Civ Discussion - Greece

[bengalryan9]

A lot of people disagreeing with me here, which I kind of expected, but I'm not sure anybody has really convinced me just yet.

Collect all city states and stack bonuses.

I do that anyways, regardless of who I play as. As the game stands right now the AI just does not seem to care all that much about becoming suzerain to city states. Even without any type of discount to befriending city states I can generally become suzerain to every single city state on my continent (and in exploration and modern, the other continent as well), so I just don't think this is all that unique to Greece. The only way I don't become suzerain of a city state is if I haven't discovered them yet, and even then I find a lot of times that they are still independent by the time I finally do. Greece is very strong at something that - in the game currently - is really easy to do. That just feels pretty underwhelming to me.

I'm still just not all that impressed with their traditions, either. Strategoi is fine but you're only ever going to use it if you're fighting... if you're not doing that for a time, it does nothing for you. Xenia is good but all it does it speed up something that was going to happen for me anyways, AND I can get the same effect by spending two attribute points (and for those who say "why not take both?", I still say "why would I, I don't need to?"), AND once all the city states have been scooped up it does nothing for you. The two League traditions maybe save me, what, a turn or two of influence? There are plenty of other antiquity age traditions I'd rather have over all of these, personally.

If the AI eventually gets patched to actually care about city states then yes, I think Greece shines, but as it stands right now? I think it's a slight leg up in something I really don't need a leg up in. Everything in their kit fits well together and they are well designed, I'm just not convinced there is all that big of a need for the particular niche they fill (yet).

 

[Leucarum]

A lot of people disagreeing with me here, which I kind of expected, but I'm not sure anybody has really convinced me just yet.

I do that anyways, regardless of who I play as. As the game stands right now the AI just does not seem to care all that much about becoming suzerain to city states. Even without any type of discount to befriending city states I can generally become suzerain to every single city state on my continent (and in exploration and modern, the other continent as well), so I just don't think this is all that unique to Greece. The only way I don't become suzerain of a city state is if I haven't discovered them yet, and even then I find a lot of times that they are still independent by the time I finally do. Greece is very strong at something that - in the game currently - is really easy to do. That just feels pretty underwhelming to me.

I'm still just not all that impressed with their traditions, either. Strategoi is fine but you're only ever going to use it if you're fighting... if you're not doing that for a time, it does nothing for you. Xenia is good but all it does it speed up something that was going to happen for me anyways, AND I can get the same effect by spending two attribute points (and for those who say "why not take both?", I still say "why would I, I don't need to?"), AND once all the city states have been scooped up it does nothing for you. The two League traditions maybe save me, what, a turn or two of influence? There are plenty of other antiquity age traditions I'd rather have over all of these, personally.

If the AI eventually gets patched to actually care about city states then yes, I think Greece shines, but as it stands right now? I think it's a slight leg up in something I really don't need a leg up in. Everything in their kit fits well together and they are well designed, I'm just not convinced there is all that big of a need for the particular niche they fill (yet).

So I don't think Greece is S tier, but I do think it is good... The three best things it gives you are:

The best influence economy in the early game from their traditions, which does matter. Sure if you push for it you can get all/most of the CS, but as Greece, you'll get it way sooner. You get the bonuses from the city states sooner and and can start making diplomatic endeavours or espionage instead, which adds up quick and helps you keep important AI on-side too. I really like Greece with Harriet Tubman if you want to play that game. If you aren't making full use of your influence all game, Greece probably isn't your best choice. Their influence generation is also going to get a lot better once the nerf to hub towns hits.

Second, an ok ageless source of culture/influence from the Acropolis. The adjacencies aren't the best but it's ageless which if you set it up well can really help give you an early boost in exploration. Aksum does this better but it's not nothing.

And last, a rough terrain bias. You will have good production in your core territory most of the time. It's genuinely not something to sneeze at. Snowballing is still very much a think in Civ7 and this is what sets up a snowball.

The Hoplite is ok too... And Strategoi is a nice-to-have.

I think they're a B tier civ. Orders of magnitude better than Khmer. Nowhere near Maya. You have to shape how you play the game to them, similar to Carthage, you can't play a standard game and you absolutely can play them really badly.

 

[disjointaccount]

and for those who say "why not take both?", I still say "why would I, I don't need to?"

