Civilizations that you find boring to play

[orasis]

Remember this thread is about civilizations you find boring to play. It's not a ranking of how good or bad a Civ is. Mine are...

1. Egypt : I've tried to like this Civ but everytime I play with it I end up quitting the game.. It just feels long, like nothing is really happening. I don't know if it's the UU/UA or UB... whatever it is though, it bores the hell out of me.

2. America : Yawn-fest.

3. Germany : not only boring to play but the default color puts me to sleep as well. There are times where I can't even find my units!

4. Russia : Could it be all of that drab Tundra?

5. Spain : Yawn, Yawn, Yawn.

 

[blackcatatonic]

Brazil. There is literally nothing to do but sit back and churn out Golden Ages and GWAMs. Normally with culture-focused Civs the early game is more interesting, but with Brazil very often you need Bronze Working before you can do anything about those jungle tiles - and do you even want to, because of Brazilwood Camps later on?

 

[Inhalaattori]

I disagree with Germany, Russia and Spain. With Germany you have to play active and kill barbarians to get all the benefits from their UA. With Spain you also must be actively exploring to get all the benefits from their UA. Russian UA makes it possible for you to get huge army and be aggressive.

With Egypt and America I agree. Other ones I find pretty boring are India and England. Their UAs are passive. Indian UA might be the one I find most boring and stupid.

 

[crusader01]

Every civ with conquest and domination is fun to play because its harder.
Civs for peaceful Science Diplo = boring.

 

[kamex]

Brazil. There is literally nothing to do but sit back and churn out Golden Ages and GWAMs. Normally with culture-focused Civs the early game is more interesting, but with Brazil very often you need Bronze Working before you can do anything about those jungle tiles - and do you even want to, because of Brazilwood Camps later on?

This! 100%.

 

[PhroX]

Pretty much any civ that is almost entirely focused towards one VC - Mongols, Huns, Brazil etc.

 

[Memoryjar]

Every civ with conquest and domination is fun to play because its harder.
Civs for peaceful Science Diplo = boring.

I partially disagree.

This time, I often think domination is easier than science, culture or diplomatic victory. Sometimes, if I try to science on culture win, I break my strategies to overload the map. Just to end faster the game.

The last quarter of the game is really boring. You known you have win, but you need to click around 40 or 50 times on next turn to really win. If I warmong, it's longer cause I need to move my units.

For the thread question :
- Greece : Do nothing and at least you'll have diplomatic victory.
- Zulus : Impis… and… what else. And Impis have two movements : yeah, I will crush Rio after I'd passed this jungle in 5 turn.
- Portugal : Same games, CS, freitora, cash.

For Egypt, Ireally love my last game, on Emperor, trying to catch all wonders, for culture victory. I'll try in Immortal, next time.

 

[PhroX]

Every civ with conquest and domination is fun to play because its harder.
Civs for peaceful Science Diplo = boring.

I actually consider the "science" civs to be pretty good warmongers, particularly if you're going for a later war (eg arty spamming). Maybe not quite up to the "pure" conquest civs like the Mongols, but having a tech edge can make up for non-war based UAs and weak/wrong era UUs.

 

[Walter R]

I love reading threads like this because it demonstrates the diversity within the Forum.

For myself I like Dom victories best (although by no means exclusively), so I tend to play Civs that are well designed for that VC most often; conversely I find overly peaceful types boring and often frustrating. However I've cranked out my fair share of SVs and a handful of culture and diplo wins.

So I'm unlikley to play India very often for example because it's not my favoured playstyle.

 

[Ikael]

Any civ that doesn't have special characteristics that makes me rethink my gameply style (city positioning, wonders to get, tech tree, etc) are boring as hell. The original civs were terribly designed and as vainilla as they get:

- America the generic
- The Ottomans (bonus to manteinance: most exciting thing ever)
- (Old) Japan (nerfed into oblivion with the expansions)
- (Old) Germany (war war war hey look, yet another manteinance bonus!)
- China (because deciding to build libraries or not is such a hard decision, yes)
- Brazil: I can't believe that they actually managed to make the improved cultural game boring

As for the funniest ones:

- Spain, Portugal and the Soshone rules because they are the very few civs that are built around exploration
- Byzantium requires an extra focus on religion and unique vessels rules
- Aztecs: they alter both city positioning (lakes & freshwater, uber alles) and the cultural gameplay, what is not to like?
- Mongols: Early warmongery + rethinking city placement (pastures)
- New France: Because they do alter the cultural game quite a bit
- The Dutch: Nifty UA, great UI that allows you to rethink your cities
- Morocco: Because rocking the cashbah owns, specially when coupled with Petra.
- Venice: Because, VENICE

 

[cpm4001]

America, until the UUs come online, anyway,
Siam, because it's meh,
China, because it's super-meh,
Byzantium, because if you miss out on a religion it's Game Over,
and any civ with a focus on the ancient/classical era (Persia, Rome, Greece, The Celts, etc.) because that period of the game goes by too fast, even on Marathon speed.

