Best leaders to play, or play against

[Dr.Null]

Being new to Civ 4, I'm leaning towards trying out Willem. I used to use Alexander in Civ 3 as I love being in front of the tech race.

Can someone advise best leader for me - my game style is to play peacefully, slowly building up my cities and then open up attacking as I reach the middle ages, I like to have my cities all spaced out and develop them to within an inch of their lives. The maps I use are normally temperate climate , with normal landmass types.

Would Willem be my best bet?

Willem is fine for your play style, as is any other Financial leader.

Look at some of the civs who have middle-ages UUs ("unique units"). The Ethiopians and Ottomans are absolutely brutal if they get to Gunpowder early enough.

 

[Zx Zero Zx]

None of you have mentioned the best leader in the game or the best civilization. You see every game that isn't a forum game I play as this really awesome leader, his name is Random of Random. He is great because he can build every UU and UB in the game, and he is every trait in the game. So how can you beat that?

 

[happyturtle]

I dunno, I beaten Random of Random pretty handily before.

 

[steelm2003]

Random gave me Pascal on an archipelago map (shuffle) lately and I was pretty impressed. The combination of financial (commerce), expansive (health) and UB ball court (happiness) gives a solid startup. Even the holkan rush worked fine.

 

[LegioCorvus]

None of you have mentioned the best leader in the game or the best civilization. You see every game that isn't a forum game I play as this really awesome leader, his name is Random of Random. He is great because he can build every UU and UB in the game, and he is every trait in the game. So how can you beat that?

Random of Random once gave me Charlemagne of the Germans. We weren't on speaking terms after that.

 

[Thor7]

Some of my faves other than the big 3 of darius/jc/hayuna:

Fredrick - surprised he doesn't get more votes. His combo of org and germany's UB mean you can get factories up almost instantaneously after getting assembly line, crank out a bunch of infantry and rule the world. He is a monster late game and org and phi are great traits to build an empire and bide your time until factories.

Victoria - I'm not a huge fan of lizzy, but I love vicky. Imp is an awesome trait for early expansion and warfare later. And she has very good UU and UB.

Wang kon - I've had some very good games with him lately. You can found a religion early if you want, shrine income is always very nice. His prot trait is maybe one of the worse ones but it seesm to work well with him if you use him as an empire builder- have really big cities with tons of research from his UB and then protect them with protective longbows. He makes fighting off shaka a breeze.

Memhed is also very good, one of the most flexible leaders.

Worst to play against, I am suprised there aren't more votes for joao. He is a rex nightmare! Also you do not want sitting bull next door. You'll never have enough units to beat his high unitbuild probabilities plus protective.

 

[drlake]

Worst to play against, I am suprised there aren't more votes for joao. He is a rex nightmare! Also you do not want sitting bull next door. You'll never have enough units to beat his high unitbuild probabilities plus protective.

Funny, as I opened this thread I was thinking that I don't really mind SB as a neighbor. He doesn't tend to be very aggressive, and while Protective Archers suck if I want to do an early rush by the Medieval era he's usually well behind in techs. In the Pericles game I'm playing right now, it was pure joy to go after is Longbows with Riflemen and Cannons. Next up, Monty, who is barely to Muskets!

 

[ManiaMuse]

HC is fun to play against. Lend him marble and/or stone and let him spam wonders for you to then capture when you feel like it. Never seems to have too impressive a military even at immortal unless he manages to get loads of land.

 

[Graven]

Wow, I read through the entire thread and there's no love for Lincoln. Philosophical and charasmatic are probably my two favorite leader traits. Granted, the UU and UB are irrelivant, but if Washington is going to be named so often, Lincoln should as well.

As for my favorite leader, it's JC...and it's not close. Prats are the single most game-changing aspect of the game and they come at the most pivital point in the game. If I'm going to try a new difficulty level, he's automatic.

 

[Ataxerxes]

As for my favorite leader, it's JC...and it's not close. Prats are the single most game-changing aspect of the game and they come at the most pivital point in the game. If I'm going to try a new difficulty level, he's automatic.

JC probably is the best leader, better than Augustus. I can't think of any other leader who can get so much mileage out of organzed. Prats often do make me feel like I'm playing a level lower.

