Civ 6 Deity Tier List –– discussing DLC civs now, R&F civs starting 2/19

[Ornen]

Thanks for the list. I think it would be better if you did it per leader instead of per Civ. I think this is going to cause confusion when people don't know who you are referencing. What if who the strongest leader changes, or what if people are looking for the weaker of the pair? It's just better to have everyone listed.

We'll see how it goes once more leader bonuses are out. What I'm likely to do near term is put the better leader in parentheses without creating a separate entry on the list for the alt leader. I don't want the list to get too cluttered – Civ 5 ended up with 40+ civs in the end, and I expect Civ 6 to easily hit 60+ leaders. So far, different leaders aren't that different: Pericles and Gorgo have far more in common than what separates them. But I'll go ahead and add parentheses for preferred leader, and I might change my approach to this as more come out.

2 cities into prayers works the most consistently yes. It's not so bad that you can't switch into units or other if needed wrt barbs or AIs.

the 'push effect' depends on what you're doing with them. go tithe/etc, and choose mass spread options and you'll pay for a lot of stuff. Go culture boosters and you need less theatres to get civics, etc.

the +4 combat strength bonus works for both combat units and theological units; therefore it neuters the AIs +4 difficulty level bonus. extra inquisitor removal helps if you get swamped.

(more on conquistadores, trade bonus, and missions)

I'll have to try it out – I still need to play a religious game. Phillip seems uniquely suited to pursue a religious victory, as more than one of his bonuses don't reach their full effect unless you're actively converting other civs.

I'm glad Spain can reliably found a religion, but that's a lot of effort early game to earn bonuses that other civs get for free. I'm also worried that it severely restricts your very important opening turns. You're right that I'm biased towards certain playstyles, like early conquest and a midgame production emphasis – so far, those playstyles seem very effective, and it's not just me saying this.

Yes, England, so famous for it's seaside resorts.

I mean, England in-game is clearly represented as the expansive British Empire, which settled all over the world, including great beach territory in the Caribbean, Australia, Africa, and Southeast Asia. It's honestly not that crazy for Britain to throw down beaches, especially if they're settling faraway cities for it.

 

[A+ombomb]

Rome is #1

 

[CaiusDrewart]

The trade route booster is always great. Early fleets just depends on the amount of water on the map, but since it's a small bonus anyways, so is it's loss (small) if you're on a Pangaea.

The mission.. I liked it less, but then I saw that the text for it is actually poor. It's 1 faith on capitals continent, 3 faith on any other one. 1 science by a campus, +2 more (possibly need to build one later to verify) later game with a civic.

I just don't see it with Spain. I think the only thing Spain really has going for it is the combat bonus.

The between-continents trade route bonus is far from "always great." You want to be running internal trade routes and most of the time most of your cities are going to be on the same continent. Sure you might get lucky and start on the edge of a continent, but you probably won't. Making fleets earlier is totally laughable. If you need a navy at all, you'd be better off just building two boats and keeping them separate. Inquisitors just aren't needed as the game is currently balanced. And the Mission is pathetic. Even a fully buffed Mission under ideal circumstances (which is going to be quite rare) is only OK, and most of the time they're a waste of builder charges. The Conquistador is a pretty generic midgame UU. It's alright but nothing special compared to what other Civs get. Maybe like the ~10th best UU. I'd definitely rather have the Hoplite, Ngao Mbeba, Legion, Horse Archer, Chariot Archer, Mameluk, Varu, Eagle Warrior, and War-Cart. But it's not terrible.

The +4 combat bonus IS decent. But it probably won't apply in the very early game (when you need it the most), and you can't 100% rely on it later, either. Even when you can, +4 is not that gamechanging. I'd say Spain's a bottom two Civ for sure.

 

[MadDjinn]

I just don't see it with Spain. I think the only thing Spain really has going for it is the combat bonus.

The between-continents trade route bonus is far from "always great." You want to be running internal trade routes and most of the time most of your cities are going to be on the same continent. Sure you might get lucky and start on the edge of a continent, but you probably won't. Making fleets earlier is totally laughable. If you need a navy at all, you'd be better off just building two boats and keeping them separate. Inquisitors just aren't needed as the game is currently balanced. And the Mission is pathetic. Even a fully buffed Mission under ideal circumstances (which is going to be quite rare) is only OK, and most of the time they're a waste of builder charges. The Conquistador is a pretty generic midgame UU. It's alright but nothing special compared to what other Civs get. Maybe like the ~10th best UU. I'd definitely rather have the Hoplite, Ngao Mbeba, Legion, Horse Archer, Chariot Archer, Mameluk, Varu, Eagle Warrior, and War-Cart. But it's not terrible.

