View Full Version : The Americans


Ision
Dec 28, 2003, 02:39 AM
I have decided to do a review on each CIV. My intention is to encourage debate and hopefully to help others (and myself) in their game play.

The Americans

“I love thee, I love thee not, I love thee, I love thee not…” would be the national anthem of America if the Civs had one. Beloved, despised and sometimes both at the same time - America is one of the most debated Civs in the game. Typically this Civ is disliked by ‘newbies’ and praised by the higher-level players. The truth lies somewhere in between.

Industrious and Expansionist, America has the traits that can result in an explosive early game start. In combination these two traits are arguably the most complimentary traits in the game. Together these two traits result in pure production power. The Industrious trait will result in a faster road network. This will quickly translates out to higher gold revenues than most other Civs. The Expansionist trait usually results into a quick tech lead combined with a greater knowledge of the map. Add to this the fact that America starts with Pottery, which allows for immediate access to granaries, and this results in a faster city expansion. Add yet again the fact that those early scouts will have located the ‘prime real estate’ for the settlers to found the cities. Combine all these elements and what results is a total city lead, scientific lead, commercial lead, production lead, and trade advantage. Out of the starting gate, few if any Civs can rival the sheer force of the American expansion.

The trick to America is to translate that early lead into a permanent state of affairs. It is here that the ‘newbie’ loses patience and the veteran begins to cement his dominance. America, and only 2 other Civs, has no half priced buildings of any sort. The American pays ‘sticker’ price on everything! To offset this it is imperative that the American maintain his expansion as long as possible. He may not crank out temples and libraries as fast as others – but he will have more. He may take longer on those barracks and airports - but he will have more. His cities may not produce as much science, food, or commerce as other Civs – but he will out produce them nevertheless. With America – SIZE DOES MATTER. The key to this Civ is simple. It’s a numbers game.

As a warmonger Civ America is greatly underrated. The lack of a UU in the first 3 ages leads many to this false conclusion. Whatever America may lack in quality is easily made up in quantity. Or to quote a particularly evil man, “quantity is it’s own quality”. Given the typical large sprawling empire of the Americans, the ability to crank out what will seem like an endless stream of units can quickly overwhelm even the best equipped or cutting edge of armies. America wins it wars with its economy (pure production/commerce/quantity advantage) and logistics (faster workers facilitating military movement by roading). A successful early war with America will pay off more than perhaps any other Civ. Launch that war at the end of your expansion phase (or during - if the conditions are perfect) and you indirectly lengthen that expansion phase. Remember, with America – SIZE DOES MATTER. If you’re the type of player that likes to have high scores – you will be hard pressed to find a better Civ than America. As a builder America is again, often underrated. No you will not have the oldest temples/libraries in the game, but to repeat myself – you will have the most. America builds almost in the same manner that it wars – it relies on the power of its economy. While not the best of builder Civs, America can hold it’s own well. I will add this however; with this Civ you are often better served waiting (Middle Ages) to build temples or libraries. Their benefit simply does not outweigh the fact that they are slowing that crucial expansion phase. Chase those luxury resources like crazy – while important to any Civ, their impact on America is especially strong.

America has 3 major downsides. Firstly a Modern Age UU (the F-15 jet fighter) that while an excellent and versatile unit (now with the C3C improvements) it simply is a non-factor in all but the most unusual of circumstances. Secondly, the lack of an early UU necessitates that America pursue at least a minimal wonder strategy in order to initiate a Golden Age. This will tie up a valuable city or two in the part of the game - where it hurts America the most. As a production powerhouse, I strongly recommend the pursuit of the Pyramids for this Civ – free granaries for America accentuates their production advantage to near ridiculous levels! Regardless, pull 1 Industrious wonder in the Ancient Age and Copernicus or Magellan’s in the Middle Ages, for your GA.

The 3rd downside is a subtle one, but the most important one. In essence America plays ‘differently’ than any other Civ. There is a certain commonality of play between most Civs that is not as consistent with America. The Civ trait combo that is perhaps the most complimentary in the game - may also be the most demanding. The fundamental problem with America is that no other Civ is as unforgiving of early mistakes as America. New players struggle with proper worker management, happiness, and tech research. America is built around proper worker management and getting the absolute most out of their traits. This Civ is a challenge even to mid-level players, no wonder that ‘newbies’ dislike this Civ so intensely! Every Civ provides players with built in advantages; America has very subtle advantages that require patience and attention to detail.

