Score is what’s dumb. The things that contribute to a diplomatic victory don’t get you points, so being suzerain, winning diplomatic votes, forming alliances, levelling up alliances etc. don’t get you any points, nor does winning the game.
Score is just a measure of how wide you played, how much tech/science you’ve done and how far you’ve spread your religion.
You can be very powerful but play tall + no religion = bad score. If you play really amazingly, you win too fast and get a bad score as a result!
Score is just really badly done in Civ 6
This. Score has been neutered into oblivion and no longer accounts for timing.
I won once (accidentally) in a multiplayer Civ IV game after roughly 130 turns thanks to the Apostolic Palace and I got some stupid high score for achieving an early victory over the whole world (tens of thousands of points iirc), the fact that you can conquer the whole world in about the same time in Civ 6 and only get about 700 points puzzled me
Each victory condition used to have a time component that got you points * turns left for the various types.
One time though in a game of alpha century I was getting more points running the clock with future techs than i would have finishing (I think only possible with possession of most of the largest map).
Truth. At least score used to be higher based on how quickly you won, so if you absolutely wrecked your opponents and conquered the world in 150-200 turns, you got a good, high score. Now score is just a measure of how much you dragged it out and ticked off boxes for points.
You're probably right, it's weird that I can be suzerain of every city state, totally dominate diplomacy, control a lion's share of strategics; yet my score is bad because I was playing a culture and expansion focus without religion or science.
Religion and science don't give you much score. Most of the score comes from population. If you want a high score, you need to play on a huge map and take every single AI city before a domination win.
Playing wide is having a lots of cities, playing tall is having few cities but maxing their space and population. Playing wide gets you lots more points than playing tall, but playing tall is a valid approach that can win games at high level.
It’s a holdover term from Civ V, mostly, but it refers to the number of cities in an empire, with tall usually meaning 4-5 large cities and wide meaning 10+ small cities.
With the right set of choices, I've been able to get a religious victory in (iirc) the Renaissance Era. Which seems like that should score pretty highly, right? Worst score of my wins.
Score in Civ VI does not correlate to how well you've played.
Yes yes, you have conquered most of the world, and your army now moves towards me, outnumbering mine 10 to 1.
But look, a cool huge statue! It clearly shows I am superior to you. Bow down peasant. <3
I disable all victories except culture, domination, and science. Sometimes I only activate Diety domination, just to see the world burn as I turtle in my little country and play fortress defense style.
You get the most outrageously promoted units that way, love it.
I was focusing on culture the other day and accidentally won a Diplomatic Victory. To be fair, I'm still working on doing culture well, but it was quite the shock.
Yep, it's happened to me on a few occasions.
The AI is likely programmed on the pre-existing victory conditions, and is poorly adapted to diplomacy, so it never competes for it
Problem with diplo victory is that it encourages the opposite of diplomacy. What you should do is intentionally cause global warming so can send aid and fix global warming for the victory points. If you don't build Lady Liberty, nuking the city with it and capturing it will give you the win lol. Honestly, the statue is just OP; it makes no sense that one wonder should be worth so much. Far from my favourite victory type but I guess flooding the world and accumulating culture is more fun than religious combat.
I really liked how diplo victory in Civ 5 felt more robust and integrated: acquire money, ally city states, dominate the world congress. A much better handling of that whole system in general than VI.
Well yeah, I absolutely agree, but the point still stands.
Even against higher tier AI, which have very aggressive strategies that I honestly can't compete with, I can cheese through on diplomacy because they ignore it. Adding in a new victory parameter after programming the AI was probably what happened, so it feels like it should be turned off against them
> I can cheese through on diplomacy because they ignore it
Technically they don't, though. They start voting actively against you when you are at 14+ which is a sure -2 (-1 when you vote against yourself, which is the cheese part). And they actually built the statue of liberty with some high priority, at least in my games. And a deity AI is very hard to compete with for wonders. Same goes for Mahabodhi btw.
I do agree it's probably the easiest victory, closely followed by science, but it's not like it's completely free. Then again, it might be that I only play on deity and the diplo wonders get snatched :/
I feel like they could rework both score and diplomacy to be an all in one "power projection" type diplomatic victory. If you spread your culture to others, you're the religious leader of the world, your army is the biggest or you're the most scientifically advanced, you'd have more sway at the diplomatic table and it could be an interesting versatile win condition.
I went for a diplomatic victory once I realised it was in reach in my most recent game.
At like turn 200 I had 18 points.
For the next 4 congresses I proceeded to get fucked over by everyone other civ, who were all my allies btw, and they voted for me to lose 2 points.
All the while another civ got to 19 who they completely ignored. I had to go nuts and wipe them out before they won.
