22nd of March 2026
Last weekend I participated in a Civilization 6 LAN party. I've done LAN parties before, but never one this big for this long - and never with a game that has felt so much like a board game. That being said, I can't help but feel like I would have enjoyed myself more if I had been playing a board game (a la Twilight Imperium), and I feel the need to talk about this.
Although Civ has many elements of a board game in the way that it is set up, it could never be a board game as it is without significant changes. There are far too many numbers, chances, and little elements to keep track of that would make it nearly impossible for players to play, let alone the amount of time that would be devoted to ticking counters and upkeep. Nonetheless, it definitely draws comparison with its turns, hex grid "board", and engine building style mechanics. However, there are two large elements of civ that I think keep it from being effective in a LAN setting.
1.
Although many board games are turn based, the best board games have a reason for you to be thinking, playing, or doing something on an opponents turn. Returning to the Twilight Imperium example, leadership cards force players to be aware of what others are doing and carefully plan out which resources they may need to save for when another player triggers their leadership card. In Civ however, the moment a turn is complete, you are waiting for other players to complete theirs. Although there is some planning that can be done, in stages of the mid-late game you often have your engine built and are waiting for certain elements to be completed before you can move on to the next aspect of your planning. As our LAN event went on, several players became increasingly disengaged as their turns were over extremely quickly compared to the other players involved in an active war. While something like a turn timer may have helped this, overall I think that this is still a problem endemic to Civ and the way that it is structured. Which leads me to point number -
2.
Civ is a game enjoyed in front of your own screen. Unlike board games with a shared visible table, or couch competitive games where everyone is gathered around a TV, Civ is not really playable in front of the same screen together. This puts a disconnect between the players. It is harder to see and feel the actions that others are having, and how they impact you. You can't see the reactions of others to the moves that you are making or the moves made by others. You can't read a subtle scheme in someone's facial expression because you can't really see each other directly. There's something far more tangible about being present around a shared space that all players are affecting that is missing from playing a game like Civ, and personally I think it is the reason that board games are both a better and worse shared experience than video games.
Board games are a better shared experience than video games because they bring people together into a shared space. It is more interesting and engaging to witness the effects of your gameplay on other players. Board games are a worse shared experience than video games because they require everyone to be in the same space at the same time. Video games are much easier to schedule when people don't have to leave the house or even be in the same city.
Nonetheless, I think it's always worth it when you have the time and opportunity to bring players together to bond over a shared experience.
