is inspiration tying science to piddly questing instead of economics. At best these little quests should only offer like 10-20% of the science cost for the tech, not 50+%. It has already been hinted at that this makes research and expansion go hand in hand which discourages building up instead of building out. Now this also does rely on what the tech tree looks like but by the sounds of it, city sprawl tactics will be rewarded with advanced technology. While city focus tactics will suffer from no research benefits.

I don't think 'questing' is quite the word for it - it just seems like a more rational way of dealing with technology and research, because the current system allows a totally landlocked empire to develop sailing at the same rate as an archipelago, depending on the player's priorities. At least this might stop the demoralising effect of all the other players charging through the eras.

I think it will actually encourage players to be able to charge through eras, especially players. Once you know your science path, you can do these trivial 'quests' and get your science rate doubled! This means it is either do the quest attached to the tech, or fall behind everyone else. Hopefully, the AI will know to do this too or else the player will constantly be passing the AI. Part of the allure to previous civs was building your economy to be strong enough to outpace your enemies. This feature is too strong to be a 'bonus' but rather this 'questing' is stronger than any research building which usually only offer 25%.

It is still a day one purchase for me as everything else looks great, and the ability to mod will be present. I could be wrong when it comes out, but this seems like one of those things that look blatantly obvious concerning balance. (Plus, Firaxis and balance don't have a good track record. Their games are like cheesy fun strategy, not deep strategy.)

 

[Thyunda]

I think it will actually encourage players to be able to charge through eras, especially players. Once you know your science path, you can do these trivial 'quests' and get your science rate doubled! This means it is either do the quest attached to the tech, or fall behind everyone else. Hopefully, the AI will know to do this too or else the player will constantly be passing the AI. Part of the allure to previous civs was building your economy to be strong enough to outpace your enemies. This feature is too strong to be a 'bonus' but rather this 'questing' is stronger than any research building which usually only offer 25%.

It is still a day one purchase for me as everything else looks great, and the ability to mod will be present. I could be wrong when it comes out, but this seems like one of those things that look blatantly obvious concerning balance. (Plus, Firaxis and balance don't have a good track record. Their games are like cheesy fun strategy, not deep strategy.)

Oh, no, I totally agree. I should've clarified my post - I would assume that this 'questing' means that the 'correct path' through the eras no longer exists, otherwise a coastal city will advance faster than a landlocked one, or...I can't remember what the path is in V. I was never too bothered with it, I concentrated on trade routes and literally buying my way to victory. Hopefully this will just mean that if you have, say, silver, by your first city, you'll develop mining faster. If you have ivory or fur sources nearby you'll get through animal husbandry and trapping faster, whereas your neighbours who live in the mountains surrounded by stone and iron will perfect their masonry and ironworking faster.

I'm mostly projecting here - you could well be right and Firaxis have ended up with an Eden clause that means there is a perfect starting scenario for the fastest advancement, but if the game is going the way I hope it's going, then it'll lead to more unique civilisations and more combinations of nation/playstyle.

 

[Shamanic Rhythm]

This is an interesting change. Building workers to construct tile improvements has essentially been an unchanged mechanic since they separated the function from settlers in Civ 3. I think it's about due for a shakeup, and this seems sensible. Gets rid of a lot of micro, but makes them more important because they interrupt city production and only have three uses.

Big question though is what are you actually doing on a turn by turn basis?

 

[Grouchy Imp_v1legacy]

It was always a little "gamey" that it took multiple decades to build a farm, especially when you founded a settlement instantly.

...

...

...

I have honestly never thought about it like that before. And now you've called it to my attention I can't not think about it like that. Curse you! *shakes fist*