 

[Gustavus Rex]

Ethiopia, Babylon and Shoshone.

I always end up quitting the game out of boredom with them.

 

[crusader01]

I actually consider the "science" civs to be pretty good warmongers, particularly if you're going for a later war (eg arty spamming). Maybe not quite up to the "pure" conquest civs like the Mongols, but having a tech edge can make up for non-war based UAs and weak/wrong era UUs.

Because most of you dont play at Diety, and not for a huge crowded map. If you play Diety level with 12 civs in huge map, you will understand that focus on science will lead to failure in Domination Victory.

 

[Aaron90495]

Because most of you dont play at Diety, and not for a huge crowded map. If you play Diety level with 12 civs in huge map, you will understand that focus on science will lead to failure in Domination Victory.

C'mon, don't be that guy. No need to be all passive-aggressive and arrogant. And furthermore, I would beg to differ. Try using the Mongols when you're 10 techs behind everyone. Unless you're on Marathon (or Epic, to an extent), you're dead. Meanwhile, play as Babylon, then beeline Artillery (or Flight, or even Nuclear Phsyics (?)) - you win.

Back on-topic, America, Russia, and Japan really bore me. There's very little about their UA's that are "active," and their UU's are very fun to use, either. I actually find Spain quite fun to play, even though they're horribly unbalanced; they really make you seek out, settle, and possibly fight for those NW's.

 

[Navelgazer]

I'm not sure he was being "that guy." Different difficulty levels are just going to play differently.

Anyway, most boring:
Ethiopia - powerfully synergized to have you small and running on autopilot the entire game.
Babylon - Basically like above. Pretty (if pretty useless) UB, but not even the strategy of founding the first religion.

Brazil and America might have made the cut, but I kind of like late-game UUs, so they get a pass.

 

[Koiranputki]

I guess all of them can get boring.... Many of the civs I haven't played, so I don't really consider my views as very objective, but it seems I can have fun with many of them in the early part of the game...then, quite often, I suddenly don't care anymore what happens...then I start I new game...

Spain can a be a lot of fun, but it is situational. If I don't find any interesting NWs I'll almost always abandon the game....even if I have otherwise good locations because without that extra edge some of the NWs give, the game becomes, well...."yawn, yawn, yawn".....

The Mongols can be fun but again it seems when the Keshiks lose their "pizzazz", the game quickly becomes a "yawnfest".

Venice I seem to really like...most games I start. If I get a good starting location, those games seem to hold my interest right through to a cultural victory at the end.

Venice might be a bit OP...but it is interesting waiting until you see which CS's are worth buying, then all you have to do is send out a Great Merchant and with one key stroke you can have an almost fully built up city complete with military units...often more units than I already have, maybe a few triremes which I might not have had time to build, and a nice location for making future mischief on the other civs....

 

[Talcove]

All of the warmongering Civs.
I participate a fair bit in wars, but it's only a secondary, or tertiary concern. It comes after I've layed the groundwork (Infrustructure, economy, cities, et cetera) for the victory condition I'm going for. A Civ focused completely on war, especially ones with early unique units, are just plain boring.

 

[spherejoint]

Babylon really lacks flavor after the early game.

 

[Sagax]

America. By the time it reveals its unique units the player has probably already died of boredom.

 

[Dgodus]

All of the warmongering Civs.
I participate a fair bit in wars, but it's only a secondary, or tertiary concern. It comes after I've layed the groundwork (Infrustructure, economy, cities, et cetera) for the victory condition I'm going for. A Civ focused completely on war, especially ones with early unique units, are just plain boring.

A Civ focused on any one aspect of the game is boring tbh. It's like painting with only one or two colors. Interesting the odd time here and there, but on average give me a versatile Civ that is competent in different areas (ie Aztecs can war, grow tall, and amass culture, and tech with all those jungle tiles later in the game if you've left some)