The +4 combat bonus IS decent. But it probably won't apply in the very early game (when you need it the most), and you can't 100% rely on it later, either. Even when you can, +4 is not that gamechanging. I'd say Spain's a bottom two Civ for sure.

So you never leave the continent you started on? That might explain the reaction. Also seems likely you haven't played anything but land maps or done anything religiously.

Also likely that you haven't had to play the mid game properly since the conquistador with the Spain bonus is already 1/2 way towards wiping out a similar unit from any one else and definitely comes close to one shooting all prior era units. But that is likely less your fault than the tech tree.

 

[CaiusDrewart]

So you never leave the continent you started on? That might explain the reaction. Also seems likely you haven't played anything but land maps or done anything religiously.

Also likely that you haven't had to play the mid game properly since the conquistador with the Spain bonus is already 1/2 way towards wiping out a similar unit from any one else and definitely comes close to one shooting all prior era units. But that is likely less your fault than the tech tree.

I've played mostly Continents maps. I've found Spain's trade bonus to be pretty uninspiring there. Certainly it won't do anything until later in the game.

The Conquistador is fine, like I said, but it's competing with a lot of UUs that are equally devastating and come earlier. I generally find that by this point in the game pretty much any Civ can outtech the AI and produce some unit that can rip apart the AI by itself. As you suggest, I think if the game were designed so the AI teched better and had more modern armies, the Conquistador might be look better. I'd still probably prefer the earlier UUs though. Basically all the land UUs in this game are strong and I'd rather have the Ancient/Classical ones.

I've only done the Religious Victory once, because I kind of hate it. I'm sure Spain is pretty decent at that, though I think Russia and Arabia are probably better.

 

[Adooombray]

The problem with Teddy is that the continent bonus can be amazing or useless, and you never know until you get a nice radius of scouting in - the way continents work is kind of hot garbage right now because they just arbitrarily divide contents on lines. It's like Sykes-Picot everywhere. It would be amazing... and REALLY OP on pangea.. if you were just guaranteed a 4 or 5 city "continent" but it can be split 2 or 3 ways and rough riders come too late to be of any help conquering your "continent"

Seeded properly though its like the +5 vs barbarians without needing to use the card slot, which, given the intelligence of barbs now, I am always getting that card first with anyone other than TR

 

[Ornen]

The problem with Teddy is that the continent bonus can be amazing or useless, and you never know until you get a nice radius of scouting in - the way continents work is kind of hot garbage right now because they just arbitrarily divide contents on lines. It's like Sykes-Picot everywhere. It would be amazing... and REALLY OP on pangea.. if you were just guaranteed a 4 or 5 city "continent" but it can be split 2 or 3 ways and rough riders come too late to be of any help conquering your "continent"

I agree 100% about continents, and wish they'd just replace it with a 'within x tiles of your capital' system, maybe counting water tiles as double distance. In my current England game, the city I founded 5 tiles away from my capital on turn 15 counted as a separate continent, but cities I'm founding 25+ tiles away on separate landmasses do not. It's ridiculous.

But it also seems likely on most starts your civ will share its starting continent with a few neighbors, making the US's bonus broadly useful for early conquest and defense. I don't think I've seen a start so far where I didn't have at least one continent neighbor.

 

[xDaunt]

I agree 100% about continents, and wish they'd just replace it with a 'within x tiles of your capital' system, maybe counting water tiles as double distance. In my current England game, the city I founded 5 tiles away from my capital on turn 15 counted as a separate continent, but cities I'm founding 25+ tiles away on separate landmasses do not. It's ridiculous.

But it also seems likely on most starts your civ will share its starting continent with a few neighbors, making the US's bonus broadly useful for early conquest and defense. I don't think I've seen a start so far where I didn't have at least one continent neighbor.

Yeah, it's very seldom that you're going to have a "continent" all to yourself. There almost always will be an opportunity for a nice war to take advantage of the bonus.

 

[Frank327]

I've been thinking a bit about this, isn't the royal navy dockyard one of the stronger unique districts? Getting a lot of trade routes for your civilization is very important both in terms of gold and other yields. That's one of the reasons why you want a commerce district in pretty much every city. A harbor/harbor replacement does pretty much the same thing but because the royal navy dockyard is unique, it's also half price and doesn't count towards maximum districts. This makes it kind of easy to get a royal navy dockyard + commerce + Industrial district in most of your cities. On top of that, trade routes to that city now generate 2 food and 6 (!) production.

