What do you think is the [b]worst[/b] civ to play with?

S

Shirastro

The ruler of the Gnomes
Joined
Aug 18, 2003
Messages
499
Inspired be the recent "What do you think is the best civ to play with?" thread, i was wondering, wich one is the civ you really dont like to play with.
Akward traits, stupid UU, ugly leaderhead, whatever is the reason, what is the civ you dont like?
For me those that i like the less are the militaristic-expantionist civs.
Dont get me wrong, i like wars, and ususaly end up having conquered half of the world, bur i "must" have at least one builders trait (relgius id a must-have).

I know that exp-mil combo gives you a huge initial bust, but i like more the slow and well organised military-economic-teritorial expantion.

P.S. plus i really hate Impis :D
 
Well, let's see. The English have a pretty pathetic trait combo, and a crappy UU...so, I'd say the English.
 
The English? Crappy? It's one of the best combination possible, and the UU rules the water, being twice as strong than contemporary vessels! One of the 5 best and strongest Civs in C3C - but if you're talking about Civ3/PtW, I agree.

Worst Civs? Mongols and Zulu for me, their trait combo simply doesn't work together, and the mediocre UUs (in SP, Impis in MP are a different issue) doesn't make up for that.
US/Aztecs/Hittites also have UUs I consider weak, but their traits are actually good.
And, on the higher levels any Civ that does not start with Alphabet is bad.
 
Perhaps Rome. I loved playing Rome, but militaristic is one of the traits I value not too high. Commercial is not bad, but I could think of better combos.

The Legionary is good on the defense, but most players prefer speed and offensive power. In Civ3, it is ridiculous how they could rule the world, this shows that Caesar and other Romans must have been Emperor-level players at least. :)

Edit: I would not recommend the Hittites and their wheeld UU either.

I would love the Legionary to be able to build roads in C3C, as it is able to in the Conquest-scenarios, this would reflect the Roman habit of building roads everywhere to anywhere. :)

I assume you are playing C3C 1.22, and not PtW or Vanilla.
 
PTW English. MoW is not as useful without the enslave ability, and exp/com are not a strong complimentary combo.
 
Zulu. Impis just don't hold up well. The only good thing about being Zulu is then I don't have to worry about an attack from them fifteen turns into the game.
 
I totally trashed the zulu in the CGOTM pregame discussion, so I'll have to stay with them.

The English UU is terrible, I agree. Yeah, I rule the world by ruling the seas. :rolleyes:

All I need is my 12 galleons to reach English shores once and there goes the war.
 
The Portuguese. They're good at tech trading and exploring and... thats about it. Their UU is quickly replaced, and their traits are quickly obsoleted. (Seafaring is little more than a novelty once you reach the Industrial Age, and Expansionist is useless after the Ancient Age.)

I think I might just play as them.
 
It depends a bit on the map, but my candidate is the Hittites. They have a clumsy UU and and ungainly combo of traits. I tried them a couple of them - I am a historian by education and am fascinated by the Hittite civilization- but I have to realize that it is a real upward struggle.
Portugal, Rome and Spain also fail to impress me.
 
Persia. I know they're supposed to be reallly good, but it doesn't work for me. Ind and Sci together make a very cumbersome trait combo for me, the Immortals suck, and the only reason I play as them is to avoid having to face them if they got a different continent to grow strong on.
 
Your crazy IMHO the persians rule, industrious = well developed country to build a unit as strong as knight that cost less and cheap librarys plus a free tech every era helps too...

I think the worst civ is russia, scouts are a short lived bonus and the cossack blitz is only really effective as long as musketman are the best deffensive unit in play....

dgt
 
I hate the mongols, I mean who could have more of a pathetic UU, it has one less defence and only ignores mountains (and hills for those with conquests). So what? espicially with land on 5 million.
 
Oh, and the plus 2/1/0 from longbowman to berzerk rules the age until Military tradition. After that the only worry is the Russians, Germans, and (if somehow you got far enough) the Americans.
 
T-money: Immortal sucks??? It's a medieval unit in the ancient age.
Doc: Thanks for pointing that out. It only shows my ignorance. But I still find Spain a bit akward, perhaps I should point out that I have just played this game for some 3 months and I am still learning.
Norwegianwiking:(Er du norsk, forresten?) Try to rule on a large continent or pangea against hordes of riders. My money would surely be on the Chinese.
 
T-money: Immortal sucks??? It's a medieval unit in the ancient age.
Click to expand...

Yeah. I don't know why, but I never find a use for the Immortals. I tend to do most of my warmongering in the medieval infantry-cavalry-tank era, never fight in modern or ancient, so it really has no use for me.
 
Very difficult to say. Even the Zulu and Mongols have their strong points. They do quite well on a pangaea map with their scouts. I agree with DocT that no alphabet (no commercial or seafaring) on Sid is very bad news (especially on non-pangaea maps). You can't make early contact with the curragh and essentialy get an age behind in no time.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

vmxa
Anyone know how to start with IA, while the AI starts on MA?
Replies
6
Views
775
vmxa
vmxa
L
Civ 6 dlc is not available to buy
Replies
5
Views
1K
lander
L
K
Alternative campaign-the Mongols
2 3
Replies
52
Views
3K
kaskavel
K
Lebo44
  • Poll Poll
At what difficulty level do you play Civ 7 (Poll)
3 4 5
Replies
90
Views
8K
Lebo44
Lebo44
SeBounart
Do you think a post-modern era could be added to the game?
4 5 6
Replies
101
Views
5K
reddishrecue
reddishrecue
Back
Top Bottom