Summary: Before C3C, I often said that if America had a UU like the Immortal or Rider, there would have been a ‘best’ Civ – America would have been untouchable. Had you asked me to rate this Civ prior to C3C, I would have given it an unqualified top tier status (among my personal top 5). This is no longer the case. The toning down of the Industrious trait hits America harder than any other Industrious Civ. America relies on the strengths of this trait to a greater extent than all the other Industrious Civs. The greater value of expansionist does mitigate this somewhat, but not enough to balance out the loss. So where does Ision put them? As usual America doesn’t make anything easy. On a huge/pang map – 1st tier choice, on a stand/continents map – 2nd tier choice – on a small map or island map – 3rd tier bottom level. So I’ll split the difference, overall a middle of the pack - second tier Civ.

below is the link to my other Civ reviews:

other CIV Reviews by Ision (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=87014)

Zardnaar
Dec 28, 2003, 04:34 AM
Your longest review yet. Unfortionatly for America (and expansionist civs in general) most industrious civs can be played like america. You may not have scout but you can build more warriors or UU to get the job done to some degree.

My personal favourite is the Maya at the moment. This civ I think can beat America in the early growth because of the agriculture trait and the Javelin thrower UU. The civ where you look forward to barbarian huts. America might get to the other side of the map 1st or grab an early tech lead but good luck keeping it.

Kaboth
Dec 28, 2003, 04:48 AM
Wow I never realised America was quite so respected, an insightful and much appreciated review of them. Here's hoping I land them as random some day :) So which Civ is next Ision?

ipris
Dec 28, 2003, 09:54 AM
well done Ision, thanks. I think i'll check out some of your other reviews.

ybbor
Dec 28, 2003, 10:08 AM
something i've noticed in all of your reviews, especially this one is too much emphasis on thepositive, and not enough tips on how to combat the negative. who's next? (you know we're always going to ask you that question, put it at the end of your reviews) how about japan?

wilbill
Dec 28, 2003, 10:15 AM
The 3rd downside is a subtle one, but the most important one. In essence America plays ‘differently’ than any other Civ. There is a certain commonality of play between most Civs that is not as consistent with America. The Civ trait combo that is perhaps the most complimentary in the game - may also be the most demanding. The fundamental problem with America is that no other Civ is as unforgiving of early mistakes as America. New players struggle with proper worker management, happiness, and tech research. America is built around proper worker management and getting the absolute most out of their traits. This Civ is a challenge even to mid-level players, no wonder that ‘newbies’ dislike this Civ so intensely! Every Civ provides players with built in advantages; America has very subtle advantages that require patience and attention to detail Nice insight, Ision. Now I know why I've always flinched a little when the RNG makes me the Americans. Knowing what the challenge is, though, I think I'll start my next game as Honest Abe! And with a more positive attitude.

Ision
Dec 28, 2003, 11:54 AM
"something i've noticed in all of your reviews, especially this one is too much emphasis on thepositive, and not enough tips on how to combat the negative. "

That's the problem with doing Civ reviews - there's no pleasing everyone.

My focus on what you call the 'postive' is in reality a focus on the 'ideal'. In other words, how a Civ may perform when played to it's strengths. I believe that I cover plenty of 'negatives' in my reviews. In fact in this case nearly half the review examines the weaker aspects of the Civ.

Nevertheless, thanks for you input.

Ision

Kaboth
Dec 28, 2003, 02:12 PM
Is the next civ a secret/suprise? Or perhaps Ision hasn't thought who to write about next :D I look forward to when there all done, I'll certainly add them to my collection of Civ3 resources.

Ision
Dec 28, 2003, 02:32 PM
Kaboth,

Rome

Ision

ybbor
Dec 28, 2003, 02:42 PM
Originally posted by Ision
My focus on what you call the 'postive' is in reality a focus on the 'ideal'. In other words, how a Civ may perform when played to it's strengths.

i din't think of it like that, i probably never would have posted that if not for the post you made in one of your earlier reviews that we should have more discussion than just "good review ision :goodjob: " and it is a good review, i just wanted to arise discussion

Ision
Dec 28, 2003, 03:03 PM
ybbor,

I apologize if I sounded 'testy'.

