Byzantines: Great Civilization, or the Greatest Civilization?

Huayna Capac357

Huayna Capac357

Deity
Joined
Jun 30, 2007
Messages
8,194
Location
Boston, Massachusetts
I recently read how awesome the Byzantines are in Civ IV BTS. Here is why:

1. Start with Wheel/Mysticism. Wheel is the gateway to many techs, and with Mysticism, you can be the first to found all the religions:).

2. Justinian is Spiritual/Imperialistic. Spiritual: NO ANARCHY!!:D. (And half production speed of Temple). Imperialistic: Double Great General Speed:D. And -50% Settler Production is also pretty handy.

3. Hippodromes are a good culture boost and have a cool name :lol:.

4. Cataphracts are one of the best mounted units in the game!

5. Byzantium is just a cool name:).

Now that you have the evidence, I must ask the question: Byzantium: Great Civilization or the Greatest Civilization?


(Please Post.......)
 
Huayna Capac357 said:
....1. Start with Wheel/Mysticism. Wheel is the gateway to many techs, and with Mysticism, you can be the first to found all the religions:).
Click to expand...

I'm happy to get Taoism or Islam later. No way I could conceive of getting all the religions.

6) Justinian has very cool music. :D
 
i liked the Dromon from Civ3 as a UU. In MP in was a real niche Civ that was fun to play. But all in all- the more the merrier, glad ya like em.
 
Traits: Average. At least neither is useless (i.e. Protective).

Techs: Wheel is possibly the best starting tech; your Worker will always have something to do. On Monarch+ religions are a gamble; Stonehenge is easy.

UB: The Hippodrome is Justinian's best feature in my view.

UU: Have to say I haven't used the Cataphract. Guilds is a tech I rarely prioritize.

Personally Gilgamesh is my favorite. Monster UU, best starting techs possible, auto-land grab via Cultural. All this outweighs the nearly-useless Protective. And he just looks cool.

EDIT--

i liked the Dromon from Civ3
Click to expand...

Hellz yeah! WTB greek fire

6) Justinian has very cool music.
Click to expand...

QFT
 
I've played a lot of Byzantium since BtS was released. It's a great civilization, and I'm beginning to think it may be one of the easiest for a beginner to start with. For starters, Spiritual having no anarchy has a larger advantage than first seems. Faster settlers really lets builder types grow that much quicker. The hippodrome can be interesting with good tweaking of the cultural slider bar. Also, having mysticism gives you that big jump on an early religion.

However, what really makes this civ shine is the UU. Cataphracts make what I consider to be a poor unit (knight) so much better. Anyone stuck in a deep medieval war is going to appreciate a str 12 mounted unit over the rather lackluster str 10 knight.

I've been playing Japan recently in BtS, but I'm moving up a skill level and going back to Byzantium in my regular, non-GotM or HoF games. Anyone who hasn't given this civ a chance is certainly missing out.

Greatest civ? To be fair, I would have to try most of the rest out. However, Byzantium seems to fit my normal, balanced playstyle when I'm not warmongering with Japan/Aztec or going cultural with someone else.
 
They may work well for some people, but the Byzantines aren't my cup of tea. I really can't vouch for them being the greatest civ considering there are close to 10 civs I'd rather play ;)

They're a well balanced civ, but other than a really powerful UU (which can still be countered by two notably cheaper units, I might add) but they don't have any economic perks worth mentioning and... Well, Imperialistic is a trait I find to be pretty weak in general.
 
Kanidyen said:
Anyone stuck in a deep medieval war is going to appreciate a str 12 mounted unit over the rather lackluster str 10 knight.
Click to expand...

And in Renaissance wars, as well--Cataphracts aren't outmatched until Rifling. Cheaper than Cuirassiers, more mobile than Grenadiers, plus the built-in flank against Cats and Trebs.
 