 

[RealHuhn]

England has insane museums. One archeologist is enough to grab 6 artifacts which turn into a massive theming bonus no matter what. And where do you find places for seaside resorts? Exactly, on little unsettled islands on different continents. What helps you to settle those places? Free melee units, the redcoat, the privateer UU and the cheap harbor to boost growth and production with trade routes. England is extremely well designed for a cultural victory and extremely efficient at it.
Bump her up already .

 

[Ornen]

I'm actually nearing the end of an England game so far. Here are my reservations with them:

The harbor is a great district, but I don't think it's as strong as many of the other districts. For one, you can't build it everywhere. Outside of small islands maps, many of the best city locations will be inland, where the harbor is simply off-limits. For another, you get probably the worst GP points in the game. Naval combat as a whole is pretty weak outside of islands maps, since the game enables (and even encourages) players to settle slightly inland, out of reach of naval units. Our current maps don't help either, as my games have been full of intrusive icecaps and inland seas that weaken exploration – in my current game on Fractal, I spawned in between two inland seas, making naval combat especially useless. This goes beyond the Great Admiral – half the bonuses the Harbor gives go to waste, unless you're on a map that's particularly inclined to naval combat. Which, again, I haven't seen outside of islands.

The continents thing, as mentioned, is also pretty wonky and map dependent – I got a free warrior on t15 for settling a few tiles away from my capital, but don't get redcoats for settling 25+ tiles away on separate landmasses because for some reason they're the 'same' continent. So far, different continent bonuses seem much harder to take advantage of than same continent bonuses.

As for the archaeologists, it's a substantial boost to your tourism, especially if you land Mary Leakey. It's also a lot of production and a lot of work, as you'll have to build several culture buildings and two archaeologists to take advantage of it – in every city you would like to do so. That includes the cities you're trying to develop as well as those you're trying to grab powerful tourism wonders in. And this is for a somewhat limited supply of sites. Once you've sent out 5-6 archaeologists, it will become much harder to find good sites, even if you have Terra Cotta Army. Which is basically a must-build for England. I'll have to compare the tourism boost to the film studio in my US game, but the Teddy certainly gets points for sitting at home making movies while England has to build a legion of archaeologists and cover the whole damn world.

Not that England is a bad civ! Based on this playthrough, I really think they belong where they are, which is really my baseline tier (there's a reason it has more civs than the others do). Like China, they're a strong candidate to move up when I create another tier, but I really don't see a place for them alongside civs like Russia and Sumeria.

 

[RealHuhn]

Ehm, I'm pretty sure one british archeologist can grab 6 artifacts instead of 3. There are plenty of sites available, especially after you get those sea wrecks as well.

Not that England is a bad civ! Based on this playthrough, I really think they belong where they are, which is really my baseline tier (there's a reason it has more civs than the others do). Like China, they're a strong candidate to move up when I create another tier, but I really don't see a place for them alongside civs like Russia and Sumeria.

This is kinda true but I still think England deserves the higher tier. We'll see what others think.
Or maybe split the tier into two?

 

[Ornen]

I can confirm that one archaeologist still grabs just three artifacts. The artifacts are there, but starting to get scarce in my game, and I still have a couple museums to fill.

Again, they're a strong candidate to move up into a new middle tier.

 

[MadDjinn]

Ehm, I'm pretty sure one british archeologist can grab 6 artifacts instead of 3. There are plenty of sites available, especially after you get those sea wrecks as well.



This is kinda true but I still think England deserves the higher tier. We'll see what others think.
Or maybe split the tier into two?

England can build 2 archaeologists per city which gets them their 6. Only 3 each though. Their better bonus on that is the auto theming. You don't have to care what artifacts you find, so just vacuum up all of them.

 

[RaidandTrade]

New to deity in Civ V and not a good strike rate there.

In the midst of my second in VI as America and really finding the +5 a big boost. Cleared England and Spain from my continent early on which gave me a good base to build from for the mid game. Won't be setting any records - turn 250 and have three capitals to go - but having a good start really seems to make for a good mid - late game

Aborted first game in VI at deity as I came up against America and got my *** handed to me. Big time.

