![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
I just finished a game of Civ VI. Playing as Qin Shi Huang, I used his special abilities early and often, scooping up Stonehenge, the Hanging Gardens, the Temple of Artemis, the Pyramids, the Oracle, and Petra all in the early going, giving me an insurmountable cultural lead; it culminated in a Culture victory around 1260 AD.
The scoring system ranked my performance as comparable to Neville Chamberlain.
This is my biggest beef with Civ VI. I enjoy the game play, but the scoring system is strongly biased in favor of late-game victories. Population, number of tech and civic advances, Wonders built - all of these are things that pile up late. But an early victory surely should get credit as well! I've toyed with a scheme adding (500 - turn number) to the official score, but I don't think even that's enough, and in any case it lacks official sanction and therefore a certain amount of cachet.
Grmph.
The scoring system ranked my performance as comparable to Neville Chamberlain.
This is my biggest beef with Civ VI. I enjoy the game play, but the scoring system is strongly biased in favor of late-game victories. Population, number of tech and civic advances, Wonders built - all of these are things that pile up late. But an early victory surely should get credit as well! I've toyed with a scheme adding (500 - turn number) to the official score, but I don't think even that's enough, and in any case it lacks official sanction and therefore a certain amount of cachet.
Grmph.