Yes I do want discussion and disagreement. for example, if you had said, "I disagree Ision, I believe that America is no harder to play than any other Civ" followed by your x-y-z reason for disagreement. Thats what I welcome and am looking for.

However, my take on your criticism was not my points - but of my writing style (too much positives - not enough negatives) - I freely admit that I am not Mark Twain! Because of the effort involved in writing these things I may get a bit testy when this comes into question.

Once again, thanks for your input.

Ision

tigerden27
Dec 28, 2003, 04:07 PM
Having never played America and considering myself a mid-level (newly Monarch) player. I have a few questions about America as a civ:

1) Is it possible to still be in the game if you haven't gotten a Golden Age somewhere in the Middle/Industrial ages?

2) Do fighters/F-15 not spawn Golden Ages?

3) Would it be worth not getting the Golden Age until F-15 to plan for a Space Race victory?

Thanks,

BTW, good review.

Ision
Dec 28, 2003, 06:13 PM
tigerden27,

1, yes

2. yes (the F-15 does intiate a GA)

3. no

Ision

SammyDaBull
Dec 28, 2003, 07:29 PM
Or to quote a particularly evil man, “quantity is it’s own quality”

That quote was either Ford or an Allied general, i don't see how he is evil.

Ision
Dec 28, 2003, 07:38 PM
it was Joseph Stalin

Kjle
Dec 28, 2003, 09:52 PM
Very good reveiw. I prefer America early in the game, but like all Expansionist civs, it loses some of its magic after I've finished expoloring. One petty gripe, though important to me: I find it less exotic than some of the others. I'd prefer to found Heliopolis rather than Buffalo.

Archer 007
Dec 29, 2003, 03:24 AM
I just hate America's UU.

Vanadorn
Dec 29, 2003, 11:24 AM
Playing against America in a number of my later games, I can safely say that if you have not begun to whittle Lincoln's power before the Industrial Revolution, it is a trying task to uproot him after that time.

An excellent review, as are the other's you have written. Informative without being too long. Bravo.

Zoke0
Dec 29, 2003, 11:30 AM
I played as the Americans the first time I ever played Civ3 (and civilization for that matter). After learning how to use them, I felt a little tied down when I tried anyone else. Now I don't feel as though I'm stuck with a "noobish" civ, but infact I choose a good civ when I was a newb (I love how that word has two ways to spell it).


Also Kjle. I find it much more fun to found cities that are American that aren't on the list like St. Paul instead of founding New Washington or New Heliopolis for that matter.

kb2tvl
Dec 29, 2003, 12:51 PM
This is probably one of your best reviews. The expansionist trait can score you a free settler or city very early which will give you an early score lead.

One of the more subtle tricks is to get a large score early and the other civs will tend to leave you alone if you build a few military units. I can't stress the advantage of getting an extra city/higher score early gives.

Also, there are some techs that bolster the expansionist civs. Those are writing and map making. America will probably meet more civs sooner and America can sell contacts and their world map for a ton of techs and cash. This is another very important charateristic of an expansionist civ in civ 3/ptw.

Ision
Dec 30, 2003, 01:46 AM
"One of the more subtle tricks is to get a large score early and the other civs will tend to leave you alone if you build a few military units. I can't stress the advantage of getting an extra city/higher score early gives."

kb2tvl,

Well said and accurate. Once the AIs avoid wars with you, - your flexibility increases significantly.

Ision

Nación_Íbera
Dec 30, 2003, 04:49 AM
my question is,
why is there an American civ in the first place? and i need a historical explication, please.
do 200 years of history really desirve to be set in the game in spite of other civs like Spain? as far as i know, the Spanish Empire discovered America and once ruled half of the world.
cheers!

kb2tvl
Dec 30, 2003, 10:33 AM
America deserves a civ because americans will be more inclined to buy this game. :)

Zardnaar
Dec 30, 2003, 01:03 PM
Originally posted by Nación_Íbera
my question is,
why is there an American civ in the first place? and i need a historical explication, please.
do 200 years of history really desirve to be set in the game in spite of other civs like Spain? as far as i know, the Spanish Empire discovered America and once ruled half of the world.
cheers!