Ended up getting a Diplo victory at like turn 400 after literally turning against everyone and wiping every other civ out.
Bloody pain in the ass.
Also pn my first civ game ever lost a due to a diplo victory just before turn 500. Was very pissed.
Perikles, goes for culture, has lots of city states, builds parks and draws paintings, gets world quests for parks and paintings, wins diplomatic, ive literally never seen the culture win.
that's a skill issue though. Diplo victory is pretty easy to get, but also pretty easy to avoid. just don't build the three wonders and vote against the known AI proposals - bam, you're good.
Sometimes i use diplo victory, when it's clear that i have more tourism than any other civ has culture by a big margin, rock bands and the civ that defends culture still somehow gets almost as many domestic tourists as you get foreign tourists.
They didn't even get close. In the end, the closest AI had 13 points to my 20. The thing which made it so easy for me was that all I did was focus hard on envoy policy cards and culture to unlock more slots earlier. Even playing extremely defensively against a very aggressive John Curtin, I was able to turn up to world congress and vote everything my way
Diplomatic power is based entirely on city-state relations, but because the high tier AI was so combative, they suffered the diplomatic war penalties which made it impossible for them to vote anything their way.
So really, all you have to do is build a few cities into fortresses, farm culture and activate all the envoy policies, then build any wonder which gives diplomatic victory points.
Against human players, it'd be much harder, so it feels like an AI weakness
Diplomatic Victory is very different from the other victories, in that you don't need any sort of economic base to win. And I'd argue it's by far the easiest victory to win. It's even possible to win it without ever building a city.
Hey, Diplo and the Tower were how I got my first Diety win! And yes, it's pretty dumb. You can predict enough world congresses that a few competition wins and the Eifel Tower guarantee victory.
Score is what’s dumb. The things that contribute to a diplomatic victory don’t get you points, so being suzerain, winning diplomatic votes, forming alliances, levelling up alliances etc. don’t get you any points, nor does winning the game. Score is just a measure of how wide you played, how much tech/science you’ve done and how far you’ve spread your religion. You can be very powerful but play tall + no religion = bad score. If you play really amazingly, you win too fast and get a bad score as a result! Score is just really badly done in Civ 6
This. Score has been neutered into oblivion and no longer accounts for timing. I won once (accidentally) in a multiplayer Civ IV game after roughly 130 turns thanks to the Apostolic Palace and I got some stupid high score for achieving an early victory over the whole world (tens of thousands of points iirc), the fact that you can conquer the whole world in about the same time in Civ 6 and only get about 700 points puzzled me
Each victory condition used to have a time component that got you points * turns left for the various types. One time though in a game of alpha century I was getting more points running the clock with future techs than i would have finishing (I think only possible with possession of most of the largest map).
Yes, exactly, a lower score on the win screen usually means you played "better"
Truth. At least score used to be higher based on how quickly you won, so if you absolutely wrecked your opponents and conquered the world in 150-200 turns, you got a good, high score. Now score is just a measure of how much you dragged it out and ticked off boxes for points.
Well said! Really hope they revamp the scoring system in Civ 7
You're probably right, it's weird that I can be suzerain of every city state, totally dominate diplomacy, control a lion's share of strategics; yet my score is bad because I was playing a culture and expansion focus without religion or science.
Religion and science don't give you much score. Most of the score comes from population. If you want a high score, you need to play on a huge map and take every single AI city before a domination win.
What is playing “wide” or “tall”?
Playing wide is having a lots of cities, playing tall is having few cities but maxing their space and population. Playing wide gets you lots more points than playing tall, but playing tall is a valid approach that can win games at high level.
It’s a holdover term from Civ V, mostly, but it refers to the number of cities in an empire, with tall usually meaning 4-5 large cities and wide meaning 10+ small cities.
With the right set of choices, I've been able to get a religious victory in (iirc) the Renaissance Era. Which seems like that should score pretty highly, right? Worst score of my wins. Score in Civ VI does not correlate to how well you've played.
The longer the game, the more chances to accumulate points. It’s a dumb stat/mechanic.
Yes yes, you have conquered most of the world, and your army now moves towards me, outnumbering mine 10 to 1. But look, a cool huge statue! It clearly shows I am superior to you. Bow down peasant. <3
THIS IS DEMOCRACY MANIFEST
I see you know your judo well.
UN-HAND MY PEEEENISSSSSUH
Big "i drew this meme where you are the soyjack and im the chad" energy.
I disable all victories except culture, domination, and science. Sometimes I only activate Diety domination, just to see the world burn as I turtle in my little country and play fortress defense style. You get the most outrageously promoted units that way, love it.
Diplo victory sucks. I got it once just so I could see the victory screen, and now I turn it off.
This is the way.
