OK...so we still don't have an agreement of how Protective civs stack with the non-Protective civs.

But, how about Protective civs compared to each other?

Please take a vote, and discuss if you wish...


One of the reasons for having this poll is to get a basic picture of how game difficulties are affected, either positively or negatively, by having one of these leaders.

1. Gilgamesh
2. Qi shuang
3. Sitting bull
4.Toku
5. Corean guy
6. Churchill
7. Saladin
8. Charlemagne
9 .Mao

My ranking is:

1) Qin Shi Huang
2) Wang Kon
3) Chruchill
4) Tokugawa
5) Saladin
6) Mao Zedong

No comment on the BTS leaders.

Oh, I could've voted for 3. Anyways I voted for Wang, that guy always seems to tech like a madman in my games.

I voted Churchhill. Those preotective Redcoats from a charismatic leader!!! Then add the UB for economy. Stronge starting techs can get him moving fast also.

Tokugawa is one of the strongest leaders militarily from the Samuri on, but is real difficult getting there.

Both Chinese leaders are excellent also.

1) Churchill: Redcoats + Charismatic.
2) Gilgamesh: good all-around leader. Ziggurat is huge.
3) Qin: Industrious + UU.
4) Sitting Bull: very close to Top 3 imo, but not huge fan of UB and lightbulbing is less powerful for Protective due to techs.
5) Mao: UU + Protective = early win.
6) Wang Kon: Financial + UB.
7) Toku.
8) Charlemagne.
9) Saladin.

1) Qin
2) Gil
3) Sitting Bull

The rest are more or less equivalent in their respective ways.

Churchill is getting a lot of votes...I'm surprised.

He has Charismatic + Protective, with Redcoats.

But no economic bonuses, unless you count the extra happiness.

I guess the selling point is the synergy with the Redcoat, because it has both leader traits helping it. And pre-Gunpowder, you'll have archery units getting a boost from both leader traits as well.


I voted #3 for him, but that was only considering the 6 protective leaders in Warlords.

charlemagne is strongest protective ldr because he has a UU that is a pike and fights horse and melee which is good cause the enemy uses both.
great Generals are good to attach to pikes and win wars which cost much
but the unique building makes it cheaper

Churchill, Wang Kon, Tokugawa.

Gilly, Chuck and Churchill with close followups WSH and WK

Disregarding the protective trait, I went charismatic, financial and philosophical. But the question is not well defined.. powerful for whom?

Disregarding the protective trait, I went charismatic, financial and philosophical. But the question is not well defined.. powerful for whom?

...for the human player.

Disregarding the protective trait, I went charismatic, financial and philosophical. But the question is not well defined.. powerful for whom?

Be sure to count UU and UBs in aswell.

Not that that makes Cha (Churchill), Fin (WK) or Phi (SB) worse ofc.

There seem to be 3 tiers, at the moment...

1st tier:
Gilgamesh
Churchill

2nd tier:
Wang Kon
Qin Shi Huang
Tokugawa
Sitting Bull

3rd tier:
Charlemagne
Saladin
Mao Zedong



Gilgamesh is in 1st place. Can someone care to explain why he rates so high on the list (I don't play BTS) ?


Also, is Mao Zedong's UU enough to bring him out of last place?

Because his unique building is a 90-hammer courthouse that comes with Priesthood instead of Code of Laws. Combine that with the creative trait, and you have a leader that's a champ at grabbing land. His unique unit is good for rushes also; it's an axeman with 6:strength: but only +25% against melee. Protective helps him hold onto the land he so selfishly hogs for himself.

Voted Gilgamesh, Churchill, Qin Shi Huang.

Gilgamesh- no comments needed here
Sitting Bull- phil isnt something that you can just skip, and if you can do the Machinery/Feu slingshot...
Wang Kong- excellent techer, most players concider his UU as weak, for me it is great.
Churchil- never played with him, but sounds good
Toku- good for warmonger game, nice UU
Qin- For the UU only. Ind+Pro sounds bad to me
Mao- The same reason
Sal- Excellent for religious economy, I rarely play this kind economy
Charlemagne- I really really hate him(sorry Mad)

clearly gil > church > charlie
gil for obvious, great UU/UB + cre, church for redcoats (:D), charlie for nice synergies.