So who has the biggest economy or effectivly rules the world now? If that doesn't qualify I don't know what does. Germany is younger than America and they're in the game. I

Its a game. Its so biased. Wheres New Zealand as a Civ. I can see it now. Seafaring and Agricutural with either a 8/10 Anzac Infantry UU or a Maori War Canoe UU.

All bow down to NZ:D

Flavor Dave
Dec 30, 2003, 02:34 PM
Great review. Yes, the Americans have the best "complement" of traits. Another thing is that the early game is critical. If you can get a good food square in your capital, then you've got a worker/settler factory. Then use your scout to lock up luxuries. Then you're set.

Kaboth
Dec 30, 2003, 04:46 PM
So who would be the leader for New Zealand; Peter Jackson wearing his polo shirt and shorts? :D UU Hobbits?

dozenlong
Dec 30, 2003, 07:03 PM
kbtvl is right. Without americans, there'd be no civ3!

Zardnaar
Dec 30, 2003, 10:20 PM
Originally posted by Kaboth
So who would be the leader for New Zealand; Peter Jackson wearing his polo shirt and shorts? :D UU Hobbits?

Why not.

CIVPhilzilla
Dec 31, 2003, 01:08 PM
Well done Ision, this was a very good review and you definatley hit the nail on the head about the Americans. Though after the toning down of industrious and the addition of agricultural, America is no longer the mass expander it used to be. I think that has been passed down to the Mayans.

Ision
Jan 01, 2004, 11:28 AM
CIVPhilzilla,

I agree the Mayans may be the new kings of 'rapid expansion' - interestingly their early game play is very similar (not identical) to the Americans.

Ision

Zardnaar
Jan 01, 2004, 04:24 PM
Ision. I'm considering using the Americans when I move up to Demi God/Deity. Do the higher difficulty levels punish the expansionistic trait? Also wouldn't it be harder to trigger a american GA if you have to wait for F15s and fail to build the right wonders? Rocketry is a long way off. I usually use my GA to catch up to the AI.

Ision
Jan 01, 2004, 04:44 PM
The Higher levels reward this trait. Pottery=instant access to granary. Scouts=at least a couple of techs and maybe a lucky settler. The higher the level the more important rapid expansion is. The more important rapid expansion is , the greater the value of the EXP trait. Remember, the stupid AI NEVER builds any scouts - it only plays with the free initial scout it gets - so even at Deity, only the HUMAN will be able to properly exploit the 'scout' advantage of multiple scouts.

It will be harder to trigger your GA. Target a late ancient age Industrious wonder (you will NOT get the pyramids at diety, without tremendous luck). Then plan very carefully for Copernicus or Magellans.

As the Americans at Diety I often targeted Hanging Gardens (AI does not prefer the bottom tech row) and Copernicus - I tended to beeline to Monarchy, followed by a beeline to Military Tradition -VERY heavy Middle age warmongering - real heavy,

followed by a peaceful tech leap in Industrial Age with ToE and then a Space Race Victory attempt OR a beeline to Tanks - followed by a final push to a conquest or dom victory. One or the other - you can NOT do BOTH the ToE AND the Tanks gambit at Deity - you will lose if attempted. This is not Regent/Monarch!

Hope this helps.

Ision
Jan 01, 2004, 05:05 PM
a few more tips:

If you do not pull your GA in the first 2 ages - do not despair - the game can still be won (albeit - harder), when this happened to me I would initiate an F-15 GA in the middle of a Space Race attempt - it's better than nothing.

A CIVer can play up to Monarch without ever really having to learn how to play Commie or Fascism. At Deity, I STRONGLY reccomend that you be prepared to to use these Governments - read a few strats on them in the forums. Of the 2, Fascism would be my choice.

IMHO, at the higher levels Religous and Scientific begin to lose their value, while the other traits gain. The higher the level, the greater the need to war, the greater the need to war, the less value 'builder' traits have. At deity I tend to favor the 'alternating wars' strat, a series of short wars against each Civ, the idea being to eliminate the possibility of any close neighbors becoming too strong - later in the game the same strat with allies, can begin to weaken the more powerful civs one by one -bear in mind, that this strat will not endear you to the other AIs! -lol- so beware a late age AI alliance against YOU!

