Civilization elimination thread

[whyidie]

Will have to stop the random rolls and play specifically with these Civs as interestingly enough the finalists are amongst the least playeds CiVs for me.

Arabia - Once
Babylon - Once
China - 0
Inca - Once
Korea - 0
Maya - Once (111 turn defeat)
Persia - Three times
Siam - Two times

 

[Dogmouth]

Like I said, Inca are a good civ, but they are well-rounded, meaning they'll do a bit better than average for every victory condition, but aren't going to really shine in any victory condition over civs better suited to those victories.

The fact that they aren't geared towards a single victory condition is one reason why I love them. I don't like starting a game with a single victory condition in mind. The game is much more exciting if you play based on the circumstances rather than preordained goal.

edit: Also, the UA's road maintenence aspect saves more than just a few gold. The savings are very significant. It also changes the way you build roads and select city sites. If you continue only building 4 roads between cities, you're doing it wrong. You should be building highways for strategic reasons when you have worker downtime. And you should be more flexible on city distance than you are with our civs.

 

[woodshadows]

The fact that they aren't geared towards a single victory condition is one reason why I love them. I don't like starting a game with a single victory condition in mind. The game is much more exciting if you play based on the circumstances rather than preordained goal.

edit: Also, the UA's road maintenence aspect saves more than just a few gold. The savings are very significant. It also changes the way you build roads and select city sites. If you continue only building 4 roads between cities, you're doing it wrong. You should be building highways for strategic reasons when you have worker downtime. And you should be more flexible on city distance than you are with our civs.

I've only played Inca a few times but I do often take commerce tree with the policy for 50% savings on roads and railroads and even with a sprawling empire I find the savings very insignificant, often in the range of 6 gold or so, so I'd assume the Incan savings wouldn't be much more than that, which isn't bad but doesn't really compare to 240 gold per lux every 30 turns, from Arabia or the Dutch.

I often build strategic roads as it is, at least by late medieval or so, which coincides with when my economy can support them and when I either have a lot of workers or worker downtime. I'd still take the Iroquois forest-roads though which require no build-time, are available from the start of the game and are generally spread out all over already, forming effective strategic networks, with maybe a gap or two that are easily filled with a single road tile.

When I play Inca i find myself feeling like I'm playing a very bland agricultural civ or something, like they just want to stay at home farming their terraces, not really teching ahead of anyone or becoming richer than anyone, with a mediocre military that likes to run from combat and often sheltering behind a great wall of mountains in isolation, which the AI is too stupid to get to you around.

 

[Crafty Bison]

I've only played Inca a few times but I do often take commerce tree with the policy for 50% savings on roads and railroads and even with a sprawling empire I find the savings very insignificant, often in the range of 6 gold or so, so I'd assume the Incan savings wouldn't be much more than that, which isn't bad but doesn't really compare to 240 gold per lux every 30 turns, from Arabia or the Dutch.

I often build strategic roads as it is, at least by late medieval or so, which coincides with when my economy can support them and when I either have a lot of workers or worker downtime. I'd still take the Iroquois forest-roads though which require no build-time, are available from the start of the game and are generally spread out all over already, forming effective strategic networks, with maybe a gap or two that are easily filled with a single road tile.

When I play Inca i find myself feeling like I'm playing a very bland agricultural civ or something, like they just want to stay at home farming their terraces, not really teching ahead of anyone or becoming richer than anyone, with a mediocre military that likes to run from combat and often sheltering behind a great wall of mountains in isolation, which the AI is too stupid to get to you around.

I don't really like the Inca at this point in the poll, but think the trade routes is fairly strong as half of a UA. Firstly it's a double bonus on hills, which are likely from the start bias - secondly, if you're only getting 6 gpt bonus, expand more and further. Lastly, 6 gpt is comparable to 240 every 30 turns, it's 75% of it and not dependant on other civs. Also the dutch lose 2 hapiness from their trade (3 with the patronage SP).

 

[cman2010]

Arabia 16
Babylon 18
China 20
Inca 38
Korea 28
Maya 13
Persia 18
Siam 9


maya DV dont like there UA, Persia GA Rock

 

[ANeMiA GRaViS]

Arabia 16
Babylon 18
China 21 +1
Inca 36 -2
Korea 28
Maya 13
Persia 18
Siam 9

I hate Inca .... i mean i liked them in Civ 4 BTS but here they just go on my nerves ... ..... China ftw .... war. ....

