Thoughts on the Strongest Leader in Warlords

[a4phantom]

Here is also a list of all trait combinations done on a Word Spreadsheet. Red is combos that dont exsist and yellow is current leaders, while black is the same trait on both axis. Some trait combos that are left out (IMBA IMO) are Organized/Aggresive, Aggresive/Charsmatic, Finacial/Organized and Philisphocial/Industrious. I also find that the imperialistic is one of the weaker traits and I'd rather have creative or expansive over this trait.

You're right about those being OP. Financial/Organized was George Washington in Vanilla, and it was extremely powerful. Aggressive/Charismatic would be straight up murder. Philo/Industrial would also kick tail for wonders/GP, did anyone used to have that?

 

[Martinus]

You're right about those being OP. Financial/Organized was George Washington in Vanilla, and it was extremely powerful. Aggressive/Charismatic would be straight up murder. Philo/Industrial would also kick tail for wonders/GP, did anyone used to have that?

Nope. Phi/Ind was one of the two combos missing from vanilla. (The other was Cre/Org, which is now held by Augustus).

 

[Martinus]

Here is also a list of all trait combinations done on a Word Spreadsheet. Red is combos that dont exsist and yellow is current leaders, while black is the same trait on both axis. Some trait combos that are left out (IMBA IMO) are Organized/Aggresive, Aggresive/Charsmatic, Finacial/Organized and Philisphocial/Industrious. I also find that the imperialistic is one of the weaker traits and I'd rather have creative or expansive over this trait.

Thanks for compiling this up. It's interesting to see that some traits appear in almost every possible combination (e.g. Spiritual which is paired with everything except for Imperialistic), whereas some are rather rare (notably, Philosophical and Creative, each of them having only 5 out of 10 possible pairings). I wonder if this is a game development decision (and an indicator of whether Firaxis considers some traits to be more powerful than others, and thus made them rarer) or simply a fact that, say, Spiritual is an easy trait to give to historical leaders, since many of them were big on religion and mysticism?

 

[morahed18]

There's some pretty interesting comments here lately. So after spending some time with Warlords, I'm going to throw out the two most notable leaders that haven't been given enough credit.

First off is Ramesses II. He's my vote for the best leader for religious domination. The Spiritual/Philosophical combo (currently Gandhi, formerly Saladin) seems to be getting a lot of attention, with emphasis on the double great prophet production. The limiting factor here is always that Caste System doesn't allow for unlimited priests. So unless you score a couple of early wonders, you're left with (oh joy) 1 Priest from the temple built in your GP farm.

The Egyptian UB allows for 2 more Priests very early in the game, which is a huge edge. Ramesses' industrious trait ensures that you'll score at least one, if not two of the early prophet producing wonders. And the reduction in temple cost is icing on the cake. I'm of the opinion that these factors in combination completely overshadow the edge that a Philosophical leader would provide when trying to dominate the world's religions. (as a side note I like the War Chariot more that the Immortal - which seems to be getting an overwhelming amount of attention on this thread)

The 2nd leader which hasn't been mentioned in a while is Julius Caesar. I don't know if he's better than Cyrus as a warmonger, but I think he rivals him. The Organized trait allows for those expensive wartime civics. And the Roman UU... yikes. It doesn't allow for the really early rush that the Immortal provides, but it stays useful for so darn long, that it might make up for it.

 

[The Lardossen]

I think the research path is about as long for Preats as for Immortals. BW will probably be the first tech you research. After that is HBR and archery for Immortals, or just IW for Praets.

 

[Martinus]

First off is Ramesses II. He's my vote for the best leader for religious domination. The Spiritual/Philosophical combo (currently Gandhi, formerly Saladin) seems to be getting a lot of attention, with emphasis on the double great prophet production. The limiting factor here is always that Caste System doesn't allow for unlimited priests. So unless you score a couple of early wonders, you're left with (oh joy) 1 Priest from the temple built in your GP farm.

The Egyptian UB allows for 2 more Priests very early in the game, which is a huge edge. Ramesses' industrious trait ensures that you'll score at least one, if not two of the early prophet producing wonders. And the reduction in temple cost is icing on the cake. I'm of the opinion that these factors in combination completely overshadow the edge that a Philosophical leader would provide when trying to dominate the world's religions. (as a side note I like the War Chariot more that the Immortal - which seems to be getting an overwhelming amount of attention on this thread)

Good comments there. Don't forget that for the perfect synergy there you get your UB in all cities by building Stonehenge which is cheap (and doubly so for Industrious Ramesses) and grants you Great Prophet points.

