1. We have added a Gift Upgrades feature that allows you to gift an account upgrade to another member, just in time for the holiday season. You can see the gift option when going to the Account Upgrades screen, or on any user profile screen.
    Dismiss Notice

6 Most Frustrating Leaders to Play Against

Discussion in 'Civ4 - General Discussions' started by LegioCorvus, Oct 21, 2009.

  1. LegioCorvus

    LegioCorvus Prince

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2009
    Messages:
    455
    Location:
    Switzerland
    I'm trying to set up a Prince - Terra - Normal Size/Speed map where I play against the 6 leaders that always make you groan when you discover them.

    A good example would be Montezuma. When you're playing a game and discover Monty, you know that except for that small percentage of the time you have the same religion, he's going to go to war with you at some very inconvenient point. Probably even if he's got the same religion.

    Another good example is Isabella, she of the religious convictions. The problem is, I'm not sure a map with both Montezuma & Isabella would be that hard. Isabella would try to spread her religion to my & Monty's lands, then we'd all be part of the same happy religious war family. (That, and Isabella is backwards as all heck).

    So, what would be the must frustrating group of 6 nations to play against?

    This is the best I could come up with, but I know someone out there can come up with a lot better:

    Julius Caesar - Rome
    Suryavarman II - Khmer
    Montezuma - Aztec
    Catherine - Russia
    Boudica - Celts
    Shaka - Zulu

    I figure with 2 religious founders, it keeps anyone from getting a huge religious block, especially since most of the others don't care about religion. Montezuma is a wild card, and Julius Caesar is more stable but more dangerous. Catherine I wasn't sure about, as she can be your best friend or worst enemy. Either way, with her rapid expansion and 'diplomacy,' she is hard when you play against her. Shaka is a pain up front, and Boudica is one of the few warlords that isn't completely backwards when it comes to tech. That, and she has mysticism for balance.

    So... can anyone beat that grouping? I'm looking forward to a very interesting game.
     
  2. KeloGBites

    KeloGBites Warlord

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2009
    Messages:
    274
    Monty is never a threat aside from early game, which is the best time to take him out. I'd replace him with Ramses II who will provide a challenge on the culture front( or Mansa Munsa to create Giga-Shaka). Caesar is good, I'd change Survaryman II who is just lol-worthy with Gilgamesh who is possibly the most capable AI leader and damn near impossible to take out early on. Boudica is quite fun, but very tame in my experience. Change her to Napoleon or Hannibal. Last game I've had with those 6 leaders on a Pangea map resulted in a loss in the BC years though
     
  3. dirtyparrot

    dirtyparrot Upholding Brannigan's Law

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2005
    Messages:
    1,841
    For me it's Zara, Sury, Napoleon, Gilgamesh, and one of Alex/JC/Ragnar.
     
  4. TheMeInTeam

    TheMeInTeam Top Logic

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2008
    Messages:
    25,749
    1. Gilgamesh ---> Consistently strong AI that expands well, dominates other AIs, and is probably the 2nd hardest AI to rush in the entire game.
    2. Shaka ---> The most consistently successful of the warmongers, tied 1st in unitprob, and a UB that bails his tendencies out to an extent. His tendencies match his civ/traits well.
    3. Sury ---> Declares at pleased, gives -2 for request refusals, and does well enough that siding with him can be dangerous. He also expands heavily. A little easier than 1 and 2 due to his zealous tendencies sending him after non-religious allies with more certainty.
    4. Cathy ---> Rarely a military issue early, but her culture is a pain, she declares at friendly, gives -2 for refusals, and expands like crazy. A low unitprob doesn't hurt her if she's #1 in land/pop by 10% or more. Rated below Gilly because she is easier to get rid of if close.
    5. Mehmed ---> Another severe annoyance despite not declaring at pleased. He has easy cap management (boon to the AI) and is also tied #1 in unitprob. He pursues a variety of victories and if he DOES go to war, it's going to hurt the target especially if that target is an AI.
    6. Willem ---> My least favorite of the AIs that's FIN. He is CRE and thus expands somewhat better. He also whores religions and frequently pursues culture, however his peace weight keeps warmongers off him sometimes and worse yet he declares at pleased. His chummy attitude to the warmonger AIs can tech feed them and that's a damned hassle.

    Honorable mention: Joao (similar to cathy but more diplo manageable), Capac (similar to willem), Napoleon (like a weaker shaka), Pacal (similar to willem also).
     
  5. Rycheman

    Rycheman Warlord

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2006
    Messages:
    148
    Location:
    Yorkshire UK
    My choice would be :-
    1.Shaka
    2.Mehmed
    3.Napoleon
    4.Ragnar
    5.Sury
    6.Gilgamesh
     
  6. davelisowski

    davelisowski Spartan

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2006
    Messages:
    353
    for me it's any civ that will declare war against me, attack me, lose all their units, and still won't make peace.

    this happens a lot when they are far away and sending units in waves. i'll kill their stacks and they won't accept peace because another stack is on it's way.

