Catherine of Russia - The Anti-Oprah and Other Observations About Civ V Leaders

I guess I don't really notice how much other empires expand. I generally stick to at least 4 cities, 6 tops, but when I go into the trade menu and check other players' city counts I feel like an underdog despite always coming out on top.

How many cities do you folks usually own? What's your ideal amount of cities?
 
I guess I don't really notice how much other empires expand. I generally stick to at least 4 cities, 6 tops, but when I go into the trade menu and check other players' city counts I feel like an underdog despite always coming out on top.

How many cities do you folks usually own? What's your ideal amount of cities?

Normally 5-7 cities.
 
Yeah, I never understood why the other civilizations tend to have 12+ cities. They put very little effort into each city too. I don't see workers too often or as many improvements as their should be.

Does anybody ever build those x % more production toward land/building/naval/horse units? I find those to be useless.
 
Catherine's alright. They should've made an Australian civ so they could put in Julia Gillard and have a super hot leader.
 
I loved the list :rotfl:

Where are the DLC civs?:please:
 
Great list :)

I will add a minor caveat though. Catherine was how you describe to a T before the patch, but I tried an experiment on my latest game with the latest version released last month. In that game, I met Catherine about halfway through (after sailing across the ocean blue). I denounced the same civs she denounced (out of convenience -- they were actually the civs I wanted to denounce). Catherine at that up. She thought I was the best thing since sliced bread. I even got her and I to agree to Defensive Pacts for much of the endgame (from about 100 turns to victory until I won). Since denouncements expire now, you can also change mid-course if you find you want to try to woo someone else but the denouncements aren't completely in-line.

So, for all the complaints about the denounce system, it is a lot better than the black box before it, and especially better now that denouncements expire and aren't so much of an "all denounce you" syndrome. It takes some of the mystery away from Catherine -- she just wants loyal subjects if you want to try to woo her.
 
Great list :)

I will add a minor caveat though. Catherine was how you describe to a T before the patch, but I tried an experiment on my latest game with the latest version released last month. In that game, I met Catherine about halfway through (after sailing across the ocean blue). I denounced the same civs she denounced (out of convenience -- they were actually the civs I wanted to denounce). Catherine at that up. She thought I was the best thing since sliced bread. I even got her and I to agree to Defensive Pacts for much of the endgame (from about 100 turns to victory until I won). Since denouncements expire now, you can also change mid-course if you find you want to try to woo someone else but the denouncements aren't completely in-line.

So, for all the complaints about the denounce system, it is a lot better than the black box before it, and especially better now that denouncements expire and aren't so much of an "all denounce you" syndrome. It takes some of the mystery away from Catherine -- she just wants loyal subjects if you want to try to woo her.

All of this is true - but, she still scares the hell out of me. I mean... being Russian and all automatically makes her badass. ;)
 
Right, Russo-phobia...
 
Descriptions don't match some of what I see in my games. I just had one where Mr 'I trust you are a friend of liberty?' pummeled his entire continent, three times second AI civ in score. Start off the game in the industrial era and you'll find he has 'liberty' confused with 'fascism'. That's right - autocracy all the way. Trust you are a friend of liberty?
 
That cracked me up more than once.

As an aside, I had a game where Askia actually managed to conquer the entire continent that he started on. Even more surprisingly, he was quite friendly towards me, despite my empire being half the size of his and not a whole lot more advanced.
 
Can't wait for the write-ups on the DLC Civs. Polynesia seems extremely easygoing in my games, and the Inca are reasonably friendly. Nebuchadnezzar is extremely grouchy, and seldom agrees to diplomatic offerings. Can't really label Isabella yet. I've yet to meat Khan in a game, but I think it's safe to assume that he's a homicidal maniac.
 
I have to admit, the elite brigade of super-friends is a pita when your conquering nations..

Your 100% true about Alexander as well, about 70? turns into a game, he invaded me with 7 warriors, and a great general. Truth be told, owned was a understatement in that match, because i rush wonders at around those turns.
 
Can't wait for the write-ups on the DLC Civs. Polynesia seems extremely easygoing in my games, and the Inca are reasonably friendly. Nebuchadnezzar is extremely grouchy, and seldom agrees to diplomatic offerings. Can't really label Isabella yet. I've yet to meat Khan in a game, but I think it's safe to assume that he's a homicidal maniac.

Genghis Khan is, in a nutshell, an idiot. First off, he always lags behind in technology. Also, he commented on how puny my civ was WHILE I WAS ON A ONE-CITY CHALLENGE. Also, he will do anything to get just one horse. I know his units require it, but he is just insane about horses. I'm sure he'll invade my city with only horsemen...
 
That cracked me up more than once.

As an aside, I had a game where Askia actually managed to conquer the entire continent that he started on. Even more surprisingly, he was quite friendly towards me, despite my empire being half the size of his and not a whole lot more advanced.

First of all, thank you for reading! Secondly, it sounds like you got lucky with Askia there. I wish I'd get that lucky. Unfortunately, when I play, it always seems that the AI is operating at "full capacity".
 
Can't wait for the write-ups on the DLC Civs. Polynesia seems extremely easygoing in my games, and the Inca are reasonably friendly. Nebuchadnezzar is extremely grouchy, and seldom agrees to diplomatic offerings. Can't really label Isabella yet. I've yet to meat Khan in a game, but I think it's safe to assume that he's a homicidal maniac.

I know I've been promising a write-up on the DLC Civs FOREVER and people are probably ready to grab their torches and pitchforks, lop my head off, and display it on the nearest castle wall; but, rest assured, I've been feeling the mounted pressure and am working on it as we speak. :)

As for your assessments of the DLC Civs... yup, pretty much correcto-mundo there my friend.
 
Poor Cathy, i like her :p

ok, maybe is because we dont use to share continent, but is nicer than the spanish bastard of Isa, asking money and stuff for nothing and if u say no, then war. At least Cathy likes to trade until she won at the end of the game.

But i also luv to kneel down Spain (im catalonian :p )
 
The book that suliman is holding a quran. Just saw that you wrote yo didnt know, even though im prety sure you where joking
 
Top Bottom