Best and Worst Civs?

[Zardnaar]

I'm a noob at this game and I'm just wondering what the best and worst civs are? I've been playing on King and the French, Aztecs and Zulu seem quite good. Then again I could be very wrong.

Cheers.

 

[ericball]

Best & worst are in the eye of the beholder and will depend on your personal playstyle, the SP level you are playing or your MP opponent playstyles.

However, in higher level games and MP, the initial and Medieval bonuses tend to be more important. Then there are some clear standouts in initial rush & development ability:

Americans - can use GP to explore; 1/2 price rush in Medieval
Arab - Fundmentalism for +1 attack
Aztec - gold for instant warrior & units heal
Chinese - +1 city pop speeds development
English - archer +1 defense
German - veteran warriors & elite units upgrade; forests +1 production in Medieval
Greeks - hopilites for defense, democracy for science/gold
Indians - terrain bonuses can speed development, Fundmentalism for +1 attack in Medieval
Mongol - barbarians convert to cities; cavalry +1 move in Medieval
Romans - Republic for quicker settlers
Russian - area map to locate huts & capitals; Loyalty for defense in Medieval
Zulu - warriors move 2 and have easy overrun

 

[Zardnaar]

I played the Russians last night and won with a space race. Whats is the loyalty ability? I noticed I had very tough defensive units and half price riflemen was great. Each city had a cheap rifleman rmy in it and the one the 2 AIs kept attacking easily repulsed assaults. Leonardos workshop was great in that game as it upgraded the warrior armies into tanks and all my riflemen, archers, pikemen into modern infantry.

unlike previous civs havung hordes crossing your borders doesn't matter to much if your cities are safe.

 

[PeteAtoms]

I played the Russians last night and won with a space race. Whats is the loyalty ability? I noticed I had very tough defensive units and half price riflemen was great. Each city had a cheap rifleman rmy in it and the one the 2 AIs kept attacking easily repulsed assaults. Leonardos workshop was great in that game as it upgraded the warrior armies into tanks and all my riflemen, archers, pikemen into modern infantry.

unlike previous civs havung hordes crossing your borders doesn't matter to much if your cities are safe.

The loyalty promotion gives the defensive unit +50% defense.

And yeah, the Russians were one of the first civ's I used to gain a non-military victory.

I'm not sure about which civ's are the worst and which are the best, but I play the American's and Russians alot, and I hardly play as the Arabs or the Romans.

 

[Zardnaar]

The only real problem so far with a non military victory is that its usually quicker to just ipe them out. I got the economic victory with the Aztecs, and Techological one with the Germans. Also had some cultural victories. Going to go get the 360 version of the game and sell my PS3 copy methinks.

 

[GGrayson]

This has been discussed on many threads, on a few different forums.

The general consesus:
top civs
Americans- their medieval bonus is broken, but in a way that unfairly favors them.
Zulu- the impi rush plus overrun bonus make them the easiest civ to consistently pick up early caps with and dominate the map early
China- Hands down the best tech civ, and besides the americans, they are probably the best defenders.

Worst Civs
France- they have nothing compared to other civs. The only good thing they have is the cathedral, which can be destroyed by a singel spy. Their whole strategy hinges on Great People, which is a pretty random and inconsitent thing to rely. Widely accepted as the worst civ.

Russians- They don't have any good bonuses to help you win, just bonuses to help you stay alive. you can get a rush going with them some times, if the local area map shows you a way to pick up fast gold, or get techs from huts, but the rest of their bonuses aren't good at all. Defense and spies won't win you games, +1 food from plains isn't a game changer. I like the Russians, they are the most vanilla civ in the game, and you have to earn most everything you get with them.

Mongols- tough to get gold with, tough to play with, those barbs that change to 1 pop cities often have no growth. If you don't get more than 2 barbs, things are really really hard. They actually have good bonuses as the game continues on, but getting things started can be difficult.


The rest of the civs not mentioned here are what I call the "muddled middle" Some are close to being top civs, some closer to the bottom, but all the civs i didn't list here all have powerful enough strategies that are reproducible to not be considered the bottom civs, but not powerful enough or not consistent enough to be consider among the best civs.

 

[Zardnaar]

I've won 2 deity games now with the Chinese and USA. Late game the USA just pumped out units, chinese expanded very fast. Current deity game is with the Aztecs and I've been hemmed in by 3 civs, didn't get to many goodie huts and have been at war with 2-3 civs constantly. My core empire is only 3 average cities, with a couple of cities up near the Indians who extorted a great leader out of me.

I did manage to find 3 artifacts-Angkor Wat, Knights Templar and the Ark of the Covenant. I had to pop them a bit sooner than I woudhave liked. Hemmed in, out numer, barely holding on. Making a beeline for navigation and hiding behind my free city walls and do a late game spanish style gold rush methinks. Gonna go for spacerace or cultural victory to get the achievements on the 360.