    Of course, this tends to be the same AIs as you all have mentioned.

    Shaka
    Sitting Bull (i'm having difficulty with him, but have only seen him twice in game)
    Alexander
    Julius
    Montezuma

    of course I despise the tech-savvy AIs also, but I can deal with them once my army can handle the aggressors and build an attack force.
     
  7. Iranon

    Iranon Deity Whipping Boy

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2007
    Messages:
    3,214
    Location:
    Germany
    Top 4 annoyances to me would be Gilgamesh, Willem, Suryavarman andZara Yaqob, All are Creative, a trait which is annoying in neighbours (more culture pressure) and greatly helps the AI.

    Gilgamesh is very very difficult do rush, not a safe neighbour and competent enough to remain a threat.
    Willem can be a bit of a push-over at first, but he is opportunistic and better at going for victory than most.
    Suryavarman is a credible threat when you can't get on his good side and quite balanced overall.
    Zara Yaqob might seem friendly... but he's stifling when close and a good candidate for a runaway AI when far away.

    *

    Last 2 are trickier... on the whole, I find extreme personalities easier to deal with. Sitting Bull in your face is ugly, but he can keep the warmongers out of your hairl (high peace weight but definitely no push-over). Catherine just needs to be pointed at her other friends before those do the same thing to you; often enough I can set her up to be the strongest AI but universally despised. Very useful to simplify diplomacy.
    The hardcore warmongers can be excellent friends, or major risks if you encounter them before you can befriend them.
    I also don't like

    Louis (nicking my shinies and being VERY unpredictable)
    Mehmed (overall solid, hard to push around by diplomacy)
     
  8. Yonez

    Yonez Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2009
    Messages:
    88
    Now, I don't play on an especially high level, but apart from the obvious war-mongering head-cases, I groan when I discover Mansa on a different continent next to someone who expands a lot. You just know he's going to become the grower's vassal at some point (the worst I saw was with Joao) and become ultra tech buddies.
     
  9. TheMeInTeam

    TheMeInTeam Top Logic

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2008
    Messages:
    25,749
    I mostly agree but I must note that it is very, very easy to manipulate zara due to a +2 hidden modifier and the fact that using EITHER religion OR theocracy will quickly send him to friendly. If he does not run away TOO badly, this can very often play to one's advantage (similar to cathy perhaps as you outline her), and that's why I didn't mention him although I definitely would have in honorable mention if I'd remembered.
     
  10. Navarre

    Navarre Legio XIII

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2007
    Messages:
    536
    Location:
    France
    Mine would be :

    - Goddammit Surya, his fast expansion and his billion of demands
    - Pacal, always tech whoring and ugly as heck.
    - Tokuselessgawa, who doesn't want to trade or doesn't have anything worthy to trade, ever, and is dangerous with his billion of agg/pro troops.
    - Joao, just... Joao. Can I kill him mom ?
    - Alexander the backstabber, the man who DoWs on you at 2000 BC and razes your newly founded city with his three phalanx just for the lolz.
    - Some wondermonger, let's say Huayna "I'll build them all !" Capac.
     
  11. Snowman084

    Snowman084 Chieftain

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2008
    Messages:
    46
    Location:
    Canada
    1. Gilgamesh
    2. Alexander <---- :mad:
    3. Julius Caesar
    4. Joao
    5. Huyana Caupac
    6. Willhem

    my mind is usually always changing but Julius and Alexander are always on my hit list because they are back stabbers.... i agree with everyone else that Gilgamesh is annoying....
     
  12. tijup

    tijup Warlord

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2009
    Messages:
    246
    Sury
    Gilgamesh
    Zara (if I can't get him as an ally or as a non belligerant in war)
    Mehmed (I got a game with a 2500 years phoney war with him.)
    Williem
    Alexander
    Pacal II
    Roosevelt (annoying espionnage level as for Mehmed)

    I tend to have early wars with my most common Nemesis, such as Alexander, Ragnar,
    Shaka, just to get rid of them at middle ages (I play only at Noble).
     
  13. Mittens

    Mittens Chieftain

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2009
    Messages:
    36
    Sury
    Cathy
    Gilgamesh
    Zara

    No non creatives are that annyoing (though if you random personalitied, shaka + monty would be lots of trouble, it's just you can see it coming).
     
  14. azzaman333

    azzaman333 meh

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2005
    Messages:
    22,877
    Location:
    Melbourne, AUS Reputation:131^(9/2)
    Gilly as a neighbour, Joao as a distant power.
     
