Who's your favorite?

[King Flevance]

If you were to pick someone to always play Civ 4 as, who would it be?

I personally use the random choice option anymore. But if I chose someone it would probably be Alex(BTS). I used to play Alex back in 1 because he was green. Then in 2 because he is who I played in 1. In 3, Xerxes came in and took the lead. - and was green. (Phi/Ind ala Civ 3 ) And now I am back to Alex as my fav again. Honorable mention would be to Mao/Toku ala civ 4 vanilla.

Cavalry and hoplites smash through everything.

 

[Lemon Merchant]

I often play as Cathy because settlers are faster and I like to REX, though I have been trying out some other leaders lately as I'm trying different strategies. I had a really good game as Saladin a while back. I haven't played an aggressive leader yet, so maybe next game...

 

[g.neuman]

I like Stalin purely because of his traits. I like to build wonders and every one of my cities gets a forge regardless of circumstances, so industrious is huge for me. I am also meticulous about specializing my units with promotions, and Combat I is a great place to start because it opens up so many other choices, so aggressive is right up my alley as well.

Other leaders I like to play are Gandhi (in vanilla when he was still industrious), Bismark, and Huayna Capac. I haven't tried Ramses or Roosevelt yet, but my next game will probably be one of those two.

 

[Iranon]

(playing BTS...)

Huayna Capac and Augustus are my favourites, but playing them exclusively would make the game quite formulaic.

In the end, I'd probably pick Gandhi because he is flexible and strong without totally dominating the game in any way.

 

[Bob the Barbari]

King Flevance, who is Xerxes (you can't refer to Persian king because he is not in the game)?

Stupid question now that I have the answer. I thought it's an acronym for one of the leaders.

 

[AmazonQueen]

Assuming we're not allowing unrestricted leaders so I have to take the UU and UB that come with the traits it would be 1 of Gilgamesh, Justinian, Sitting Bull, or Hannibal probably

 

[King Flevance]

I haven't got to play as Stalin yet - and Cathy very little. I have rolled Cathy twice but something like a patch update or possibly a mod made me end my games early. I really want to try out Cossacks though. (I have had 1 game with Peter and got smashed early a long time ago.)

King Flevance, who is Xerxes (you can't refer to Persian king because he is not in the game)?

Yeah, that's the one. He was Persia's leader in Civ 3. In 4 I prefer Alex. I just got to thinking last night and realized I have always had a "favorite" person to play as in each Civ version. And it has been Alex alot. (Although 1 was for color, 2 was simply habit) Back then a who do you like to play as thread would be little pointless though. In 3 I was a big fan of Xerxes with Smoke Jaguar getting honorable mention.

Assuming we're not allowing unrestricted leaders so I have to take the UU and UB that come with the traits it would be 1 of Gilgamesh, Justinian, Sitting Bull, or Hannibal probably.

They can all be fun. Hannibal helped me focus on city specialization better for some reason. Sitting Bull I haven't got much play time in on yet but I had a game where I went on mad rampage with dog soldiers. But ended up spread too thin.

 

[Bob the Barbari]

Oh, now I get it. It seems I didn't pay attention to the numbers in your post.

Btw. I liked Persia in CIV 3 too (for the traits).

 

[Kip Beagle]

I think I'd have to stick with the Americans... I guess I'm just sentimental for my country, although I'm not necessarily patriotic or nationalistic. It's probably because it's most familiar to me (or maybe I'm too simple).

As for the three American leaders, I'd pick Roosevelt. Not for the traits but because he was the United States' greatest president, in my opinion.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

BTS Washington. Very well rounded. Big cities, decent-to-strong military, above average economy. If America had an earlier UB, I might play as him constantly.

But I use random a lot, or since I play in forum games just take what I'm given.

 

[Kiwi Tyrant]

Darius (continental-type landmass) or Hannibal (archipelago-type landmass).

Unknown random map = Sitting Bull.

 

[Öjevind Lång]

Elizabeth because she's financial and can generate a lot of Great Persons. I also like the redcoat, and the stock exchange is awesome.

Mansa Musa isn't bad either, and playing as him means one desn't have to risk playing against him.

 

[Civaddict78]

Hello all. Newbie here. First post and this seemed the most appropriate!
Apologies if I waffle on, iits fun to have found a forum and people to share ideas with.

So far, I've played Elizabeth or Victoria the most and always had a lot of success. Maybe its because I'm English and we all think alike . Like someone posted above, I love Redcoats. For my style of play they come in at just the right time of play if you go for the Oracle as your first real 'extravagence) and cut down loads of woods for it and then head for Gunpowder and Rifling as fast as you can without being really silly about it.

It tends to mean you're left behind in a few areas after specialising so much but by having a good strong industrial base with an army as experienced as you can get them and as large as you can, the Red Coats add a real edge (from around 1500 I think is the earliest I've got them but I cannot remember off hand) and you can take loads of land in a short space of time and put yourself ahead on points where you have been lacking due to being so focused on thread of research.

Again it could be an English thing but I try and group my Redcoats into cohesive units of 5, either with a real speciality like City Attack (gained from earlier experience in older units) or a mixture with all 5 covering almost every possible experience upto that point- eg. Medical, hills, forest, rifles, extra strength.

Doing them in squads of 5 makes it easy to keep track of numbers and how strong your army is. It also makes it more versatile and wieldly- they can be grouped by 'battalions' to form a division- eg 5 Redcoats with City Attack experience, 5 Recoats with Extra Stars for real power, and 5 Artillery. Create 2,3,4,5 etc of these types of groupings- must have a cavalry division!- and you can really build up a logical and manageable army.

Waffling on-

Finally, my most succesful game ever was with the Japanese. Has anyone else ever found this?

And how do people arrange armies depending on their leader?

 

[Monsterzuma]

William of Orange, probably. Kublia Khan second. Alexander third.

Am a major Creative/Agressive buff, though Financial is so powerful it can not be ignored. Damn if I stick with my principles if it means missing out on overpoweredness for the rest of my life.

 

[bestbrian]

Shaka! Great for rexing, banging heads, and getting over Wonder Addiction (and don't even get me started about how awesome the UB is).

 

[Jerrymander]

Charles or Catherine.

Probably Charlemagne.

 

[Firestorm94]

look at my avatar and take a wild guess

 

[Genv [FP]]

Willem Van Orange or Willem the Silent

 

[King Flevance]

Finally, my most succesful game ever was with the Japanese. Has anyone else ever found this?

I used to play the crap out of Toku in vanilla. But he lost alot of weight with warlords when they took org from him and gave him Pro and gave him a UB that was sub-par among the others. But agg samurais are pretty tough.

Probably Charlemagne.

Yeah Landshecks(sp) rule.

look at my avatar and take a wild guess

Hehe about 3 months ago I randomly rolled Justinian 3 games in a row. I got to know him pretty well then.

 

[AmazonQueen]

I remember playing Toku in the 1000AD scenario once. I got the event that adds Pinch to Gunpowder units if you build a load of musketeers. Nice