Because his unique building is a 90-hammer courthouse that comes with Priesthood instead of Code of Laws. Combine that with the creative trait, and you have a leader that's a champ at grabbing land. His unique unit is good for rushes also; it's an axeman with 6:strength: but only +25% against melee. Protective helps him hold onto the land he so selfishly hogs for himself.

Voted Gilgamesh, Churchill, Qin Shi Huang.

So, basically, a lot of early game advantages that happen to go to a Protective leader.

...

But Churchill is a much different story, whose UU and UB come much later.
And he's ranking 2nd now. Are the advantages of playing Churchill so great that they can offset the near lack of economic bonuses (besides the extra happiness)?

But Churchill is a much different story, whose UU and UB come much later.
And he's ranking 2nd now. Are the advantages of playing Churchill so great that they can offset the near lack of economic bonuses (besides the extra happiness)?
Churchill is just awesome, as a person. Early Feudalism = you win.

On Churchill: People at times underestimate the extra happy points on Charismatic. You also have to think of Protective Gunpowder units + the lower promotion requirements = uber units.

Well I consider charismatic the best trait now so..
But you're all right that Gilgamesh should be in the top three because of the UU & UB, perhaps replace Sitting Bull as I don't like his UU and UB.

Well I consider charismatic the best trait now so..


I'm not sure I'd say charismatic is the best traits but it's certainly one of my favorites when planning alot of wars. (I.e. about 90% of my games)

Churchill's redcoats rock though.

I'm a warmonger most of the time, so I voted for Churchill, Qin & Toku. Churchill's Redcoats are simply insane, Qin can Pyramid/Forge his way to Machinery, and Toku has multiple UUs as far as I'm concerned (Samurai + every gunpowder unit). Saladin is the one I've had most troubles with, maybe I'm not playing him well. I did win an easy cultural victory with him once though.

perhaps replace Sitting Bull as I don't like his UU and UB.

:eek:

Dog Soldiers+Totem Pole-Enhanced Archers is the closest thing to early-game impregnability I've ever had. And with Philosophical, you don't need much more.

Warlords, it's

1. Churchill
2. Saladin
3. Wang Kon (in theory) or Qui

The problem is people play specialize Saladin with religion in mid and hence think that he's weak, and this is unfair to him. It's their strategy that's weak, not Saladin.

The problem is people play specialize Saladin with religion in mid and hence think that he's weak, and this is unfair to him. It's their strategy that's weak, not Saladin.

I can't say that I blame them for thinking that way. Arabia starts with Mysticism and their unique building can farm a great prophet. That's a shot at an early religion with a theology slingshot as a fall-back plan.

I can't say that I blame them for thinking that way. Arabia starts with Mysticism and their unique building can farm a great prophet. That's a shot at an early religion with a theology slingshot as a fall-back plan.

Yet if it's such a good idea, why is he such a weak leader? I just don't like people's logic. Strategies are supposed to make you stronger, but implicitly it doesn't seem true.

Yet if it's such a good idea, why is he such a weak leader?

Because I can also do a theology slingshot with Ramesses II, and the war chariot is way better than the camel archer. :p

In all fairness, I don't think Saladin is bad, but Spiritual/Protective isn't up there as one of my favorite trait pairs. His old trait combo would have worked wonders with the Madrassa (an awesome and apparently underrated UB).

Mao Zedong picked up 1 vote recently, to bring him into a tie for last.

Meanwhile, Churchill is narrowing the gap between 2nd and 1st.


You know, it's almost a coincidence...I thought Churchill was really great when I started out, but after getting a little more familiar with the game, I thought both Qin Shi Huang and Wang Kon were a notch better than him, because of the economic bonuses. He still ranks 3rd to me, though.

