Best civ for expansion won't be expansionist! ??

[ecofx]

I want to expand quickly and have been looking at strategy for this. Looking at civ abilities, I've decided the best civ to be is the.... French!! (commercial/industrious) Why? Well, workers work faster (vital for setting up land for fast growth), there's one extra production and commerce in each city centre (the more cities, the more city centres), AND there's less corruption (obviously a big advantage for cities further from your palace - with or without a hidden palace somewhere).

Expansionist abilities (free scout and better village stuff) are worth far less for expansion than either less corruption or faster workers over the course of the early part of the game, in my opinion.

Opinions from the civ-team tweakers and others on this point??

 

[WUM]

On the corruption-part: you´re absolutely right.

On the other part: i do not agree.
I don´t think workers are as important as you think. After your workers are transformed to engineers, this advantage is gone. I rather have an extra scout to collect as much goody huts as possible and within a short time. better stuff will definitely mean that you will find a lot of 'you discovered an advanced tribe-huts'..!
Besides you can explore a lot of terrain very early, so you can build your cities on the best spots. And by the time you can see 'new' resources, your boundaries will probably and hopefully allready have expanded so much that you can use these anyway.

I might be wrong when workers won´t be upgraded to engineers or when, as engineers, they will still work harder. In that case i´m not so sure about all this. So it is intriguing!

 

[Serg]

Extra production and commerce sounds good.
It is enough talk about different civs features was in the forum and there are many opinions was told for and against its advantage. It appears from this Firaxis makes civs features to be balanced and only experience will show the best.

 

[jjoakim]

I agree that you will have a good ground to expand from with the French. I also like the French attributes, they will be my first choice.

Why?

Cause I like to do my expansion with a firm hand, building a Defence unit, then a Settler to keep expanding and one to improve the surroundings of my newfound city, and then I start to build improvements… An industrious civ is ideal for this… What I also like, cause I’m a non-violent player, is to be ahead in economy and science, therefore a commercial civ is a good choice… And since you need roads to have commerce one is even more depending on the fast workers of a industrious civ…

I will certainly go french the first couple of games…

 

[boca]

I'm sorry, but I thinks Russians would make a better choice.
Think about it. Expansionist and Scientific.
That means that you benefit from the hutties and also you will be ahead in science.

My first game will be with the Romans, but then I'll try to perfect my skills with the Russians.

 

[stravaig]

The French fit my style to a large degree. I'm big on infrastructure, and that's what they're all about.

But ... I'm bigger on science. I'm still leaning towards the Russians. It'll be interesting to see whether or not the French bonuses add up to a big advantage in being able to research (extra commerce can go a long way). If so, I might lean that way.

I think I agree with Ecofx over all; the Expansionistic trait does nothing /directly/ to make your empire grow, with the possible exception of finding new cities from Barbarian villages - and we don't really know how common that's going to be...

- Stravaig

 

[ecofx]

Hi WUM. By the time you get engineers, the advantage may be gone, but that's further into the game. I'm interested in earlyish advantages that stick. An extra scout is nice, but with 40 goes for size 3 in my first city, I'll have time to build a couple of anything cheap and get moving around anyway. My worker will have tried to find good land for irrigation of city 2 by then too.
As explained elsewhere, I think the best time for settlers will be from size 5-3 or 6-4, giving my earliest troops enough time to look round.

On the goody huts, you may be right, if advanced tribes or wandering nomads (I hope settlers) appear a lot. The question is, how much more often? The best abilities are the ones that are there for you go after go, and the French's abilities are!

Hi Boca. I love getting ahead on the tech-tree, believe me, but the rewards of expansion normally get me science through sheer size and a high percentage of my commerce going to science. a free random tech every new era is not much of a gift compared to other abilities used wisely. Reduced costs for universities etc also won't help at the start, when my tactic is GROWTH!
Still, you may be right, trying things out will give us the answer.

Hi Serg, jjoakim, stravaig - we seem to have the same sort of opinion

 

[The_Newbie]

They are:grad:and :tank:. Both of these are useful throughout the ages and even though I am not milititaristic I still like a good military and the scientific will make sure your units have the edge. Plus their special unit is the second best in the game (after the american F-15).

