Which German leader would you like best for playing on prince and maybe monarch later.

I prefer Frederick, he is better for warmongering. If you want to go wonderspam pick Bismarck.

Both work fine on higher difficulties, it's more about how you play than what leaders you pick. :)

Both are good. I lean toward Fred because I think phil + org is a stronger combo than exp + ind. If you pick up some nice wonder combinations though Bismarck can be quite strong as well.

The German UB is only ok, but the UU is exceptional. Imo it is one of the top 3 UUs in the game. This is imo because of the power of tanks already in BtS.

Frederick gets a discount on the UB, which of course is nice. But mostly, Philosophical beats Industrous and Organized beats Expansive..so no question really in my mind.

Expansive trait is so bad, I'd probably rank it worse than financial.

I ran a few tests on the charismatic trait lately, but so far this one seems to fail bigtime for me. I"m not saying it totally sucks, it's just I find it not performing up to standards. Hell, you lose half your trait when your obelisk goes kaplooie (assuming you even have one!). And only get that extra happy face again once you get radio towers built? Groan.... and what is +1 happy at that point when your cities are supposed to be much greater anyhow, and resources give at least +2 by that stage.

I ran a few tests on the charismatic trait lately, but so far this one seems to fail bigtime for me.

Half of charismatic depends on play-style. The higher happy cap is a decent economic boost in the early game where it is needed most but the promotion bonus really rocks for warmongering.
Together, it is a top trait for me.

I think both German leaders are very balanced and the traits have good sych with each other.

Bismark has an earlier advantage as he can get early wonders, early and cheap forge (if MC slingshot is done) and the expansive trait helps with cheap graneries. Industrious still helps at the mid to late game, but if properly played the IND of Bismark should not matter much whether you get those wonders (as you should be pretty far ahead). The expansive +2 health helps at the end with the UB, you need coal to help build it faster but get the extra unhealth from coal. THe expansive trait helps control that.

Fred can expand further earlier because of the org trait and fast courthouse. The very fast production of assembly plants are amazing if you have coal. He excels at mid came with all the early GPs and fast production of universities.

The UU has no preference for one over the other, as all the groundwork of the traits have been laid.

As I said above I think the UB is helped by both the expansive and organized traits.

I am a fan of the late game civilizations, Americans and Germans because those leaders get stronger the longer the game plays out.

Expansive trait is so bad, I'd probably rank it worse than financial.

I ran a few tests on the charismatic trait lately, but so far this one seems to fail bigtime for me. I"m not saying it totally sucks, it's just I find it not performing up to standards. Hell, you lose half your trait when your obelisk goes kaplooie (assuming you even have one!). And only get that extra happy face again once you get radio towers built? Groan.... and what is +1 happy at that point when your cities are supposed to be much greater anyhow, and resources give at least +2 by that stage.

Well, you play in an odd way :p With your playstyle Charismatic wouldn't reach it's top potential. (or do you play "normal" sometimes too? :D)
The 2 happy early game is invaluable, when obelisks go obsolete ;) happy isn't very important anymore, but army is, and thats what you need at that point.

Monuments go obsolete with Astronomy, at which point you can trade for :) from overseas civs. It's not like before where they went obsolete with Calendar. That sucked.

Philosophical is much more powerful than Industrious.

Monuments go obsolete with Astronomy, at which point you can trade for :) from overseas civs. It's not like before where they went obsolete with Calendar. That sucked.

But you didn't have to research it. The AI would always want to GIVE it to you :P

I always wondered if this was just because it KNEW you'd lose your obelisks. I suppose they moved the obsolete point to astronomy because the charismatic players were complaining so much.

And now, the AI doesn't gift it anymore :(

Up till monarch Bismark is better (or should rephrased as more fun). Expansive and industrious lead to early wonders, which add a lot more depth and enjoyment to the game.

Emperor+ I'd go with Frederick. Philosophical is a powerful trait, and organized is pretty darn good too. You can still build wonders and be Bismark, but for Frederick all you need to do is pull an early REX, pop some techs, trade around, and pull away as you can pop more techs/start golden ages/abuse your tech lead in a war (I'm thinking more emperor here).

@obsolete: I agree. Besides, charismatic's bonuses still aren't good enough to bypass hereditary rule for a CE early on and wouldn't add anything to a specialist economy.

@obsolete: I agree. Besides, charismatic's bonuses still aren't good enough to bypass hereditary rule for a CE early on and wouldn't add anything to a specialist economy.

Why would you bypass hereditary rule with charismatic? You got to get happy from somewhere, Charismatic gives you it straight from the start, get a couple of happy resources and your cities can be size 8-9 (10 for capital), thats usually enough for the early game. Later you can build temples, switch civics and other stuff, but the early happy gives you a production/growth boost which is invaluable. I feel gimped when playing without it, thats how huge i feel the effect from it.

CE/SE has nothing to do with this, Charismatic gives a straight boost in growth/production from the start with no expensive techs/wonders in price. Add cheaper promotions for all units in addition and you got one of the best traits in the game.

So in conclusion, Charismatic Frederick would be the best choice.
(sorry for derailing ;))

Charismatic is a very good warmongering tech no doubt. But economically, I was thinking about the happy cap on immortal, 5 for capital and 4 for other cities IIRC? +2 happiness to other cities gives you 6 plus, lets say, gold for 7 happiness. 7 happiness is huge, but if you had just the gold w/o charismatic you still have 5, and working 5 cottages to get to an early Hereditary rule lets your cities to grow to size 13, 14, 15, etc. Its a trade off- the charismatic trait helps the happy cap, but you'd still want the early HR to grow cities unlimited. The size 7 pop would help you get to HR earlier, but it after HR charismatics +2 happiness dies off and non-charismatic works almost as effectively. If charismatic let your cities grow to size 11 or 12, then you would just bypass HR and go straight for CoL/civil service/currency.

