1. We have added a Gift Upgrades feature that allows you to gift an account upgrade to another member, just in time for the holiday season. You can see the gift option when going to the Account Upgrades screen, or on any user profile screen.
    Dismiss Notice

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

Discussion in 'Civ6 - Strategy & Tips' started by Ornen, Oct 31, 2016.

  1. KmDubya

    KmDubya King

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2008
    Messages:
    632
    Location:
    Nong Bua Lam Pha, Thailand
    I'm not seeing where Hoplites are that great.

    A fresh out of the chute swordsman is at 35 strength with a +10 bonus vs spearmen. That's 45 vs your 44 strength Hoplite. Add in Oligarchy for another +4 and its 49vs44. No Great general needed, no keeping Hoplites next to each other just need iron and iron working.

    Then if you consider long term warfare Hoplites also fare poorly. Spearmen get no boost to production from cards, lose badly to melee class, upgrade to pikemen which are out of the way on the tech tree, expensive and at 41 strength still lose to swordsmen and even knights will run right over them. Their next upgrade is a distant AT crew.

    Meanwhile melee class starts with maintenance free Warriors, upgrade to the powerful swordsmen (they might be slow but with a battering ram or siege tower they can take cities, hold up well against archers and are as strong as horsemen) and then keep current with Musketmen and then Infantry.
     
  2. CaiusDrewart

    CaiusDrewart King

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2015
    Messages:
    834
    Location:
    Los Angeles
    Totally agree. Hoplites are a pretty substantial upgrade over spearmen--+10 strength is no joke. But in this case the base unit is just so pathetic that even a fairly consistent +10 strength bonus isn't enough to make Hoplites good. An average UU at best.

    If I had to rank only UUs, I would do so as follows:

    Completely Broken Tier: War-Cart. (Absurdly overpowered. Should be heavily nerfed.)

    Excellent Tier: Mameluk, Eagle Warrior, Cossack. (Gamechanging UUs that make conquest a breeze. The Eagle Warrior comes with a unique and substantial economic boost.)

    Great Tier: Maryanna Chariot Archer, Legion, Varu, Conquistador. (These are great units that you can plan a rush around. They're not quite as efficient and fast as the Excellent Tier units.)

    Good Tier: Ngao Mbeba, Saka Horse Archer, Redcoat. (The first two are decent early-game units, but a bit lacking in raw power. Redcoats are a bit situational but can be a good conquest unit in the right circumstances.)

    Okay Tier: Hoplite, Minas Geraes, Crouching Tiger Cannon. (We're starting to get a little weak at this point. These are all unlikely to be gamechangers.)

    Poor Tier: Garde Imperiale, Rough Rider, Sea Dog, Samurai. (I just don't like the bonuses these units get.)

    Pathetic Tier: U-Boat, P-51 Mustang, Berserker. (The first two come very late and are unlikely to change a typical game very much. Berserkers just suck.)

    Of course, UUs don't exist in a vacuum, and there are plenty of cases of synergy between UU and Civ. E.g., Eagle Warriors capture builders for which Aztecs have a special use. Rome can get to Oligarchy quickly via their free Monuments, which makes Legions even stronger. Sumeria wants to clear as many barb camps as possible so having a strong, mobile War-Cart that is immune to anticav is even better than it otherwise would be. And so forth.
     
    Last edited: Nov 23, 2016
    jollywonk likes this.
  3. Chibisuke

    Chibisuke Warlord

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2016
    Messages:
    268
    I tried a more serious game as Trajan. Decided to try focusing heavy on legions. Built a bunch of warriors instead of slingers first, about 5. Then slingers after. Also, I built a settler somewhere in there.

    I managed to steal a settler from Brazil too. I rushed to swordsmen, used a settler to settle next to the closest iron, then upgraded all my warriors.

    This was a pretty slow start at the beginning but as soon as I upgraded my warriors to legions things picked up quickly. Those guys plus 3 archers were able to take all Brazil cities, all of which had walls by then.

    After that I upgraded to xbow and took most of Sumeria. Their remaining 2 cities had 60+ Str so I had to wait for field cannons to finish them off. I was in a pretty solid position with a ton of good cities by then. However, I couldn't maintain suzeran on any city states and Kongo was on other continent teching up.