Spiritual/Imperialistic falls probably around the worst combo on a leader... Even if he was Justinian of Rome he'd still suck. And I hardly consider Mysticism a great starting tech: it doesn't matter if you have it on higher difficulties, the AI is still gonna fund all the early religions anyway. You'd be better off just CoL slinging Confucianism.
 
Kanidyen said:
I've played a lot of Byzantium since BtS was released. It's a great civilization, and I'm beginning to think it may be one of the easiest for a beginner to start with. For starters, Spiritual having no anarchy has a larger advantage than first seems. Faster settlers really lets builder types grow that much quicker. The hippodrome can be interesting with good tweaking of the cultural slider bar. Also, having mysticism gives you that big jump on an early religion.

However, what really makes this civ shine is the UU. Cataphracts make what I consider to be a poor unit (knight) so much better. Anyone stuck in a deep medieval war is going to appreciate a str 12 mounted unit over the rather lackluster str 10 knight.

I've been playing Japan recently in BtS, but I'm moving up a skill level and going back to Byzantium in my regular, non-GotM or HoF games. Anyone who hasn't given this civ a chance is certainly missing out.

Greatest civ? To be fair, I would have to try most of the rest out. However, Byzantium seems to fit my normal, balanced playstyle when I'm not warmongering with Japan/Aztec or going cultural with someone else.
Click to expand...

I agree with everything said here. This models my own opinion so much its scary. I don't have a "greatest civ" opinion but I am really liking the Byzantines. Imperialistic is a trait that IMO is more useful for warmongers than aggressive is.

In my current game I already have 6 GGs and have been at peace for about 50 turns. Its at 1400ad right now. With at least 2 more wars in store. Although I took over the great wall so I get 2 GG points for every xp point gained outside my turf, and 3 points for every xp gained in my turf.
Also, I am a big fan of Spiritual. As for the starting techs, I wouldn't mind switching the wheel with either agriculture or mining personally.

But when playing the Byzantines, going for guilds ASAP will result in more victories, thus more GGs, thus more victories, etc. There are times I will skip CS to get guilds faster then backfill CS. "What's that? you got Str 8 maces?... Cool. I got str 12 knights. You lose." :D
 
Imperialistic is a trait I find to be pretty weak in general.
Click to expand...

Agreed. Only Protective is worse.

I hardly consider Mysticism a great starting tech: it doesn't matter if you have it on higher difficulties, the AI is still gonna fund all the early religions anyway.
Click to expand...

Agree again. On Monarch, even if I start with Mysticism, and have a beginning tile producing a commerce, I usually get beat to Poly. Mysticism is good for Stonehenge though.
 
The traits suck unless you are playing on Marathon which makes Spiritual godly. Imperialistic's a real bummer.

Cataphracts are overrated by some, but not bad. They're great for attacking an enemy stack that has siege in it, because they will flank and with 12 strength you can count on them surviving. The loss of first strike immunity is a pain when it comes to taking cities though. Longbowman first strikes are pretty signifigant.

Hippodromes are crazy. If you're at peace or limited war you don't need to rely on happiness boosting civics and resources to keep those happiness caps loose. If you're fighting a lot they will hold off WW for a long time, and if the weariness finally starts getting unbearable, hey, there's spiritual for a penalty free switch to Hereditary Rule or something to bail you out.

Crap traits + okay unit + incredible building = okay civ. Far from the best, though.
 
Mysticism is the worst tech at higher levels.

Imperialistic is useful on occasion, but in general its not a first tier trait. Justinian has no economy to support a big empire. The only half-priced buildings from his trait combo are temples, big deal.

Cataphrats are great (but need both iron and horses, I don't get them both in quite a number of time), hippodome is even better. They make Justinian a good one, but far from "the greatest".
 
Monkeyfinger said:
Cataphracts are overrated by some, but not bad. They're great for attacking an enemy stack that has siege in it, because they will flank and with 12 strength you can count on them surviving. The loss of first strike immunity is a pain when it comes to taking cities though. Longbowman first strikes are pretty signifigant.
Click to expand...

