Does Poland make most other culture civs obsolete

I was mainly thinking about Poland compared to the Aztecs.

The more culture you accumulate as Poland throughout the game, the more your free social policies are worth, in terms of raw culture.

Assuming that you focused somewhat on culture as Poland in order to maximize the value of your free social policies, do you think that the Aztecs could possibly earn enough culture through war to match the value they would have gotten from being Poland?


I don't have a good general idea of how much culture the Aztecs can accumulate through war. But assuming that it is less than or nearly equal to 6 or 7 free social policies, I might reason that the Aztecs face pressure to battle for what Poland receives for free.

In that sense, Poland might make the Aztecs obsolete, save for their floating gardens (which is pretty awesome nonetheless) and Jaguar.



BQ: Since acquiring as much culture as possible is necessary to maximize the value of Poland's 7 free social policies, does that make a CV the best suitable victory type for Poland?

Assuming that your goal in amassing culture is to adopt as many social policies as possible, I would agree that Poland's UA is dramatically stronger than any competing culture bonus. 7 free policies, with no corresponding increase to the cost of policies earned with culture, is far more than any other civ will give you.
Other civ's culture bonuses can, however, do things that Poland's can't. Any building or improvement will increase border growth, and any civ that gains culture from tile improvements (France, Brazil, Polynesia) will be able to convert that culture into tourism with hotels and airport, gaining an extra tourism source that no other civ can access. This may not be enough to make them stronger civs than Poland overall, but it does mean they can do something that Poland can't.
Additionally, as you alluded to in your example of the Aztecs, most civs with a culture bonus also have other advantages. The Aztec's floating garden probably contributes more to their power than their UA does. Except for the culture UI civs, I don't think there's any civ that gains as much of its power from culture bonuses as Poland does, so while Poland may be the most powerful culture civ, I don't think it would be fair to say that it makes other civs with culture bonuses obsolete.

The argument can be considered if you sold it off as "Poland eclipses other culture civs, for the sole purpose of accruing extra social policies".

But as Amunril has stated, every different civilization has different dimensions to their kit, so you can't really compare apples to oranges very well.

@Athenaeum.

Are you trying to create some sort of record for creating threads?

Seriously every time I log on, the forum is full of threads by you.

Lol no, I just like to discuss this game and I have many questions.

Amrunril said:

Assuming that your goal in amassing culture is to adopt as many social policies as possible, I would agree that Poland's UA is dramatically stronger than any competing culture bonus. 7 free policies, with no corresponding increase to the cost of policies earned with culture, is far more than any other civ will give you.
Other civ's culture bonuses can, however, do things that Poland's can't. Any building or improvement will increase border growth, and any civ that gains culture from tile improvements (France, Brazil, Polynesia) will be able to convert that culture into tourism with hotels and airport, gaining an extra tourism source that no other civ can access. This may not be enough to make them stronger civs than Poland overall, but it does mean they can do something that Poland can't.
Additionally, as you alluded to in your example of the Aztecs, most civs with a culture bonus also have other advantages. The Aztec's floating garden probably contributes more to their power than their UA does. Except for the culture UI civs, I don't think there's any civ that gains as much of its power from culture bonuses as Poland does, so while Poland may be the most powerful culture civ, I don't think it would be fair to say that it makes other civs with culture bonuses obsolete.

Click to expand...

You made some good points in there...do you know if Aztecs' culture acquired through combat is applied to border growth or the tourism from airports and hotels? My immediate guess would be no, but just making sure.

Building off of what Thor posted, "obsolete" is certainly not the appropriate term. "Obsolete" implies that there are no plausible scenarios in which the other civ would perform equally or better, such as a strength 21 unit making a strength 14 unit with the same number of moves obsolete.

So Poland in no way makes the Aztecs obsolete. Poland is a civ with a culture UA, a predominantly GPT-boosting UB (that situationally helps with production), and a so-so level lancer replacement. The Aztecs are a civ with a (admittedly inferior) culture UA, a growth-boosting UB that's cheaper and less map-restrictive, and a warrior replacement UU that carries all bpnuses all the way to mech infrantry. While total accumulation of social policies will favor Poland in all but the most extreme and isolated of circumstances, overall performance of the two civs have too many variables to say that one will consistently perform better, and certainly each have their own advantages which prevents either from making the other "obsolete."