 

[suspendinlight]

I think the research path is about as long for Preats as for Immortals. BW will probably be the first tech you research. After that is HBR and archery for Immortals, or just IW for Praets.

You only need the Wheel and AH for Immortals so they definately come sooner.

 

[morahed18]

I think the research path is about as long for Preats as for Immortals. BW will probably be the first tech you research. After that is HBR and archery for Immortals, or just IW for Praets.

Yea, the tech path to the Immortal is a little shorter, and more convenient than a B line to IW. But the main difference is the lower production cost/extra movement of the Immortal, that allows for a big invasion significantly earlier in the game.

 

[Duncan_Idaho]

I completely agree with Morahed. I never tried praetorians but the immortals are cheap enough to build in numbers and rock with the bonus against axemen and archers. Spearmen can be a problem but if you manage to get your units upgraded, they are a lesser problem. Also, the immortals can do an awesome job pillaging the enemy's resources.

Another leader I'd like to mention is Genghis Khan. Nobody mentioned him so far but he plain rocks. You'll say Keshiks come too late in the game. You may say they are too expensive and they don't offer advantages. You may say they only have 6 strength - nothing more than a swordsman.

I tried them out and was astounded by their efficiency. They come just in the time when you will have build a couple of cities with good production so you can start massing them without bothering to stop the production of military units because you need civil buildings or workers which is the problem with the early units.

Second, use the Ger Nothing, I mean nothing can stop a stack of Keshiks who came out of a city which has barracks, a ger and Theocracy (very easy to get with a prophet). Imagine you get the imperialistic bonus to get more experience to the units built in your cities.

Those upgraded monsters devastate spearmen behind city defenses.

The imperialistic bonus does help to get an advantage in the early claiming of territory and still not get slowed by producing a settler. The advantage isn't that great but it helps.

Genghis is also aggressive - so you can get some early protection with good axes and spears while expanding.

By the time your neighbours get macemen (and worse - pikes), they will find out they are a part of the huge Mongolian Empire

 

[a4phantom]

Yeah, I don't have warlords yet but the stable building seems like a huge christmas present for the Mongols even aside from their's (the Ger) being double strength.

 

[Martinus]

Mongol leaders seem interesting, however they never really appealed to me much because their special unit does not benefit from their Aggressive trait at all (would be much useful for them to be Charismatic). Personally, I think the Aggressive and Protective bonuses should extend to UUs of their respective leaders, no matter what their nature.

 

[morahed18]

First off is Ramesses II. He's my vote for the best leader for religious domination. The Spiritual/Philosophical combo (currently Gandhi, formerly Saladin) seems to be getting a lot of attention, with emphasis on the double great prophet production. The limiting factor here is always that Caste System doesn't allow for unlimited priests. So unless you score a couple of early wonders, you're left with (oh joy) 1 Priest from the temple built in your GP farm.

The Egyptian UB allows for 2 more Priests very early in the game, which is a huge edge. Ramesses' industrious trait ensures that you'll score at least one, if not two of the early prophet producing wonders. And the reduction in temple cost is icing on the cake. I'm of the opinion that these factors in combination completely overshadow the edge that a Philosophical leader would provide when trying to dominate the world's religions.

A note worth making here - Egypt does NOT start with mysticism. So you will most likely miss Buddhism/Hinduism. That taken into account levels the playing field significantly between Ramesses and Gandhi.

 

[DrMayhem]

I definitely need to reiterate that Rammesses II is amazing. to found a religion, just get a GP and have him show you the way to Code of Laws. If you can coordinate this with building the oracle there is noy much hope to opposing Ramesses. You should have sufficient enough production to spam missionaries at one civ and to spam war chariots at another. I played monarch difficulty, uniter my continent under confucsionism, and when I got astronomy I was able to take half of the other continent witha handful of macemen, knights, and trebuchets.

with the being said. I will mention somebody who has been excluded.... NAPOLEON. after having a good start with Kublai Kahn, I realized a 7 experience keshik was no better (except for mobility) than a 5 experiwnce horse archer with a charismatic leader. since my research was failing as a mongol, I thought that organized would help with my empire costs. now with Napoleon I am having a similarly easy time in a monarch game to what I had with rammesses.

the next civ to try... Ottoman. I want to research pottery first turn and start making half cost granaries. follow that with the UB soon after and you will giant cities even in ancient times.

peace out.