Edit: Of course, this is for my playstyle.

Playstyle differs, if you always go for early monarchy Charismatic won't seem that strong but keep in mind you sacrifice things for that early HR too, not everybody techs the same way you do. Some people get pyramids instead, some other conquer early for extra happy. Thats the beauty of this game, no set strategy is the best. Play the map and the traits to your best, don't get stuck in a set strategy you do every time. :p

phil + org (...) exp + ind.

Waiting traits against each other, thos four rank:
1: Org
2: Exp
3: Ind
4: Phil
...In my style of games, atleast. Maybe if playing a nation biased against cultural victory (France?) I'd rate Phi and Ind higher than Exp.
I'd prolly pick Freddy, Org is a top tier trait. Exp is mid-low tier, and Ind & Phil is bottom-rack, with Ind being slightly better than Phi.

I don't understand how you can rank philosophical so low. What is wrong with generating more great people faster? Industrious I can see as hit or miss depending on play style, availability of stone/marble, and availability of good production centers, but I never say no to more great people faster.

I don't understand how you can rank philosophical so low. What is wrong with generating more great people faster? Industrious I can see as hit or miss depending on play style, availability of stone/marble, and availability of good production centers, but I never say no to more great people faster.

The only argument that I can see is if you don't mind having a wonder driven GP farm. This would probably only work on Monarch and lower, but theorectically an Industrious leader could build more wonders, thus generating an equal or greater amount of GPPs as philosophical leaders. It would run into a lot of problems at higher levels because of the happiness/health shortage and the AI bonuses. You wouldn't have much control over what GPs you got, it would be a crackerjack box GP farm at best.

One of the powerful uses of philosophical is the fast univeristy and thus oxford. Run a few scientists in multiple cities early on, stock them away or tech Phil, paper, education very early. Then spam the cheap universities in all your cities and build Oxford in the chief science city. The AI will be behind for a long time in tech. You can ignore liberalism for a while if you want (I generally don't) and the quality of the GP farm doesn't matter (well it does, but not essential to leverage). Use another GS to bulb printing press, get liberalism and replacable parts and soon you have rifles before anyone is close to education. All because of the PHIL trait. Just 4 GS's ASAP.

The fast building for Philosophical comes very late compared to others, and the fast GPs allow that leader to there quickly. The AI is VERY slow getting to education.

The only similar trait that allows that big on an edge is doing the MC oracle slingshot which allows cheap forges faster than any AI for massive production.

I think both German leaders are very balanced
I am a fan of the late game civilizations, Americans and Germans because those leaders get stronger the longer the game plays out.

Well it helps that all of their leaders have excellent traits.. :P Lincoln in particular whom I've never tried (always have a hard time playing with american swordsmen :lol: ) is a member of the famous "Two top tier traits club" or T4 club. The other members are Liz and Hannibal.

The only argument that I can see is if you don't mind having a wonder driven GP farm. This would probably only work on Monarch and lower, but theorectically an Industrious leader could build more wonders, thus generating an equal or greater amount of GPPs as philosophical leaders. It would run into a lot of problems at higher levels because of the happiness/health sortage and the AI bonuses. You wouldn't have much control over what GPs you got, it would be a crackerjack box GP farm at best.

obsolete can prove you wrong.. ;)
Mind you, I'm not arguing industrous is better than philosophical, it's certainly not close to as good.

Industrious can be quite good. Nabbing certain wonder combos can be really helpful at times. Pyramids-Parthenon-GL-NE. GLH-Colossus-ToA. SM-US-AP-SC. Not to mention the faster builds of National Wonders (Oxford, IW, WS). And not to mention some expensive but great late-game wonders (SoL, Pent, CR).

However, philosophical is great and faster Oxford is also great. Universities are pricy and the cities you usually want them in usually have low hammers so getting them 1/2 off is nothing to sneeze at.

Industrious can be quite good. Nabbing certain wonder combos can be really helpful at times. Pyramids-Parthenon-GL-NE. GLH-Colossus-ToA. SM-US-AP-SC. Not to mention the faster builds of National Wonders (Oxford, IW, WS). And not to mention some expensive but great late-game wonders (SoL, Pent, CR).

.

Mmmmmm...he said wooooonnnnndddeeeerrrrrrsssss....sorry drooling...gonna go play as Bismark now....mmmmmm shiny shiny cities with lots of buildings I don't need....mmmmmmmm

I find that in my games the Frederick AI almost always plays better than the Bismarck AI. Bismarck is programmed to focus more heavily on military and thus doesn't fully leverage his industrious trait, IMO.

I find that in my games the Frederick AI almost always plays better than the Bismarck AI. Bismarck is programmed to focus more heavily on military and thus doesn't fully leverage his industrious trait, IMO.

Fred the AI does play a bit better, but Bismark the AI has hogged wonders in my games. Bismark is also more unpredictable in BTS and seams to prefer war more than Warlords. To many tiems I have lost out on wonder races early on to Bismark.

I've never understood Bismarck's preference for early warring. Late warring I can understand with the Panzer and all, but industrious + expansive doesn't scream warfare to me. Fred the AI is a tightwad tech-trader which I think adds to his competitiveness. He'll trade, but it better be in his favour :lol: Phil+Org I think is fairly easy for the AI to leverage as well, especially given their preference for building farms all over the place :lol: It's a bit better in BtS but the AI still needs to build more cottages imo.