I think this is probably just a playstyle thing. Either you have like 500 hub towns and are drowning in influence to the point it's meaningless, or you're just not really doing much with your influence beyond suze-ing the IPs you come across (neither of these is meant as a dig, both perfectly fine ways to play the game).

I find myself constantly wanting more influence - I want to be taking suzerainties (and speeding them up where possible - either to beat an AI leader, nab the CS before someone disperses it, or just to get to boosts faster), spamming and supporting endeavors with the neighbours I want to ally, and building up a stockpile to use for big war support when it's time to rush someone. With war support especially, I really can't have too much. Yes, part of this scarcity is I limit my hub town usage (though again, the excess hub towns give you is being imminently cut down), but even in the odd game where I do go crazy with hub towns, it's not until late in the age that I really find myself sitting on a lot more influence than I can spend. It's an extremely valuable resource, and also a very scarce one, so I really don't think there's such a thing as too much extra influence. Hence why I feel the more Greece gives me, the better.

I think they're a B tier civ. Orders of magnitude better than Khmer. Nowhere near Maya. You have to shape how you play the game to them, similar to Carthage, you can't play a standard game and you absolutely can play them really badly.

I'd say I broadly agree with this. Overall, they're B tier, but like Carthage, they can give S-tier performances in the right game when played well. It's less a case of Greece or Carthage being flatly worse than Maya and more so that you could fall asleep on your keyboard on still win with Maya, whereas Greece and Carthage require some skill and the right circumstances to hit their ceiling.

 

[bengalryan9]

Either you have like 500 hub towns and are drowning in influence to the point it's meaningless, or you're just not really doing much with your influence beyond suze-ing the IPs you come across (neither of these is meant as a dig, both perfectly fine ways to play the game).

Actually, neither. I *might* have one hub town, maybe, and I only recently even learned that apparently they are super easy to spam for easy influence (and I probably wouldn't do that anyways because I usually have enough to meet my needs as is). I don't even really tend to go more than one over the settlement cap in my games because I don't think that's very well balanced at the moment. I still spend influence on things like endeavors, levying units, espionage, and merging city states into my empire, so it's not like I'm not using it. I still find that, as a peaceful player who makes an effort to be smart with where I spend influence (ie, I'm not spending it on extra trade routes if there aren't worth it or there isn't anywhere to slot more resources) I generally have more than enough as it is. Could I do more with sanctions or espionage? Maybe, but personally I'm not looking to do anything to tank my relationships with other leaders.

You get the bonuses from the city states sooner

Now this is something I do think is fair and is something I did consider, but I dunno, I'm not sure that it's *quite* as important as it might seem. I'm likely to go for suzerainty on city states as early in the age as I possibly can, right? That means my empire yields are going to be at their lowest of the age and my infrastructure might not even be all that built up yet by the time I'm activating these bonuses. Even if I shave, I dunno, 10 turns off of when I might otherwise getting the bonus, how much science am I really getting from that +1 on all science buildings at that point, or at +5% overall science at that point? Even the free techs are going to be cheaper ones, and if I go for the UIs I might be getting them so early I don't have the economy set up to the point that I can spam them across all of my towns yet. I just wonder if I'm *really* getting as much out of that early suzerainty than we think, though admittedly it's not like I've done the math or anything. On the surface, sure, earlier is probably better, but is it *that* much better?

 

[Leucarum]

Actually, neither. I *might* have one hub town, maybe, and I only recently even learned that apparently they are super easy to spam for easy influence (and I probably wouldn't do that anyways because I usually have enough to meet my needs as is). I don't even really tend to go more than one over the settlement cap in my games because I don't think that's very well balanced at the moment. I still spend influence on things like endeavors, levying units, espionage, and merging city states into my empire, so it's not like I'm not using it. I still find that, as a peaceful player who makes an effort to be smart with where I spend influence (ie, I'm not spending it on extra trade routes if there aren't worth it or there isn't anywhere to slot more resources) I generally have more than enough as it is. Could I do more with sanctions or espionage? Maybe, but personally I'm not looking to do anything to tank my relationships with other leaders.

