To get some discussion going lets look at what civ we could be:D

I have a bit of a left field one and thats China.

My line of thinking here is;

-Given the lesson of the 1st MTDG no one will be looking for an early war (unless Provo gets involved:rolleyes:)

-Knights on their own are a bit expensive, but the rider with 3MP's would give us the fastest unit in the game until cavs come along a lot later. This means we will have an tactical edge until then. The timing of when we get it is good as it will be about the time room for expansion starts to run out and we might want to take someone on.

-Allows us to get a later GA with worring about wonders

-While the triats (militaristic, industrious) arn't the best they are still useful if we use them properly.

The only thing that would make me think its not worth considing China is if its going to be a map with islands.

What does everyone think?

Stupid question: Which version of Civ3 will be played?
If C3C, then Celts might be nice on a small pangaea map with iron....
Or Ottomnas, they have the best UU and if one beelines for MT, that doesn't come that late.

If older version, then China is fine, ind rocks there and mil is not bad either and their UU is great.

Stupid question: Which version of Civ3 will be played?
If C3C, then Celts might be nice on a small pangaea map with iron....
Or Ottomnas, they have the best UU and if one beelines for MT, that doesn't come that late.

If older version, then China is fine, ind rocks there and mil is not bad either and their UU is great.

C3C.
I doubt the map will be small, the last one with 4 team was standard i think, so with 5 teams they might make it bigger.

Agr is the best trait though, do we choose the civs before we know the map or the map before the civs?

I would assume map first, otherwise it would be unfair

Yeah, i think itd come down to a decision between the celts and china really :)

though i must say i do like the japanese-cheap temples and the samurai are just really good imo

The only thing i don't like about the Celts is the early UU, since i really can't see warfare before MA. Anyway there is plenty of time to work it out. Is there any other suggestions for possible civs?

Japanese :)

If Archipelago or Islands map, then Dutch (Agr+Sea) although I normally like an offensive UU.

I just plain Agr but most of them have early UUs.

I like the Japs. if we end up with an archi map then Dutch are superb especially with the 1/4 defensive units :D

I really like ag civs and the dutch on arch maps are simply awesome. The combination of traits, starting techs (Pot and alpha) fits a arch type of game and there are some nice wonders that can set off a GA assuming we don't get one from moving a stack of Swiss Mercs with MIs!

As some of you know :mischief: the Japanese are mighty difficult to mess with however the religious trait really is worthless unless we decide to try a 100k which seems unlikely.

Chinese are interesting. I don't think the militaristic trait gets enough credit for cheap rax, harbors (great on archs) and if we get there airports. Industrious is a nice trait early.

Ottos (masonry and BW) have very complimentary traits with indust/sci and as we've seen cavs and rails depending on map is ruthless.

I still favor the Iroquois for their traits(ag and commercial), starting techs (pot and alpha), cheap buildings and fantastic upgrade path for MW's.

Never played C3C, and never played above chieftan in vanilla (never going to now with Civ4) but Ottomans or Iroquois sound good.

Seems to me we got thoroughly pounded trying to play the Japanese in a ISDG, didn't we? Edit: no, that was the Aztecs, which we chose for the ability to capture barbs and conver to workers. :crazyeye: /edit And I think maybe we had China in the other ISDG and got pounded there too.

The Iroquois probably would have worked out for the Doughnuts, if we hadn't been so intent on pushing out workers and settlers ahead of the military to defend them. It's pretty hard to recover from losing a city and worker so early in the game. I've certainly played the cage match differently. MW's did indeed rock when we needed them.

but cfc was fairly crap at the ISDG regardless IIRC :)

um.. I like the Ottomans for the Siphai. They are truly fun to play with. They come a bit late, but I suspect that's exactly when we'll need them.

I'd like to steer clear of the Iroquois, just to help us fly under other's radar.

So I'd pick the Dutch if it's a sea map and Otto otherwise



and yes.. Whomp is kicking my butt (and grahamiam's) with his freaking samauri

If it indeed comes to an unknown map type, I am still in favor of Agr or Ottomans.