 

[Dogmouth]

I don't really like the Inca at this point in the poll, but think the trade routes is fairly strong as half of a UA. Firstly it's a double bonus on hills, which are likely from the start bias - secondly, if you're only getting 6 gpt bonus, expand more and further. Lastly, 6 gpt is comparable to 240 every 30 turns, it's 75% of it and not dependant on other civs. Also the dutch lose 2 hapiness from their trade (3 with the patronage SP).

Anyway, I can't imagine only getting 6 gpt. If you only have four cities, you should be getting much more than that assuming you're near hills (it would be very strange if you weren't near hills given their starting bias). I typically have 4-8 cities and at least as many puppets. My total road savings are usually in the neighborhod of 60-80 gpt pre-railroad and much more post-railroad. 6 is only reasonable in the early game.

The Iroquois road savings are great, but they usually don't apply to puppets and conquered cities and they absolutely don't apply to railroads. The hill movement bonus aspect of the Incan UA also applies offensively (this is, in fact, one of its best feature). It's hard to overstate the benefit of being able to move onto a hill and shoot a ranged weapon in the same turn. It's also hard to overstate the benefit of having cavalry that can charge through hills.

 

[Bandersnatching]

Arabia 16
Babylon 18
China 22
Inca 34 -2 = 32
Korea 28
Maya 13 +1 = 14
Persia 18
Siam 9
Wow, I came in on this thread late. Too bad.
Inca: I don't hate the Inca, and have some fun playing with them, but that lead is just ridiculous. And also they can be quite boring to play as, due to them mainly being about hill tiles. So distinctive.
Maya: I love playing as the Maya because their playstyle is so refreshing to me. I don't usually REX, but when I do, it's because I'm playing Maya (and also drinking Dos Equis). A mixed REX/Religion/Theology rush is something that I particularly enjoy.

 

[woodshadows]

I don't really like the Inca at this point in the poll, but think the trade routes is fairly strong as half of a UA. Firstly it's a double bonus on hills, which are likely from the start bias - secondly, if you're only getting 6 gpt bonus, expand more and further. Lastly, 6 gpt is comparable to 240 every 30 turns, it's 75% of it and not dependant on other civs. Also the dutch lose 2 hapiness from their trade (3 with the patronage SP).

I play standard maps and by the time I get the commerce policy I have at least 9 cities or so, depending on the game of course - mostly puppeted cities and that 6 gold per turn is the 50% savings off road maintenance, which is to say road maintenance isn't very significant to begin with so half off roads and free roads on hills seems like some spare change and that's about it. That 240 gold every 30 turns is just for one trade, if I'm Arabia or Netherlands and have my standard four city start laid out I am generally trading at least 6 or more lux every 30 turns = $$$$$$. It is dependent on other civs and loses steam as the game progresses and I piss people off/conquer people but early on you can basically buy all the food/production/science buildings in your cities to ensure a great snowball effect in your favour.

 

[Lord Kid]

Roads are only part of the savings. Any improvement built on hills is free, and any improvement elsewhere is half price. This is huge, especially in the early game where funds are not so prevalent. Couple that with free movement in hills for ALL units regardless of borders, it really makes exploration and expansion a breeze. Having my range units being able to move onto a hill and fire at the same time is beautiful. Plus if you have a city with a bunch of hills is like having a free Great Wall, because it slows down the advance of enemy units. And the Terrace Farm allows them to excel in any terrain (minus snow/ice of course). Tundra and desert which would cripple other civs is not an issue for them, provided there are hills of course.

Iroquois rely far too heavily on there being forests, which can be removed easily enough to deny the Mohawk their advantage. If anything, the Iroquois are more of a stay-at-home-turtle civ to me because their UA only works in their own borders. Granted, this is also useful for icsing/rexing, which the AI is known to do, but I really feel they are vastly limited when compared to the Inca.

 

[woodshadows]

Anyway, I can't imagine only getting 6 gpt. If you only have four cities, you should be getting much more than that assuming you're near hills (it would be very strange if you weren't near hills given their starting bias). I typically have 4-8 cities and at least as many puppets. My total road savings are usually in the neighborhod of 60-80 gpt pre-railroad and much more post-railroad. 6 is only reasonable in the early game.

The Iroquois road savings are great, but they usually don't apply to puppets and conquered cities and they absolutely don't apply to railroads. The hill movement bonus aspect of the Incan UA also applies offensively (this is, in fact, one of its best feature). It's hard to overstate the benefit of being able to move onto a hill and shoot a ranged weapon in the same turn. It's also hard to overstate the benefit of having cavalry that can charge through hills.

