Most Disliked Civ to Play
- Thread starter Jatta Pake
- Start date
Princeofnigeria
The illustrious
Listed in order of distain:
Denmark- I don't dislike embarkation or naval sides (polynesia os my favorite side in the game, and my first victory ever was with songhai) I just hate vikings. Also the ability forces you to go out of your way and the UU's are meh.
Spain- LUCK. Conquistador is funky, and the tercio is pointless as the AI only ever seem to have a handfull of horse units at any given time.
Germany- Everything.
Siam- allways got bored with them. Nothing is WRONG with them per se, I just could never get myself to enjoy them. I don't think they need to be changed at all, I just think they aren't my cup of tea.
A LOT of the BNW civs seem completely against everything I do and many would have been scattered around this list, but since I played zulu and legitimately loved it, I'll withhold my opinion on them for now.
I may be in the minority here, but I love america. I love every part of them. The +1 sight allows me to spend my early rescources on more important matters rather than just Scouts/ warriors, and it allows me to defend my borders with ease/ cease the rampant spawn of barbarians. The tile purchasing alows me to swiftly close off land from my enemies, link up cities quicker, and of course steal precious rescources. The minuteman is one of my favorite unique unuts in the game, and comes at my favorute era of warfare: the late renniasance. It is a time when the technological disparities of opposing nations really start adding up, when combat strengths really start to add up, and when the widest variety of units are on the field. Sword toting longswordsman are cut down by brand spankin' new gatling guns, while cannon fire in the distance spells death for the chivalrous knight, and all the while my glorious minutemen slip in and out of battle, stirring up confusion and spotting for my other units, being of great aid wether I am the advanced agressor or the lagging defender. Most of all I love the freedom: the freedom to go about the game as I see fit, not bound by the prefered abilities of other civs. In general I favor civs that give me liberties, rather than trying to force me down a specific playstyle or path, civs that give me tools rather than tracks, and thus I say I genuinly love being the Americans.
Denmark- I don't dislike embarkation or naval sides (polynesia os my favorite side in the game, and my first victory ever was with songhai) I just hate vikings. Also the ability forces you to go out of your way and the UU's are meh.
Spain- LUCK. Conquistador is funky, and the tercio is pointless as the AI only ever seem to have a handfull of horse units at any given time.
Germany- Everything.
Siam- allways got bored with them. Nothing is WRONG with them per se, I just could never get myself to enjoy them. I don't think they need to be changed at all, I just think they aren't my cup of tea.
A LOT of the BNW civs seem completely against everything I do and many would have been scattered around this list, but since I played zulu and legitimately loved it, I'll withhold my opinion on them for now.
I may be in the minority here, but I love america. I love every part of them. The +1 sight allows me to spend my early rescources on more important matters rather than just Scouts/ warriors, and it allows me to defend my borders with ease/ cease the rampant spawn of barbarians. The tile purchasing alows me to swiftly close off land from my enemies, link up cities quicker, and of course steal precious rescources. The minuteman is one of my favorite unique unuts in the game, and comes at my favorute era of warfare: the late renniasance. It is a time when the technological disparities of opposing nations really start adding up, when combat strengths really start to add up, and when the widest variety of units are on the field. Sword toting longswordsman are cut down by brand spankin' new gatling guns, while cannon fire in the distance spells death for the chivalrous knight, and all the while my glorious minutemen slip in and out of battle, stirring up confusion and spotting for my other units, being of great aid wether I am the advanced agressor or the lagging defender. Most of all I love the freedom: the freedom to go about the game as I see fit, not bound by the prefered abilities of other civs. In general I favor civs that give me liberties, rather than trying to force me down a specific playstyle or path, civs that give me tools rather than tracks, and thus I say I genuinly love being the Americans.
Certainly Germany's ability isn't a fair reflection of German history while it's been an actual civilisation. However, I always play raging barbarians and you can achieve great things with an early rush that way together with the Honour tree. The most convincing victory I've ever won at King level or above was through zerging a nearby Ethiopia right after it founded a religion. The rest of the game was an absolute breeze.
I don' get why some people dislike sweden... there are so many cool GP based strategies with them. 90 Influence for a great prophet that has 1 spread use left is nothing too laugh about etc. And gunpowder units that start with march promotion?! Sweden is deluxe.