Now this is something I do think is fair and is something I did consider, but I dunno, I'm not sure that it's *quite* as important as it might seem. I'm likely to go for suzerainty on city states as early in the age as I possibly can, right? That means my empire yields are going to be at their lowest of the age and my infrastructure might not even be all that built up yet by the time I'm activating these bonuses. Even if I shave, I dunno, 10 turns off of when I might otherwise getting the bonus, how much science am I really getting from that +1 on all science buildings at that point, or at +5% overall science at that point? Even the free techs are going to be cheaper ones, and if I go for the UIs I might be getting them so early I don't have the economy set up to the point that I can spam them across all of my towns yet. I just wonder if I'm *really* getting as much out of that early suzerainty than we think, though admittedly it's not like I've done the math or anything. On the surface, sure, earlier is probably better, but is it *that* much better?

It's tough to quantify, but if Civ taught me one thing, it's not to underestimate how much tempo can matter. Look at Great Stele, it's not a huge effect, but the timing of it makes it one of the most useful wonders. Greece gets a swathe of city states online at a pace which is tough to beat, and the bonuses are big... Plus they get to start putting their influence to other uses sooner...

 

[disjointaccount]

as a peaceful player

I think this is maybe the key difference in our playstyles here. War uses up a lot of influence. Buying war support, securing alliances ahead of the war and mending relationships afterwards (which is where trade with no other material benefit comes in), and then eating the influence penalties for occupying or razing cities. If you tend towards a more peaceful playstyle then you're probably nowhere near as hungry for influence lol

 

[disjointaccount]

It's tough to quantify, but if Civ taught me one thing, it's not to underestimate how much tempo can matter. Look at Great Stele, it's not a huge effect, but the timing of it makes it one of the most useful wonders. Greece gets a swathe of city states online at a pace which is tough to beat, and the bonuses are big... Plus they get to start putting their influence to other uses sooner...

Spot on; I think of Isabella as the prime example of this in 7. After turn 0, she's almost a blank leader (the Naval bonuses are at best a very minor help in exploration onwards, and you'll get one or two more cash injections from natural wonders early enough to matter if you're lucky). But that cash injection and the yields from the wonder alone make her an incredible pick because the tempo is just so strong.

 

[Leucarum]

Spot on; I think of Isabella as the prime example of this in 7. After turn 0, she's almost a blank leader (the Naval bonuses are at best a very minor help in exploration onwards, and you'll get one or two more cash injections from natural wonders early enough to matter if you're lucky). But that cash injection and the yields from the wonder alone make her an incredible pick because the tempo is just so strong.

You could also just reread the Carthage thread!

 

[disjointaccount]

You could also just reread the Carthage thread!

Whoops, am I rehashing discussions? (or worse, rehashing myself)

 

[bengalryan9]

I think this is maybe the key difference in our playstyles here. War uses up a lot of influence. Buying war support, securing alliances ahead of the war and mending relationships afterwards (which is where trade with no other material benefit comes in), and then eating the influence penalties for occupying or razing cities. If you tend towards a more peaceful playstyle then you're probably nowhere near as hungry for influence lol

I figured as much. I definitely can see how influence would be a lot more valuable to more aggressive players. It is definitely worth nothing that Greece's bonuses might not go as far for people who play like I do, though.

That's why we have these threads and discussions, it's worth pointing out that what might be great for one playstyle might be underwhelming for others.

 

[Sagax]

A lot of people disagreeing with me here, which I kind of expected, but I'm not sure anybody has really convinced me just yet.

I do that anyways, regardless of who I play as. As the game stands right now the AI just does not seem to care all that much about becoming suzerain to city states. Even without any type of discount to befriending city states I can generally become suzerain to every single city state on my continent (and in exploration and modern, the other continent as well), so I just don't think this is all that unique to Greece. The only way I don't become suzerain of a city state is if I haven't discovered them yet, and even then I find a lot of times that they are still independent by the time I finally do. Greece is very strong at something that - in the game currently - is really easy to do. That just feels pretty underwhelming to me.

I'm still just not all that impressed with their traditions, either. Strategoi is fine but you're only ever going to use it if you're fighting... if you're not doing that for a time, it does nothing for you. Xenia is good but all it does it speed up something that was going to happen for me anyways, AND I can get the same effect by spending two attribute points (and for those who say "why not take both?", I still say "why would I, I don't need to?"), AND once all the city states have been scooped up it does nothing for you. The two League traditions maybe save me, what, a turn or two of influence? There are plenty of other antiquity age traditions I'd rather have over all of these, personally.

