Civilization elimination thread

[maurcus]

he is Caucasian looking because Iran was originally settled by people of Aryan descent thus Iran "land of the Aryans"

 

[truenarnian]

he is Caucasian looking because Iran was originally settled by people of Aryan descent thus Iran "land of the Aryans"

Um, you may want to look up your history. The kind of superficial logic you are using would lead us to assume that Darius also had blond hair and blue eyes. Just because Hitler laid out his own bizarre race parameters doesn't mean that they are correct - Hitler was a delusional psychopath that made up all kind of ludicrous "history".

"Aryan" is a broad enough term to include people who do not have skin as fair as the "Nordic peoples" - and in any case, I've never found any source that lists Darius as Aryan. The depictions of Darius that I have seen only relate his features, not his skin colour.

And he was much darker in skin tone in Civ 4.

 

[woodshadows]

Um, you may want to look up your history. The kind of superficial logic you are using would lead us to assume that Darius also had blond hair and blue eyes. Just because Hitler laid out his own bizarre race parameters doesn't mean that they are correct - Hitler was a delusional psychopath that made up all kind of ludicrous "history".

"Aryan" is a broad enough term to include people who do not have skin as fair as the "Nordic peoples" - and in any case, I've never found any source that lists Darius as Aryan. The depictions of Darius that I have seen only relate his features, not his skin colour.

And he was much darker in skin tone in Civ 4.

Too dark.. he also looked like a fool with his chin curtain.

 

[Dogmouth]

Arabia 15
Babylon 12 (-2)
China 18
Inca 31 (+1)
Korea 27
Maya 10
Persia 13

Wow, this is getting really hard. I'm dinging Babylon because they're so dull. When you fire up a game with Babylon, you know exactly how you're going to play, and you basically only have one unique characteristic (bowmen are a flash in the pan now and the walls are meaningless). They're a good civ, but they have no replayability for me.

Another upvote for the Inca because they're flexible and unique. You don't know where the game will go, but you do know that you've got a number of traits that are completely different than almost any other civ. They're also really strong in combat (movement bonus for every unit) and trade (almost no road/rr maintenence).

 

[kamikazees]

Okay I've tried to make corrections for both bcaiko, truenarnian and Dogmouth's votes, but each of them appeared to use different previous votes. Feel free to correct this latest template if it is not correct. In any event:

Arabia 15
Babylon 10
China 17 (+1) (corrected)
Inca 31
Korea 27
Maya 12
Persia 11 (-2)

China: Top 5 civ IMO, if not top 3. Libraries are like the second or third building you should build, and +3 GPT per building in the early game is very good. A Chinese GG makes the most powerful army in the game, all things equal, and more citadels is good. Do I even have to talk about the chu-ko-nu?

Persia: Great civ, but you really need golden ages, Chichen Itza and Freedom to play max potential, 3 things which might or might not go your way in a game.

 

[Lord Kid]

I have been testing both Babylon and Korea, and so far, Korea has trouble catching up with Babylon's early tech advantage. Babylon reaches the Renaissance about 20-25 turns earlier and has more Academies cranking out throughout the game.

Babylon's UA is nice. Getting a free GS at writing is great, and the double GS production is great as well. However, that is all they are good for. Bowmen are obsolete too fast. By the time you get a sizable army of them, at least a couple other civs have already tech'd CB's. The walls are good, but honestly regular walls are good enough.

Korea, OTOH, is far more versatile. Their UA is much better, providing a 2 BPT for every specialist, so you can still tech while doing culture or dom. You're not forced to go for the stars if you don't want. Even when they patch the bug, the H'wacha will still be powerful. Turtle Ships are a bit lame, I will give that, but their combat strength pretty much makes them city takers by themselves, perfect for getting enemy coastal cities to clean up your own continent.

 

[PhilBowles]

Arabia 13
Babylon 14
China 18
Inca 28
Korea 29
Maya 14
Persia 15

Shoring up my Incans. Their lack of a dedicated focus is their focus, imo. They really are capable of winning in any way, at any time.

That's true of most civs. There are still plenty - Siam, Sweden, Persia, Korea, Maya among them - who can shoot for any victory condition while still playing in a distinctive way specific to that civ. I don't get that sense with the Inca. They're better wide than tall (reduced road costs and a tile improvement that's best for growing relatively small, unspecialised cities that quickly produce the 'core buildings' but will never give you the food needed to support a tall specialist economy), but that's about all I can identify to define their 'feel'.

Babylon's only value is it's UA, and that is outshined by Korea in the science dept. They get the slash today.

