Civilization Rankings! Part Five: RESULTS!

After two weeks of voting the results of the four "Civilization Rankings" threads are in!

Thanks to all of you who participated, and a special thank you to the handful of you who scored all 43 civs (that being evilcat, Enrico Swagolo, Liufeng, and pyroflare77).



So, without further ado, THE RANKINGS!


The full results are attached to the post.

MORE RANKINGS ARE BEING ACCEPTED BUT MUST BE POSTED TO THIS THREAD BY MONDAY SEPTEMBER 2ND. THANK YOU!

Huh, I've played half of the bottom 10. Rather funny the vast majority of the top 10 is obtained by DLC.

Japan is a victim of DLC in a way, as the game changed their once OP bonus was suddenly not that good with 100 hit points. They need an overhaul.

SS-18 ICBM said:

Huh, I've played half of the bottom 10. Rather funny the vast majority of the top 10 is obtained by DLC.

Click to expand...

If you call GnK and BNW 'DLC,' sure. However, if you go with the more conventional definition of what DLC which puts the expansions in their own categories, you have a fair distribution of civs in the top 10: 2 Vanilla, 3 DLC, 2 GnK, 3 BNW

Point is, you still have to buy stuff other than the base game to obtain them.

I get the feeling that a lot of the people who voted for India have not played them since BNW came out.

Oh man I was gonna rank the BNW civs as soon as I finished my Shoshone game. Then I would have had them aaaaalllll! ALAAAAAS!

Also, how do you deal with super-situational Civs?

Also, my 9.5 for Babylon wasn't included despite my making such a case for it that nimzo upgraded his rating (still too low, though. . .)

38 of the 43 civs are 'above average'


I think something went wrong

arand86 said:

38 of the 43 civs are 'above average'


I think something went wrong

Click to expand...

It's just ratings 1-10 of how much people enjoy playing them/how good they are. If you ask me, something went right.

I feel that although Germany and Japan are bad civs, they took a hit because the devs admitted they were bad. If the devs said the same about, say, Polynesia, I'm sure they'd be at the bottom too.

^ I actually didn't know that and still rated both quite low.

And Polynesia can't be considered just "bad" because it's so situational. They'll rule a deep water archipelago or small islands map easily thanks to instant embark ability. Germany and Japan are just never the best civ.

Yes India is quite shocking, everyone considers Traidcion as superior branch, and India is still soo low.
Beside that i wouldnt take results too serious, since everyone was using his own benchmark, which wasnt even linear.

SS-18 ICBM said:

Huh, I've played half of the bottom 10. Rather funny the vast majority of the top 10 is obtained by DLC.

Click to expand...

I was thinking along the same lines...only 1 vanilla civ in the top 10. china at number 9. That just is not right. The original civs should be the best. Though I am sure some would disagree....

Arabia is number one? Interesting.

Well, a poll is a poll. It's just normal to not see those we love and are used to. However, I never expected to see the Zulu in the third place, after all the "they're just good for war, and I like peaceful civs !".
On the other hand, I expected to see Siam in the top 10.

For India, the Iroquois, and the Aztecs to be that low is insane.

seasnake said:

Japan is a victim of DLC in a way, as the game changed their once OP bonus was suddenly not that good with 100 hit points. They need an overhaul.

Click to expand...

I really haven't played Japan since vanilla, didn't they even change it to work on <10 instead ? O.o

georgie said:

Arabia is number one? Interesting.

Click to expand...

It is not as suprising, even if some familiarity factor come into play.
Arabia has extra gold (always good), and Oil is important resource, with petra and desert folklore (and flood plains) desert bias is actually boon, camel archers are like super sayan xbowmen which comes from chilvary (easier to tech). And it is already fine, but then bam, bazaar for even more gold (or hapiness).

Keirador said:

Also, my 9.5 for Babylon wasn't included despite my making such a case for it that nimzo upgraded his rating (still too low, though. . .)

Click to expand...

"Ok, everybody, we have to upgrade our rating to 9.5 for Babylon, like Keirador!"

You don't forget easily... You know, I'm not the only one who gave a mediocre rate to Babylon.

And you know, some people are left-winger, other, right-winger... This forum is democraticc, and some people like some things, other people no... Difference between point of view is normal. This is the life!

I played with Babylon (at Immortal) again. I got some G.S in this game (but AI built Great Library and Oracle, so I wait to medieval before seeing the beginning of a edge in this sector), but with those G.S, it was impossible to get any G.E, so I was unable to build some important Wonders... I finish the game with 7 Academy, I never used UU and UB, because the first one is situational (we can wait until Construction before building Archer) and the second one is only a "last card in hand" when you are about to fall, so I think Babylon is overated. (Maya too, because Great People aren't "free" at all, and UU is weak). At the end, I won a Diplo victory, but... it's difficult to lose a game...

**

Anyway, people can use any Civ they want to use, no matters the rating, so I don't see any problem with that.

Forget that. My personal favorite Civ is 40th (Indian), and you know what?... I will play with India again and again, because for my playstyle, happiness is the key.