Best civilizations for Liberty ?

Civ should have less impact on policy trees than given map or VC. For war game Liberty is definitely the right choice. For peaceful games currently Tradition looks better.

For a pure war game I think honor is superior to liberty, but liberty may be superior if you do not in war the whole game like if you get control of a whole continent in the early game.

Tradition vs liberty in a peacful game may go to either side, tradition probably have a stronger early game while liberty got a stronger late game. If you go for culture tradition will probably be better however liberty can reduce the cost of your policies.
 
I like Liberty with Ethiopia. Screw their UA, I'm going to become a Faith powerhouse with the UB.
 
You're not gonna "easily" have 3+ cities with walls of babylon...but if you can early rush a nearby capitol with bowmen, I guess it's not so bad. I have better success with babylon razing a couple cities early on, but turtling my first 3-4 cities, so I feel tradition is better for that.

If u don't have cash to rush-buy WoB or u don't build them early when u start near Alexander, then shame on u. :p
The reason I suggest Liberty is because generally more cities = overall larger pop = More science. Also whats the point of having 2 defensive traits. To rush tradition & get oliarghy or to focus on liberty & get new cities up for extra science while ur UU & UB take care of early rushers.
 
You can destoy standard pangea emperor with 1 city germany carpeting landsknecht and a few catapults.
Not sure what's your point. I can do all kind of things. In the described scenario (assuming it's a proper OCC with auto-razing) I wouldn't pick either but go Honor instead. What does it prove exactly?
 
I like Liberty with Ethiopia. Screw their UA, I'm going to become a Faith powerhouse with the UB.

I would say the same. Why have a UA that can make your play bad just to keep it. How many times do you lose if you got more cities then everyone else. The steele is basicly a super temple in ancient era and the more cities the more steele's which will give so much faith that maybe your religion will dominate all the other which can give you far bigger bonuses then the UA can give you.
 
"Specialized" cities and research agreements=more science.

Whatever. I think I'm debating a number of people who play prince-king difficulty. There's nothing to discuss there. You don't need stacked bonuses, specialized cites, or anything else that takes 5 seconds of consideration for that. You don't even need walls until emperor. Why bother even playing babylon?
 
Not sure what's your point. I can do all kind of things. In the described scenario (assuming it's a proper OCC with auto-razing) I wouldn't pick either but go Honor instead. What does it prove exactly?
'

Civ should have less impact on policy trees than given map or VC. For war game Liberty is definitely the right choice. For peaceful games currently Tradition looks better.

Bigger, cities make units faster.
 
For a pure war game I think honor is superior to liberty, but liberty may be superior if you do not in war the whole game like if you get control of a whole continent in the early game.
Honor hasn't been improved since vanilla, so it still sucks. Although as Atilla, for example, taking left side asap for faster XP is not a bad choice. I've gone Liberty after that anyways. Meritocracy alone is worth it.

Tradition vs liberty in a peacful game may go to either side, tradition probably have a stronger early game while liberty got a stronger late game. If you go for culture tradition will probably be better however liberty can reduce the cost of your policies.
That's true, however it depends on your map. Like you said, when you have a space for 3 cities there is no much point in taking Liberty. However, if you have enough space and/or aim for mass puppeting, there is no much point in taking Tradition. The balance between the two is pretty decent now.
 
You made the blanket statement about liberty being "the" warring policy track. Don't change the subject.
 
You made the blanket statement about liberty being "the" warring policy track. Don't change the subject.
:D Sure, pal, we're done here. Your suggested OCC scenario is extreme and marginal at best, usually people don't play this way. If you insist on twisting my words and picking on me for not addressing it in my original post, be my guest. For those who are interested in discussion, I'm sure, what I meant is pretty clear.
 
I'm not trying to be mean. I'm sorry. I just don't agree any of the "first 6", unless you're pushing the "faith units and combat bonuses" (piety) are really "better" for combat oriented civs.
 
You might want to reconsider this, because the extra +3 culture never actually gives you more culture than the extra cultural cost of the new policies. So if you only take the Tradition opener for the extra culture, you will receive every further policy throughout the game later than you normally would.

Granted, the Tradition opener gives an additional benefit of faster border growth, but unless you specifically go for that, taking just the opener is a waste and a delay.

On a more on-topic note: Liberty is potentially viable for all civilizations, but as noted, it might be sub-optimal for civilizations like India or Ethiopia. It's definitely not worth it if your strategy calls for 4 or fewer cities, unless you need the free Great Person badly.
I find that I reach the end of the Liberty tree earlier even with the additional policy. This is especially true with G&K since Stonehenge and Temples now give :faith: instead of :c5culture: which makes early :c5culture: harder to come by. The +3 :c5culture: is really nice to get the policies rolling.

