Are there civs You never choose to play cause of UA, UB, UU?

[historix69]

Are there civs You never choose to play because of their UA, UB, UU?

 

[FeiLing]

Ottomans - UA.

 

[The_Quasar]

The Ottaman's UA is very powerful on a water map... park your ships next to Barbarian camps, and you'll have a serious navy in no time!

 

[Optional]

Triremes aren't serious, two archer shots and they're at the bottom of the sea.
I like to play them, though, the Ottomans, especially their colours are nice.

I answered America, Babylon and Egypt. America I never play in any version of civ, they normally have uninspired late game units. For Babylon and America we both don't need to do anything to earn their specialism, with Egypt we have to build wonders.

Whether a civ is weak or strong has little to do with why I like to play them or not.

 

[Hpuk]

India, unless you abuse the courthouse bug, their UA forces you to play with fewer cities than others.
Not to mention you'll have to delay your second and third cities so much that the AI may take the good spots.

 

[GenjiKhan]

Usually I don't play with Babylon,Egypt and Rome,because they seem to be OP .

 

[FeiLing]

The Ottaman's UA is very powerful on a water map... park your ships next to Barbarian camps, and you'll have a serious navy in no time!

In TSG 31 (or 32?) we were the Ottomans... and I remember disbanding all those stupid little ships due to maintenance costs. The galleys can't even cross oceans and upgrading all these would cost an immense amounts of gold.

 

[strijder20]

Usually I don't play with Babylon,Egypt and Rome,because they seem to be OP .

Yeah, Mongolia is obviously a lot weaker than all of those. Keshiks? Can't kill anything.

 

[Jacques Lamerde]

I played as the Ottomans, last week. The Janissary IMHO is one of the best U.U.'s
They are powerful on the attack, and instaheal when they kill an enemy unit. Spam a bunch of these guys, ASAP line them up, and go on the attack. I believe they maintain this ability when you upgrade them as well. In fact this was the first game I played as them on King level, they were a complete game breaker for me. In the Renaissance era they helped me conquer most of my continent, then I just sat back and cruised to an easy science victory.
I do only play on King level, but I've managed win with every Civ now. In my experience all
of the Civs have a U.U. or U.A that can be used to great effect.

Edit: Actually, I haven't won as India yet. I'll be trying that soon.

 

[smallfish]

All civs are good to play as. Their strength varies across eras in the case of uniques, but they cannot escape the wrath of Brother Atom.

It's a matter of personal mood.

 

[jeffah3539]

I won't say I will never play them again but I only played India once because I had a horrible experience with their UA. I got stuck with a very low / low start which made expansion and growth nearly impossible. That, combined with an aggressive Oda, meant an early demise.

 

[PhilBowles]

I won't say I will never play them again but I only played India once because I had a horrible experience with their UA. I got stuck with a very low / low start which made expansion and growth nearly impossible. That, combined with an aggressive Oda, meant an early demise.

I don't like playing India or Babylon because they so tightly constrain the player to specific strategies - currently my favourite civs are Songhai and Siam (and just finished a long domination game in which, as Songhai, my chief rival happened to be Siam), both of which are civs that have the potential to be very powerful but allow flexibility in their approaches and victory conditions, and require work to get the most out of their UA.

 

[Hpuk]

I don't like playing India or Babylon because they so tightly constrain the player to specific strategies

I agree about India, but how does Babylon constrain you? At least their UU/UA/UB doesn't have any negatives like the India UA.
Speaking about negatives, are there other civs that have uniques that are worse off because of them?
I guess the Korean turtle ship is kinda iffy, having to wait one more tech to get proper naval scouting.

 

[PhilBowles]

I agree about India, but how does Babylon constrain you? At least their UU/UA/UB doesn't have any negatives like the India UA.

No, but you don't get a lot of use out of it if you don't go for the Great Scientist factory strategy. And the UUs are somewhat uninteresting - they play exactly like the normal versions, only slightly better. Units like the Hwacha, Mandelaku and Keshik play very differently from the units they replace.

Speaking about negatives, are there other civs that have uniques that are worse off because of them?
I guess the Korean turtle ship is kinda iffy, having to wait one more tech to get proper naval scouting.

The Siamese Wat is worse at science than the University, because it loses the jungle science bonus. That's the only one that comes to mind.

 

[Optional]

The Siamese Wat is worse at science than the University, because it loses the jungle science bonus. That's the only one that comes to mind.

No, you don't lose it.
The only thing that comes to my mind, is again... India. Their War Elephant is dearer than the unit it replaces, and also slower. On top of that it doesn't get a production discount when you have a stable, but the elephants don't require horses, so that's not really a good point, I suppose.

I think I remember something about one of Spain's units as well, that you have to build it from scratch, the Tercio it must be. There might be more like that in the game, though, I'm not sure.

 

[GenjiKhan]

No, you don't lose it.
The only thing that comes to my mind, is again... India. Their War Elephant is dearer than the unit it replaces, and also slower. On top of that it doesn't get a production discount when you have a stable, but the elephants don't require horses, so that's not really a good point, I suppose.

Indian War Elephant is kinda underrated . They don't have the movement penalty of chariot when entering hill tile,which is a huge advantage . They are like the Arabia's UU of Ancient age,except that they don't have that huge mobility bonus,but thanks to the bad-designed India's UA,their use are limited for defense only .

 

[ampmclock]

The vote has it! Ottomans suck!

 

[smallfish]

The vote has it! Ottomans suck!

Ok, that's it. I'm voting 'murca to help boost the Ottomans.

 

[SammyKhalifa]

The vote has it! Ottomans suck!

I don't think it's about "suck." At least for me. I don't play Japan because I don't think they're very interesting (I don't like any of the all-war uniques too much though). Looks like I'm the only one though.

 

[Tabarnak]

In TSG 31 (or 32?) we were the Ottomans... and I remember disbanding all those stupid little ships due to maintenance costs. The galleys can't even cross oceans and upgrading all these would cost an immense amounts of gold.

Hmm they only have 33% maintenance. You need a very large armanda to let some of them away.

For myself i can't vote because i find that every civs have something interesting to play. I played all of them at least 3-4 times so far. Some are more powerful than others for some situations but against the AI every civs are OP...excepted for deity.