 

[Duncan_Idaho]

the next civ to try... Ottoman. I want to research pottery first turn and start making half cost granaries. follow that with the UB soon after and you will giant cities even in ancient times.

peace out.

Use granaries THAT early? Or am I missing some super growth strategy? Pls share if so

I can't play CIV 4 right now but I agree that Mehmed should be an awesome warmonger/balance of power guy. With some luck with the resources, you could use the +3 health bonus to get huge cities in the middle of flood plains and not be worried by jungle nearby.Then you can expand normally (eating a neighbour or two early) and then when you get suffocated by the maintenance costs you could use those cheap courthouses (I so longed for them with Cyrus).
And when your cities grow a little and time comes for granaries/lighthouses - you could easily build them, thus getting an even better growth. Then you have the cheap harbours for better trade routes..

 

[DrMayhem]

Yes, I am talking about turn 15 or so granary in my capital and granary being the first thing built in new cities. It has worked great so far. I have conquered much of my continent, take that Mansa Musa! But soon I will have infantry and artillery coming up against riflemen, and will take the rest of the continent.

 

[DrMayhem]

Using the granary quite that early is not necessarily the best way to go about it, although I won handily with the Ottomans. Having the super early granary if you couple if with slavery could possibly make for a warmonging nightmare (for the other players or computer). As a result of this new thought, I might try the new washington for the first time, or use Shaka for the second time, and see if I can improve upon what I did with him the first time.

 

[smatt834]

It also depends on what era you are starting in. In an ancient any civ that starts with mysticism is strong. So far i've found brennus to be one of the fastest techers if you get the oracle and use the priest for civil service. Send yer keshiks, cho-ko's, elephants, and hwacha's. I've got musketmen.

 

[Gozert]

Lol. I just dislike that of the THREE ENglish leders, they pick two of the individual worst ones (Victoria and ELizabeth) just to gender balance the game. Come on where is ALfred, Henry V, henryVIII, edward, william of orange, cromwell. Lots of better choices but if they wanted a woman, they wanted a woman.

I'll just point out that it isn't William of Orange, it's Willem van Oranje. And he's Dutch, not English.

William Orange was also king of England

Actually, the Dutch and English call different persons William of Orange.

First there is William of Orange-Nassov (a.k.a. William the Silent), which Dutch call William of Orange. He was actually born in Germany, and was considered the pater patriae of the Netherlands. The Dutch national anthem was written in his honor.

Then there's William III, which the English call William of Orange and was actually Dutch. He was king of England, Scotland and Ireland, and Stadtholder of the United Netherlands.

So neither of them were true Englishmen

 

[Lance of Llanwy]

I must say that I find Stalin to be a very nice leader. Though the UB is underwhelming, Cossacks are still a pretty good UU, and Agg/Ind is a surprisingly useful combo. MC-slingshot anyone? And Industrious could also be put to work to help hold up your economy in an early war(Great Lighthouse and Temple of Artemis, both of which the AI forgets about in their mad rush for stone-based wonders.) Certainly very flexible and effective, in my experience.

And I think the new Cathy is pretty interesting. Just crank out settlers and let creative fill in the gaps. Cottage spam isn't as good for her anymore, so make up quality with quantity I say!

Oh, and last comment...I miss Toku's Organized trait. Maybe it's because I haven't played any of Toku games long enough to get gunpowder though...

 

[a4phantom]

And I think the new Cathy is pretty interesting. Just crank out settlers and let creative fill in the gaps. Cottage spam isn't as good for her anymore, so make up quality with quantity I say!

Funny, since it was Stalin who said "Quantity is its own quality" and then went on to prove it by winning WWII.

I just got warlords and I'm pretty impressed with Cyrus' super warmonger traits, although I'm still afraid to attack Korea.

DrMayhem: Having the super early granary if you couple if with slavery could possibly make for a warmonging nightmare (for the other players or computer). As a result of this new thought, I might try the new washington for the first time, or use Shaka for the second time, and see if I can improve upon what I did with him the first time.

Try that with Charisma to keep the cities happier and an early city taking UU like the Immortals.