Even if we're looking exclusively at culture, Poland has almost inarguably the best culture bonus, but it is not better in all circumstances. While Poland will end up with more social policies than the Aztecs (or any other civ for that matter), civ is a game of exponential growth and early advantages have exponential impacts. Since Poland's UA does not take effect until the player enters the classical era but the Aztec bonus starts on turn 0, the Aztec player may reach an essential SP several turns before the Poland player would, such as monarchy for the tradition player or, even more potent, collective rule for the Liberty player. Getting to either tree's production bonus policy a few turns earlier could likely mean the difference between getting and missing an early game wonder or, even more importantly, getting the settler in place to snag a great city site instead of spending the next 150 turns focused on fixing that missed opportunity.

Finally, while social policies are the biggest boost that culture accumulation provides, it's not the only function of culture and other civs with culture bonuses enjoy some benefits that Poland misses. Most notably is what Amrunril already mentioned about tourism accumulation. Another element is border expansion which would be enhanced in civs with either terrain-based culture bonuses (France, Polynesia, etc.) or civs with culture bonuses in buildings (Siam, Songhai, etc.) but not Poland.

So what do you guys have to say about my BQ (in the original post)?

Athenaeum said:

So what do you guys have to say about my BQ (in the original post)?

Click to expand...

What's a BQ?

To address the "will X civilization ever earn enough culture to beat Poland....", the answer is going to be a flat "no".

In the best case scenario (i.e. Poland gaining all social policies with zero additional culture (and thus flat-lining their UA value to the cost of the first 7 social policies))


At the very minimum, Poland's UA is worth 1010 culture.

Realistically, it's going to be worth something closer to 5,000-7000(+) culture over the course of a standard game (assuming around 16-20 policies/tenets adopted, varying based on how much culture (and therefore Social Policies adopted) Poland produces by conventional means).

For reference, here is a table with the social policy costs for the first 30 policies. Poland's UA value can be calculated based on the cost of the SP number it gets for free at each era:


The formula governing the culture cost of a social policy is

Stands for bonus question. In my first post, I asked:

Since acquiring as much culture as possible is necessary to maximize the value of Poland's 7 free social policies, does that make a CV the best suitable victory type for Poland?

Athenaeum said:

Does that make a CV the best suitable victory type for Poland?

Click to expand...

Not necessarily.... any victory type is suitable.... to say "best suitable VC" you'd need to stipulate a set of environmental conditions (i.e. map type/map size, among other things).

Well I would say that nations such as Babylon and Korea would be better suited for an SV, whereas nations like Venice and Greece would be better for a DV. Is this not a fair statement? In the same way, I am asking if Poland is better suited for a CV in the same way that Brazil and France are.

The reason I'm saying this is because Poland maximizes their UA by adopting as many social policies as possible. This is because the 7 free policies they receive are worth more if their subsequent policy costs are higher.

Focusing on culture and tourism go hand in hand I feel, because of great works and hotels, airports, etc.

Because of this, if Poland created as many great works as possible, they would maximize the value of their UA, and end up netting a lot of tourism in the process.

Poland is the most powerful civ, just in general. They are Meta-Knight in SSBB. They are tier-0 That said...

The Aztecs are going to be a lot better at wrecking things and racking up culture from the get-go. They are the only Civ with a turn-0 culture bonus, aside from a very lucky Japan roll. Aztecs are tier-1, by my estimation, and culture victory might be their most tenable win condition, with domination a decent second. Aztecs play very differently from Poland or anyone else, but they can give Poland and everyone else a run for their money and definitely beat them if played properly. Especially if Aztecs meet Poland early and have no good reason not to just rake in culture while destroying them. Aztecs also can generate population like basically no one else because of the floating gardens. Don't underestimate what it means to man your specialist buildings.