Ision

Zardnaar
Jan 01, 2004, 05:31 PM
And I really wanted to play Babylon:D Let me guess. The primary purpose of war in the higher difficulty levels would be to control the AI and to expand in the early ages? On emperor it was annoying to have a AI on a different continent being scientific and being a democracy.

I think I have become addicted to a middle age GA though. So many great wonders and Universities, Cathedrals, and Banks.

I sent you a PM.

Ision
Jan 01, 2004, 10:47 PM
Let me guess. The primary purpose of war in the higher difficulty levels would be to control the AI and to expand in the early ages?

If your still guessing at the reasons for this - then I reccomend that you remain at the same skill level and play a few more games with DIFFERENT strats/CIVs/and traits

Ision

yankees
Jan 18, 2004, 04:20 AM
Ision , your reviews are awesome! keep going!

thefrenchzulu
Mar 28, 2004, 11:10 AM
Originally posted by Ision

As the Americans at Diety I often targeted Hanging Gardens (AI does not prefer the bottom tech row) and Copernicus - I tended to beeline to Monarchy, followed by a beeline to Military Tradition -VERY heavy Middle age warmongering - real heavy,

followed by a peaceful tech leap in Industrial Age with ToE and then a Space Race Victory attempt OR a beeline to Tanks - followed by a final push to a conquest or dom victory. One or the other - you can NOT do BOTH the ToE AND the Tanks gambit at Deity - you will lose if attempted. This is not Regent/Monarch!

Hope this helps.

My first demigod game was played as the Americans! I won by domination and triggered my GA with a F15. I have never, never tried for the Hanging Gardens in any of my games? I always try, for the Great Library or if this fails, I go military. I got the ToE in that game and killed basically everybody using tanks? OK, this was not Deity, but it still worked quite well.

As far as the American Traits. I think they are awesome and you can see the developers are probably American...

Early map knowledge is key in winning at higher levels. Securing that second or ever third luxury source is key for trading techs with the AI. More often than not, the AI will form a military alliance with me for a luxury and then there is also the GPT right through the game.

Secondly, I will never play a game with a non-industrious civ. I don't have the patience. Early roads and mine/irregation is key for quick expansion and later shield production is really great.

(Personally I still prefer the French, though I would have loved a scout. I now have to great early warrior to scout and it is so slow...)

The F15 is a awesome unit! It doesn't have the French units laugh, but is the best unit for air superiority. (Stealth unit doesn't have this) (I got my GA by killing a unit I already blew to pieces with my artillery)

Ok, enough said. America rule if you play the higher level against the AI.

RX2000
Apr 02, 2004, 12:55 PM
I just recently tried playing the Americans again on my first attempt at Monarch difficulty after playing as only the Babylonians for ummm.... pretty much ever since Civ3 came out. :p

I have to say I really enjoyed this game. I used to think that I couldnt play any non-religious civ, but its not really all that bad. I usually dont change govts all that often anyways, so the anarchy isnt a game-killing event or anything, altho it does suck when they destroy some really expensive improvement.

The Exp. trait really seemed to help me in this game. (Monarch diff. normal map, 6 other civs, continents) I started off on a decent sized continent with the Byzantines, and was able to expand quickly to take up around 2/3 of the continent to the Byzantine's 1/3. I am peaceful by nature however, so I didnt take over the Byzantines until I had modern armor. :p

Its been a fun game so far, and I think I am getting close to a space race victory. I have learned to really like the Americans again. I'll probably play as them from now on. Exp + Ind rocks.

kb2tvl
Apr 03, 2004, 08:48 AM
For civ3/ptw, Americans were the first civ that made me think that I could go without a GA and just depend completely on the traits and skills.

necrosmith
Apr 03, 2004, 11:46 AM
Originally posted by Nación_Íbera
my question is,
why is there an American civ in the first place? and i need a historical explication, please.
do 200 years of history really desirve to be set in the game in spite of other civs like Spain? as far as i know, the Spanish Empire discovered America and once ruled half of the world.
cheers!
I agree that 200 years is a short time period to include a tribe. However, in those 200 years, America has risen to become the most powerful empire humanity has ever known. In my mind, that qualifies. Leaving America out would be a gross omission.

RX2000
Apr 03, 2004, 11:51 AM
Yep we are more powerful than any other civilization has ever been, and our culture and military simply dominates.

