An alternative Deity Tier List (a.k.a. 'Don't Forget About Conquest')

[consentient]

I've just realised a way someone could feasibly convince me that Polynesia is better than Poland: beat the T193 SV HoF record.

Or beat the fastest HoF DomV time using Poland...

Or get a sub T200 CV...

any of these would do it...

 

[Sclb]

For CV, Polynesia has a 237, but there's a Polish one at 192, pretty impressive sub 200. There are also 2 sub 100 Spain, but that's obviously SS that only Spain can pull off with early NW.

For Dom, Poland isn't on the list but there are Polynesian ones as quick as 106. So that's pretty surprising.

 

[vadalaz]

For CV, Polynesia has a 237, but there's a Polish one at 192, pretty impressive sub 200. There are also 2 sub 100 Spain, but that's obviously SS that only Spain can pull off with early NW.

For Dom, Poland isn't on the list but there are Polynesian ones as quick as 106. So that's pretty surprising.

The Poland T192 game is SS too. There are no sub-200 traditional CVs in HoF, I think Ironfighter had at least one but unfortunately forgot to submit it.

Polynesia is fantastic for fast island map domination, probably the best civ for that overall. You get all the ruins, pillage all the trade routes for thousands of gold, then rush-buy a ton of Galleasses and take all the capitals in 30-40 turns. Sadly I don't think this can be used for a fast conquest-assisted SV, because island maps tend to have terrible land, at least the default scripts. A Polynesian sub-200 HoF-compliant SV on an island map would be so cool to see.

 

[consentient]

Thanks to all those who have done leg work in checking the records. I would like to put this to bed, really. If someone has a legitimate problem with a rating I have made of a unique feature of a civ that can be compared with The Neutrals, I will consider it, but having Polynesia, Japan and Venice fanboys show up and miss the whole point of the rating system and its logic, is a bit boring now, sorry.

 

[vadalaz]

If someone has a legitimate problem with a rating I have made of a unique feature of a civ that can be compared with The Neutrals, I will consider it, but having Polynesia, Japan and Venice fanboys show up and miss the whole point of the rating system and its logic, is a bit boring now, sorry.

I think the Huns should be moved to God tier. I would change BR's rating to 5/5 and free AH to 1/5. One thing you don't mention about rams in the OP is that they provide such a big boost to your army score in demographics. It's very easy to demand tribute from CSs with rams, and you can abuse peace deals with weaker AIs as well. Free AH isn't a huge bonus, but it does give you a bit more information on turn 0 than you get with the Neutrals. Making sure you get Horses in the capital is pretty good, especially if you get an early worker steal to get an excellent tile and some gpt from trading (or lump sum in a peace deal with the AI you stole the worker from).

But I'm a biased Huns fanboy and I'm not even denying that. Perhaps my perspective is skewed because I chase fast victories, while this list is about ease of winning.

 

[consentient]

The Huns are damned powerful, no doubt about it, but we have to remember that if the game goes much beyond T150, the Huns revert to a neutral civ. By that time, Rams are nothing, HAs have faded, and the production boost is minimal. So I favour gamelong bonuses over those that give a fast start. Also, the list is for Pangaea, Continents and Fractal. The Huns are not great on non-Pangaea. If I was to make a Pangaea only list, Huns might even be top.

 

[vadalaz]

Yeah, that's fair. I just think early game bonuses kind of turn into gamelong ones due to all the snowballing in this game, but it's difficult to measure.

 

[consentient]

I mean, the other thing I'd add is that it's about how the civ performs in the hands of the average Deity player. Not everyone is good enough or careful enough to be able to what you did with them in that Science game for the HoF. Clearly, the bonuses that The Huns have mean that that strategy was made much easier by the civ you were playing as, but it's really not that easy.

So while this Tier List is weighted towards the use of conquest (including combining it with other VCs), I can't ignore the fact that for a Traditional CV or DiploV, the Huns don't get much of a bonus.

Pangaea only, Dom only, The Huns are god tier, no question.

People are surprised most about the placement of Arabia and Persia, but for me, they are easy mode in almost every game.

 

[vadalaz]

I hardly ever play Continents, so I have a question for you. Assuming you can clear your starting continent by Astronomy as the Neutrals, how much of an advantage would clearing it 20 turns faster as the Huns give you, if any? Other than being easier, that is.

 

[consentient]

From a Diplomatic POV, of course it's less risky, as you probably won't be discovered to be an appalling warmonger. But in all likelihood there would be opportunity cost disadvantages as well. You're probably a bit behind in science if you do that. At least, I am every time I do it, and I'm not completely crap.

