Best Civ and why

[caliskier]

Hey guys, sorry for what I know must be the most annoying question. I have been out of the game due to the persuit of a masters degree and just picked up CIV 4. I searched for this answer and did not find anything,(maybe I used the search wrong).

What do people think are the good civs. I played one game as Byzantium because I like the idea you do not have to take the anarchy hit due to spiritual. But I was considering going to the celts due to the spiritual and charismatic. Or perhaps going with Mali because they have the financial with the spiritual going. I noticed that I got poorer and poorer and had to reduce science down to 30% to keep from going broke.

What are your thoughts?

Also is it all that great to found a religion? Just curious, I know that is not my original question.

(BTW - reason I am asking and not experimenting is because I have one class left and only have this weekend to play )

 

[lasombra1984]

Justy, not a Byzantium is Spiritual.
Byzantium is really a nightmare because of Cataphracts.
Rome & Inca is cheating IMO.

30% is not to bad. Generally if I reduce too low I run more commerce tiles, build Courthouses & buildings that increase wealth (Market, Grocer, Bank)

Religion is awesome for large armies. I don't found early three, worker techs is more useful than early religion. Also spreading Religion eats hammers, while in the early game you have a lot where to spend them

 

[caliskier]

Justy, not a Byzantium is Spiritual.
Byzantium is really a nightmare because of Cataphracts.
Rome & Inca is cheating IMO.

30% is not to bad. Generally if I reduce too low I run more commerce tiles, build Courthouses & buildings that increase wealth (Market, Grocer, Bank)

Religion is awesome for large armies. I don't found early three, worker techs is more useful than early religion. Also spreading Religion eats hammers, while in the early game you have a lot where to spend them

Good call on religion, I ran for judiasm when I saw two other religions captured, missing the worker techs. Are you saying that Bysantium is not a good civ to use?

 

[s.bernbaum]

What constitutes a "good" civ depends on what your goals are. The "best" civ for a domination victory is quite different from the best one for a culture victory. That said, you can win any victory with any leader. Some will just be more of a challenge to achieve a particular victory. Personally, I like to use a random leader and then see what I can make of him (or her).

 

[TheMulattoMaker]

What do people think are the good civs.

America cuz we're teh Awesome!!!1!!111

Just kidding (serious answers to follow.) I never actually play as America- it's just no fun, the UU and UB are so late-game.

Okay, first of all, I'm still a noob, so please take my "advice" with a large grain of salt. Now that that's out of the way, I wanted to follow up on...

Justy, not a Byzantium is Spiritual.
Byzantium is really a nightmare because of Cataphracts.

What lasombra1984 is saying is that the two traits come from Justinian (the leader)- not Byzantium (the civ). Normally the leader and the civ go together- unless you check "Play Unrestricted Leaders" at the beginning of the game. This lets you mix-and-match whatever leader/civ combo you want. There's another thread going on right now that lists some good combinations. If you don't want to mix them up, then yes, Byzantium will be led by Justinian (and will still be SPI/IMP).

What I do personally is decide from the beginning what kind of game I want play, and pick a leader/civ combo that would work for that. (A lot of people would find this too predictable, but it works for me.) If I want to stomp all over everyone right from the beginning, it's Persia or Egypt or Rome (strong early UUs) matched with a leader that has AGG, IMP, or CHA. If I pick a map with a ton of ocean, I'll play the Dutch, Portuguese, or Vikings, and probably pick a FIN leader to take advantage of the Colossus. Big continents with a lot of jungle? Maybe India (Fast Worker UU) with an EXP or IMP leader to really REX.

Are you saying that Bysantium is not a good civ to use?

I think he's saying Byzantium is a nightmare for everyone around them (in the middle of the game, anyway) because they have a strong UU, not that they're a nightmare to play as.

Oh, and kudos on the degree. My wife keeps telling me there's more to life than BtS, but I'm not sure.

 

[caliskier]

America cuz we're teh Awesome!!!1!!111

Just kidding (serious answers to follow.) I never actually play as America- it's just no fun, the UU and UB are so late-game.

Okay, first of all, I'm still a noob, so please take my "advice" with a large grain of salt. Now that that's out of the way, I wanted to follow up on...



What lasombra1984 is saying is that the two traits come from Justinian (the leader)- not Byzantium (the civ). Normally the leader and the civ go together- unless you check "Play Unrestricted Leaders" at the beginning of the game. This lets you mix-and-match whatever leader/civ combo you want. There's another thread going on right now that lists some good combinations. If you don't want to mix them up, then yes, Byzantium will be led by Justinian (and will still be SPI/IMP).