    At end game he's barely ahead of me in space race and I probably can't catch him without sending a big army over there to mess him up, which might not be realistic at this point.

    So I feel like Trajan is pretty strong but starts to loose steam in end game at the point where America is still picking up steam.
     
    Last edited: Nov 22, 2016
  4. Soffacet

    Soffacet Warlord

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2013
    Messages:
    207
    I didn't say they were great, I said they can be used offensively if you use Republic to generate a GG, in response to someone saying that they couldn't on account of their two movement points. You don't have to use only Hoplite, you can use 2 or 3 to front for an army of +5 Archer, the power of which is being discussed in the context of America in this very thread. This is a job that they do better than warriors and significantly before swordsmen are available, setting aside the rarity of actually having the necessary Iron.
     
  5. teks

    teks Prince

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2008
    Messages:
    330
    Location:
    Florida
    This is actually a great point. It's very easy to get the boosts for archery and bronze working.
    Some really good counter points, some parts I disagree with...

    Spearmen are boosted by the same card as warriors, archers, and swordmen. Classes are confusing, but spearmen are a part of that 50℅ boost.

    That simple iron requirement for swordsmen is kind of a big deal. It's two iron, which is pretty steep early game.

    The thing about classing the UUs. What are the best UUs? mounted. Things like varu and war cart. And the Greeks happen to have a UU that is a counter to those. It's only OK but definitely not useless.

    IMO if they are going to leave spearmen as they are, a cut in production costs would go far. At most the same price as an archer.
     
  6. elitetroops

    elitetroops Deity

    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2012
    Messages:
    5,504
    I finished the Roosevelt game with a culture victory. Film Studio was nice, but I can't say it's superb. The problem was that when I had my Film Studios up, only 3 out of 7 AI was in the modern era. Later most of them catched up to give me my culture bonus, except Harald the pathetic. And this was an exceptionally slow game for me as I played entirely peacefully. If I had captured a few cities early with the home continent bonus, I would have had the Film Studio much earlier. The faster you win, the less useful it is. I think on lower difficulties the Film Studio can't help at all if the goal is fastest possible Culture victory.

    Rome is definitely one tier above Roosevelt. The only thing Teddy has going for him is the home continent bonus, which certainly can be good. The Film Studio helps a bit with a culture victory, but that's too specific to make it count as great. His other abilities are nothing to write home about. The UU fighter is probably as useless as any unit can get. The rough rider is a more expensive Cavalry that you can't upgrade into, with a bonus on your home continent, which you should have conquered long before the rough rider is available. In addition the rough rider is about as far away as possible from the tech path you'd take in a culture victory, so there is absolutely no synergy with the UB. Double legacy bonus is another ability that matters less the faster you win.

    Rome, on the other hand, has nothing but good abilities. Free monuments, free roads, instant trading posts, boosted trade routes, super cheap housing with an extra amenity and a very strong UU. All of his abilities will come into play in just about every game and they have a very big impact early on when it matters the most. The Legion is actually really good, not only because of extra strength, but because it can chop and also repair pillaged improvements. With Legions you can pillage a lot more than you'd normally do, as they can instantly repair the improvements after taking the city.
     
    CaiusDrewart likes this.
  7. Chibisuke

    Chibisuke Warlord

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2016
    Messages:
    268
    Actually the double legacy bonus from America is pretty huge because it helps you in all phases of the game and continually grows from start to finish. I personally think it is one of the most powerful unique in the game due to that consistent growth and relevancy.

    Also, you are looking at rough rider incorrectly. It is not an expensive calvary. It is a cheap tank that gives bonus culture on kills. It is not the absolute best UU, but it is pretty good especially considering how much more important mobility is in this game compared to Civ 5.

    I agree the P-51 sucks so far, mainly because it comes so late in the game and air wars seem fairly unlikely in a deity game.

    Film studio is pretty solid, though I haven't gone culture victory yet myself.

    And I think their +5 bonus on home continent is just huge because it beefs up archers by 20%! That is big early game. Conquest much faster. I am actually going to test out a similar strategy for America to what I just used with Rome because I am betting it will be stronger with America. That's because American swordsmen with home continent boost are the same Str as legions, but America will also have Slingers 33% stronger and warriors 25% stronger.