I voted for Churchill (UU), Gilga (UU/UB/Cre = good), and Wang (fin/UB/UU is ok still).

Also ok are Qin and Sitting Bull.

The bad ones imo are Saladin, Mao, and especially Charlemagne. Toku is good late game...if you can get there.

So it looks like Tokugawa is dead center in the middle of the pile.

I'm considering playing my next game as him, come to think of it.

:eek:

Dog Soldiers+Totem Pole-Enhanced Archers is the closest thing to early-game impregnability I've ever had. And with Philosophical, you don't need much more.

No doubt philosophical is strong, but I prefer offensive power. Sitting Bull can't axe rush.. well sure he CAN, just as much as Mansa can skirmish rush. :rolleyes:

Edit: By the way am I the only one that thinks Wangs UU is good?

No doubt philosophical is strong, but I prefer offensive power. Sitting Bull can't axe rush.. well sure he CAN, just as much as Mansa can skirmish rush. :rolleyes:

On the other hand, if I'm going to Axe Rush, I'm going to do it with an Aggressive leader. ;)

Toss up between Wang and Saladin for me, with Churchill a distant third.

Wang's UU is very powerful, but I prefer making a minimal amount of siege.

Best Protective AI's:
1. Gilgamesh
2. Charlemagne
3. Churchill

If I'm playing them:

1. Churchill
2. Tokugawa
3. Gilgamesh

So it looks like Tokugawa is dead center in the middle of the pile.

I'm considering playing my next game as him, come to think of it.


On the other hand, Tokugawa's war strategy would probably be influenced more by Aggressive than Protective.


So I might try someone like Mao Zedong or Qin Shi Huang. I'll think it over a bit...

Because I can also do a theology slingshot with Ramesses II, and the war chariot is way better than the camel archer. :p

In all fairness, I don't think Saladin is bad, but Spiritual/Protective isn't up there as one of my favorite trait pairs. His old trait combo would have worked wonders with the Madrassa (an awesome and apparently underrated UB).

I'm not sure I can stand for this. My biggest gripe with knights is their lack of withdrawal chance. What do camel archers get?! HA-class withdrawal. Even a half-"effort" beeline to guilds can dominate with some spies. What holds up to 50% withdrawal knights pre-rifles/cannons/grenades? Pikes, and basically nothing else. The AI does not use tons of pikes. (besides, war chariots carry a similar counter).

I've been meaning to try a theology bulb with a subsequent beeline to camel archers. Use a shrine or two (especially those juicy captured kind :p) to cover expenses, and really terrorize the world with camel archers + spies.

A first strike immune 10 str unit is pretty scary even remotely early, especially if the iron can be pillaged...

I've seriously beelined curies before just to get some withdrawal chance back. No need with Sal.

BUT:

I didn't vote for him :lol:. There are quite a few leaders on this list that are QUITE powerful, so Sal loses out!

Wang Kon is tops for me, just because of financial.

After all those votes...Churchill and Gilgamesh are tied for 1st at 50 votes.


Well, seeing how high Qin Shi Huang ranks on the list, it looks like Mao Zedong will be the next leader I play.

I also want to play Tokugawa, but since he's Aggressive, and I want to play a Protective game, it will have to wait until later.

With Mao in dead last on the list, it seems like he'll be a real test.

Toku's entire game is dictated by war since he can leverage nearly any wartime scenario into an advantage. At the start of the game, he can invade with Aggressive Axemen stacked with cheap Protective Archers for defense. Once he starts capturing cities, he can expose his newly captured cities to counterinvasion, allowing his Protective Archers to mop up enemy stacks before continuing his rampage through enemy land.

Half-price Walls in newly captured cities is pretty nice to use for this tactic, the one case in which I can imagine using Chichen Itza for its listed benefit.

I think giglamesh is just crazy good. I had my most dominant games with him. Priesthood courthouse combined with great wall. Get you access to real spy points. I never teched so fast. After settled a great spy and later built scotland yard. His UU is great for early rush, and combined with those early courthouses you actually afford to just rush.