I agree with necrosmith, leaving America out would have been unforgivable. :p

CiverDan
Apr 03, 2004, 05:44 PM
The UU is a problem. By that time in the game, the is often won (or lost) and if it is still competitive, Bombers and Tank Armies are more useful that the F-15. The traits arent bad, if you are playing the lower levels. Expansionist civs on the highest levels don't give you much except empty huts, for the most part.

RX2000
Apr 04, 2004, 12:20 AM
And pottery from the start......

Ision
Apr 04, 2004, 12:26 AM
The traits arent bad, if you are playing the lower levels. Expansionist civs on the highest levels don't give you much except empty huts, for the most part.

Actually, the traits are better the HIGHER the level you play. It is usually the higher-level players that appreciate this CIV the most. As for expansionist - the traits advantages become more pronounced the higher the level you play and the greater the skill level of the player.

Ision

troytheface
May 01, 2004, 08:47 PM
I think that this was a well thought out and written review. Your insight and comments were very cool....someone mentioned that they missed the "exotic" aspect the other civs have that america does not...and to this i agree- but that kind of goes with your contention of the "subtley " that one needs to work with america-
i suspect Korea will be very similiar in this regard- and i eagerly await your reviews of India the English and Japan-the much derided Hittites (whom i really like) and Spain (my fav)

Ision
May 02, 2004, 06:13 AM
I think that this was a well thought out and written review. Your insight and comments were very cool....someone mentioned that they missed the "exotic" aspect the other civs have that america does not...and to this i agree- but that kind of goes with your contention of the "subtley " that one needs to work with america-

Thanks for your kind remarks, and yes I agree to your observation of the subtlety aspect to the American CIV.

Ision

dgfred
May 02, 2004, 02:23 PM
Great work also I. :goodjob: Looking forward to Celts, Iroquois,
and Vikings. Thanks again for your time and effort.
:thumbsup:

Zardnaar
May 02, 2004, 10:37 PM
Ision would the American in general be the 3rd fastest expanding civ behind the Maya and Inca's? I was a newb when I 1st played this civ long a while ago- I was winning but abandoned the game as the turns were taking to long, I didn't know holding down the shift key made the AI units move faster.

Zardnaar
May 02, 2004, 10:38 PM
My bad. Double post.

Ision
May 03, 2004, 05:25 AM
Zard,

It is very difficult to pinpoint it in that fashion, so much depends on a players style and focus (war or building). That said, I would say 'yes' but approximately so. It would be far more accurate to say , in the tradition of my 'tier' system, that the Americans are in the top 3rd.

Ision

binyo66
May 05, 2004, 01:24 AM
@ision
I'm not deity yet. I play several emperors random civs, random huge map and as many civs as allowed on C3C1.0, CivIII 1.29f and PTW 1.27f. Randomly I was assigned as Germany, Japan, India and Roman (I have no problem with them). Once I was assigned as American, and got a pangea with 24 civs on a continent. I was strugling to survive, no more room to expand, only a little huts I could get. Although I finally won by domination, but among other civs, it was the hardest emperor game I ever played. Someone told me (very respectful player, and for some reason, I better not to mention his name) that for American Civ the more the AIs the worst it would be. Then I follow his advice, American, Huge Map, and total standard civs (12?). The random give me archipelago and I was with Japan. Sure, this time playing as American was one of the easiest Emperor Game, I got several techs from huts. After I found all civs (I got Sci Leader and Rushed Great Light House), trading, soon, they were very backward, then I abandom the game (too boring).

1. American Civ would be better if we play with less civ and bigger map (expantionist )?!?
2. I'm not SID level yet, not even deity (still like enjoying monarch and Emperor Level). But what I read on SID level, Expantionist is quite useless. AI would outexpand u,

1337
May 12, 2004, 04:31 PM
I hate having them as enemies. They're always so good and kill me every single time.

RFHolloway
May 28, 2004, 08:43 AM
As another quote from a US election race states, the most important thing to the Americans?.... "its the economy, stupid". That throws some light on them in itself.

Nakar
May 29, 2004, 12:38 PM
@Ision:

So far you've described most of these civs you've reviewed as "2nd tier," implying they're average-to-good but not the "best." I know these reviews take time, but in your opinion (i.e. just a list), what are the "top tier" civs, the "middle tier" civs, and the "bottom tier" civs?