 

[Victoria]

I suspect you severely are underestimating the uses of an free fully upgraded soldier for every new city not on their original continent (not landmass). The flexibility here I am not going to discuss, still finding uses.

The gold England gets, its a money grubbing country ... with a royal dock and lighthouse and commercial district in every city you can buy the world.

Do not get me wrong, keep it at tier C if you wish. I think its early days and this puppy is flexible. Only real restraint is to avoid religion due to tech path time and that means loosing your redcoat. But loosing your religion means less diplomatic issues and not wasting time on it.

 

[Ornen]

I suspect you severely are underestimating the uses of an free fully upgraded soldier for every new city not on their original continent (not landmass). The flexibility here I am not going to discuss, still finding uses.

The gold England gets, its a money grubbing country ... with a royal dock and lighthouse and commercial district in every city you can buy the world.

Again, Tier C is very solid, and they're a strong candidate for a Tier B when I create it (and move A up to S). To quote myself, these are "Good civs that can be great in the right circumstances", which I think applies in the case of England.

I'd love to hear more about the flexibility when you get the chance. Seems very useful, especially if when you go on a conquest spree. But in my current game, there are few viable chances to land it through settlement, which is a disappointment, and makes me consider the bonus a bit situational.

Besides the +2 gold per foreign continent, am I missing anything in the dock + lighthouse + commercial combo that other civs aren't getting? Short of the production boost to dock, which is significant.

Also, does anyone have thoughts on what civs could be moved down? As can be expected, we've had a lot of "this civ is great and should be moved up", but not a lot of "civ X isn't that strong and should be moved down". What do you guys think? I have some idea of a couple civs I might move down from the current B tier when I make the new tier B, but I'd like to see what others think first.

 

[sadsquid]

To be honest , I don't really think Russia is quite that good. Maybe when you create that new tier they could move down into it?

I mean their Cossack is fairly late and not the most amazing UU.

The leader UA is poor. Even if you're behind, it doesn't seem like a very strong ability compared to others .

The tundra bonus is pretty meh. They're bad tiles, so improving them a bit just makes them less bad , but still not great . The extra land however is definitely a strong bonus. Makes grabbing resources and good tiles much quicker, cheaper and easier.

The Lavra is great if you're going for a religious victory. And unique districts are just strong in general . But it's not as useful if you're going for any other victory . Decent, but not amazing .

Overall I think they're a good civ, but not quite up to the level of Scythia, Sumeria or Rome. Can't really comment on Japan or Aztecs as I haven't played them yet.

 

[Roxlimn]

Disclaimer: I don't normally play Deity. I find it more enjoyable to play on Emp/King. Have some comments, though.

1. The Conquistadors ARE very strong. They're a match for the Guard Imperiale and the Redcoat. Arguably better in some ways. They're 65 Strength like those units, unlock from Military Science, and get +10 bonus for having a stacked Religious unit on their tile (which should be a Chaplain or Inquisitor). They get an additional +4 bonus for fighting against Civs that are not your religion, which should be most of the time.

2. They don't upgrade from Swordsmen. I tried it during my last Spain game and my Swordsmen upgraded to Musketmen while I had to hard-build Conquistadors. It's actually not that bad, but there you go. This isn't Civ V where making the latest unit is an exercise in frustration. There are ways to mitigate the unit cost, and Conquistadors remain relevant all the way to the Atomic Age since they're basically very cheap Infantry (79 vs 80 Strength).

3. The Mission gives base +3 Faith +1 Science on a reliable basis so long as you can put it in a tile outside your home continent and it's next to a Campus. I did not observe the yield getting better. It's better than putting Specialists in Holy Sites, and you can put it on Tundra. It's worthless on the home continent.

4. Spain's main problem isn't getting a Religion. Most of their bonuses come into play so long as they have a Religion, even if it's not their own. Their main problem is that they need to get to another continent and settle or conquer it to get their most potent abilities and they have no help in getting there other than a coastal start. Treasure Fleet is way stronger than El Escorial. Spain should arguably get a continental edge bias but that could make them too strong (but probably not).

Not a Deity player. Just relating what I played.

 

[lamaros]

"Spain relies on a religion it won’t be able to found without a bit of luck and a hard push at the start of the game. No part of France’s varied bonuses seems particularly useful."

Spain is bad because it's bad even when it gets a religion. It's not that hard to get a religion on deity.

France is better than Norway and Spain. It's a one trick wonder, and not as good as others, but it's still good at cultural victory.