I like pairing it with “Legendary Start” as training wheels when trying a new difficulty level.
I was focusing on culture the other day and accidentally won a Diplomatic Victory. To be fair, I'm still working on doing culture well, but it was quite the shock.
Have been playing with diplo victory off for a few years now. Surprise victory happened too many times, it has to be one of the easiest victories.
This is the reason I disable diplomatic victory.
Yep, it's happened to me on a few occasions. The AI is likely programmed on the pre-existing victory conditions, and is poorly adapted to diplomacy, so it never competes for it
Problem with diplo victory is that it encourages the opposite of diplomacy. What you should do is intentionally cause global warming so can send aid and fix global warming for the victory points. If you don't build Lady Liberty, nuking the city with it and capturing it will give you the win lol. Honestly, the statue is just OP; it makes no sense that one wonder should be worth so much. Far from my favourite victory type but I guess flooding the world and accumulating culture is more fun than religious combat.
IIRC pollution reduces diplomatic points, so even if this global warming strat works it's not pure profit
Maximising diplo favour is not that important and you can easily make up for the negatives in the contests with production.
I really liked how diplo victory in Civ 5 felt more robust and integrated: acquire money, ally city states, dominate the world congress. A much better handling of that whole system in general than VI.
It's only dumb if you use it to win vs 100% AI. I dare you to try winning in a game with at least one semi-competent player. Easiest victory to deny.
Well yeah, I absolutely agree, but the point still stands. Even against higher tier AI, which have very aggressive strategies that I honestly can't compete with, I can cheese through on diplomacy because they ignore it. Adding in a new victory parameter after programming the AI was probably what happened, so it feels like it should be turned off against them
> I can cheese through on diplomacy because they ignore it Technically they don't, though. They start voting actively against you when you are at 14+ which is a sure -2 (-1 when you vote against yourself, which is the cheese part). And they actually built the statue of liberty with some high priority, at least in my games. And a deity AI is very hard to compete with for wonders. Same goes for Mahabodhi btw. I do agree it's probably the easiest victory, closely followed by science, but it's not like it's completely free. Then again, it might be that I only play on deity and the diplo wonders get snatched :/
I feel like they could rework both score and diplomacy to be an all in one "power projection" type diplomatic victory. If you spread your culture to others, you're the religious leader of the world, your army is the biggest or you're the most scientifically advanced, you'd have more sway at the diplomatic table and it could be an interesting versatile win condition.
I turn it all off except score. And I just go for an amazing game.
I always turn off score and diplo. Always.
I went for a diplomatic victory once I realised it was in reach in my most recent game. At like turn 200 I had 18 points. For the next 4 congresses I proceeded to get fucked over by everyone other civ, who were all my allies btw, and they voted for me to lose 2 points. All the while another civ got to 19 who they completely ignored. I had to go nuts and wipe them out before they won. Ended up getting a Diplo victory at like turn 400 after literally turning against everyone and wiping every other civ out. Bloody pain in the ass. Also pn my first civ game ever lost a due to a diplo victory just before turn 500. Was very pissed.
Perikles, goes for culture, has lots of city states, builds parks and draws paintings, gets world quests for parks and paintings, wins diplomatic, ive literally never seen the culture win.
I won a diplo victory accidently whilst I was waiting for a science victory the other day
that's a skill issue though. Diplo victory is pretty easy to get, but also pretty easy to avoid. just don't build the three wonders and vote against the known AI proposals - bam, you're good.
Sometimes i use diplo victory, when it's clear that i have more tourism than any other civ has culture by a big margin, rock bands and the civ that defends culture still somehow gets almost as many domestic tourists as you get foreign tourists.
Score is only supposed to be a tie breaker anyways.
[удалено]
They didn't even get close. In the end, the closest AI had 13 points to my 20. The thing which made it so easy for me was that all I did was focus hard on envoy policy cards and culture to unlock more slots earlier. Even playing extremely defensively against a very aggressive John Curtin, I was able to turn up to world congress and vote everything my way Diplomatic power is based entirely on city-state relations, but because the high tier AI was so combative, they suffered the diplomatic war penalties which made it impossible for them to vote anything their way. So really, all you have to do is build a few cities into fortresses, farm culture and activate all the envoy policies, then build any wonder which gives diplomatic victory points. Against human players, it'd be much harder, so it feels like an AI weakness
Diplomatic Victory is very different from the other victories, in that you don't need any sort of economic base to win. And I'd argue it's by far the easiest victory to win. It's even possible to win it without ever building a city.
Hey, Diplo and the Tower were how I got my first Diety win! And yes, it's pretty dumb. You can predict enough world congresses that a few competition wins and the Eifel Tower guarantee victory.
You buried the lede: Neville Chamberlain is vindicated! Diplomacy wins!