  15. LegioCorvus

    LegioCorvus Prince

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2009
    Messages:
    455
    Location:
    Switzerland
    By going from what I've seen here, it looks like the top 6 most annoying leaders to find on your map are:

    1) Gilgamesh
    ~ very unpopular
    2) Suryavarman
    ~ very close second
    3) Alexander
    ~ kind of surprising third
    4) Mehmed II (tied)
    ~ really?
    4) Willem van Oranje (tied)
    ~ again, really?
    6) Choice of: Julius Caesar, Napoleon, Shaka, or Zara
    ~ all understandable

    I know from personal experience how annoying Sury can be, but I've never had a problem with Gilgamesh. Maybe it's because I haven't played many maps with him. I am surprised by Mehmed & Willem. I've only played a few maps with Mehmed, so that stands to reason, but I've had many with Willem. He's always been a reasonably good techer who's never really been a threat. Maybe it's my play style.

    Alexander, I will agree, is an annoying backstabber. He almost made my beta list. I also agree with Sitting Bull, who was originally on my beta list, but he's more of a pain to take out than a real threat. Still, every time I see him appear on a map, I groan audibly. I guess the idea is "most annoying" and not "most threatening" leaders to play against, though... hmmm...

    Well, by going with what people are telling me and personal preference, here's my updated list:

    Gilgamesh
    Suryavarman
    Alexander
    Mehmed II
    Julius Caesar
    Zara

    I removed Willem because I've made that guy my lapdog almost every game. It seems a little warmonger heavy, but I'll take your guys word that Gilgamesh & Mehmed are full game length annoyances. Zara's there for something different, namely annoying culture battles.

    Comments? Opinions?

    I won't be starting this game until my next day off, Saturday, so there's still plenty of time to fine tune this list. Like I mentioned in the first post, I'm curious to see how these annoying leaders would be to play against as a whole. I don't think religion would affect this group too much either, though it is a part of the diplomacy angle I always play when available. (Force of habit).
     
  16. azzaman333

    azzaman333 meh

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2005
    Messages:
    22,877
    Location:
    Melbourne, AUS Reputation:131^(9/2)
    I've never seen Alex be anything more than a minor annoyance early.

    Replacing Alex with Shaka and Zara with Willem would be a much more frustrating experience IMO.
     
  17. Rooftrellen

    Rooftrellen King

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2009
    Messages:
    691
    Location:
    Vitória, Brazil
    1. Darius - Not a huge headache on his own, but in the wrong combonations...ugh.

    2. Sury - I have only ever taken him out early or been in 5+ wars with him thoughout a game. Oh, and when I say early, I mean like my warrior walking into his city and knocking over his hut (noble/prince player here). He develops so quickly that he becomes a threat soon.

    3. Genghis Khan - He stops being a threat fairly quickly, due to his bad teching, but he is crazy about war.

    4. Gligamesh - He gets good early and stays good for a long long time...and he is probably secretly planning on killing you from the start.

    5. Napoleon - A very good AI that can war well but doesn't die without feeding on someone.

    6. Toku - There goes one spot that could have been a good trading partner.


    Overall, this is probably not the worst 6 individual leaders, but the fact that most of them are warmongers means they will likely go after the player or Darius. If they go after Darius, its very likely they will end up with a vassel to tech for them. If they start targeting each other, one will likely just start to run away with the game, collecting vassels.

    I really can't imagine a game with these 6 leaders turning out too well due to the fact that either the player will be under constant assult or someone is going to start running away with the game, collecting vassels, including, most likely, tech happy Darius.
     
  18. LegioCorvus

    LegioCorvus Prince

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2009
    Messages:
    455
    Location:
    Switzerland

    That's why he didn't make my beta list. Still, he seems pretty unpopular here. Maybe he'll be cut for the next one unless he gets some supporters for how annoying he can be late game.

    "Early annoyances that don't last long into the game" is also the reason I'm not including leaders like Tokugawa, Genghis Khan, or Montezuma on the updated list. Though Montezuma is very, very tempting. He's up there with Shaka & Isabella for making me groan when I find them on my maps.

    Still, is Shaka that good late game? I almost always take him out early (or him, me) when I play, so I've never really had a chance to find out. I kind of assumed he was as backwards as Monty or Toku.
     
  19. TheMeInTeam

    TheMeInTeam Top Logic

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2008
    Messages:
    25,749
    Nukes are the kiss of death for huge, backwards AIs, and if there are still free civs that aren't you targeted you can even gift them to rile things up. However a typical runaway warmonger will struggle mightily to invade you if you're packing a couple tac nukes for each stack he has. Even on deity, where it's possible to get hit by 100 unit squads, 2 tacticals and what's left of it is probably less than 1/4 of it, all red-lined.

    Also, you can always opt to be one of the runaway powers yourself.
     
  20. 0range

    0range Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 18, 2009
    Messages:
    84
    Location:
    CA
    Brennus
    Montezuma
    Tokugawa
    Shaka
    Boudica

    Darn those Celts! :trouble:
     

Share This Page