 

[Sn1p3rk1ll3]

Try Russia : its easy as hell to settle all over the place early on (plains = grasslands for food )

getting attacked?
-5 techs, and your defensive units will have loyalty when you make them.

End-game you'll have rediculously cheap rifles, so spam them all over and cut your enemies resourses.

Spies are cheap as russia, so demolishing your enemies cities/stealing great persons can change the course of the game quite effectively in your advantage.


Russia is a jack of all trades, because of the easy settling and good defenses, so make good use of that and you will win (unless facing better oponents who have a brain).

 

[Zardnaar]

I just completed a 1 city challenge on King to get the achievment. Also won as Russia via domination. Nice late game civ.

 

[MorteEterna]

Try Russia : its easy as hell to settle all over the place early on (plains = grasslands for food )

getting attacked?
-5 techs, and your defensive units will have loyalty when you make them.

End-game you'll have rediculously cheap rifles, so spam them all over and cut your enemies resourses.

Spies are cheap as russia, so demolishing your enemies cities/stealing great persons can change the course of the game quite effectively in your advantage.


Russia is a jack of all trades, because of the easy settling and good defenses, so make good use of that and you will win (unless facing better oponents who have a brain).

Russia is one of the 4 worst civilizations.. Why don't you tell people the truth? You should know the bonuses you are talking about are bad. Without rushing and expanding they are really bad. Not really good advice..

 

[GGrayson]

Yeah, I've tried Russia. Probably used them more than 99% of players out there. I got into the top 25 in H2H only using them, I played a lot of MP games with them, and have been successful, mainly due to horserushing, but more importantly, the weak skill of a lot of opponets. i even wrote a strategy for them (Morte did too).

After all of that, they are still one of the worst civs. Not as bad as France most of the time, but still pretty terrible.

every civ is a good "late game civ". They have bonuses to help them exist, that's it.

 

[GGrayson]

Russia is a jack of all trades, because of the easy settling and good defenses, so make good use of that and you will win (unless facing better oponents who have a brain).

it doesn't require a better opponet to beat the Russians, usually just a better civ. If russia can't get off to a great start, then their expansion is actually a lot slower than most civs. They grow fast, and can defend ok, but their last two bonuses are really bad compared to most other civs.

I'd say if you are playing a lowered skilled player who is using a good civ, then they only need maybe 45% of a brain to win most of the time against the Russians. The power civs against russia, maybe only 25% of a brain is required.

 

[Sljusto]

Where can you see all those bonuses you're talking about? I mean all the bonuses I can see in the game are the UU and UB..

edit: sorry but I'm a big noob in civ, I'm a homm vet

edit 2: well I'm obviously in the wrong forum for one, I play BtS not revolution :/

 

[bavoss22]

I really like the Indians! They start off with access to all resources which allows you to get great cities up and running quickly. This also allows you to skip a couple of techs b/c you already have access to these resources.

 

[GGrayson]

I really like the Indians! They start off with access to all resources which allows you to get great cities up and running quickly. This also allows you to skip a couple of techs b/c you already have access to these resources.

sort of, but you only have partial access to the bonuses. Let's say you never research Navigation. This means if you have a city with a whale, you'll only get +1 food in the Ancient Era, +2 in the Medieval, +3 in the Industrial, and +4 in the Modern Era. For the resources that come early, like fish (you gain access w/ bronze working) or wine, it doesn't make a huge difference.

The power of the indians comes with the resources like aluminum and rubber, which don't come till later in the game, but you can still acess them. Resources that net you lots of production typically translate into the most powerful types of resources you can get w/ the Indians, since you get Fundamentalism early, and you can do a lot of things with a large advantage in overall hammers. Having boosts in food and trade are nice too, but from my experience, having production early, and plenitful throughout the game, makes them a great civ. Not the best by any stretch, but still a good civ that requires great skill and flexible strategies.

 

[jayhawklaw]

My least favorite civilizations to play as on deity are the Greeks and the Mongols. The reasons the Mongols are so challenging has been addressed already, but the Greeks haven't been discussed, so I'll delve into that.

Starting bonus is a courthouse and that you start as a democracy. The courthouse doesn't do much for you at the start of the game because your population is so small that you can't utilize more resources than you could without it, you just have more of a selection if you want to customize. Starting as a democracy kind of sucks because you have to change governments and lose a turn of production if you want to capture an enemy settler or caravan and yet another turn if you decide to switch back to democracy.

Also, I typically like to research monarchy first (among government types) to get the free great person if England isn't in the game. I switch to monarchy without losing a turn upon discovery and then research code of laws so that i can switch over and build a settler or two at a discount. If you start as a democracy, you lose a turn to switch to republic and yet another to go back to democracy.

