Civ/leader discussions

Lord Parkin

aka emperor
Joined
Apr 27, 2004
Messages
6,374
Location
New Zealand
At present, we don't know for sure whether we'll be controlling two civs or one in this game (refer to the discussion on "double civs" - there'll be a team vote soon which will decide this either way). But still, it's good to get started on discussing what civs/leaders we'd like to play with. So fire away with your suggestions! :)

By the way, the way that we will run the selection of our civs/leaders (once we find out whether it's a "double civ" game or not) is as follows:

1. We discuss here to see which civs/leaders are preferred by which people. Everyone is welcome to share their opinion!

2. All of the civs/leaders which are nominated in this thread (or any others), no matter if it's many people pushing for them or just one person, will be put forward to a voting thread. I expect there may be 10-15 choices in this poll, but that's fine. Everyone will be able to vote on which civs/leaders are their favourites, and everyone can vote on as many or as few of these 10-15 choices as they like.

3. The 2-6 top civ/leader choices (dependent on how many ties and such there are), as revealed from the poll in the above step, will be put forward to the next round of voting as we narrow down our leader choice.

4. If necessary, if there is a strong competition between two civs/leaders (or two civ/leader combinations, as in the case of a "double civ" setup), then we will have a final poll between the top 2 options, to finally decide our civ/leader choice.

Anyway, have fun discussing things! I'll post my own thoughts on civs/leaders soon in this thread. :)
 
Personally, my tendency leads towards picking someone with the Financial trait, since it's so overpowered in Civ4. Maybe it's a bit predictable (and perhaps boring) for some, but there's no denying the all-around usefulness of being Financial. There's no map on which this trait doesn't work its magic - it's really a great thing to have regardless of your situation.

Besides, many of the other teams are likely to pick Financial leaders themselves, so if we don't pick a leader with the Financial trait then we'll automatically be at a disadvantage - especially if tech trading ends up being off. (And if tech trading is voted off, I would 100% lobby for a Financial leader, or else we'll almost certainly find ourselves backward during the mid game.) The only reason I wouldn't be worried about avoiding the Financial trait would be if we knew none of the other teams would be Financial. But as it is, it's pretty important to pick a Financial leader, in my opinion. ;)

So, who are the Financial leaders?

Darius
Other Trait: Organized - decent economic civic, plus good building bonuses spread out across the game (Lighthouse, Courthouse, Factory)
UU: Immortal (Chariot) - slim possibility of rushing a neighbour, although unlikely since we will probably be spread out on the map... but still handy for battling barbs
UB: Apothecary (Grocer) - additional 2 health, not bad but not great

Elizabeth
Other Trait: Philosophical - useful to have, allows our first great people to be available earlier
UU: Redcoat (Rifleman) - not bad but comes pretty late... it was much better before it was nerfed in BTS
UB: Stock Exchange (Bank) - a nice little bonus, but it comes pretty late in the game

Hannibal
Other Trait: Charismatic - effectively 2 extra happiness per city in the early game once we get Monuments up, fairly good especially if the happiness resources are not plentiful... also the lower XP thresholds should not be underestimated, they can prove extremely useful
UU: Numidian Cavalry (Horse Archer) - awkward to enable (Horseback Riding is a dead-end tech), and not really very powerful against an opponent with Spearmen (probably everyone)... useful for home territory defence, but not good for taking cities
UB: Cothon (Harbor) - adds an extra trade route at the cost of more hammers to build, alright but not great

Huayna Capac
Other Trait: Industrious - bonus production on wonders, extremely useful in the early game, especially if stone and marble are not plentiful on the map (which they often aren't), slightly less useful as the game progresses
UU: Quecha (Warrior) - will never be a factor in any war, but still useful in the early game against barbarians... plus very useful for military police as they don't obsolete until Macemen become available
UB: Terrace (Granary) - a very useful unique building, we won't need to worry about building Monuments in most (if not all) cities

Mansa Musa
Other Trait: Spiritual - very handy for those quick civic switches in war and peacetime, although slightly less powerful as Golden Ages also allow anarchy-free civic changes since BTS
UU: Skirmisher (Archer) - quite powerful, and should remove a lot of barbarian hassles as well as deterring any neighbours from attacking us early on
UB: Mint (Forge) - although it's only a +10% gold bonus, you want Forges in every city anyway so this is actually quite a useful bonus