I also tend to go back an finish off Tradition later (or at least take one or two more policies depending on my mid to late game goals), so it is not a complete waste.
 
I agree - although if you want a specific Great Person, fast and can't get them by any other means, the Liberty finisher is probably the easiest (especially with Hagia Sophia being changed in GaK).

That being said, I still wouldn't take the entire tree just for one Great Person, unless I played a civilization with large early culture production (Aztecs or France, for example) AND the Great Person was crucial to my strategy (e.g. I needed a Great Prophet and didn't have time to explore the upper part of the tech tree). For a small empire, Liberty is next to useless, and spending 6 policies on one Great Person is bad planning in virtually all situations.
It isn't just about the free great person finisher (which becomes an early wonder in all my games). Liberty also gives a free Settler, a free Worker, an extra :c5production: for every city with is huge early in the game or when settling new cities.

With the possible exception of a OCC game, I can't really think of a situation where Liberty has a downside or where I would prefer to take either of the other two policy trees available in the Ancient Era.
 
Yeh, those are great, they just come at the expense of alot of gold, happiness and growth, not to mention a far more substantial capitol and wonder production.
 
Back to the question which civs work best with liberty:
Basically, you want to spam a lot of cities, so your civ should be able to combat the disadvantages of spamming cities :)

What are those disadvantages?
1) Gold per turn - you need a lot of expensive infrastructure like monuments, shrines, libraries etc. before you get to markets
2) Lack of production - cities remain small and you want to be able to maximize production with as few citizens as possible
3) Negative Happiness = no growth - certainly the biggest limiting factor
4) The AI will get mad at you - defense can be very difficult
5) Culture - Costs per policy increase a lot per city so the more culture the better
6) Religion - very flexible and can negate 1-2 problems

So yeah, which civs can counter these disadvantages with their UA, UB and UU (best per category)?

Money:
Inca or Carthage, without a doubt. With Inca, you save 1 gpt per free road on hills which is extremely strong and easily beats Arabia in the early game. Just build enough workers to get your road network up and running asap. Carthage gets free trade routes between coastal cities.

Production:
I'd say Russia or Rome. Extra hammers are very important to get the essential buildings in every city. Russia also has the additional advantage of selling a shedload of horses to the AI for extra cash.

Happiness:
Believe it or not but I'd say Egypt. +2 happiness per burial tomb is awesome. Take the piety opener as well for faster production.

Defense:
Everyone with an early UU. UUs can certainly help but aren't the most critical factor.

Culture:
France, obviously. Followed by Polynesia with Moais - they can also settle on islands immediately and grab a lot of luxuries.

Religion:
The Celts and Mayans

Others:
America also works well because they have the best scouts for good city locations and can purchase important tiles with less gold.

Final list: Inca, Carthage, Russia, Rome, Egypt, France, Polynesia, Celts, Maya, America

I feel like I'm missing someone here but it doesn't really matter :)
 
I'm not trying to be mean. I'm sorry. I just don't agree any of the "first 6", unless you're pushing the "faith units and combat bonuses" (piety) are really "better" for combat oriented civs.
Seriously, maybe it's something wrong with me. I really don't understand you. Who are the 'first 6' and what Piety has to do with anything? :crazyeye:
Ok, one more attempt. All I'm trying to say, is when you have a pretty standard domination game, i.e. some native cities + many puppets, Liberty is better than Tradition. When you want to play a standard peaceful game, i.e. few large cities and no conquest, Tradition is better than Liberty. If you disagree with that, you'll have to explain in simple words to stupid me what is it exactly we disagree on, otherwise we're not going anywhere.
 
If you are going to grow beyond one city, at some point you have to take Liberty. This tree represents freedom for your people instead of despotism. There is a big happiness boost in this tree if you are running 3 or 4 tall cities, not to mention the reduced costs of future social policies and a wildcard GP.
 
Production:
I'd say Russia or Rome. Extra hammers are very important to get the essential buildings in every city. Russia also has the additional advantage of selling a shedload of horses to the AI for extra cash.


I feel like I'm missing someone here but it doesn't really matter :)

I'd add the Huns to Production. They get that +1 to pastures (and can build them as soon as they get a worker out) which is a nice production boost for the early game. The Horse Archer is also a decent defensive unit for the early game. It's an alternate, yet viable peaceful playstyle for these warmongers.

Besides, if you do decide to go Attila on your neighbors, the Liberty tree will help you make those cities that you can't raze into a viable part of your empire. Honor first, of course, for the warmonger.
 
Top Bottom