What I do personally is decide from the beginning what kind of game I want play, and pick a leader/civ combo that would work for that. (A lot of people would find this too predictable, but it works for me.) If I want to stomp all over everyone right from the beginning, it's Persia or Egypt or Rome (strong early UUs) matched with a leader that has AGG, IMP, or CHA. If I pick a map with a ton of ocean, I'll play the Dutch, Portuguese, or Vikings, and probably pick a FIN leader to take advantage of the Colossus. Big continents with a lot of jungle? Maybe India (Fast Worker UU) with an EXP or IMP leader to really REX.



I think he's saying Byzantium is a nightmare for everyone around them (in the middle of the game, anyway) because they have a strong UU, not that they're a nightmare to play as.

Oh, and kudos on the degree. My wife keeps telling me there's more to life than BtS, but I'm not sure.

Thanks for your putts, good to know about unrestricted leader. As far as what your wife said, I get that. I sometimes feel that I could have better spent my time figuring out a good investment rather than playing civilization.

 

[Iranon]

It seems you're considering regular (not unrestricted) leader rather than just the civilization. But this also depends on your level of play. Organized is only in full effect from Emperor upwards, priorities also change depending on whether you want a long-term boost or whether you need help to survive the early game.

Huayna Capac is generally considered the strongest from Monarch up - solid economy traits, useful early Unique Building that gives you culture in what's usually the first build and also lets you conquer a culture source.
Quechuas allow you to beat up archers with relative ease - whether it means eating multiple civs at the very start or fending off annoying barbarians or slowing down a Deity neighbour with a sitzkrieg.

On low levels you can rush successfully with standard warriors; you may get more out of a slightly later Unique Unit with a longer shelf life than a tight rush unit. Praetorians dominate the scene for some time and remain useful into the medieval or even renaissance era. Rome's Unique Building is rather poor, but traits are solid enough.

 

[Kid R]

All the civs are good in their own way really, and as the OP self-answered in their post edit, it's most fun to try them all out and see how you like it.

So I'm not sure what the question is really. It sounds like you're asking for the strongest civ to play one game and win it, because you only have one day available to play. If so maybe it would be simplest to play a random leader on a lower difficulty setting than you did before. (Or play Inca, I'm genuinely surprised a forum search did not turn up at least 10 threads which conclude they are the strongest.)

If the question is really you want a leader to deliver the most enjoyable experience in the only game of civ you ever play, I would say pick somebody creative because it's the only trait which negates the need for an easy-to-forget-but-essential piece of micromanagement from the game.

Re. religion question. It has pros and cons, so you're generally not losing out if you forget it.

 

[HorribleHarald]

I'd say Incas,
Huayna Capac has good traits and money do not run out so easily than with many other civs. Their UB is one of the best and UU which I can whipe one or two nearest civs out in the beginning of the game and Quachua is also good against barbarians and taking barbarian cities.

 

[Ataxerxes]

I'd say Incas,
Huayna Capac has good traits and money do not run out so easily than with many other civs. Their UB is one of the best and UU which I can whipe one or two nearest civs out in the beginning of the game and Quachua is also good against barbarians and taking barbarian cities.

Even at lower levels HC is a good choice. Quechua isn't as important, but Industrious works even better.

OP: I wouldn't try to found a religion unless I was isolated from other religions. Usually the diplo from adopting your neighbor's religion more than makes up for loss of shrine income. Also, even if you spread your religion using missionaries (hammer intensive) the AI will still prefer it's own home-grown religion. The earliest religion I would found is Confuscianism and use the free missionary to win over a neighbor. If I already have my neighbor's religion the missionary is useless.

Unrestricted leaders - you might try some leader with 2 good traits of Sumeria.

 

[Brenador]

I'd say Incas,
Huayna Capac has good traits and money do not run out so easily than with many other civs. Their UB is one of the best and UU which I can whipe one or two nearest civs out in the beginning of the game and Quachua is also good against barbarians and taking barbarian cities.

The Incas are particularly good at cultural victories because Huayna Capac has Financial and Industrious. I even saw the AI win that way with them once.

I am also fond of the Dutch. Willem van Oranje has Creative and Financial, my two favorite leader traits. Creative really helps you expand your borders, and is a lot of fun in that way. Financial is really good for research and gold, which affects just about everything else. The Dike is really good for coastal cities, and is an improved version of a very good improvement. And the East Indiaman is a useful but unusual unique unit.