I probably didn't word things well, what I mean is when I play a standard civ and have around 8 - 10 cities and then pop the commerce tree policy which reduces road maintenance by 50% I only notice a 6 - 10 gpt savings. So what this tells me is that if I were to play the Incas and even given perfect circumstances where I could build every single road on hills I would only be seeing a 12 - 20 gpt savings, or more likely less than that since I'll have to build at least some roads on normal terrain and only get a 50% savings on them. That's incredible savings that you mention, 60 - 80gpt?? Maybe you play much larger maps than me, or have more cities at that stage in the game. If I saw 60 - 80gpt savings with the Incas I would indeed rate them higher, though I still am skeptical about that number, even in the biggest sprawling puppet empires I've had, which span 20+ cities when I look at my gold icon it says road maintenance is pretty minimal for expenses compared to everything else in my empire.

I have had a lot of fun with the Incan hill movement on the offense, but I wouldnt place Incans as a powerhouse domination civ like a keshik rush or camel archer rush, or landsknecht spam, or any of the other really great domination civs. Basically it's a little help like the Songhai or American free promos.

 

[woodshadows]

Roads are only part of the savings. Any improvement built on hills is free, and any improvement elsewhere is half price.

I wasn't aware improvements cost anything, other than roads/railroads/forts. Interesting..

Edit: according to this http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=417309 - it's just roads/railroads.. though I'm pretty sure forts also have a gpt cost as well.

 

[Gali]

Commerce roade bonus is 33% off not 50% and incan bonus is more than 50 if you count in free hill roads. Beyond just straight savings you can road any and all hills for free giving your workers something to do and with hill bonus you're very mobile. Its not that they're uber powerul its that they are UNIQUE and allow you to look at the map and settle in a different way.

 

[woodshadows]

Commerce roade bonus is 33% off not 50% and incan bonus is more than 50 if you count in free hill roads. Beyond just straight savings you can road any and all hills for free giving your workers something to do and with hill bonus you're very mobile. Its not that they're uber powerul its that they are UNIQUE and allow you to look at the map and settle in a different way.

shows how closely i read policies, i always took it as 50%, probably because the whole right side of commerce is so underwhelming i never pay much attention, i just beeline to that sweet sweet protectionism. ill have to give inca another try next time i play, i havent had a chance to play them since G&K, maybe the better promotion line for the slingers will make a difference, or the terrace farms now getting the benefit of the later techs. if they hide me behind a mountain range though i'm going to quit in frustration - most boring games ever.

 

[Awsome Sause]

Arabia 16
Babylon 16
China 22
Inca 32
Korea 28
Maya 15
Persia 18
Siam 9

Maya: My favorite Civ for going extremely wide! They can generate a large Science lead with pyramids and messenger of the gods pantheon, and there UA supplements great people they will not be getting because of going so wide.

Babylon: A good Civ, But with a UU and UB that are kind of lacking, all this Civ really has going for it is its UA.

 

[PhilBowles]

Wow, I couldn't disagree more with your interpretation of things. I think the civ developers wanted to balance difficulty levels and this is why they intentionally programmed ai's to over-value luxuries they often don't need. I would also hypothesise that the AI is provided such a load of GPT in order to deal with setbacks and quickly get back in the game, while not being overpowering by being allowed to use loads of gold per turn, this is why you'll often see a runaway with 100,000gold by late game and you're thinking "why doesn't genghis just buy a gazillion units and destroy me?"

Making the AI overvalue luxuries is built-in to give the human player a means of surviving on Immortal/Deity, I don't know anyone who doesn't take advantage of this,

I never take advantage of it and I can win Immortal and fairly reliably survive Deity (although I've yet to win a Deity game). Gold-for-lux is a crutch; people can't imagine other ways to win because they rely on winning that way. It may be significant that as my play got better, I stopped making even the marginal use of the gold-for-lux trades I did use - which were mostly to rush-buy garrisons, or occasionally to fund a research agreement.

It's also struck me that many of the same people who use this approach then turn around and complain the game is too easy; sometimes to the point of suggesting nerfs to the gold-for-lux trading to make the game more challenging. These players also often see diplomacy and city-states as irrelevant, when they're critical to both survival and victory at these levels without lux-for-gold trading.