There are 7 civs left, not two. We're not at a stage where the outcome comes down to "which is better - Babylon or Korea?" (although ultimately we probably should be); the Babylonian UA puts them well ahead of most of the remaining civs, since - yes - early science is great. Babylon requires rather specific play to outshine Korea - basically, OCC with very early National College to maximise the bonus of the early Academy, and then aggressive exploitation of the 50% generation bonus from the UA - but a lot of the reason it's favoured is that it peaks earlier, which makes it potentially stronger at the highest difficulty levels where the AI can reach science victory so early.

 

[SammyKhalifa]

They're better wide than tall (reduced road costs and a tile improvement that's best for growing relatively small, unspecialised cities that quickly produce the 'core buildings' but will never give you the food needed to support a tall specialist economy), but that's about all I can identify to define their 'feel'.

Really? I seem to get larger cities with Inca than I do with anyone else, combined with production which makes pretty good Tall cities.

 

[Mesix]

Babylon's UA is nice. Getting a free GS at writing is great, and the double GS production is great as well. However, that is all they are good for. Bowmen are obsolete too fast. By the time you get a sizable army of them, at least a couple other civs have already tech'd CB's. The walls are good, but honestly regular walls are good enough.

Korea, OTOH, is far more versatile. Their UA is much better, providing a 2 BPT for every specialist, so you can still tech while doing culture or dom. You're not forced to go for the stars if you don't want. Even when they patch the bug, the H'wacha will still be powerful. Turtle Ships are a bit lame, I will give that, but their combat strength pretty much makes them city takers by themselves, perfect for getting enemy coastal cities to clean up your own continent.

Actually, I would argue that Korea is considerably less flexible. You must play a tall strategy with Korea and grow high city which can support a lot of specialists. Babylon on the other hand can do just about anything they want. Hit the Renaissance shortly after turn 100 and the Industrial era 50 turns later. Crank out units to dominate your opponents...or build all the wonders before they research the necessary techs...or shoot for the stars! You can really attempt any victory condition and go either tall or wide with Babylon. The key is and with Babylon you are practically guaranteed to out tech all other civs even on the highest difficulty settings.

 

[PhilBowles]

Why do defensive? Arabia is a fine Civ and their building ability is fine and interesting and not cheap. What is cheap is that every single civ now uses resource selling as an integral part of strategy at the beginning of the game (before the Arab building is even available I might add). It's over-relied on and therefore probably too powerful early.

It also means Arabia tends to scale very badly across the course of the game - you get fewer and fewer opportunities to trade as time goes on because other civs are connecting resources you can offer, and at the same time your trades become harder, the value of 240 gold as a one-off falls because things are so much more expensive.

We're actually left with 4 of my least favorite civs, but the Maya are my favorites left. People talk about their science but as I said in another thread you might as well judge Songhai by their culture due to their UB.

Very poor analogy. Mayan science isn't just a function of a UB with +2 science, it's:

1. When that science comes, which means very early tech progression. The Mud Pyramid Temple doesn't provide culture any earlier than you'd get an equivalent culture building anyway (if you took Drama & Poetry instead of Philosophy).

2. The Maya UA relies on teching quickly to Theology, along the Education tech path. This means that you're inherently pigeonholed into science civ tech progression, so you may as well exploit it.

3. The fact that Messenger of the Gods, while anyone can take it, is designed to be most effective in wide empires, and the Maya strategy is to play wide. The Pyramid has strong synergy with this, as it comes early enough to help with getting a fast Pantheon, but (like any shrine) you won't usually have enough cities early enough for it to get you a full religion much more quickly than anyone else.

4. The ability to get a Great Scientist earlier than any civ except Babylon and, most importantly, the ability to get both a Great Scientist and a Great Engineer from the same UA - and it's very easy to time the latter to coincide with reaching Architecture. I'm not aware of any equivalently strong play with the Maya from other GP selections you can make along their preselected tech path.

 

[Hammer Rabbi]

Arabia 15
Babylon 11
China 17
Inca 31
Korea 25
Maya 12
Persia 11

Looks like Babylon is getting bee-lined out of here while korea is still in the high 20s. that just doesnt feel right to me. At least they made it to the top 10.

 

[SammyKhalifa]

It also means Arabia tends to scale very badly across the course of the game - you get fewer and fewer opportunities to trade as time goes on because other civs are connecting resources you can offer, and at the same time your trades become harder, the value of 240 gold as a one-off falls because things are so much more expensive.

Yeah, I don't know what to do. I'm just not so sure of the early 240 "scheme" or if people other than me even see it as a problem

 

[Gucumatz]

Arabia 15
Babylon 11
China 15 (-2)
Inca 31
Korea 25
Maya 13 (+1)
Persia 11

Honestly the Inca SHOULD win this IMHO. However the real fight is for the top 5.

