best civ for war-mongering?
- Thread starter jake2007
- Start date
Pick a leader with Charismatic first, it's the best military trait cause it works on all units and it gives extra happiness (huge early game) When you get some Great Generals settled and is cranking out Combat 3-4 Knights/Cavalry you will understand the power of Charismatic 
Organized or Financial for your tech rate and paying your army
(because of cheap courthouses organized tends to be better for the early conquests you can keep going a bit longer, for pure research financial is better)
From this Napoleon and Hannibal is the best warmongers (just regarding traits)
Give them a decent UU/UB and they are frighteningly strong. Thats probably why they have such crappy UU's, to balance them
You got a bunch of other leaders with either good traits or good UU too, though some of them are less straightforward to play. The easiest leader for a low difficulty player should be Hannibal i think. So it's more a leader thing than a Civ thing
If you really push the Civ question it's only one answer. Romans.
(they got the best UU in the game)
Organized or Financial for your tech rate and paying your army
(because of cheap courthouses organized tends to be better for the early conquests you can keep going a bit longer, for pure research financial is better)
From this Napoleon and Hannibal is the best warmongers (just regarding traits)
Give them a decent UU/UB and they are frighteningly strong. Thats probably why they have such crappy UU's, to balance them
You got a bunch of other leaders with either good traits or good UU too, though some of them are less straightforward to play. The easiest leader for a low difficulty player should be Hannibal i think. So it's more a leader thing than a Civ thing
If you really push the Civ question it's only one answer. Romans.
(they got the best UU in the game)
reknaw
the Hopeless
Romans because Praets are awesome, I also like to warmonger early with a Keshik rush as Kublai Kahn. It's rather fun (if not much of a challenge) to play a small pangea map as Kublai and pump out nothing but Keshiks until I've razed every city on the map. 
That said, any civ can be a great warmonger, even peace loving old Gandhi can be formidable if you warmonger with him.
That said, any civ can be a great warmonger, even peace loving old Gandhi can be formidable if you warmonger with him.Click search and you'll get dozens of answers..
Romans, Hannibal, Boudica, Shaka, Persia, Lincoln, Ragnar, etc etc..
I got tired of typing seriously, there isnt a best warmonger there is a best for you.
If your dumb and all you can do is spam a unit then you want romans, if you have some skill you want Shaka, if you just like to bong things on the head pick Boudica..
If you can handle it pick Hannibal, he's prob the best guy in the game period.
or if your smart pick India.. but keep that on the low
Aggressive = Early War
Charismatic = Late War
Philosophical = War Economy of choice.
Romans, Hannibal, Boudica, Shaka, Persia, Lincoln, Ragnar, etc etc..
I got tired of typing seriously, there isnt a best warmonger there is a best for you.
If your dumb and all you can do is spam a unit then you want romans, if you have some skill you want Shaka, if you just like to bong things on the head pick Boudica..
If you can handle it pick Hannibal, he's prob the best guy in the game period.
or if your smart pick India.. but keep that on the low
Aggressive = Early War
Charismatic = Late War
Philosophical = War Economy of choice.
Ancient warfare:
- The Incas can be good. Their special Warriors get a bonus against Archers. As a bonus, they'll be economically strong for the rest of the game.
- The Egyptians have the quick and strong War Chariots, and also start with the wheel. Make sure you pillage their copper, though, so you don't face Spearmen.
- Boudica of the Celts is Aggressive and Charismatic. Added to that, her Swordsmen start with Guerilla I. They'll give your army an impressive core of veterans.
- The Romans' Praetorians are pretty strong until Macemen arrive.
Medieval warfare:
- Japanese gunpowder units start with three free promotions. And to keep you going while you wait, their UU is a Maceman with first strikes (handy against longbowmen).
- On an island map, the Viking Berserkers form the core of a really flexible army (their ships are faster, too). They also have Aggressive, for warring, and Financial, which is even better on water maps than it is on land.
Really, though, by the time you're hitting late medieval there are so many ways to get an advantage at war - it doesn't have to be through Charismatic or a good UU, it can be through a tech lead, a production lead, smart drafting and whipping, a large land area, cunning diplomacy... it's true at any stage of the game, but especially late on, that any civ can go to war and win.
- The Incas can be good. Their special Warriors get a bonus against Archers. As a bonus, they'll be economically strong for the rest of the game.
- The Egyptians have the quick and strong War Chariots, and also start with the wheel. Make sure you pillage their copper, though, so you don't face Spearmen.