    All the benefits you mentioned for Rome are there and they are definitely a good civ, but their start is delayed if you really want to take advantage of legions. Like I said I was still able to conquer despite the delay, but I think that plus their lack of mid/end game strength makes them barely not top tier for me.
     
  8. ExodusMe

    ExodusMe Chieftain

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2016
    Messages:
    3
    Gender:
    Male
    Can you provide reasoning in your OP for why they are ranked as such and such? I think that would be more valuable than the rankings themselves.
     
  9. MaximusPlatypus

    MaximusPlatypus O.O

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2016
    Messages:
    654
    Location:
    the great city-state of Chicago
    I think it would be easier to make points and counterpoints (keeping in mind these are all subjective) by people posting their own rankings, as the OP is obviously just one players assessment. I'd do the same myself, but holding off as I've hardly played even 40% of the civs myself yet.
     
  10. elitetroops

    elitetroops Deity

    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2012
    Messages:
    5,504
    At the end of my game the gain from double legacy bonus was +5% Great People points and -6% gold purchase cost. That's nothing really. I haven't checked if GPP bonus from classical republic applies to Great People points from projects. (I doubt it, since that would make it the same as Democracy.) If not, then +5% on GPP from buildings doesn't really have any impact at all. The discount on gold purchases is also so small that Rome's bonus gold from trade routes passing through trading posts would have increased my purchasing power a lot more.
    It's closest in strength to Cavalry, which makes it the best comparison, even if one of them is heavy and the other light cavalry. Cavalry comes one tech earlier and you can upgrade your veteran horsemen the same turn you research that tech. With that option available, it just doesn't make sense at all to build Rough Riders. If you go Cav instead, the war is won before you would have managed to build your Roughs. The bonus culture shouldn't come into play since it's only on your home continent, which you should control long before these units become relevant. The good thing with the Rough Rider is the low maintenance cost. They are practically maintenance free at that time. If it was a Cavalry replacement, then it would be really good. Though still not as good as the Cossack...
    Percentage increases in strength don't mean anything in Civ VI. Combats odds are based on the difference in strength. A 10 vs 5 battle is the same as a 100 vs 95 battle.
    You don't have to delay the start. You can take out the first target with archers, then add legions to the second war.
     
    CaiusDrewart likes this.
  11. jaegybomb

    jaegybomb Chieftain

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2016
    Messages:
    79
    Gender:
    Male
    Greece is overrated in general. They are a balanced, midrange speed civ and Rome, Russia and China do what they do better than them.
     
    Last edited: Nov 23, 2016
  12. CaiusDrewart

    CaiusDrewart King

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2015
    Messages:
    834
    Location:
    Los Angeles
    Yeah, America's legacy bonus is usually inconsequential. +5% GPP and -6% gold purchasing would be pretty weak even if you got that bonus all game long; but of course for most of the game you had much less than that, and for the critical early turns you had nothing. I think Founding Fathers is one of the very weakest Civ UAs, right in the bottom tier with Dharma (India), Knarr (Norway), and Treasure Fleets (Spain). Which is a shame, since Founding Fathers works well thematically and since the whole concept of legacy bonuses is a very neat idea. But as the game is currently balanced, it just doesn't really do anything.
     
    4N4C0ND4 likes this.
  13. Gwanelle

    Gwanelle Chieftain

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2016
    Messages:
    2
    Wrong , "anti-cavalry" units don't benefits that 50% boost
     
  14. RealHuhn

    RealHuhn Emperor

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2009
    Messages:
    1,091
    Location:
    Germany
    On the other hand, the +7 combat strength vs melee and ranged promotion also applies against spearmen. It doesn't make any sense that anti-cav is excluded from the production boosts. Same thing with siege units and ranged.
     
  15. teks

    teks Prince

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2008
    Messages:
    330
    Location:
    Florida
    Early game, with the melee and ranged boost, I am making spearmen in 6 turns, archers in 5 turns. That's proportional to their price difference. Anti-cav is a type of melee unit, just as heavy cavalry is a type of cavalry unit. It's confusing because you can actually distinguish the subclasses of cavalry.
    But it is what it is.
     