Pacal II
Other Trait: Expansive - slightly faster Worker builds are useful, and extra health is sometimes useful, but the cheaper Granaries are very handy
UU: Holkan (Spearman) - not really much use at all in a game like this, where we are almost certain to be able to find Copper or Iron somewhere in our vicinity, and distances will be too large for people to rush us early on
UB: Ball Court (Colosseum) - bonus +2 happiness, bringing it to 3 happiness and making it a very powerful unique building, perhaps one of the best

Ragnar
Other Trait: Aggressive - handy in a war, and goes well with his unique unit, but we will not be making use of this trait until well into the game (except against barbs)
UU: Beserker (Maceman) - very decent... Macemen are typically the backbone of a mid-game army, so it's nice to have further bonuses applied to them (+10% city attack, Amphibious)
UB: Trading Post (Lighthouse) - a building that we'll want anyway in all our coastal cities... plus the extra movement point for naval units is rather useful, and if we manage to circumnavigate the globe as well it makes us tremendously powerful at sea

Victoria
Other Trait: Imperialistic - the Great General bonus is fairly mediocre, but the production bonus to Settlers is actually very powerful, especially in the early game
UU: Redcoat (Rifleman) - see above: not bad but comes pretty late... it was much better before it was nerfed in BTS
UB: Stock Exchange (Bank) - see above: a nice little bonus, but it comes pretty late in the game

Wang Kon
Other Trait: Protective - weakest trait in the game, not really very useful in multiplayer
UU: Hwacha (Catapult) - packs a powerful punch with its +50% vs. melee units
UB: Seowon (University) - an extra +10% more research, not bad but comes quite late

William Van Oranje
Other Trait: Creative - very handy in the early game since we don't have to worry about Monuments or Stonehenge; we're freer to place cities in their optimal locations right from the start... also the bonus production for Libraries is very useful
UU: East Indiaman (Galleon) - quite useful, especially if we manage to get to Astronomy first... the extra strength isn't a huge factor, but the ability to carry an extra unit is quite nice, as well as the ability to enter rival borders without Open Borders
UB: Dike (Levee) - incredibly powerful, arguably even overpowered: +1 production not only from rivers but from coastal tiles and lakes too, and it's able to be built in any city bordering a river, coast, or lake... only downside is it comes quite late in the game
 
If double civs, I'd be thinking something with free promotions, agg/pro and some sort of rex trait (exp/imp), along with a civ focused on economy.

UUs and UBs are less important than having a good spread of traits and starting techs IMO.

I can't think of anyone better than Shaka as the less economically focused civ in such a game.



However, if it's single civ, I'm a fan of the Creative and Spiritual traits in particular.
 
For a double civ game, I'd almost certainly recommend having one of the leaders with the Industrious trait, as our wonder builder. Certainly having one economically orientated civ and one militarily orientated civ is a good idea. In this respect something like a Darius/Augustus pairing is downright awesome (the same pairing as in my game with Sisiutil, by the way)... one extremely economic civ with a decent UU, and one very powerful military civ (Praetorians are the best UU in the game as long as you have Iron). You also net a full set of 4 starting techs with this pairing, as well as grabbing the Industrious trait (as mentioned above, it's handy to have for one civ), and the Imperialistic trait (so one civ can potentially build most of the Settlers for both civs at a much cheaper cost).

There are other similarly powerful combinations out there as well. But I think the general idea of getting one economic civ and one military one, ideally with the Industrious trait in there somewhere and a full set of 4 starting techs, is a good one.

It's also worth mentioning that having one leader with either or both of the Expansive and Organized traits is very nice, since you can switch cities between the civs and build certain buildings at double speed (e.g. Granaries or Lighthouses).
 
Huayna/Shaka sounds like my kind of team :)

Personally if we are having one financial leader I would much prefer to have willem/darius, but then again I am no multiplayer genius ;)
 
Eh, I've never been a big fan of industrious. It's nice to have, but I'd rather almost every other trait.
Depends on the map a bit... if stone and marble are plentiful then Industrious is not so useful, but if they're not (which is more likely), it comes in quite handy. It gives us a much better chance of grabbing powerful early-game wonders like the Pyramids, Great Lighthouse, and Great Library, especially if the other teams don't pick Industrious civs. (And in the last game, nobody picked an Industrious civ, and there wasn't any stone or marble on the map so it would have been an incredibly useful trait to have.)

