Is there a tier list yet?

wilmer007

Chieftain
Joined
Sep 10, 2010
Messages
43
I know it's too early to tell but is it safe to assume that Japan is #1 with babylon being #2? third can be open to debate as some will say russia/rome/greece/china. i think the top 2 everyone can agreed on though.


If there isn't what is your own tier list?

mine is:

God:

Japan
Babylon

High:

Russia
Rome
Greece
China

Mid:

Egypt
Persia
Aztec
France
Germany
England
America


Low:

India
Arabia
Siam
Iroquois
Ottoman
Songhai
 
WTF? Tiers?! this is not street fighter goddamnit.

Every CIV has a specialty that depends on your settings >.>


Not to mention you will eventually be able to mod the hell out of a civ once the tools are released..so...yeah
 
I know it's not street fighter but a game like this has stronger civs and weaker civs. it's not a perfectly balanced game with balanced civs. your telling me a strong civ like japan will get destroyed by a weak civ like say songhai who has an ability that has to do with barbs vs a civ that has 3 very good Uniques that are war related.
 
Check out "weak" Arabia on Emperor. This was just after they removed the "strong" civ's like Germany and France.

I was out the game next btw, within 30 turns. ;)
 

Attachments

  • WeakArabia.jpg
    WeakArabia.jpg
    308.9 KB · Views: 261
Check out "weak" Arabia on Emperor. This was just after they removed the "strong" civ's like Germany and France.

I was out the game next btw, within 30 turns. ;)

And what's that supposed to prove? Depending on difficulty settings, a skilled player can beat the AI in just about any strategy game with any race, faction, or nation.
 
And what's that supposed to prove? Depending on difficulty settings, a skilled player can beat the AI in just about any strategy game with any race, faction, or nation.

Uh what? This is Civ 5, not Civ 4. And I guarantee you nobody would have beaten this Arabian AI in this game.
 
>Arabia and Glorious Communist Siam in "Low" tier.

Oh, you.

Although I must agree, the Iroquois are generally complete garbage.

Not if you exploit forested areas correctly. Cutting down on the number of roads and the amount of gold you have to spend isn't "garbage" in my opinion.
 
I know. I just like baiting you guys. :lol:

Plus the only time i've been them so far I tried for a OCC, so.. they didn't really get a fair chance to earn my respect. ;)
 
And what's that supposed to prove? Depending on difficulty settings, a skilled player can beat the AI in just about any strategy game with any race, faction, or nation.

exactly right that is just one game. just like in street fighter where matches are predetermined before the match based on testing of matches based on both players being equally skilled.

just because you are playing on immortal doesn't mean anything. the difficulty you chose is based upon your skills to play on that difficulty.

i am currently playing on noble because i have like 1 month of civ experience. however weither it's your game on immortal or my game on noble and both our games have arabia in it, it doesn't change the odds of arabia winning.

let's say arabia who is "weak" only wins say 20% of the time that means out of 10 games arabia will win 2 games and lose 8 games. now say japan who is "godlike" they are suppose to win say 80% of the time. so in 10 games japan is suppose to win 8 times and lose 2 games.

now yes there are those few games where both japan and arabia will swap in percentage odds but hey that is what percentage odds are there for. percentage odds are there to give you an idea of where this civ you plan on playing with is ranked based on odds on winning. and odds of winning are based on your individual skill as a player in civ and then based on the civ you pick. you can play 2 games exactly alike with 1 game with japan and the other with arabia and you will see that if you follow both civs exactly the same your score and score lead will be totally different in both games.


>Arabia and Glorious Communist Siam in "Low" tier.

Oh, you.

Although I must agree, the Iroquois are generally complete garbage.

I based my tier list by just looking at each civ's uniques and compared each civ to the other 18, taking into account if one civ has only 2 early game uniques while another had 1 early game uniques and 1 mid/late game unique and giving the civ with 1 early and 1 mid/late unique priority over the 2 early unique civ if he has a better ability than the 2 early unique civ's ability.