Saying selling luxuries for gold is an exploit or 'lazy' is like saying playing almost any civ is 'lazy' in that they provide free benefits of some variety - free improvement maintenance Incas, free great people Maya, etc,

Most civ benefits, even passive UAs, rely on some work to use to best effect. Free improvements are only valuable once you've founded multiple cities, and trade route value increases with the size of your cities, rewarding growth. Maya GPs - as tirelessly pointed out here - increase later GP costs and so selecting and using them effectively is important to prevent a net drawback. etc. etc.

or rely on 'exploiting' 'bad programming' - janissaries healing on kill the AI is programmed poorly to preserve troops properly to avoid this happening, the AI is programmed poorly in combat dynamics giving <insert every UU in the game> a cheap easy advantage to exploit this weakness.

The Janissary is a decent unit that becomes better because the AI is badly-programmed - ditto most other UUs. This is not the case with the Bazaar bonus, which doesn't work at all if the AI is programmed to place a more reasonable value on luxuries. AIs never suffer from unhappiness (because they can't use their happiness bonuses effectively either), so should never have an incentive to pay for luxuries except for We Love the King or city-state quests. Play Janissaries against a human, and they don't become useless. Use a Bazaar in a game with only human players, and it does.

 

[duhu]

Wow I must really be different, other than Babylon and Persia, these are prob some of my least favorite civs.

Arabia 16
Babylon 16
China 22
Inca 30
Korea 28
Maya 15
Persia 19
Siam 9

Inca have a useless UU. Persia gets a 50% longer Golden age, an attack boost during that longer golden age, arguably the best Spearmen in the game (Immortal- 2x attack versus mounted units, heals twice as fast), and an upgraded version of the bank which increases happiness, making Golden Ages easier to achieve and Domination easier.

 

[woodshadows]

Play Janissaries against a human, and they don't become useless. Use a Bazaar in a game with only human players, and it does.

I don't play multi-player but I can imagine the bazaar would be significantly less useful, though not entirely useless since I would assume people still do need to trade lux's with eachother to maintain happiness. I'd still choose Arabia over a lot of other civs though for those great camel archers. As to whether it's "cheap" or an "exploit" to sell lux to the AI for gold, I just don't see how using a mechanic that was obviously intentionally programmed into the game is somehow 'cheating', if it were I am pretty sure they would have nerfed it after all this time, instead they added a whole other civ which is based upon taking advantage of it - Dutch. Also as I said before, the AI is basically in perma-cheat mode at Immortal/Deity level, with enormous bonus which the human player doesn't see, clearly the programmers decided to help balance things a bit by forcing mandatory purchasing of lux upon the AI and as to whether it makes the game too easy, I doubt most people are beating Deity and few are beating Immortal without it (unless choosing the top civs to play). I win about 75% of my Immortal games and I rely upon trade to provide a bit of a leg up against the AI who can plant their second city before I'm anywhere close to my first settler and who decide that my army score is the lowest of every civ and so all decide to rush me in succession with large armies of warriors/jaguars/archers/spearmen which I have to fight off while simultaneously trying to develop my science and economy, etc etc etc. Plus unless you're Arabia or to a lesser extent Dutch, selling lux for gold is often just selling happiness/golden ages for instant gold, since if you're not trading your second lux for another lux you don't have, or you're selling a lux which you only have one copy of, you're just decreasing your golden ages/possibly growth if not planned right. I think we'll just have to agree to disagree.

 

[Tabarnak]

Arabia 16
Babylon 17
China 22
Inca 30
Korea 26
Maya 15
Persia 19
Siam 9

Babylon : It gets my vote because of his free gs. What a nice boost to achieve any early goals wanted.

Korea : Inferior civ compared to Babylon. Nice bonuses but too late to make a real difference for the entire result.

 

[Furycrab]

Arabia 16
Babylon 17
China 22
Inca 30
Korea 27 (+1)
Maya 15
Persia 19
Siam 7 (-2)


Korea is easily one of my favorites for one of the best UAs that is flexible to almost all victory conditions, but especially good for science (I'm pretty convinced they are on par with Babylon if they can fix the RA bug) and Culture.

Siam: I'd downvote them for no other reason than the fact that it's expansion and tech flavors put it in my top 5 for runaway AIs (at least on deity). More seriously. They have a UA that varies too much from game to game since you can't control what CS types you'll have near you, nor how contested they will be.

Edit: Is there a running joke? I don't really care since the conversation in some of the threads are decent. However the number of elimination threads in the last month, worst, the number created by people with decently long standing of posting on these forums is a bit ridiculous. Religion Beliefs elimination thread had me facepalm pretty hard. It's as if people from another forum noticed a lot of them and decided to see how many they could created before a mod put his foot down about them...