DemonMaster
A.K.A. Fenhorn
And with a 30-40% GP boost due to DoF and also GP from the Patronage finisher, you end up with more GP than you have use for.
When I (last) played Sweden, my goal was to win a Diplomatic Victory so I didn't need to finish the tech tree, to use every single writer/artist or even other GPs, I only needed to boost influence with the right CSs (and the right number) just before the voting.
Tiggurix
Warlord
I'd say that the Conquistador's "funkyness" is a point in its favour. Also, the Tercio is stronger than a standard Musketman, and it's classified as a Melee unit, so it benefits from some bonuses that the standard Musketman do not, such as the Production bonus to Melee unit in one of the Honour Policies.
no, they can be awesome. You don't need to spend money on roads early on, it saves gpt for maintenance and time to build them. Your units move without penalty on forest. Mohawk Warriors are great, they are equal in strength yet require no iron... if you don't get iron, you're safe, if you get it, you can sell it.
Longhouse is also terrific, it gets you enough production for your cities, so you can quickly build good infrastructure and even snatch few wonders if you're lucky enough to get few forest tiles.
jlim201
King
Does anyone actually play as Askia? When I played as him, he was quite average. Is it because no one knows about him?
Le Sage
Emperor
Sweden is actually kinda boring.
BarrenEarth
Chieftain
The Dutch... I mean no one likes the Dutch... 
/me hides
/me hides
Babylon - babylonian strategy: get science academy from writing, win.
India - tragic game representation of awesome civilisation IRL
Iroquis - boring as hell (despite I love this nation in real life
)
America - the most boring civ in the entire game, for me almost always in strategies "US faction" is the most "normal" and tedious one (despite I really like USA in real life )
Spain - depends entirely on luck, if you have no natural wonder close to starting position, good luck with using two bad UUs, while if you have Lake Victoria/Solomon's Mines/one of the few other good natural wonders near your cap you feel like a cheater
Also, I absolutely hate Spanish colonial empire in real life (I'm with Aztecs, Incas, Mayas, Iberian muslims and Jews, Dutch, Philippines natives, Moroccans, Sicilians, protestants and all victims of this political entity)
India - tragic game representation of awesome civilisation IRL
Iroquis - boring as hell (despite I love this nation in real life
)America - the most boring civ in the entire game, for me almost always in strategies "US faction" is the most "normal" and tedious one (despite I really like USA in real life
)Spain - depends entirely on luck, if you have no natural wonder close to starting position, good luck with using two bad UUs, while if you have Lake Victoria/Solomon's Mines/one of the few other good natural wonders near your cap you feel like a cheater
Also, I absolutely hate Spanish colonial empire in real life (I'm with Aztecs, Incas, Mayas, Iberian muslims and Jews, Dutch, Philippines natives, Moroccans, Sicilians, protestants and all victims of this political entity)
His UA is great if you have raging barbs on, because you can get lots of gold in early game quicken expansion\infrastructure. Otherwise, his UA is useless, especially now in BNW when you don't war as often.
His UU and UB are solid, but nothing special (altho, they make awesome tanks since they have no penalty attacking cities)
AI is terrible tho, first one to gets wiped out or reduced to one terrible city.
AI is terrible tho, first one to gets wiped out or reduced to one terrible city.
Yeah, the Askia's ability to don't achieve absolutely anything in the infinite number of games is ridiculous
Seriously, in my entire "Civ5 career" I have never ever saw Songhaj being good in damn anything, either it is absolutely bland second - tier civ or civ notable only for its hilariously bad statistics (science! economy!
)I have seen Songhai conquering one country in a brutal war and being completely destroyed few turns after it, Songhaj being molested and raped by all its neighbours, Songhaj sitting in crap desert with crap city and don't doing anything, Songhai making "isolated despotic pathology" (along with Aztecs) and of course Songhaj being two eras behind everyone else
And I have never ever seen a single screenshoot of another player which would show "Songhai being a runaway", or something.Oh, and I don't like playing this civ either.
What a shame Songhai is in C5 instead of Mali/Ghana ; _ ;
The Huns really annoy me when I get them on random leaders. Firstly, I don't like doing early domination, and they unique units pretty much try to pigeonhole you into doing that. Secondly, the whole "borrow cities" thing makes it difficult for me to get any sentimentality going for my game; the premise that you happened to dominate Shanghai which was founded right next to your capital just breaks me out of the immersion.