 

[Robespierre]

Don't make such brash judgments before you even play the game - you might turn out to be wrong and the expansionist bonuses might be worth more than you think. I personally know from experience that getting a quick head start in the beginning can go a LONG way, assuming that the players are of a relatively comparable skill level. By the time your industrious/commercial civ is actually taking advantage of its bonuses, the expansionist civ may already have set up many extra cities out of goodie huts.

 

[Tao Jones]

Newbie, you're on the right track...but I cast my vote for the Chinese/Democracy/culture strategy. Here's why:
1) Industrious: fast workers + extra production = better civil works projects, including wonders. *Reduces possibility of losing by culture.

2) Militaristic:

A. Easier attainment of great leaders = ability to speed up production of wonders.

B. Cheap upkeep of military. Money saved is money earned.
*Reduces possibility of losing by military defeat.

3) Democracy: ensures that the Chinese keep abreast of all scientific discovery while maintaining a robust economy. *Reduces possibility of losing by culture.

4) Special Unit: the Rider provides extra movement and defense. Therefore, Chinese cities will require less troops to defend. Couple that with roads, and the mobile attacker/defender can cover a lot of ground. Additionally, an army of Riders can successfully penetrate the enemy and destroy his culture or seize his cities (in which case the Chinese culture is bolstered) or destroy the spaceship researchers - *reducing the real threat to the Chinese - losing by space race.

To summarize, the great leader is a tool of industry, and industry is the framework of culture. Even if victory by culture is unattainable, a historical victory becomes likely. Military power can be useful not simply for stripping an enemy of its greatness, but for protecting the culture of one's own empire. As for the Rider, it comes along before the end game, when it is virtually impossible to annihilate a well-rooted enemy, yet late enough in the game that one has built his necessities and is ready for the luxury of the conquest of spear-guarded cities.

Problem w/ Expansionism: Scouts can die quick. Huts with advanced cities may be far from the homeland. Scouts may also warn neighbors that there is a real threat living nearby.

Problem w/ Science: Although there are no spies to steal one's technology, technology is not as important as it used to be. Without the proper resources technology may be impotent. And with lots of civs out there, techs will trade fast. Production becomes paramount in order to get the wonder.

Problem w/ Commerce: In a democracy, corruption is reduced anyway. Sure, you have to wait for it, but one's empire is not going to be that vast before then anyway. Extra commerce in city is fine, but because money can't speed up the production of a wonder, it isn't that important.

Small wonder (ha ha) that Columbus set sail for a western route to Cathay.

 

[Robespierre]

I doubt Chinese riders will be able to stop anybody's scientists by the time the modern age with its tanks and jet fighters rolls around, and I think that culture might not be the single most significant thing in the game either, so a lot of that industriousness = lesser chance of losing by culture thing might not be so vital either.

I would be willing to bet, however, that Firaxis made the civ-abilities balanced enough to where everyone had a good chance of winning and good statesmanship would still be the determining factor in a victory.

 

[Tao Jones]

Roby, where's your consistency? First you point out, correctly, the signigicance of the early game, but you go on to criticize the Chinese riders as being incompetent against tanks and scientists in the late game. Nobody expects men on horses to fight, much less defeat, armored vehicles. The idea is to be successful enough in the early game that your enemies fall behind and are chasing you in the end game.
As for the value of industry over science, the ability to win the race for a wonder which increases the science output is just one way of keeping up with scientific societies. The industrious society also starts out with masonry and has a better chance of building the pyramids, which, in turn, increases population and leads to the rapid development of scientists.
While it's true that none of us have actually played the game yet, that's not the point. It's perfectly legitimate to forecast one's expectations, especially in light of the experience we already have with this series of games. In that spirit, I noticed you haven't made your prediction...I know we'd all love to hear your reasoning.

Tao Jones

 

[Tao Jones]

P.S. I don't think I addressed one of your concerns:

"I think that culture might not be the single most significant thing in the game either, so a lot of that industriousness = lesser chance of losing by culture thing might not be so vital either."

The point I had made earlier was not that culture was the single most significant "thing" in the game. One of the values of industry as it relates to culture is in the fact that by building city projects one is less likely to be defeated by in a war of culture. Suppose you're the Russians, and you have lots of scientific knowledge, but the Americans have completely out-built you and their structures have lasted centuries. You may be in danger of losing by culture. By being industrious, however, you may be able to prevent such a loss. And that is the point I was making. Industry simply provides the best means of surviving a culture war.
I hope that clears up the confusion.