Make sure a city making them has a barracks and a stable and you can give them the Flanking I and II promotions out the gate, and they are back to immune to first strikes, with even better odds of taking out seige.

gettingfat said:
Imperialistic is useful on occasion, but in general its not a first tier trait. Justinian has no economy to support a big empire. The only half-priced buildings from his trait combo are temples, big deal.
Click to expand...
I agree completely with this, I would trade in cheaper settlers for a building of some kind. Cheaper stables wouldn't be too bad, but they are already pretty cheap as it is.
 
So yeah, basically, the Byzantines are pretty good, Wheel is very nice, Mysticism... Is ok. UU and UB are good too. So it's a nice civ, I love medieval UUs, cuz I'm always at war with someone by then.

It's just that well... Justinian... BLOWS. Those are traits that'll give you NO advantage against the tough AIs or Humans... Unlike Financial :rolleyes:, or Charismatic :king:
 
Good civ overall. He has the best trait in the game, which more than makes up for Imperialistic being pretty pathetic. The hippodrome is fricking incredible, particularly with a specialist, constant-war sort of economy - which his traits are perfect for. And the cataphract is just great. The extra strength really packs a punch on an already massively-powerful unit, and the lack of first strike immunity just means Flanking II becomes a higher priority (with Spi and Imp, you should be getting some seriously elite cavalry dudes out as well). You can also ignore gunpowder and mil. trad. for a while and focus on other things instead (like constitution or biology or assembly line).
Unfortunately, he has atrocious starting techs, but that's pretty minor.
So yeah, he's a good package, and he looks like an impressively evil bastard too, which is cool :D
 
Would you mind to elaborate onto why Spiritual is the best trait in the game?
 
duende29 said:
Would you mind to elaborate onto why Spiritual is the best trait in the game?
Click to expand...

Because if you're constantly changing civics, and constantly shifting your short-term focus along with those civics, you get a massive boost to the efficiency of your whole empire. More great people, better units, more units, better building production, more missionaries, better economy, more happiness etc etc, when you need them. Not to mention the significant diplomatic benefits, and the big mid-to-late-game happiness benefits.
The CS/pacifism to slavery/OR to vassalage/slavery/theocracy shuffle is particularly important to an early-mid-game war-based SE, and it only gets better as the game goes on.
But if you're not changing your civics way more often than you would otherwise, you're not gonna get much out of it.
 
One thing I like to do is stay in caste system or serfdom, however, I switch over to slavery alot for pop rushing, but as soon as I can I switch out of it again so that I don't have to worry about slave revolts. Not being spiritual its better to just risk it. When I play spiritual I bounce around alot. ALOT.
 
And as I keep saying in this spiritual debate, there are too many really good all around civics, ones that are helpful no matter what you're trying to do (HR, Rep, Bureaucracy, Emancipation, State Property) for me to like spiritual that much. You always have to give up something that matters to do that kind of bouncing around, even if only for 5 turns before switching back.

If all the civic classes were as well balanced within each other as the religious ones, spiritual might be the best, but as is the unbalanced civics and all the clear bests make it a middle of the pack trait unless you are playing on marathon (where it still probably isn't the best, but is at least close to it).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

danjuno
Worst Civ?
2
Replies
33
Views
4K
Plains-Cow
Plains-Cow
MangoCheeseCakey
Latest news on the Civilization mobile game
Replies
19
Views
2K
Bonyduck Campersang
Bonyduck Campersang
M
UU/UB's and Wonders for map type, map speed and tech trading type
Replies
5
Views
2K
sampsa
sampsa
Evie
Team Victories, or Why does history have to be a solo sport?
2
Replies
35
Views
2K
Krajzen
Krajzen
The_J
hard-drive.net: Is Civilization VI Better Than Civilization V? The Numbers in the Titles Say Yes
Replies
9
Views
2K
Mahasona
Mahasona
Top Bottom