After playing every civ and every leader here's where I'm at. Your mileage may vary. I think the biggest surprise for me was the Mughals. When I first read the design for them I was underwhelmed, but they are so strong it's ridiculous. It's really hard for me to justify not picking them if they are available. Very sad about Pachacuti and the Incas as they were my favorites in Civ6. Also, Maya should really be in its own tier of S+, absolutely broken.
Are any civs or leaders by themselves weak? Are some too good?
- Thread starter Siptah
- Start date
After playing every civ and every leader here's where I'm at. Your mileage may vary. I think the biggest surprise for me was the Mughals. When I first read the design for them I was underwhelmed, but they are so strong it's ridiculous. It's really hard for me to justify not picking them if they are available. Very sad about Pachacuti and the Incas as they were my favorites in Civ6. Also, Maya should really be in its own tier of S+, absolutely broken.
queenpea
Emperor
Currently I’m very down on Khmer and Chola. Playing a game now and am losing for the first time.
Confucius pulled away early and I think might be OP with Han/Ming/Qing. He has thousands of science and culture on turn one of Modern where the rest of us are in low hundreds.
I transitioned to Meiji, hoping to save things, but it isn’t looking good for me.
Yzman
Deity
This is probably asking a lot...but can you name the civs? It is very hard for me to look at the symbol and instantly think of the civ so I am clueless as to most of your rankings.
queenpea
Emperor
Describe a symbol and I’ll tell you which civ it is
S tier: Maya - Mughal - Abbasid - Rome - Mongolia - Siam
A tier: Maurya - Hawai'i - Norman - Mexico - Meiji - Greece
B tier: Persia - Mississippian - Songhai - Han - Spain
C tier: America - French Empire - Ming - Egypt - Aksum
D tier: Prussia - Chola - Qing - Majapahit - Khmer
F tier: Inca - Shawnee - Russia - Buganda
I probably disagree with about half of this list
Yzman
Deity
Thanks. I agree with most though I am surprised at the low Shawnee...most people think Shawnee is very strong, and I agree. I had my best game with them.
Shawnee is a little bugged right now, so they underperform (no culture on unique improvement), but they don't belong anywhere near F on the strength of Kispoko Nena'to alone. Cheap, strong, 3 move infantry is crazy good.
I'd also move Rome & Mongolia down, Normans down, Mississippians up, Spain down, Ming and Aksum up, Chola up and Majapahit up, Khmer all the way to the bottom with Buganda.
S tier: Maya - Mughal - Abbasid - Rome - Mongolia - Siam
A tier: Maurya - Hawai'i - Norman - Mexico - Meiji - Greece
B tier: Persia - Mississippian - Songhai - Han - Spain
C tier: America - French Empire - Ming - Egypt - Aksum
D tier: Prussia - Chola - Qing - Majapahit - Khmer
F tier: Inca - Shawnee - Russia - Buganda
I probably disagree with about half of this list
Yeah, after having played more I would definitely revise the list a bit, but I'll wait until I get to try Bulgaria and Nepal.
stealth_nsk
Deity
I found Prussia to be very strong once the world falls into total war, because creating and keeping trade routes with civilizations you're at war with gives you a lot of resources, both supporting economic victory and just improving your empire.
evonannoredars
King
- Joined
- Nov 17, 2024
- Messages
- 625
Agreed, there's a few civs that have abilities that don't interest me but I probably will pick someday anyway once they suit the way my game is going.
The leader selection screen is always ughh. I don't do wars much, so half of the leaders I'm unlikely to play as until I decide to do a militaristic-focused game, and the remaining half have several with very minor bonuses. Looking forward to when we eventually get leaders that really shake up how you play.
DogeEnricoDandolo
King
- Joined
- Dec 29, 2017
- Messages
- 928
Agreed. Who is the greatest stinker for you? Pachacuti?
Leucarum
Deity
- Joined
- Dec 21, 2018
- Messages
- 2,206
He is weak but I don't hate playimg pachacuti TBH. He's very spawn dependant and his buffs are small, but you can at least have a fun specialist game with him on the right map.
For my money both on power and fun it's the Friedrichs. Infantry are the weakest unit type. The radius commendation is ok but not revolutionary, and getting great works when you are already winning (conquering cities) is just a "win more" mechanic. I'd say Baroque is slightly better as you can speed rush modern culture even harder by conquering a few cities. But for me they're probably the weakest leaders.
Noble Zarkon
Elite Quattromaster - Immortal (BTS)
Super Moderator
Hall of Fame Staff
GOTM Staff
Supporter
Interested why you have Ibn Battutta in the bottom tier, his two attribute points mean you can befriend IPs incredibly cheaply in antiquity - not saying he's S tier or anything but wouldn't have him so low.
Leucarum
Deity
- Joined
- Dec 21, 2018
- Messages
- 2,206
On flexibility alone I really rate him. There's so many ways you can make him work. The issue I see for him is that he has the worst set of trade agreements and probably the worst start bias... You need to pair him with civs that try to negate that.
thecrazyscot
Spiffy
- Joined
- Dec 27, 2012
- Messages
- 3,107
Friedrich is a kinda "win more" leader, but I'll just throw out there that if you pair Friedrich with a civ that has a unique infantry unit (particularly with a ranged attack)...well now, that's a lot of fun. Persia -> Ming -> France is a very powerful trajectory with Friedrich.
Navelgazer
Emperor
- Joined
- Jul 4, 2012
- Messages
- 1,080
What's this now? Were they nerfed in a patch today?
stealth_nsk
Deity
Increased specialist limit alone gives them quite significant jumpstart. They are still very strong as specialist and city oriented civ.
chazzycat
Deity
- Joined
- Oct 13, 2010
- Messages
- 3,083
big time. any town heavy strategy with them got absolutely slammed
Similar threads
