Oh, yes, after Civ 1 to 4, the barbs in Civ 5 were a laughing stock. In 5 it was far far too easy to bribe other civs away into wars.Ĭiv 6 has more fun barbs. In Civ 5 the mass hoarding of great scientists towards the end game and bulbing through the last techs got stale very soon.Ĭiv 6 has more fun city states, with unique bonuses, and now, that you can kill off rival envoys with spies it's even better.Īnd even with all the shortcomings still present, Civ 6 now has more sensible diplomacy than 5. Whatever you do, don't build/take another city! Civ 5 is a 'lazy man's game', where yo can call 3 cities an 'empire', and a game too easily put on rails.Ĭiv 6 policy card system is much more fun than the rigid 'pick and forget' policy trees of Civ 5, for which I had no love from the start.Ĭiv 6 has more fun great people, with unique abilities. I can't imagine how could you discourage expansion more. And if this wasn't enough, there is 'a specific building in EVERY city' requirement for national wonders. In my eyes, those two factors alone put Civ 5 into the lowest place in the whole Civ franchise. It's not even about the districts, it's about Civ 5 having a mortal sin - double punishment of players for expansion through global happiness and increasing tech/policy costs for every new city. Oh, well then, for me, even if Civ 5 had districts, Civ 6 would be much better. Civ 5 now feels to me like the test run of the concepts that would eventually become Civ 6. Especially the grip it had on gameplay that forced a very particular strategy.Ĭiv 5 has some great ideas, to be sure, but they didn't reach fruition until Civ 6. Everything about the National College.

Killing a City State so heavily punished as to completely derail the game.

City States gobbling up the best spots on the map, often right next to Natural Wonders, which then become irrelevant.

Melee units worthless except to run in after the city lost all its HP and grab it.

Archer rushes were the ideal way to take a city.

Not only was there no incentive to found a city past a certain point in the game, it actually hurt you. I found this so unbelievably frustrating.

It's a Civ game that punishes you for building cities beyond a certain point in time.

Vox Populi and mods correct a lot of the issues, but I can't say I miss Civ 5 at all. Civ 5 was left in a very unbalanced state after the second expansion in particular.

Civ 5 was a nice transition game from Civ 4 to introduce new systems, but IMO Civ 6 does almost everything better.

Civ 6 unique districts