- Boudica of the Celts is Aggressive and Charismatic. Added to that, her Swordsmen start with Guerilla I. They'll give your army an impressive core of veterans.
- The Romans' Praetorians are pretty strong until Macemen arrive.
Medieval warfare:
- Japanese gunpowder units start with three free promotions. And to keep you going while you wait, their UU is a Maceman with first strikes (handy against longbowmen).
- On an island map, the Viking Berserkers form the core of a really flexible army (their ships are faster, too). They also have Aggressive, for warring, and Financial, which is even better on water maps than it is on land.
Really, though, by the time you're hitting late medieval there are so many ways to get an advantage at war - it doesn't have to be through Charismatic or a good UU, it can be through a tech lead, a production lead, smart drafting and whipping, a large land area, cunning diplomacy... it's true at any stage of the game, but especially late on, that any civ can go to war and win.
madscientist
RPC Supergenius
Well my favorite all arround war-monger is Ghengis Kahn who has 2 great war-mongering traits and a UB that favors a different type of unit.
Imperialistic: Double GG production, means you can get the early mega-healing unit. Means you have several cities that can pump out 2 promotion units before civic or UB. Fats settler production to grab land with the military resources.
Agressive: Melee/gunpowder units start with combat I plus fast barracks. Combined with those settled GGs, very well promoted units from the get go.
UB: Ger gets +4 XP to mounted units. Have a barracks/Ger/GG/ and theocracy or vassalage that's an 11XP unit. Even if you don't run theocracy or vassalage, you start with 9 XP mounted units which need to win 1 battle to get another promotion and thus very quickly fill the GG quota getting another GG faster.
UU: Highly underappreciated on this forum if you ask me. It's no Prat I agree, but pretty formidable especially with the UB and IMperialistic trait (see above). Speed kills, and that is what we have with the Keshiks.
So the Great Kahn get's war-mongering from both traits, the UB feeds well into the UU but also feeds into the Imperialistic trait. If you can get some good commerce ealry (Mongols weekness) you can really dominate.
Imperialistic: Double GG production, means you can get the early mega-healing unit. Means you have several cities that can pump out 2 promotion units before civic or UB. Fats settler production to grab land with the military resources.
Agressive: Melee/gunpowder units start with combat I plus fast barracks. Combined with those settled GGs, very well promoted units from the get go.
UB: Ger gets +4 XP to mounted units. Have a barracks/Ger/GG/ and theocracy or vassalage that's an 11XP unit. Even if you don't run theocracy or vassalage, you start with 9 XP mounted units which need to win 1 battle to get another promotion and thus very quickly fill the GG quota getting another GG faster.
UU: Highly underappreciated on this forum if you ask me. It's no Prat I agree, but pretty formidable especially with the UB and IMperialistic trait (see above). Speed kills, and that is what we have with the Keshiks.
So the Great Kahn get's war-mongering from both traits, the UB feeds well into the UU but also feeds into the Imperialistic trait. If you can get some good commerce ealry (Mongols weekness) you can really dominate.
madscientist
RPC Supergenius
Now, to answer about war-mongers in each era and the concept overall.
1) Ancient period:
Romans for Prats and Imperialistic traits. Nothing stands to Prats except Numidian archers, war elephants or suprisingly dog warriors.
Egyptians: War chariots and the ease they get it. One tech and boom, if it's in capital BFC watch out. I like like Agressive Alex and his Phalanx.
2) Midevial:
Isabella's UB/UU are designed for warfare in this period. Toku's Samuri/Crossbows are tough. Justinian and Charlemange are tough but I have not played them yet.
3) Renasance: Churchhill, period. Those protective redcoats from a charismatic leader are a killer.
4) Modern: Americans and Germans. All three Americans are well set up for late war based on traits/UB/UU, Washington/Lincoln with Charismatic trait and Roosevelt being organized. German Panzers are the unltimate UU, nothing compares. If the AI is equal in tech (or better) you'll be glad you have that +50% armored bonus especially with gunships coming very late. IF the AI does not have tanks, means it's an easier war and you can abuse that privalege.
Of course trait combos speak for themselves. Bouduca is an obvious given and Hannibal is awesome from a charismatic and financial aspect. It is more important on how you use these traits.
As mentioned in a previous post on this thread, both Indian leadercan be very good for war-mongering (I have had alot of success with both in this regards).
1) Ancient period:
Romans for Prats and Imperialistic traits. Nothing stands to Prats except Numidian archers, war elephants or suprisingly dog warriors.
Egyptians: War chariots and the ease they get it. One tech and boom, if it's in capital BFC watch out. I like like Agressive Alex and his Phalanx.