 

[Mrdarklight]

Yeah, regarding the rating system... having an "X/5" rating system doesn't really work if you're going to give some civs more than 5 points for some feature, right? I mean, I don't disagree with most of what you came up with, and we can disagree on Polynesia, but giving a civ a 15/5 makes the 5/5 rating system meaningless, doesn't it? If you're going to do that, it should probably be an X/15 rating system for everyone.

 

[beetle]

^^ It is a good system. The points are assigned relative values. The UA is X/15 the UB/UU are X/5 each. The three are on the same relative scale, but the UA has a larger range because it can be so much more game changing than a UB or UU. In post 183, I summarized the results (a little dated).

 

[hiawafer]

I rate Korea a bit higher. I think their UA is better than you say. probably it is 10 or 11. especially if you want to make conquest more worth it. they can take annexeed cities and make them really important finaly

 

[consentient]

I already think that Korea has a slight edge over Babylon, especially taking into account conquest, as you say. I'm open to reviewing the rating I gave the UA, but would need to see some maths before I made an adjustment. I barely play myself these days, so if anyone wants to go wild with some Korean games, feel free to let me know.

@hiawafer: I see that you got a fast SV with Korea on the fast science victory thread. Do you have data from that which could be used to compare them with the Neutrals?

 

[hiawafer]

I dont have exact numbers but I remember that it was more of 300 science from the UA

 

[Blatc]

Korea estimate, using a simple 4-city example, all on hills (no windmills) next to mountains

Expos (3)
Specialist buildings: Uni, School, Lab, Market, Bank, Workshop, and 1 of Stock Exchange/Factory (i.e. 7 out of 8 specialist buildings) = 9 specialists = 18 science from UA per expo
Modifiers at 150% (Uni w/ Rationalism policy, Observatory, Lab) --> 45 science per expo
With 3 expos, that's 135 science from UA

Terrain
Estimate 1 GS and 2 Prophets planted = 6 base science
Personally, I try to plant the prophets in expos and the GS in capital, which gives different modifiers.
Prophets (2 x 2 x 150%) + GS (1 x 2 x 200%) = 10 + 6 = 16 science from UA

Capital
If 8/8 specialist buildings and 2/3 guilds (Writers, Artist), that's 15 specialist slots = 30 base science x 200% modifier = 90 science from UA

Total in this 4-city example with 7/8 specialist buildings in expos, 2/3 guilds, and 3 great people planted is 241 science from UA

Ex. 2: 4 cities by mountains, no Windmills. 8/8 specialist buildings in expos, 3/3 guilds, still 3 great people planted but all in capital:
Expos - 11 specialists/22 base science x 150% = 55 per expo x 3 = 165
Terrain - 3 x 2 x 200% = 18
Capital 17 specialists = 34 base science x 200% = 102
285 science from UA

Ex. 3: exact same as first example, but with a 4th expo for 5 cities total: 241 (total from first example) + 45 (4th expo) = 286

Ex. 4: exact same as #2, but with a 4th expo for 5 cities total: 285 + 55 = 340 science from UA

Ex. 5-7
Wide empire with 7, 9, or 11 cities
Average of 6 specialist buildings/8 specialist slots per expo = 16 base science per expo
Estimate 50% of expos have Observatories, therefore modifier average is 125%. 16 x 125% = 36 science from UA per expo
Terrain. Let's go with 3 great people and 16 total science.
Capital: Go with the #s from first example = 90 science from UA
7 cities = 90 + 16 + (6 x 36) = 106 + 216 = 322
9 cities = add 72 to above = 394
11 cities = add 72 to above = 466

I realize in spots I just wrote the modifier (ex. 200%) instead of the actual calculation # (ex. 300%); hopefully people understand what I mean.

 

[hiawafer]

hm what gave me more than 300 i wonder? i understand the results of the math but am poor at making a claculation from myself.

but still.... getting 300 more science ont top of 1500 is 20% right? thats huge

 

[Blatc]

hm what gave me more than 300 i wonder? i understand the results of the math but am poor at making a claculation from myself.

but still.... getting 300 more science ont top of 1500 is 20% right? thats huge

Where did the number of 300+ come from? It's not denoted separately, as beakers from city states and happiness are.

The +10% from Rationalism would apply: 300 beakers from Korean UA would give 330.

Korean late-game bonus is huge!

 

[hiawafer]

Where did the number of 300+ come from? It's not denoted separately, as beakers from city states and happiness are.

The +10% from Rationalism would apply: 300 beakers from Korean UA would give 330.

Korean late-game bonus is huge!

I calcullated it from what I had at the time. Subtracted academy bonus, specialist bonus and I really remember it being more than 300. Next time I will write it down!

 

[Blatc]

To be clear, I believe that you had >300 beakers from UA, just pointing out that you had to crunch the #s yourself to get that figure, so you should already know 'what gave me more than 300'