But I usually beeline to alphabet, you can use spies effective long before the anyone else. I think I had my strongest spy games with giglamesh.

Now I just got BTS, but Giglamesh is one I had best tech lead. I just steal the techs from the AI tech leader and research such stuff that dont interest AI.

Mao isn't precisely bad or weak, given the existence of Cho-ko-nus and the Pavilion. That's why I voted for my top three and then called the rest more or less equal.

Mao isn't bad, but there are atleast 5 of the others better than him - protective leaders are not bad!

Sorry :blush:

I just get impression that many here underestimate protective. Maybe it depend on your game style. I cant say that my games gone worse with protective leaders. But I just play diffrent with each kind off leaders.

Well it might have to do with my playstyle but I can't remember many situations in which I wouldn't rather have any other trait than protective. Sure you can utilize it in various ways.. you can also save every forest you have for lumbermills, you can do alot of things. :)

The poll results have nearly crystallized, as of now.

There are, roughly speaking, 3 tiers for protective leaders:

Tier 1:
Gilgamesh
Churchill
Qin Shi Huang

Tier 2:
Wang Kon
Tokugawa
Sitting Bull

Tier 3:
Charlemagne
Saladin
Mao Zedong

I voted for Churchill (UU), Gilga (UU/UB/Cre = good), and Wang (fin/UB/UU is ok still).

Also ok are Qin and Sitting Bull.

The bad ones imo are Saladin, Mao, and especially Charlemagne. Toku is good late game...if you can get there.
That were my choices exactly for the same reasons you mention.

Churchill is a charismatic civ (happy faces are important early game) with a strong UU a good UB.
Gilga has an excellent UU, a godly UB, and Cre which is perfect in earlygame.
Wang is fin with a good UB and a decent UU. nuff said.

I rank toku low because of the bad synergy of his traits before you reach gunpowder and nationalism. Once you get there he is quite a mean guy :lol:. That is if you reach there in one piece :p

Saladin is so under-rated... :(

Funny how that immortal thread talks about how bad anarchy is, which is why FE's are so much better with spiritual.

I gotta admit, I'm a little suprised at the Qin/Mao split, currently at 46/4. Industrious is really eleven times better than expansive? I like expansive better, but it shows you what these boards think these days.

Edit: Hey Artichoker, you should do this for all the traits

People love shiny things, so it's not surprising they'd like Qin, though he's definitely one of the weakest Ind leaders.

Roosevelt, Ramses, and Pacal are infinitely better.

...and Pacal are infinitely better.

You mean Capac, right?

I voted for Qin Shi Huang, Gilgamesh and Tokugawa, in the order.

Qin has the ideal setup to exploit the Oracle for very early Cho-Ko-Nus. If he can keep his opponents off horses, he will dominate warfare for millenia. Alternatively, he is well suited for a wonder-fueled cultural victory.

Gilgamesh uses Protective as a part of an effective package, although it's not the strongest part: An axeman that's better at offense to conquer some land, Protective Archers and Creative to keep it, cheap and early courthouses to make it possible when it would be overextending otherwise.

Tokugawa gets the bestest regular combat troops from the middle ages on... samurai followed by excellent riflemen (which retain their full bonuses when drafted) topped off by a UB that boosts production and health (albeit indirectly) in the industrial age. Although I prefer economic to military bonuses myself... holy cow!

***

Honourable mention: Charlemagne. City spamming with the ability to afford them and to defend them. Once corporations come around, he gets utterly ridiculous.
Only a honourable mention because I have a harder time playing to his strengths.

The main strength of Qin is not the synergy with slingshot Cho-Ku-Nus but the fact that the chinese has the best starting tech combination (agriculture and mining).

Qin's only better because of the UU beeline. Hmmm, but you could probably just chop a lot of forests for oracle anyway. Then again you get the half price forges.

Expansive is a better trait though... overall mao's probably stronger than Qin since he can REX better, and by stronger I mean you'll have a bigger advantage in most games.

You mean Capac, right?