 

[Ghpstage]

Prats are the single most game-changing aspect of the game and they come at the most pivital point in the game. If I'm going to try a new difficulty level, he's automatic.

Praets are definately very good but I personally rate both Quenchas and Keshiks above them.

Quenchas are available every game, can sometimes be used for a quite ridiculous rush and can give a dramatic boost to your growth, both horizontal and vertical as they are much better spawnbusters than warriors and they don't obsolete when spears are available.

Keshiks ability to move very quickly, to the point of usually outrunning defending forces is very powerful and you know whether you can have these once you get AH, which odds are your going to need anyway. Praets are entirely reliant on a gamble on IW which doesn't offer much else unless you are stuck in the jungle.

My top leaders would be HC, JS, Darius, Ramesses and Hatty.
When it comes to which are worst to play against it matters a lot on the cirumstances,
Soft touches like Gandhi, HC or Mansa nearby are a godsend as they are easy to please, develop land for you and provide wonders and shrines, but on another continent they are all major threats, especially if they land up with AIs like Shaka who are likely to vassalize them.
Wheras sociopaths are most threatening either as direct neighbours, or on continents with strong teching AIs, if they are a reasonable distance from you and on your continent they can be easily used to further your goals .

 

[Absolute Zero]

None of you have mentioned the best leader in the game or the best civilization. You see every game that isn't a forum game I play as this really awesome leader, his name is Random of Random. He is great because he can build every UU and UB in the game, and he is every trait in the game. So how can you beat that?

No, he can't build every UU or UB in the game. He can only build one UU and one UB, which are randomly decided.

 

[ahcos]

this is the 238457th thread 'bout this topic, isn't it? seems like SPI as a trait is underestimated alot... people only like the egyptians for their UU it seems. still, you're screwed if you rely on UUs requiring strategic resources like horses (warcharriots) or iron (praets) - that's why i wouldn't consider the related leaders as top choices.

my personal number ones are

isabella/hatse/, both SPI as my personal #1 trait and another trait to secure land. all in all i prefer isabella, with her UB you can break free out of the most ridiculous locked-in situations - lvl3 cannons out of the gate, enemy dead. in my eyes maybe the best leader, versatile and flexible. hatse is a little bit better at securing land, but that's what you HAVE to do because it's not that easy to break free of locked-in-situations as it is with isabella. hatse, on the other hand, is great for WC rush if you have to. but, being dependend on the resource, i prefer lvl3 cannons overall.
SPI gives you the ability to abuse diplomacy, and diplomacy is the best way to stay out of trouble. switching between building civics, war civics, economy civics just as you need.

#2 asoka/ghandi/ramm/monty/MM/justinian, all of them great UUs and good UBs, still they're less flexible compared to hat/isa/jus

saladin not in this list cause ... he's rather weak

#3 HC, obvious choice. other freakin' strong leaders: elizabeth, pericles, frederick, ZY, darius, WvO, gilgamesh


to play against? all techers. boring to play against, too easy to take out most of the time. shaka is a pain in the ~~~, but it's alot more fun to challenge him.

 

[OpheliaImmortal]

Any of the financial leaders are great, and I have a soft stop for spiritual leaders.. leading me to Mansa Musa.
I personally hate playing against Montezuma.. Why.. so agressive monty! Why!

 

[Yared]

Hey, that sacrificial altar needs to restock itself some how

 

[flashog]

The "best" leader depends on play style imo.
My favorite leaders are charismatic, imperialistic, aggressive, financial and spiritual... some come to mind:
Cyrus of Persia
Hannibal of Carthage
Justinian of Byzantine
Montezuma of Aztec

...but each to his own i guess.

 

[Yared]

Could someone point me to a game where someone really played to Justinian's strengths?

 

[flashog]

Why.. so agressive monty! Why!

Something about needing blood to please the gods and delay the apocalypse I think...
I actually think he's rather well-implemented

 

[flashog]

Could someone point me to a game where someone really played to Justinian's strengths?

Justinian's strength comes with the middle ages. If you can get his cataphracts early, nothing will stop them! Apply espionage via Great Wall (great with imp.) or otherwise and take out the cultural defense of the enemy cities with revolts.

Although I haven't read all the way through, I'm sure you can find some great tips here: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=360636

 

[Yared]

Ah, thanks!