Not that the other traits aren't good too though - I'm by no means saying Industrious is the be-all and end-all. :)
 
Personally if we are having one financial leader I would much prefer to have willem/darius, but then again I am no multiplayer genius ;)
That would certainly be probably the most powerful research combination you could have. Very potent indeed. The only downside is you miss out on one potential starting tech (only 3 instead of a possible 4). But still, it combines two of my personal favourite leaders in the game - not at all bad. ;)
 
I would be voting for Financial as top trait. With Williem as top vote for leader and Elizabeth as second. I do like the idea for picking a good financial leader and one of the warlord ones to hAve both an science and military focus.
 
Big map? And enough water?
Big and water - Orange and Darius.
Big and little water - Shaka and Darius.
Not big and water - Orange and Gandhi.
Not big and little water - Shaka and Gandhi.
 
Our civ/leader choice will certainly be tied to the map type, but we'll be able to see the final results of the map type discussion before we have to finalize our civ/leader.

Certainly Willem is probably my top pick for a map with a decent amount of water. Darius is also a fond favourite of mine, although my team used that leader in the last game so it might be nice for a change. I also like Ragnar if there's a decent amount of water (although Willem probably edges him out as being better overall), and Elizabeth would be an interesting pick too. Victoria is also a possibility, mainly because building Settlers faster is such a big boost in the early game.
 
Huayna/Shaka sounds like my kind of team :)

Personally if we are having one financial leader I would much prefer to have willem/darius, but then again I am no multiplayer genius ;)

The only downside, and it's a pretty big one IMO, is that Huayna starts with Mysticism. I'd much rather having Mansa (wheel instead of myst) or Hannibal (fish instead of myst) just for the better techs. (also I rate cha and spi higher than ind)
 
Mysticism isn't that bad... it allows us a better shot at an early religion if we want one (handy for happiness), and a quicker route to Stonehenge/Oracle if we want either of those wonders. Slightly quicker to Monarchy too, which is always useful.

Not that I'm disagreeing that key Worker/Work Boat techs like The Wheel and Fishing aren't great, just that I think you're underplaying Mysticism a bit. ;)
 
So we may actually go for Buddy or Hindi?
 
It would certainly be worth considering going for Buddhism or Hinduism if we start with Mysticism, especially if no-one else does. Having a guaranteed holy city - not to mention a free +1 happy in all cities and later +25% production on all buildings - is very valuable. Especially if this game is anything like the last one, where the distances between civs were so large that religions took a very long time to spread - effectively meaning that if you didn't found one, you didn't get one until quite late in the game.

Of course, the cost of going for an early religion is that with some starts, your Workers can end up with not much to do for a few turns, or you can lack Work Boats for a little longer than you'd like. It's a slight trade off, but as long as you don't get carried away and try to found 2-3 of the early religions, it's not that bad.
 
I'd rather the worker techs. Compared to having an early religion, CRE gives better border expansions, CHA gives better happiness. I would be surprised if we have a game where we don't have at least one camp/mine happy resource nearby.
 
Right, but the bonus happiness of the religion stacks on top of any trait benefits. And as you can pretty much never have too much happiness in the early game, I don't see it as a bad thing to get an early religion. Of course, it depends on the circumstances... if we're not the only civ starting with Mysticism, or if we have a very powerful start, or expect to get to Code of Laws or Monarchy very early, then an early religion is not so important.
 
Lincoln for running us lots of specialists with the increased happiness.
Augustus for making wonders (for lincoln), making settlers, and of course making praetorians, which again lincoln can promote easily :)

It would lose a starting tech though (double fishing).
 
Augustus for making wonders (for lincoln), making settlers, and of course making praetorians, which again lincoln can promote easily :)
Actually, this is no longer the case with BTS. The ability to abuse having a Charismatic/Aggressive/Protective civ on your team by gifting around your units and getting maximum free promotions no longer exists. When you gift a unit from a non-Charismatic to a Charismatic civ, it loses experience, so your proposition with switching the Praetorians between civs will not work. Just thought I'd let you know. ;)

I like hannibal although his UU and UB are hardly the greatest
Exactly... so he's not a great pick with regular civs/leaders, but with unrestricted leaders he's an awesome pick (see the unrestricted leaders thread). :)
 
Back
Top Bottom