Which start do you use?

[Lucifel]

I'm curious which people play because most guides or discussions I've read haven't specified and the difference between the two maps you start with is nothing short of gigantic, not to mention the difference between one 3000BC unlocked and the next.

I tend to use a 600AD start just because I'm not really that good yet and it seems the easier of the two. The randomness isn't there and predictable is always easier.

 

[Zhuge_Liang]

Mine, 600AD Unlocked.

 

[Lucifel]

What does 600AD unlocked let you play that 600AD doesn't?

 

[Lokolus]

What does 600AD unlocked let you play that 600AD doesn't?

Americans, I also play the 600 AD because the 3000 BC is so slow...

 

[Bob III]

I play 3000bc so that my game is always different.

 

[Virdrago]

3000 BC unlocked. Only problem is waiting for the later civs and some of the "interesting" happenings (30 minutes for Arabia and both Jerusalem and Tyre were destroyed by barbs?!).

 

[MrPopov]

I too like the 300bc unlocked. I like when many empires are about equal in strength by the time I spawn. I had a game where Carthage founded Christianity and had circumnavigated the globe.

 

[Squirrelloid]

I prefer to use the normal 3000BC start and screw around with some country not near the country I want to play until my country comes up. So my current (Incan) game featured me winning the Punic Wars as Carthage and turning the Mediterranean into a Phoenician lake before the Incans spawned... Its going to be a weird europe when/if i get there.

(One of Carthage's UHVs should totally be "establish a trade route with an american civ")

 

[Wessel V1]

600 AD because I don't want to wait 20 minutes but I think I will try it.
When I want to play as France I start as Rome, conquer the Celtic villages and delete all units just before the French come.