 

[ecofx]

Hi Tao. The Chinese, like the French, are industrious. We agree that this is good. You also argue cheap military upkeep will make a big difference (good for Chinese), but isn't it 'Reduced military improvement costs' as the benefit, not 'running costs'? An extra commerce per city AND lower corruption (important if you want to expand early while under Monarchy) will make a difference in trade income for science, cash, or happiness and production. You don't get anything for less anywhere, o.k., but you're getting more 'pocketmoney' for whatever you want to spend/build it on.

You also mention the special units. The French musketeer will provide defense more easily, the Chinese rider more allround, fast and fit , but both will be later than the early game, when, as I said at the top, I want to expand as fast as pos.

Still, I agree on the Great Leaders bit. If you are prepared to fight early on (which I will first try avoiding) and can get a great leader, or leaders to speed up a few wonders, that may give the military civs a good advantage. But when I get a peaceful golden age with lots of cities and still fairly early on, my extra civ size will really do more wonders in 20 turns than anyone else's golden age!
We'll see...

 

[PinkyGen]

Aren't the French going to have an automatic surrender button as their special ability.

 

[Robespierre]

You know, Tao, if I had to lay my bet down I would say your reasoning is pretty sound, I just think that really you can make any traits work for you in different ways. I was just pointing out the advantages of an expansionist civ that I don't think you were taking into account, or the advantages of any bonuses except for militaristic & industrious for that matter. I guess I misunderstood the thing with the Riders - I get it now, what you're saying is that a network of riders to protect you in the early game will in effect diminish your opponents' chances of advancing scientifically in the end game.

I think that expansionism might be (speculation) more valuable than commerce because you can decreace your corruption and increase your commerce in other ways anyway, though industriousness is definitely useful for developing an infrastructure. I say industrious & expansionist is the best kind of civ to have, so you can develop an empire and an infrastructure early on when everyone else's people are still trying to find ways to get honey without being stung and hiding in little caves from the all-powerful and vengeful sun god. If you have an early head start, says I, only poor strategy in the later game will make you lose that head start. I just think that civ attributes are most valuable if they help you in the early game, so an early golden age, early special unit, and things like expansionism are important, while the later game basically just goes off on tangents and is determined a lot more by player skill and statesmanship than the luck and starting bonuses that have a big influence in the beginning.

I guess we'll all have to wait and see though...

 

[WarandPeace]

Dow Jones Industrial?
I agree with the chinese theory. The military + industral is a good one, though I remember they were Roman's strength...

Everybody likes their own civ for the way they like to play the game; some more secure and tighty and some likes to expand their new weaponry, and some are battle-hearted. I myself like to expand till I bump my nose on something hard, may that be an ocean I can't cross or some foe whos stronger. I'd make my country into a circle, where as the circle will contract and expland accordingly. And in the centre my most valued culture cities far away from the battle hardened outter rings which will produced and conquer as much as possible; using my advantages to the fullest.

editpps

 

[Robespierre]

The culturally powerful cities should be out on the border, this way they will push out your borders and create big nationalism problems if the enemy tries to invade. Having them in the center just makes your "culture radius" overlap with your other cities (no gain there), and means that your enemy can easily hack off the outside parts of your empire without having to worry about nationalism.

 

[WarandPeace]

Originally posted by Robespierre
The culturally powerful cities should be out on the border, this way they will push out your borders and create big nationalism problems if the enemy tries to invade. Having them in the center just makes your "culture radius" overlap with your other cities (no gain there), and means that your enemy can easily hack off the outside parts of your empire without having to worry about nationalism.

oh... I don't know much about the game, and conjured up my plan from simple realism. For the fact that I can't see many high cultured cities with high chapels and big buildings fighting constantly.
Besides, I'd probably out produce anyone that wants to "hack off" the outter part of my cities and I'd win more on the field since I'm better at it

 

[goodyhut]

Think about it... Expansionist/Religious

Get free cities early on to grow without having to waste 2 population points for a settler and build temples and other religious buildings at reduced cost to get that culture rating up faster. The civs that win by culture will be religious civs and in Civ III expansion won't be just building more cities, it will be expanding your borders though culture as well.