Incans are underrated in just how powerful and powerfully synergized all of their uniques are, and can also overtake Poland if well-played, despite having no "culture" bonuses at all. Free money, movement, and tons of extra production and food all lend themselves to tons of culture if used right.

And don't overlook the Celts (and to a lesser extent Ethiopia.) Celts' all-but-guaranteed first pantheon, and probable first religion, means tons of faith, possibly tons of naturally recurring culture, a good synergy with the Honor opener and Pictish Warriors for more culture, Cathedrals, and mass-faith-purchasing GWAMs. Faith makes a huge difference in a culture victory, and Poland can't eclipse the Celts there.

Just my thoughts.

The culture victory is not a culture victory. It is a tourism victory.

Poland bonuses help there to get more policies like it does for winning science. But they don't make a civ like Brazil obsolete for culture victory.


Compared to Aztecs yes Poland is in general a better civ. The UA is vastly superior. Aztecs have their UB for extra food though.

Athenaeum said:

Well I would say that nations such as Babylon and Korea would be better suited for an SV, whereas nations like Venice and Greece would be better for a DV. Is this not a fair statement? In the same way, I am asking if Poland is better suited for a CV in the same way that Brazil and France are.

Click to expand...

I would not say they are more suited to a CV as opposed to another other VC. Quoting Acken:

Acken said:

The culture victory is not a culture victory. It is a tourism victory.

Poland bonuses help there to get more policies like it does for winning science. But they don't make a civ like Brazil obsolete for culture victory.

Click to expand...

As Poland, while you are ideally going to produce as much culture as possible, it is not necessarily (or even "optimal" at times). Consider (Pangaea) Domination Victory based upon an army of Winged Hussars - you do not need to spend your hammers on cultural buildings when you can just spam your UU to roll over a large section of the continent.

A "best" victory type cannot be reasonably quantified for Poland - that is simply how strong it is as a Civilization. You can win with any VC without trying very hard. The most "suitable" will be (as previously stated), dependent on your game settings, map type, map size, starting area, etc.

Amrunril said:

...7 free policies, with no corresponding increase to the cost of policies earned with culture...

Click to expand...

This isn't entirely true. The cost of the next policy won't change but the cost of the subsequent policies will take into account the number of policies unlocked(including free ones).

No. it's different. With culture you will get policies but also you will get ideology pressure. It's very important. More culture = more ideology pressure.

I wouldn't really call Poland a cultural civ. Culture is not equal to social policies. It relates to tile border growth, city state quests, defense against ideologies and can provide a bonus to tourism.
Social policies are just one aspect of culture.
That said Poland can do well for a cultural victory if that is what you are implying. The extra social policies mean you can fill out both the Aesthetics and Rationalism tree whereas other civs generally have to pick between the two.

Since culture is used not only for grabbing SP's but also for defending against tourism, Poland can in no way make any other civ obsolete.

They can fill an extra tree, sure, and it's arguably on of- if not the strongest UA in the game, but they can't win a CV solely based on this. They still need the raw tourism output to go for a CV. Same applies for culture. Poland still needs raw culture output to defend against a CV. Getting extra SP's don't change or affect that.

Yes, it enables you to grab, say, Aesthetics faster and thus gain increased culture output, but that's about it. The culture gain from the Aztecs are all pooled up into your accumulated culture output that the enemies have to beat to get a CV, whereas the free SP's from Poland don't.

Poland are great for any type of VC. That's what's so powerful about their UA. They can easily go for just about anything since the extra SP's means they can fill up a tree that would otherwise be considered a bit of a detour. (Fill out Patro/Commerce etc while waiting for Ratio to unlock etc.)

Their flexibility is their main strength and it doesn't inherently make them insanely strong at CV's. I'd still rather go Brazil or w/e than Poland for a CV.

Actually, Poland will make all other civs obsolete (for any VCs). Their UA is way to powerful, that even Deity feels like Prince (with other civs).

I would say there is no better civ than Poland, except maybe if you play Spain with FoY/GBR start.