Yeah. All those guys look and sound alike.

Getting Metal Casting (and ergo, cheap forges) from the Oracle is a great strategy for all industrious leaders. It's just that much better for Qin Shi Huang because a Machinery slingshot gets him uber-crossbows.

Tokugawa, but I only have the original version of Civ4, so most of the other leaders are unknown to me.

:eek:

Dog Soldiers+Totem Pole-Enhanced Archers is the closest thing to early-game impregnability I've ever had. And with Philosophical, you don't need much more.

That will certainly help you avoid losing in the early game. But how do you plan to win?

Sitting Bull never wins.

That will certainly help you avoid losing in the early game. But how do you plan to win?

Er . . . you've heard of an SE, right? :)

Qin's only better because of the UU beeline. Hmmm, but you could probably just chop a lot of forests for oracle anyway. Then again you get the half price forges.

Expansive is a better trait though... overall mao's probably stronger than Qin since he can REX better, and by stronger I mean you'll have a bigger advantage in most games.


I'm not so sure about that...but I'll have to see for myself.

Having a 50% production bonus on wonders makes them both quicker to build and more likely to be built successfully.

However, I'm going to choose Mao Zedong for my next game because he's against the grain, according to the poll.

Voted for Gilly (Cre, Vultures, Ziggurat, nice one), Charly (utterly ridicolous REX machine, but Shaka is better at this imo), and Sal (Spiritual, nuff said).

I'm not so sure about that...but I'll have to see for myself.

Having a 50% production bonus on wonders makes them both quicker to build and more likely to be built successfully.

Sure, industrious has other uses, but the trait is part of what makes the Machinery slingshot so powerful for Qin Shi Huang. You get a production bonus for the Oracle and cheap forges once you get Metal Casting as your free technology.

However, I'm going to choose Mao Zedong for my next game because he's against the grain, according to the poll.

Yeah, I think Mao Zedong is definitely the underdog. Wasn't he Organized/Philosophical in vanilla? That combo would probably be more popular.

How would one play Mao Zedong? Spam Workers to improve tiles and Speed grow your Cities with quick ganaries while you beeline Happy/Luxury Techs (eg - Calender, Monarchy & Drama)

and Once you grow to Max Pop in the Classical Age you Beeline to Machinery and War?

Maybe they should of Given him the Organized/Protective Trait Combination instead, Mass conquering with Chokunus while you Whip in cheap Courthouss or while you're running high cost Civcs eg- Vassalage. *Shrugs*...

Too bad they didn't give him Sitting Bull's Trait Combination... Oracle to Metal Casting and assign an Engineer Specialist after Prechopping/Building a Forge so you can Bulb Machinery for Fast Protective Chokunus... That would have been a nice synergy....

Cheap workers can mean more quickly improved tiles, which in turn can mean a tech edge. And every time I play a non-expansive Civ, I keep wishing I were expansive every time I hit the Industrial era and my health goes down the tubes. Maybe I'll give Mao a go (though I voted for Qin). It seems he would focus on having better cities that are easily protected, while Qin focuses on protecting his Wonderspamming. :)

Voted Qin for the poll. Cheap forges, choo-koo-koo, and cherry picked wonders add up to make the whole greater than sum of his parts.

Gilgamesh comes next for me. He'd be number 1, but he has so many interesting angles to pursue in such a limited time that you really cannot fully utilize all of them! Chariots, quick cottages, REX, or axe rush? It's just all too much.

Next is a 3 way tie between Wang, Toku, and the Burger King. Wang gets the user friendly financial and sweet uniques. He is also THE man to beat if you want to found one of the starting religions. Toku intrigues me with his starting techs and uniques. He has a distinct style of play that I find enjoyable. Charlie is up there for his monsters uniques, so good they trump his questionable trait combo. :king:

Honestly, Wang should prob be alone at 3, but he loses style points for the rather vanilla style of play he encourages. ;)

Wonder spamming isn't the strongest strat. In most games, you're probably better off expanding more than building lots of wonders. If you're only planning on building oracle early, you're better off being mao and having to spend a whole 50 more hammers for oracle. If you're planning on building great wall or pyramids, then Qin would be better.