And by some weird coincidence last night on my first game i picked japan playing on noble. playing on a small map (6 civs). i have aztec, india, ottoman, songhai, and 1 unmet civ and i am the score leader. so yeah i put my tier list before i remember about my game and oddly enough my tier list actually matches my game. and if that wasn't enough to justify; me, arabia, and ottoman are at war with songhai. and that was with me making a pact of cooperation with each one within just turns of each other and they came asking me not the other way around.
 
exactly right that is just one game. just like in street fighter where matches are predetermined before the match based on testing of matches based on both players being equally skilled.

just because you are playing on immortal doesn't mean anything. the difficulty you chose is based upon your skills to play on that difficulty.

i am currently playing on noble because i have like 1 month of civ experience. however weither it's your game on immortal or my game on noble and both our games have arabia in it, it doesn't change the odds of arabia winning.

Well it's only Emperor level. The difficulty level does change the odds of certain civs winning btw.

As a simple example, at noble level the AI builds much less cities, far slower. On Emperor they will really try to spread out fast. The Arab bonuses are built around having more cities...and the more they get, the more overpowered they become. Japan's unit ability remains the same no matter what level the game is played at.

let's say arabia who is "weak" only wins say 20% of the time that means out of 10 games arabia will win 2 games and lose 8 games. now say japan who is "godlike" they are suppose to win say 80% of the time. so in 10 games japan is suppose to win 8 times and lose 2 games.

now yes there are those few games where both japan and arabia will swap in percentage odds but hey that is what percentage odds are there for. percentage odds are there to give you an idea of where this civ you plan on playing with is ranked based on odds on winning. and odds of winning are based on your individual skill as a player in civ and then based on the civ you pick. you can play 2 games exactly alike with 1 game with japan and the other with arabia and you will see that if you follow both civs exactly the same your score and score lead will be totally different in both games.

There is no "tier list". Arabia will easily beat Japan 99/100 in any game played at Emperor level and above. If you play at a bit lower level, the Japanese special ability might be enough to overcome the arabs...in 8/10. It's got nothing to do with the civ's themselves though, and everything to do with how their special abilities react with the bonuses they get at higher levels.
 
So why do you think those civs are in their tiers?
Is it because japan is a "militaristic" civ? or babylon is a "scientific" civ?

Given enough planning a non "militaristic" civ can and does beat a militaristic civ.

Hell, in my current game on prince (wooo normal XD)
Japan was doing great on his own continent when 2 other civs decided to DoW him..30-40 turns later, japan is gone. Wheres your god tier now?

and tiers really only work on a pvp environment....not against AI.
and well all know how awesome civ mp is =P
 
Don't think there needs to be a tier list.

As seriously as some people take their games, there will be. But it'll take longer to work out than this... Most people are still learning the strategies... But tiering is an inevitable result of accumulated experience; eventually some consensus will emerge on which civs are somewhat inherently better, as "optimal" strategies develop...

That doesn't mean you can't pick whichever is more suited to your personal style, but if you're going to always win on Deity or whatever you're going to need to consider all the statistics.
 
So why do you think those civs are in their tiers?
Is it because japan is a "militaristic" civ? or babylon is a "scientific" civ?

Given enough planning a non "militaristic" civ can and does beat a militaristic civ.

Hell, in my current game on prince (wooo normal XD)
Japan was doing great on his own continent when 2 other civs decided to DoW him..30-40 turns later, japan is gone. Wheres your god tier now?

and tiers really only work on a pvp environment....not against AI.
and well all know how awesome civ mp is =P

well in a way yes i mean if you have a strong military or strong research it improves your odds of winning. i mean if you are playing on immortal and can out tech or catch up to arabia's tech with babylon you can take them out in the early to mid game. arabia uniques kick in at mid game so if they survive to get to mid game then they are strong with their uniques but if you are playing with greece who has 2 awesome early unique units you can wipe him out in the early game with ease.
 
Top Bottom