  16. teks

    teks Prince

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2008
    Messages:
    330
    Location:
    Florida
    Playing as the Kongo. How are they not A or B? Housing buffs everything. Artifacts are OP. They are monsters.
     
  17. SKS

    SKS Chieftain

    Joined:
    May 31, 2010
    Messages:
    26
    Basically, they are situationally strong, but not always. Bully for you if you get a village hut relic, but you might as well not have that bonus until much later otherwise. Early neighborhoods are good. Swordsman replacement is ok but not great. Religious ability is uh... strange. Not too consequential atm since only a few civs can really pursue a faith-based strategy anyways.
     
  18. jaegybomb

    jaegybomb Chieftain

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2016
    Messages:
    79
    Gender:
    Male
    Relics are harder to get vs humans since they just kill religious units with military. Melee units still just aren't as good as cav. Culture wins aren't as reliable/safe as science. Basically they are strong at doing stuff that just isn't meta.
     
  19. teks

    teks Prince

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2008
    Messages:
    330
    Location:
    Florida
    I like the religion ability. Basically "You're free to ignore the religion mechanic and still benefit from it as if you actually bothered with shrines"

    I could be overplaying it, but I feel like early houses are pretty strong.

    EDIT: I wanna add. This is a diety tier listing, so it's balance in multiplayer should be moot.
     
    Last edited: Nov 26, 2016
  20. Chibisuke

    Chibisuke Warlord

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2016
    Messages:
    268
    I just finished games with Kongo and Brazil.

    Both were pretty strong. I would have both at the second highest tier.

    I won both games on deity, standard settings. The only difference was the map size. With Kongo I played on huge map and with Brazil I played on large map.

    With Kongo I won a science victory at turn 300. With Brazil I won a science victory at turn 307, though I might have been able to win earlier, since I haven't been sure how overflow works with the Great People who give + hammers to space race projects. It seems that you get full overflow through at least a second project, but I'm not sure if you get overflow through a third project.

    Here are my general observations on each.

    Kongo
    I used to think that they were weak due to slow start. However, I have decided after a few more plays that the slow start is not a total killer as long as you can ramp up your military quickly enough after things get moving to take over at least 1 and a half other civs before crossbows come into play. This is because there tends to be a lag once you get to the point where crossbows are completely essential and you can't upgrade all of your archers at once due to the high cost. It's unlikely you will have the social policy that halves the upgrade cost right away. So you have to wait a bit until you either get that social policy or until you can upgrade enough archers at 200 Gold each to continue with the conquest.

    So, the good thing with Kongo is that their swordsmen are pretty strong against cities since they have a bonus against ranged attack, so they are less susceptible to being whittled away by a walled city attack. This allowed me to sustain my early conquests a bit longer and take more cities before the AI cities' walls became too strong and I had to wait for upgrades.

    Later on, the Unique Building allowed me to really ramp up my city growth and I was able to quickly get to the point where I had triple or quadrouple the AI's science output. Even then, they still manage to stay ahead in science race until almost the very end of the game due to whatever insane bonuses they have (plus I am certain they are doing a ton of research agreements among themselves). But at the end I caught up and used my superior great people point production to snag the best great people for the space race.

    So overall, Kongo is definitely a slow start but they are able to sustain early conquest a little longer than most other civs which leads to more cities faster, and then their superior growth in population is also big for the mid to late game push.


    Brazil
    They don't really have an early game advantage as far as conquest, so my early conquest was very hard fought and I had to improvise a lot and had to be at war a lot longer early on. So they are even more of a slow start than Kongo I would say. However, their adjacency bonuses from rainforest tiles gives a big science boost over the long haul and they have a significant boost to obtaining great people. I was able to consistently snag successive great people because my great people point generation was so high (plus getting the partial refund after getting great people) that the AI couldn't compete for a lot of the important ones.

    So overall, slower start than Kongo but faster catch up speed due to science bonus and great people.

    Both games the AI harassed me with multiple declarations of war but I was able to fend them all off and still maintain my focus on science and production.
     

Share This Page