The extra production from pastures is cool, though.
EDIT: I wouldn't badmouth the Songhai, I played one game where they captured Thebes in the early game and managed to dominate every single other civ completely by Modern era. On Prince difficulty no less o_O
The extra production from pastures is cool, though.
EDIT: I wouldn't badmouth the Songhai, I played one game where they captured Thebes in the early game and managed to dominate every single other civ completely by Modern era. On Prince difficulty no less o_O
Jon the Bastard
Warlord
In no particular order:
Aztec - A UA that's so-so and a UU that's out of vogue way too fast. Too much of your energy is spent making sure your constantly at war with some to take advantage of their UA and once their UU is teched out of the game, then you have to worry about slapping barracks and experience buildings everywhere just so you have a force strong enough to kick butt... again, so their UA doesn't become completely worthless. You can really only play 'em one way. That, to me, is boring.
Egypt - Part of this is due to the fact that I always seem to have the worst possible luck with them. Aside from that, I don't like their UU and would have much rather have seen a Unique Improvement of some sort for them. Their UA is nice, but it's effectiveness (depending on who you ask) takes a hit at higher difficulty levels.
Persia - I will own up to this one being listed by virtue of the fact that I haven't played them more than once. Perhaps I should revisit them, because I haven't played them since vanilla. But, I found them be a drag after the Renaissance.
Aztec - A UA that's so-so and a UU that's out of vogue way too fast. Too much of your energy is spent making sure your constantly at war with some to take advantage of their UA and once their UU is teched out of the game, then you have to worry about slapping barracks and experience buildings everywhere just so you have a force strong enough to kick butt... again, so their UA doesn't become completely worthless. You can really only play 'em one way. That, to me, is boring.
Egypt - Part of this is due to the fact that I always seem to have the worst possible luck with them. Aside from that, I don't like their UU and would have much rather have seen a Unique Improvement of some sort for them. Their UA is nice, but it's effectiveness (depending on who you ask) takes a hit at higher difficulty levels.
Persia - I will own up to this one being listed by virtue of the fact that I haven't played them more than once. Perhaps I should revisit them, because I haven't played them since vanilla. But, I found them be a drag after the Renaissance.
jlim201
King
America- Too boring to play as, I hate them as AI's they are always A) running away on a different continent, or B) Expanding much too close to me. I don't understand how they do that.
I grew to like Persia during the last game, but ended up going so wide the UA was practically useless as I rarely got a GA.
Yeah, the Askia's ability to don't achieve absolutely anything in the infinite number of games is ridiculous
Seriously, in my entire "Civ5 career" I have never ever saw Songhaj being good in damn anything, either it is absolutely bland second - tier civ or civ notable only for its hilariously bad statistics (science! economy!
yeah, the usually punching bag. At least you can always count that you'll get lot of land by conquering Gao.
Dunno why, but Gao always seems to have huge territory around it. 
ps. Tried Askia yesterday on Standard\Immortal game. I got Salt start (with high number of Salt tiles, like 10 of them
) so I was able to have good production and grow at the same time. Brazil was my first neighbor and he was being punk of course. So we got into fight when I got my cavalry. I kinda enjoyed using them, they are relatively cheap to build, have no penalty on attacking cities and they are really fast. If they had "move after attacking" they would be easily equal to Keshiks. I've been using nothing but horses and catapults to capture every Brazilian city, except one terribly located to leave Brazil alive. The gold gained from pillaging was (got around 700 gold from Rio, around 350 from others). Later on, punched my favorite punching bag AI - Spain. His UB - it's great. Replaces Temple, which means, you will probably build it anyway. It has +2 on culture and faith. Cost no maintenance. With religion I add them +2 happiness and culture. This made it into very powerful building, that gives +4 culture, +2 faith and +2 happiness all while costing no maintenance. (Pretty much like Egypt's burial ground, only it gives 4 happiness and 2 culture).
In other words, Askia can be really good if player uses him right, it's just AI that's terrible.
PreLynMax
Your Lord and Master
^this.
Tomplum pretty much took the words out of my mouth (with the exception as the Huns, they are quite fun to play domination as).
Also hate playing as Greece, China and the Aztecs for the same reason.
I also raqe quit at turn 1 when play as India and Venice for not allowing me to expand properly. No. Just no.
Similar threads