Agr is strong on every map type...and Ottomans' UU is useful on every map type. China e.g. is rather weak on a archipelago map or such.

We have to have more than one choice, too...

The ottomans are also a good choice "actually reading what ynnek put now :D" because dont the siphai come when cavs come which basically is the end of the game most times?

Remember Sipahis cost 100 shields not 80 for the extra 2 hps.
It seems to me we sped to infantry pretty fast in the last game rendering them pretty useless.

With that said my preference is for a fast UU or a defensive UU. Skirmishing with fast units should not be discounted.

Not in any particular order, we've talked about:

Ottomans, Dutch, Japanese, Iroquois, Celts, China

I always liked scientific to get the extra boost on an age change. Sumeria are Agr/Sci, though the UU isn't terribly useful.

Personally I'm not hung up on choice of UU except for the ones which result in faster movement, it's more about traits for me. However, if we're bent on having a later UU then Keshiks (Mongols) are good if there are mountains to deal with, and Cossacks (Russia) get blitz.

I get the feeling we're not going to be on arch maps.
The traits.
Ag –the one extra food in the base is huge. They also get a discount on ducts. I think we’ll see reasonable rivers so this is not so important. Pottery is really important imo.
Commercial-Big cities get a commerce boost and corruption is lower. Alpha is big.
Industrious—Big cities get extra shields and workers finish jobs faster. Masonry.
Militaristic—Harbors and rax are cheaper. WC means a start with archers. Purportedly units promote faster.
Scientific—Cheap libs, unis, the free tech and BW.
Religious – CB, anarchy turns and religion. I doubt this would be useful.
Seafaring. Water based improvements, commerce on the coast, faster movement and alpha.
Expansionist Scouts, huts and pottery. Yippee…


My choices would be in this order.
1. Iroquois have a good combo of traits with AG and COM. The starting techs alpha and pottery are big too. Great UU.
2. Ottos—Science and industrious. Nice trait combo. BW and Masonry are ok. Great UU with zone of control
3. French—A nice combo of traits with commercial and industrious. A UU that’s underrated IMO with a 2-5 A/D with bombard which is useful behind city walls even against cavs .
4. Germans not a realistic UU but the traits are solid with scientific and militaristic. That’s a lot of cheap buildings but may need a wonder generated GA. BW and WC
5. Japanese. Samurais and the wheel. There's not much more I can say about them but samurais are absolutely nasty in pbems.

poll offering all choices that I found in this thread is located here (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=192416). It is multiple choice and public in case someone wants to change their vote, we can see who voted where.

Wouldn't France have a 2(1)-5-1 UU on C3C ?

I like France and Iros for the traits, and dutch for the morale quality of the swisses. Cheap 4 defense units that threaten to GA their arses up should they come too close, at and beyond knight time. If we want to play diplo, this is definitely a choice to consider. France also has a bit of that quality, and Iroquois MW generally hold their end of the bargain - if it ever should come to only that, MW are awesome pre-emptive strike "fodder" with 3 attack for 30 shields.

About sammies, they're nasty but getting a knight UU is like demanding your neighbors to gang-rush you with horses ASAP. Make that a warning to a large exponent for riders and sipahi.

So we need to pick a way of choosing (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=192759) the civs for the world - who's for 5 in order, who's for traits, and who's for something else?

I feel safer about everyone having an existing civ, so 5 in order is where my money is at. I wouldn't like too much for everyone to be AGR+(COM/SCI) with a rider/sipahi UU - it's nearly the same as saying no traits/UU for anyone.

I really don't like what they're proposing. I think part of the difficult part of playing this game is not having all the perfect traits. Risk/Reward with each.

I prefer each team picks their top 5 like the first MTDG.

yup i prefer us actually picking the civ we want as well

I agree with Whomp as well. I don't understand everyones facination of doing things a different way considering they worked the first time

there is a poll on how to choose the civs.. . the link is in the Checklist thread (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=192828).