 

[Scoottr]

You can always found a religion and then switch to the most popular one shortly after. Then you can build the shrine and still get the cash for spreading the religion. Lets you stay in the happy with the rest of the AI's too

 

[uat2d]

Julius Caesar of the Romans. The Praetorians are awesome and the Organized trait is really helpful in keeping an expanding empire's economy from collapsing.

Besides, I can pretend I know Latin from all the Roman quotes I learned from playing Fallout New Vegas.

Quidquid latine dictum sit altum videtur.

 

[lasombra1984]

Julius Caesar of the Romans. The Praetorians are awesome and the Organized trait is really helpful in keeping an expanding empire's economy from collapsing.

Besides, I can pretend I know Latin from all the Roman quotes I learned from playing Fallout New Vegas.

Quidquid latine dictum sit altum videtur.

Julius of Rome is cheating)

 

[Lemon Merchant]

The best civ is whatever civ I happen to be playing as.

- I'm nice to look at in the diplo screen. (According to Mrs. Lemon)
- I'm rather fashionable.
- I tend to be nice to my vassals.
- I will often delay a war until it's too late.
- I smell better than Boudica.

 

[Sportyatuncw06]

I usually select random leader and try to mold the way I play around my leader. But I particulately like FIn and Org. Almost all the Fin leaders are good in my book. Some of my fav leaders are Darius, Mehemed, Surryiman, because they all have good trait combos and good UU and UB's

 

[Farm Boy]

- I smell better than Boudica.

"Earthy" can be very appealing now and then! We would do well to leave our hermetically sealed air conditioned boxes every now and then and let our inner mammal run free. Pon farr!!!

Admittedly, a stinky spouse sitting in the living room all the time would get old...

 

[thecaesar]

I personally have never liked the "spiritual" trait that much; I rarely change civics and usually don't have a religion, so I never use it enough for it to match up to something like aggressive, which helps me build barracks faster and get better melee/gunpowder units! Plus, in late-game play, spiritual's double building speed ability even peters out, making it essentially useless. And adding it all up, you get what? Maybe 6-7 extra turns from no anarchy? No way, spiritual is the worst one (though I used to like it more, but now I turned warmonger )

Anyways, my favorite civ is Julius Caesar of Rome, because charismatic helps my units get upgrades faster, and organized helps me conquer more cities faster with less consequences.

My second favorite? Toku, because in late-game play, his gunpowder units get Combat I, City Garrison I, and Drill I!!!! Plus his UB is totally useful if you have no coal.

Edit: That's not including other upgrades from Barracks or West point of Great Generals, I get quite a lot of those...

 

[Grassland Farm]

Without unrestricted, I would pick:

-Boobica of Celts: Monster infantry (AGG + CHA + cheap barracks), decent cavalry (CHA + cheap barracks), capable archers (Free guerilla + cheap barracks)
The celtic warrior retains guerrila when upgraded, and G2 is great to choke over hill ressources, or to protect stacks!

-MM of Mali: UU prevents early rush and is great at choking, spiritual means you don't lose a single beakers, fin means more beakers and gold, UB means mroe gold. Supertechlead combo.

-HC: Fin boosts tech and gold, Ind boost wonders and brings easy forges (so your cities are wealthy and busy), quecha is a monster to remove that annoying MM/Sitting/Justie, Terrace is almost a easy Creative Trait.

-Shaka: Expansive and cheap Ikhanda improves early rush, including in jungle'd locations, with less maintenance for 38
Impi is great to choke/worker steal/Pillage

-Louis XIV: The cultural whore. Creative gets what you need cheaper, industrious allow you to grab this sistine, muskets can remove a annoying neighbor if beelined, salon makes any city pop GA.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

Julius of Rome is cheating)

Yeah...quoted statement is objectively wrong:

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/cheating

Setting aside of course that the prat is an inferior rush unit to some others on speeds faster than marathon is of course a blunder also. Try praetorian rushing shaka with metal (he'll usually have it) or sitting bull on immortal or deity. Go ahead, try it. It's so much "cheating" one will head straight to a loss.

In MP the Mali are very dangerous, probably moreso than Rome on average. Fin/Spi is one thing and pretty reasonable; an archer that will have ~90% odds against your own archers on flatlands, on the other hand...is less reasonable. While Rome can be realistically denied iron or simply beaten hammer for hammer with axes, there aren't a lot of valid non-UU options to block a skimisher choke for fewer hammers than the attacker sent, which is ridiculous.

Mali loses some luster in SP, but can nevertheless execute chokes, desperation rushes, stomp early aggression, and hold up with good economy and as such is still a top tier civ. Other top tier SP civs include rome, persia, egypt, zulu, inca, and maya.