All Civs are equal! BUT, are some either more, or less equal?

Mansa Musa often seems to take an early tech lead in my games and would go on to win by space race almost everytime he is present if only the AIs were playing. Ghandi is also pretty good, using his industrious trait to hog the wonders (lacks defence in my experience though).

Obviously the agressive AIs with early UUs are the most dangerous to start near but I have never seen them toward to top of the table in the industrial/modern eras.
 
I think the worst are the mongols. They are always doing "average", but declares unprepared wars.
In every game I have played they have been present, and have always declared war on me as the first civilization. The wierd thing is that unlike other civs, they don't land a prepared invasion force after the DOW, but just sits around waiting. So you build up an army in 10-20 turns, invades and beats the crap out them because they haven't build up an army. I havent seen any other AIs make worse DOWs
 
Incas and Aztecs are always bothering me, but are never stronger techwise
Mali are always in the lead when I'm not or middle-tier when I am the tech-leader.
Catherine always seem to be able to keep up with me
Both English queens seem to trail bigtime, techwise
Egytians and Romans always seem to keep up, but never lead in tech
Asoka and Ghandi are giving me a rough time techwise
Ghengis Khan is always extremely behind in tech, but still making silly demands
 
I have found that all the AI civs can do well depending on the situation. I seem to see the financial civs doing better since they love cottages so much. Mansa Munsa always does well in my games since he usually gets a religion and spreads it well and then rakes in the cash. Tokugawa seems to do poorly I've noticed.
I guess it really depends on their starting location, resources and their opponents. I think they can all excel or fall flat on their face depending on these factors. Pretty well done I think.
 
In my latest game, Napolean has conquered the germans, most of the Romans and most of the Russians. He has hands down the biggerst miltary, and he has backstabbed me twice. Montezuma too is powerful and is very agressive, siding with Napolean.

Mansa Musa and the Egyptians have always been the most powerful nations in my (limited) experience. Mansa Musa built the spaceship in my first game, and in my second game he was second only to an immensly powerful China.

Tokugawa has done poorly in my few games. I think it is because he's reluctant to trade maps or give open borders, so he never has great relations with any of the civs.

Alexander also has quite a temper, and is a hard one to maintain relations with. I've been boys with Ceasar though.
 
Ive noticed that Napoleon is the biggest warmonger so far... plus he's got the military skill to complete big conquests. The Mali are always near the top in my games, even when they start in undesirable starting locations ( near tundra). Ive actually played as the Mali's once starting near the south pole and managed to be in 3rd place by the middle of the game with 18 civs. I also agree that Tokugawa is usually the most backward of players. However, in my current game, he was actually in the lead by the start of the renissance until I invaded him and bumped him down to the middle of the list.
 
My characteristics. I mostly play on huge with 18 or 14 civs and have spacerace victory enabled. I like wars but usually won't start them myself.


Caesar, Alexander, Peter: Opportunistic warmongers, they usually know who to pick on, create large empires but fall short scientifically to compete for the spacerace.

The Indians, Americans, Germans and English. And Cyrus i suppose. Quiet laborers who all are able to win by spaceship victory if left alone and given some room to expand. Ghandi is a natural target for the warmongers but he can bounce back from seemingly hopeless situations. All of this group are pretty tough, can survives bare periods and suddenly reappear.

The loudmouths: Catherine, a lot of potential but always taking it just too far. As do the Mongols and the French. They just miss that instinct for a successful campaign that the warmongers have. Maybe the Chinese belong in this group too. Getting too cocky when they seem to be running away with the game.

Saladin, Montezuma and Huayna Capac. Rulers of the early game who don't seem to know how to follow that up. Maybe they pick the wrong friends. And the latter two definitely pick the wrong enemies.

Mansa Musa. He's a bit of a loner. I like him. Suddenly appears to have some advanced techs noone else has. he's not tough enough for this game though (as am i).

Hatshepsut and Isabella. One trick ponies, which they sometimes pull off. Hattie with a smile, Isabella with her zealotry. I have a soft spot for Hattie. And with the assurance that she won't be able to sustain her blitz start i'll allways throw her some goodies, she's rarely less that pleased with me.

Leaves just the king of the game: Tokugawa. As stubborn as they get. I played a noble, standard map with 14 civs with the sole intention to be his puppet (character name: Tokugawa Rules), allways give in to his demands, adopt his religion and civics. And wonder, he was my closest neighbour. Well, it was actually a very boring game. I had a good starting position, took a commanding lead but his stupid mercantilism (prepatch but i doubt it's much better now) cost me dearly. I observed a bit what techchoices he made but it looked all very random, i think he completed the Sistine Chapel. During the space race he dragged me into a war with the leader, of all people, Hatshepsut. Louis XIV, our mutual neighbour, with whom he had very good relations, quickly jumped in on me. I overlooked a fleet of gunships and my capital, with several wonders, was taken and all my land pillaged. I managed to recapture it and force peace with Louis. I fooled on a bit, gave my capital to Hatshepsut for peace, the next turn Toku took it :). He then taught me a very useful lesson, let a city surrounded by hostile culture die to level 1 and build it up from there, in no time it was 50% Japanese. He's still my hero.

Phew, that was a lot longer than intended. Sorry.
 
Nice stuff guys, I read each and every one of these.

It seems that it really is different in everyone's own opinion. However, many have said Mansa Musa has won the space victory and/or was taking the lead in technology.

The same just happened to me in my last game (in which I had a CTD and hence I'm giving a reply to my own thread now :P ) and by the time we hit the middle ages, he had the lead in technologies by 8! I was playing Japan (and was doing great), was like third after Mali and Egypt, and Mali got the lead again.