2) Midevial:
Isabella's UB/UU are designed for warfare in this period. Toku's Samuri/Crossbows are tough. Justinian and Charlemange are tough but I have not played them yet.
3) Renasance: Churchhill, period. Those protective redcoats from a charismatic leader are a killer.
4) Modern: Americans and Germans. All three Americans are well set up for late war based on traits/UB/UU, Washington/Lincoln with Charismatic trait and Roosevelt being organized. German Panzers are the unltimate UU, nothing compares. If the AI is equal in tech (or better) you'll be glad you have that +50% armored bonus especially with gunships coming very late. IF the AI does not have tanks, means it's an easier war and you can abuse that privalege.
Of course trait combos speak for themselves. Bouduca is an obvious given and Hannibal is awesome from a charismatic and financial aspect. It is more important on how you use these traits.
As mentioned in a previous post on this thread, both Indian leadercan be very good for war-mongering (I have had alot of success with both in this regards).
Martinus
Emperor
I think people are also overlooking the benefits of Creative for a warmonger - since you will conquer a lot of cities you will need them to be able to sustain themselves quickly culture-wise or they will flip back to their original owners. And Creative may just give you the edge you need.
Plus cheap libraries and happiness buildings is also something a good warmonger needs, since it means more hammers for units.
This makes Zara Yacob (Cre/Org) a good warmonger material, imo.
Plus cheap libraries and happiness buildings is also something a good warmonger needs, since it means more hammers for units.
This makes Zara Yacob (Cre/Org) a good warmonger material, imo.
I have to disagree on this. Genghis Khan is a leader which makes no sense. Aggressive is essentially useless on his UU, his UB comes from a dead end tech and is mostly only useful for knights/cavalry. Imperialistic is one of the worst traits. Sure a couple of extra greater generals is nice, but enough to make it a good trait? No. Fix the settler bonus to apply for food and maybe i'll consider it decent.
A lot of other leaders would suit the mongols better than him. (Cyrus comes to mind if you really want more generals)Firaxis made a mistake giving the Khan these traits, if any leader should be Aggressive/Charismatic it should be him.
Just a small personal note, when i started playing this game i was a very peaceful builder (imagine that
) so when i wanted some more wars i tried to select a leader who would suit a domination attempt. And that surely must be Genghis! Boy was i disappointed. Keshik's sucked donkey balls,(i wanted cities with them ) Aggressive didn't seem to help at all, and Imperialistic was a joke. I have improved my play a lot since then true, but i still think he is like that now too. A mediocre leader at the most, with more flavor than true abilities 
madscientist
RPC Supergenius
I have to disagree on this. Genghis Khan is a leader which makes no sense. Aggressive is essentially useless on his UU, his UB comes from a dead end tech and is mostly only useful for knights/cavalry. Imperialistic is one of the worst traits. Sure a couple of extra greater generals is nice, but enough to make it a good trait? No. Fix the settler bonus to apply for food and maybe i'll consider it decent.
Firaxis made a mistake giving the Khan these traits, if any leader should be Aggressive/Charismatic it should be him.
Just a small personal note, when i started playing this game i was a very peaceful builder (imagine that
Your missing the boat on the Great Kahn, The agressive trait and the UU/UB are completely independent of each other, that's the point. You get a benefit in everything except archery and seige units (only Isabella, the chinese and Wang get any edge here).
Any military resource and he can war-monger, he also has it all after 4 techs (AH/Mining/BW/archery) and need sbut one lone food tech to get moving. He get improved melee/gunpowder units as well as better improved mounted units (chariots/keshiks/knights/Crussairs/cavalry) which are alot up to the modern era. By the modern era if you do not have a slew of GGs settled for highly promoted tanks something is wrong.
Now, imperialistic doubles GGs which is pretty awesome if your are war-mongering (HE city with a barracks+GEr + 2 GGs rocks). What I mean by war-mongering is constant military action where peace is a time to regroup not a time to rebuild. If your a builder or semi-builder the imperialistic trait is useful early on for settlers.
You may not quite see how to play up the Great Kahns war-mongering abilities. They are not obvious.
No problems here with Cyrus, the imperialistic and charismatic traits go great together. The Immortal is one of the best units (Better than the Keshiks IMHO), and a shield promoted Immortal can easily take down a slightly catapult damaged defending longbow and are dirt cheap. The only very slight hit on Cyrus is the UB does not directly support war but the UU makes up for it. I would say with horses Cyrus is slightly better than Ghengis, without them he's further behind Ghengis.