1337
May 29, 2004, 03:16 PM
I view India as a top civ. The americans would be in between top and middle but closer to the top. Russia is sometimes top too. I view France as a top but that may just be because that is my new fav civ.

Bucephalus
May 30, 2004, 04:31 PM
Quote:America has risen to become the most powerful empire humanity has ever known.

America has an empire? Enlighten me.

Nicci
May 31, 2004, 03:22 AM
one question: why do u built granaries? i allways feel this is a waste of shields. once a city is up to 6, it will not grow unless u built a aquaduct. being there fast is not a big issue for me.

binyo66
May 31, 2004, 03:35 AM
Granary is necessary for worker or settler factory.

Edit :
Which are likely next to the river, so it can grow up to 12.

1337
Jun 01, 2004, 03:11 PM
It makes newer cities grow faster too which is imperative to have metropolises in a communism too support your army

ScottyPip0
Sep 19, 2004, 07:14 PM
It's very strange that you state that newbies tend to dislike America. The first day I played civ3 I went the Americans, and I've only tried another civ once. Generally I play by using my expansion against the enemies. With only 1 unit defending each city but having 3 times the amount of cities then my enemies, I am the most powerful nation. Generally, I start the game and no matter where my settler starts that is where Washington ends up. Then I move instantly onto building a granary. The reason for this should be seen in the goody hut percentage guide. If I have no units, am not building any settlers then I am likely to find a warrior or settler in a goody hut. This small chance is worth it.

sabo
Sep 20, 2004, 11:42 AM
Actually, the traits are better the HIGHER the level you play. It is usually the higher-level players that appreciate this CIV the most.
Ision

Agreed, I won my first deity game as the Americans. I had never played them before but I couldn 't pass up those traits they had for a high level game.

Dereliction
Feb 07, 2005, 03:10 AM
Quote:America has risen to become the most powerful empire humanity has ever known.

America has an empire? Enlighten me.

American Empire (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Empire)

Consider yourself enlightened :)

Madroc
Jun 10, 2006, 09:55 AM
I play PTW, Regent/Monarch and America is my favorite civ. Ision hit the nail on the head- it rewards a more sophisticated playing style and can be very powerful in the right hands. In PTW Industrious is probably (is there consensus?) the most powerful trait, and I think Expansionist is the most underrated. I personally prefer it over Militaristic for sure, and probably Scientific and Religious as well. It's only really useful in the first half of the AA, but that is the most critical phase of the game. You won't wipe out a neighbor with an archer rush, but if you can make contact with two groups of civs that are isolated from each other, the tech brokering opportunities can put the game on ice while you are still in Despotism.

There are plenty of other civs with an inconvenient UU -- either early ones that trigger a despotic GA, or defensive units that don't always let you start a GA on your own terms. I've never been very good at incorporating a GA into my game strategy; I tend to treat them and Leaders as a pleasant bonus that I can live without.

Mirc
Jun 10, 2006, 12:40 PM
Are you from America?

wallyskier
Sep 18, 2006, 06:42 PM
Ision-

After reading your review I decided to give America a try again. I first used them when I got Civ III but rapidly worked with the French, and then the Germans> I wandered through the other cultures but came back home, so to speak.
I agree with everything you say after playing a few games and getting high scores on my chart. Nothing compared to what I see here, but it was a challenge to work out production, science and exploration with America. I think the scout can be one of the most powerful tools in the early game and it's use to find the terrain, plot and plan cities and map resources gives a powerful leg up on non expansionist cultures. The downside, I feel, is the lack of bargain basement city improvements, but that would probably unhinge the game too much.
Bravo on the reviews! Are you going to do more cultures soon? :goodjob:

c_pablo
Mar 17, 2010, 02:33 PM
America if often my main problem and enemy, always in good position in score and in the tech tree

Aabraxan
Mar 18, 2010, 08:58 AM
If the Americans are giving you problems, there are several things you could do. First of all, play with no barbs. No barbs = no goody huts. Second, play on an island map. They won't get enough huts to really pull ahead. Third, if their scout shows up at your border in the early game, kill him. Losing their scout will slow down that hut-popping that they do.

73vwtodd
Jul 31, 2012, 08:27 PM
America!!!