All in all, it makes it harder to get a civilization set up with more than two cities. I always feel like I need to catch a break in order to do well with the Greeks. With almost any other civilization, regardless of the opponents and circumstances, I feel like I have a better shot of winning.

 

[elthrasher]

Starting bonus is a courthouse and that you start as a democracy. The courthouse doesn't do much for you at the start of the game because your population is so small that you can't utilize more resources than you could without it, you just have more of a selection if you want to customize. Starting as a democracy kind of sucks because you have to change governments and lose a turn of production if you want to capture an enemy settler or caravan and yet another turn if you decide to switch back to democracy.

Yes, it gets worse in MP because if you change government and then take an enemy capital that same turn, you will often get booted out of the game at the start of the next turn. Thus, if you roll up on a lightly-defended capital, you can't just try your luck. What I typically do is move my settler for a couple of turns at the start and change to despotism while I'm doing that (thought for some reason you can't do this on the first turn). If I haven't settled yet, I'm not losing anything for being in anarchy.

It's easier to move your settler because of the courthouse. You don't need trees to be right next to the spot you settle as long as they are in courthouse range. So I move my settler looking for nice resources or an enemy capital to surprise (also known as settler rush).

Also, I typically like to research monarchy first (among government types) to get the free great person if England isn't in the game. I switch to monarchy without losing a turn upon discovery and then research code of laws so that i can switch over and build a settler or two at a discount. If you start as a democracy, you lose a turn to switch to republic and yet another to go back to democracy.

Getting Monarchy before Code of Laws isn't a good idea because Code of Laws is a prerequisite for Monarchy. You basically end up paying for Code of Laws twice. Read this article to understand: http://forums.2kgames.com/forums/showthread.php?18743-Technology-Tree-An-In-Depth-Look

Also Monarchy isn't a very strong government, except at the start of the game. What it does is double your palace culture. Palace culture is equal to the total population of your empire with a max of 5. Monarchy doubles that to 10 and Democracy eliminates it. So if you tech Monarchy for the GP and then switch to Monarchy, what are you really gaining? You just got a GP and must accumulate a lot of culture to get to the next one.

To be clear, the technology Monarchy is good for access to dye and the free GP, but the government just isn't that great. I wouldn't go out of my way to get it.

A longish Greek game might have me doing something like this:

• Switch to despotism for early aggression
• Back to Democracy to quickly tech Code of Laws
• Republic to expand
• Back to Democracy to tech up
• Maybe Fundamentalism for the kill at some point

Monarchy is nice for the English to start with and can be useful for any civ that hasn't had its first GP yet (if you take out the English early and get free Monarchy), but after that it's really not worth much other than it being a government with no drawbacks.

All in all, it makes it harder to get a civilization set up with more than two cities. I always feel like I need to catch a break in order to do well with the Greeks. With almost any other civilization, regardless of the opponents and circumstances, I feel like I have a better shot of winning.

The Greeks were my worst civ for a long time in MP because the early Democracy doesn't gel very well with the need for aggression. I kind of sorted that by deciding that Democracy should be used for getting quickly to Republic or other early techs as needed (you might want Mathematics for a rush or something).

 

[ninefingerchef]

I find that the Americans, Aztec, Chinese, Zulu, and Romans to be the easiest to play with. I personally don't like to war, so expanding with these countries is fun.
The Romans are especially broken with the ability to produce a settler after two warriors having never done pop growth. Half price wonders are clutch to a growing empire. Especially Magna Carta and East India Company. These guys just explode, you don't even have to worry about placing cities so well because you will have so many of them. Try to place near cattle if possible. Code of laws allows you to harvest them, and it's all about pop growth with Rome.

 

[jordissim]

I find that the Americans, Aztec, Chinese, Zulu, and Romans to be the easiest to play with. I personally don't like to war, so expanding with these countries is fun.
The Romans are especially broken with the ability to produce a settler after two warriors having never done pop growth. Half price wonders are clutch to a growing empire. Especially Magna Carta and East India Company. These guys just explode, you don't even have to worry about placing cities so well because you will have so many of them. Try to place near cattle if possible. Code of laws allows you to harvest them, and it's all about pop growth with Rome.

I completely agree with you, specially regarding the Romans. In my opinion, they are by far the best civilization if you're not planning a blitz win but a high-score game. I usually tend to follow three rules (as I explained in another post):

1) Develop Feudalism ASAP. Cataphracts are BY FAR the best units you can get in early-mid stages of the game, and can easily defend themselves from attacks AND conquer heavily defended cities.

2) Expand, expand, and expand. Place cities two squares apart, prioritize defensive units in strategical places and use the rest in order to build settlers.

3) Try to build the Oracle of Rhodes. Use the Romans' ability to get wonders at half-cost. Knowing in a more or less reliable way whether you're going to win a battle is priceless.

That's just my opinion, though, and I confess I never play Deity... Things are probably much different in that level, I wouldn't know.