If the AI eventually gets patched to actually care about city states then yes, I think Greece shines, but as it stands right now? I think it's a slight leg up in something I really don't need a leg up in. Everything in their kit fits well together and they are well designed, I'm just not convinced there is all that big of a need for the particular niche they fill (yet).

I guess it’s a matter of timing CS bonuses and coming online faster, rather than “you either can suze or you can’t”. Granted, the current AI doesn’t seem to be capable of squeezing the player in this regard, but I can see it being of more value in more competitive settings. Whether it’s a testament to the civ being underwhelming or the AI being the real issue, I’m not sure.

Also, some AI are very trigger-happy to kill off IPs, and being able to CS them a few turns easier helps prevent that (attacking at suzerained CS counts as war declaration against the suze and requires confirmation action). That being said, I do feel like AI became less aggressive on this front in recent patches - most of my observed IP-wipes were definitely from earlier playthroughs.

I do like to stockpile on influence, though, and enjoy being able to on-demand outrace AI for a contested IP, levy a CS ship without investing into navy myself, max out trade routes/endeavors for a relationship bump, or overwhelm enemies with war support. My influence engine is at its weakest in Antiquity, so Greece definitely helps with that.

 

[user746383]

Greece is one of my favorite immersion civs, probably for many others too. I mainly use their influence for war support to attack AIs so their kit is a bit of a mixed bag for me, but still super fun and thematic to play with your hoplites running around in groups.

 

[Calcifer]

A quick tip that I didn’t see mentioned: you can slot the Xenia tradition, spend a bunch of influence on IP, then remove the tradition the same turn and put another policy in its place. Same goes for Delian/Peloponnesian League. This makes those traditions slightly better since they don’t have the opportunity cost of using up a policy slot.

 

[sixty4half]

Slightly... maybe. In order to take advantage of that you have to hoard influence until your next celebration. For some Leaders that may be less of a problem but then your running into an opportunity cost problem.

Also, I doubt the devs intended for that. Could be a bug. I know that +1 movement cards dont take effect until the next turn so maybe that's how they intended all cards to work, idk

 

[marius_kaparius]

I love this iteration of Greece. Rough terrain starts and nice looking cities with the unique district. Hoplites look epic too.

 

[javier51]

I'm testing a Greece/Himko Chamana/Extended Eras game. The idea is to get as many Diplomatic attribute points as possible, reaching the end of the culture tree to do so. Something similar would have also been possible with the Scientific Persona, but I think the Cultural one also provides other synergies. For the Age of Exploration, I hope to have the 3% increase in all yields per alliance working from the begining. The goal would be to have about four alliances and the attribute point repeated about four times; this would give almost a 50% increase in yields, ideally in the first part of the Age of Exploration. I'm supported by the Diplomatic Memento, of course, and the two legacy ones you can take at the beginning of the era.

In practice, I had to completely eliminate an opponent to get the Military Legacy points, so the Antiquity Age was shortened considerably. But the alternative would have affected the relationships, so I need to try to maximize the friendly ones for the next era. I haven't had much luck with the city-states either, all except one hostile and none scientific. I only ended up with two scientific legacy points, but I don't think it's that important. Now I think I'll go with the Shawnee to continue with the diplomatic points. Maybe I will have a 3x3x3 increase in yiedls instead of 3x4x4, but enough for me to try new things.

By the way, hub towns can't be selected until the Age of Exploration, so Greece is strong for maximizing the influence in the Antiquity, even if you go down this other route later.

Edit: after finishing the game I'll add a few clarifications here. Repeating the diplomatic attribute points with the 3% increase in yields is easier than I thought, and by the end of the Age of Exploration, I was at six, so I moved on to the cultural section, where I also completed the entire tree. All of this is largely thanks to the wild cards you get upon completing the culture branch. However, the other leg, gaining allies, is really difficult, and I only had one throughout the entire game. I thought it would just be a matter of spending influence on endeavors, but the leader's agenda and nearby settlements (which they put on your side) really make everything difficult. That's not even mentioning the drawbacks, such as getting into unwanted wars. In any case, I think the strategy is still more than acceptable (my first cultural victory below turn 50 in standard speed). If I were to try something similar again, I would just change the map to Pangea with the goal of two allies.