Wonder spamming isn't the strongest strat.

Tell that to obsolete. :)

How would one play Mao Zedong? Spam Workers to improve tiles and Speed grow your Cities with quick ganaries while you beeline Happy/Luxury Techs (eg - Calender, Monarchy & Drama)

and Once you grow to Max Pop in the Classical Age you Beeline to Machinery and War?

Maybe they should of Given him the Organized/Protective Trait Combination instead, Mass conquering with Chokunus while you Whip in cheap Courthouss or while you're running high cost Civcs eg- Vassalage. *Shrugs*...

Too bad they didn't give him Sitting Bull's Trait Combination... Oracle to Metal Casting and assign an Engineer Specialist after Prechopping/Building a Forge so you can Bulb Machinery for Fast Protective Chokunus... That would have been a nice synergy....


This is coming from a purely theoretical perspective, as I have never played Mao Zedong before...

For an Expansive leader, you would want to maximize the hammer discount on both Workers and Granaries. So, you would want to create situations in which the number of Workers and Granaries is maximized to whatever is practically possible.

For this to work, the build priority of cities will tend to favor Granaries over Barracks, for most cities. This means that military unit production should be coming from as few cities as possible, so that the utility of each Barracks (which gets no hammer discount) is maximized.

I agree. Exploiting the production bonus towards workers and granaries is a huge part of playing expansive to its strengths. Unfortunately, I find that granaries aren't always worth it if you don't have early luxuries; the low happy cap either forces you to avoid growth or whip and have the city grow back to its happy cap faster than the whip unhappiness goes away. In this case, you need a religion or hereditary rule to give you extra happiness, and I think that's a matter or luck for Mao Zedong: either he gets religion from a neighbor or has a excruciating wait as he techs Monarchy. I think of expansive and protective as traits that lend themselves to expansion, but put them together and you have no economic advantage to balance things out.

Short version: pray for early luxuries in your game. ;) (Or consider building the Oracle with Monarchy as your free tech.)

Expansion is an economic advantage. Whipping granaries at size 2 is let's see, 24+26=50 food faster than at size 4, and then you'll grow to size 4 only slightly slower than it would take to grow to size 4 without the granary.

Granaries are just too expensive to afford in the REX phase without expansive. With it, you're quicker to jump into production or cottaging. It does help to have happiness, but you can still 2 pop whip axemen for double production.

There could be a significant difference in the bonuses for Expansive in Warlords and BTS.

According to the BTS Info Center, Expansive gives only a +25% bonus to Worker production. But it's +50% in Warlords.

Gilga / Churchill

and Charlemagne.

With Qin it is easy to do a machinery slingshot for the awesome Cho-ko-nu (or whatever its called)

@Above: It is Chokonu, and that is the main reason I find him better than Mao. Other than that, I think people like the chinese uniques and therefore vote one chinese in, and that is mostly QSH. The difference between the two chinese is minimal, but it's silly to use 2 votes on china, although most voters find them good enough to use one vote. I believe Mao would've gotten many more votes if QSH was further down the list/Not available.

Qin is much better for pursuing Cultural Victories because of the Industrious trait. Therefore he outstripped Mao, for me.

@Above: It is Chokonu, and that is the main reason I find him better than Mao. Other than that, I think people like the chinese uniques and therefore vote one chinese in, and that is mostly QSH. The difference between the two chinese is minimal, but it's silly to use 2 votes on china, although most voters find them good enough to use one vote. I believe Mao would've gotten many more votes if QSH was further down the list/Not available.

That's a very possible scenario...

I could have added a second question for the 3 weakest Protective leaders, but I fear that might have been too biased, especially for the bad name that some of them have (Saladin, maybe?).

Saladin is not weak, imho, none of the PRO's really are, they just require a different strategy, and I don't like the Sal strategy, too biased against a religion and against early war.