Civ Tiers

[Invisible Rhino]

Overall ranking (i.e. not just a certain type of map or certain style of play) as compiled from the reviews of Ision, Zarnaar, scoutscout, and Keirador. So I would regard these as the "official" ranks so far. I just thought it would be nice to have this in one place.

1ST TIER :

Babylonians, Dutch, Greeks, Icans, Ottomans, Persians,

2ND TIER :

Americans, Aztecs, Byzantines, Celts, Chinese, Egyptians, Germans, Sumerians,

3RD TIER :

Hittites, Indians, Koreans, Mongols, Romans, Portuguese

NOT REVIEWED :

Arabs, Carthaginians, French, Iroquois, Japanese, Mayans, Russians, Scandinavians, Spanish, Zulus.

REVIEWED, BUT NO OVERALL RANK GIVEN :

English.

 

[Own]

Good list, it's good to be able to see all his reviews in a "big picture."

 

[DaveMcW]

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=87014

 

[Doc Tsiolkovski]

That list makes no sense, being a mixtue of vanilla, PtW and C3C rankings.
Nobody with half a brain would list Babylon as first tier in C3C. And IND isn't worth much in C3C as well.

 

[Invisible Rhino]

Okay thaks DaveMcW I thought I had seen that somewhere.

 

[Zardnaar]

That list makes no sense, being a mixtue of vanilla, PtW and C3C rankings.
Nobody with half a brain would list Babylon as first tier in C3C. And IND isn't worth much in C3C as well.

I think Babylon would be near the bottom of the 1st tier. Its better than most/all of the 2nd tier Civs on Isions list. Its a great builder civ and decent at war. A bit weaker on the higher levels because it doesn't start with alphabet.

 

[Ansar]

I think Babylon would be near the bottom of the 1st tier. Its better than most/all of the 2nd tier Civs on Isions list. Its a great builder civ and decent at war. A bit weaker on the higher levels because it doesn't start with alphabet.

So, Commercial civs are ALSO good becaause they start with Alphabet?

 

[Tomoyo]

No one with half a brain would put Sumerians on the second tier either...

 

[Zardnaar]

No one with half a brain would put Sumerians on the second tier either...

I reviewed them and I made a mistake by rating them 2nd tier. I over emphasised(sp?) their few negatives IMHO.

 

[Doc Tsiolkovski]

Personnal preferences aside:
(For C3C)

Traits:
Strong: AGR, COM; SEA*
Fine: IND, SCI; EXP*
Weak: REL, MIL

*=on suitable maps only.

UUs:
The Bowman for sure is one of weakest...

Starting techs:
Order of usefulness:
Alpha - Pottery - Masonry - The Wheel* - Warrior Code - Bronze Working - Ceremonial Burial

*=Trade fodder.
Now, as long as you start with either Alpha, Masonry or Wheel, it's ok; you have something valuable to trade.
Pottery allows for the immediate Granary, and Warrior Code for other means to obtain techs.
Bronze allows for the Colossus, and heading to Iron.
-----------
Bottom line:
While Babylon gains a bonus for the cultural victory synergy, it undoublty starts with only the 2 worst techs, has a bad UU, and no really good trait - a low second tier up to midlevel, a third tier for the harder ones.

And, the culture issue is also worth less in C3C:
100k strategies often use the ToA, or Feudalism/Whipping. ToA works for everyone, Feud a lot better with Celts.
20k almost requires REL or SCI, admittedly. But, Spain, Celts or Arabs and Byzantium, Sumeria and Russia are all way better.

[shameless plug]I also may point here: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=104658
[/shameless plug]

 

[Shujaa]

Why is Military weak in C3C? Cheaper barracks and high promotion rate...

 

[Doc Tsiolkovski]

No trait (except for EXP on tiny 80% water islands...) is "weak".

But, the other traits are stronger.

And cheap barracks can hardly compete with +1fpt, faster Workers, +25%OCN, +1 commerce per town right from start, a free Settler in turn 3, +1 Sea Movement, half-priced Aquaducts/Libraries, higher chance for SGLs, a free tech at start of age.

Now, if MIL would have a higher chance for MGL, it would be different...but elites are abundant anyway on the higher levels.

 

[Ansar]

Dutch is first tier? I didnt think they were good.

 

[Own]

Japan has the worst traits, but they make a good combo. The only improvements I build before war are temples (on demigod above) to avoid flips and barracks for obvious reasons. Both are cheaper.

 

[Whomp]

Dutch is first tier? I didnt think they were good.

1st, food does not corrupt.
The Ag/Sea are awesome traits especially on an arch map. Their UU is timed perfectly for a republic GA. SM's are 30s vs. 60s for muskets. With no salt requirement.

IMHO Iroquois is the best civ. They are simply overpowering with their combo of Ag/Com traits . Their UU is awesome. You can crank a lot of MW's at 30s vs. knights (needs iron) at 70s. As DocT has said 70s is a very awkward number at that stage of the game. As well, it can time a GA because they don't have to be used until after you become a republic.

 

[Zardnaar]

The Iro would be a good candidate for best civ.

 

[Tomoyo]

I think the Iroquois are the best civ as well. The best traits, the best starting techs, a wonderful UU.

The AI sucks with the Iroquois because the AI doesn't look at movement when deciding what to build, so the AI Iroquois rarely builds Mounted Warriors.

To me, though, the Dutch are a close second. I don't need to say anything for Agricultural, since it's the best. Seafaring is almost as good as Commercial, and much more fun. Seafaring is wonderful for contacts. The UU gives you a perfectly timed golden age, too.

 

[Tone]

I maintain that there is no 'best civ'. Most of the civs are worth playing in specific circumstances and some of those not in the first tier will rule the roost on specific types of maps. There is a great deal of subjectivity in the rankings and so much depends upon the game set-up and the victory condition that you are going for. I would urge anyone to look deeper into Ision's reviews than just what tier they are in as the full reviews reflects the richness of the game. You only need to read the other posts in this thread to see how much people differ in their opinions of different civs. I'll openly admit that I have my favourites but I also say that you should try each and every one of them a few times at least. Variety is the spice of life after all.

 

[Tomoyo]

I would like to say something that I just thought of:

People who have been around CFC for a while always use indirect statements or the subjunctive to express the rankings of civs.

 

[Doc Tsiolkovski]

I still can agree with the Iroquis and Dutch being the strongest Civs for the human in the game. You can for sure win with other Civs as well, and for some scenarios other Civs may indeed by stronger (AW, Space, HoF, and especially culture victories) - but it's pretty safe to say that with Iro/Dutch a victory would have been even easier...

Personnally, Iros are not a favorite of mine; I prefer several SEA Civs, France and Sumeria before.