This time, I checked by looking at the diplomacy menu (or opening a trade window would do the same trick). I counted: 8 techs ahead of me. Egypt, being second, was only 1 tech ahead of me.

If you EVER put Mansa Musa to the game, make sure to set his difficulty level to something higher than the other ones. Something that'd cripple him a little, so that he's not always in the lead by a far margin.
 
If you turn off tech-trading. You will actually be able to identify easier what kind of leaders these guys are. ;) Oh well I love Asoka as neighbours....My chariot keeps jacking his workers. LOL

Mansa Musa tech is amazing tho...but he couldn't translate it to military power for some reason. Tokugawa is too aggressive to be effective and his UU came too late to save him most of the time. Caesar is probably the scariest neighbour, his UU is just harsh to counter luckily his leader traits are average.

I am currently enjoying this 12 Civ in Standard Pangea with no Tech trades. Bunch of nations jostling for space = tension & wars. ^^ Culture aint gonna save their butts if they can't trade music for military
 
I usually start each new game with either Alexander or Isabella shrieking and cursing and vowing to destroy whoever is closest. To date that has consistently been myself. I really don't have very good luck when it comes to neighbors. More often than not I spring a war on them and take them out early, and it's worked well so far.

Germany under Bismarck usually ends up being close as well, though recently I was neighbors with Frederick for a time. In all cases they did moderately well, enough to be upper-middle in terms of score and had an adequate military, but they mostly kept to themselves.

The one time I've met Mansa Musa he was my best friend in a world that hated me; Mao, Peter and Tokugawa just didn't like me and were constantly making vague threats and demands. I was aiming for a cultural victory at the time, so I mosty capitulated to their bully ways, unwilling to shift my production to a military focus. Musa was pretty burly and we got along just swimmingly, so I relied (in advance) on his support in the event of war (that never happened), and repaid the (potential) favor by slowly absorbing his cities into my culture. It's what friends are for.

Usually China, under either leader, is my main rival, the shadowy menace that arises from the Unexplored Black in the middle ages. They end up on the other side of the world from me, with their own religion, a few wonders under their belt, and by the time I'm a worldly presence, they're a major world power and in cahoots with several satellite civilizations. They're usually the first to start progressing in the space race, too. I think this is karma, because I was in love with playing the Chinese in Civ 3, and a billion souls stomped by almighty China in the past hunger for justice.

Like everybody else, I usually see Japan as a surly little backwater nation that husters and blusters but rarely actually does anything menacing other than make faces at my passing Galleons.
 
I have noticed in a lot of my games, especially my one city challenge ones, that you get a Peaceful bloc and a warmonger bloc. All the aggressive nations (Mongolia, Japan, and Greece) banded together against the peaceniks. (Myself, Ghandi, and Saladin). Frederick was allied too but he was powerful enough to stand on his own.
If you are peaceful and culture minded, it is hard to make friends with the warmongers out there. It is possible but a lot harder than making friends with the peaceful civs like Hatty and Ghandi.
Just my observations.
 
sign a defensive pack with any civ, and no one will declare war on u, even weakest civ signs defensive pack with u
 
panzooka said:
sign a defensive pack with any civ, and no one will declare war on u, even weakest civ signs defensive pack with u

Not true. I've had Peter declare war on me and the persians.
 
I've played two games with the Mali, both times they started on my continent and both times I was able to confine them to one small corner of the continent and limit their spread, so they amounted to nothing.

In my current game the Romans are all buddy-buddy, they're my best friends. Matter of fact I think I had them in another game or two, but I don't remember them ever declaring war.
 
I've never seen Catherine or Gandhi have a bad game yet. Japan, Aztecs and Germany seem to be poor most games.
 
Isabella, Genghis, and Caesar form the category known as the supercilious surrealists. Because they make arrogant demands without looking at the situation at hand --- they're usually behind.
 
Frankly I dont want all the civs to be equal. How boring!

As to the comments that some civs seem to be more powerful than others, I think the civs are pretty well balanced. But keep in mind that that balance changes depending on game conditions such as map size/type, starting location, rules, the human players play style, etc.

Its no different than say a human player with the Romans not having iron anywhere until Praetorians are worthless vs having it pop up on a hill right next to your capitol.
 
for me Asoka and huayna capac are the 2 worst warmongers. Tho egypt(cant spell her name) did declare war on her for denying her open borders 3 times. - was very early in game and she bordered me - was trying to stop her from planting cities where I wanted them.
Won a game with Rome as my perm ally - only war they fought was one I declared and they joined with me. Victoria is the strongest point grabber that I know of - she is currently leading the game i am in by points/land/and tech - I am second place points in 1862 and she is 300 points ahead and gaining. discovers everything first, builds most wonders - as persia my claims to fame are land and military. Asoka is right behind me threatening me and everyone else almost every turn- 8 civs and only 1 other civ is pleased with him - rest are annoyed or furious.
I have played japan and it is a challenge to win with them - everything seems to cost more - but they are stronger militarily, or so it seems.
My favorites to play are : Mali, Aztecs, and Rome - Rome because you have to love those legionnaires early in the game.
My favorite maps are: Achepeligo(set to tiny isles) - what a true p-sser that can be. and Inland sea - strange non-globe map that usually has tons of barbarians and corners to hide in. like it when I have a corner of the map and have 2 sides protected from attack. Build up and then come stormin' out.
 
Interesting stuff, but I'm sure the level of difficulty makes a difference as to a leader's effectiveness. At what level are these showing up? Noble? Monarch? Warlord?
 
Back
Top Bottom