In no particular order
My top 5
Arabia
Babylon
Inca
Korea
Maya

Which leaves out 2 civs China and Persia. Persia you can go on an immortal heavy strategy and use immortal/pikeman + faith healers + medic1/2 to take over the world. Or go the heavy GA/GA strat collecting artists, chichen, freedom, etc. :: Ultimately acting too situational for consistent dependency upon

China - with Cho-Ko-Nuhs are amazing for sure. Paper Makers are decent and a great building. The UA is decent as well. But synergy for the civ is far weaker than the remaining civs above. The maya as I have said before very versatile - expansive, easy to protect wide territory with atlatlists, and provides momentum. Civilizations with better momentum in war have already been taken out - not sure why China or Persia deserves to survive then on either war or a weaker synergy than the remaining [Huns gone, England gone, Mongolia gone, etc]

 

[PhilBowles]

Arabia 15
Babylon 11
China 15 (-2)
Inca 31
Korea 25
Maya 13 (+1)
Persia 11

Honestly the Inca SHOULD win this IMHO. However the real fight is for the top 5.

In no particular order
My top 5
Arabia
Babylon
Inca
Korea
Maya

Which leaves out 2 civs China and Persia. Persia you can go on an immortal heavy strategy and use immortal/pikeman + faith healers + medic1/2 to take over the world. Or go the heavy GA/GA strat collecting artists, chichen, freedom, etc. :: Ultimately acting too situational for consistent dependency upon

China - with Cho-Ko-Nuhs are amazing for sure. Paper Makers are decent and a great building. The UA is decent as well. But synergy for the civ is far weaker than the remaining civs above. The maya as I have said before very versatile - expansive, easy to protect wide territory with atlatlists, and provides momentum. Civilizations with better momentum in war have already been taken out - not sure why China or Persia deserves to survive then on either war or a weaker synergy than the remaining [Huns gone, England gone, Mongolia gone, etc]

I would (unsurprisingly) switch Persia with Arabia in your list, but otherwise I'd agree from the remaining options (since Siam is no longer in a position to make the top 5). Definitely agreed that China should really go.

 

[Hammer Rabbi]

i like that list, gucumatz. but in trying to keep true to the original post of this thread im not trying to vote in who i think is the most powerful or useful but who i like to play the most. (for some "most poewerful/useful" and "most fun" are one and the same and that's fine.) so my list would look the the same except I'd have Persia instead of Maya because i love that a civ can make better use of a golden age as their UA. i know its not most powerful but i find them to be great fun from an immersive standpoint. it isnt often to say a culture spent its entire existence extremely happy, haha.

but to slightly contradict myself, i do love the incans for their versatility. i do like to start games with an intent of a particular VC but incans are great for changing your mind and not worrying about it.

my particular order for fun reasons would go as follows:
1. babylon
2. arabia
3. inca
4. persia
5. korea

if all the civs were still around it would be completely different after #1.

 

[Gucumatz]

@ Phil
Not surprising - I just think Arabia is one of the best civs in game though, synergy, momentum, early, and late game wise.

Early game with bazaars coming much earlier being able to sell luxuries for even more gold in singleplayer is very useful. Having a desert start bias coupled with the fact Arabia I believe also has an Oasis bias [With petra and bazaars which boost oases adds extra deserty incentives] gives Arabia even more of an edge in GK. It can focus on religion picking the desert pantheon and go religion heavy pretty easily and with the bias has a relatively good chance for an amazing Petra city nearly every game. Messenger of the gods can be subsituted to combine with the UA to work with ICS amazingly well.

Camel Archers are sturdier keshiks - and considered possibly the best UU in game you have the ability for mid game war domination. In multiplayer it being a sturdier weapon than a keshik allows it to pack a bigger punch even when hit (which it will be in multi).

Extra gold from trade routes helps as well - though less useful normally than the Inca it is powerful. With Bombers being even stronger in GK double oil allows Arabia to finish any opponent. In multi oil can be the limiting factor on losing a war/winning a war - with Arabia you have no such issue.

===
Its just such a complete civ in my mind compared to Persia/China

 

[DGDobrev]

Sheesh, Babylon is getting hit hard. Now that's something I didn't see coming. I always thought that since tech is paramount, any civilization that can tech up quickly and is the fastest at cranking out industrial units and cannons would easily be on top - but it seems not In any case, it is refreshing to see people approaching the game from different perspectives. Civ 3 and Civ 4 were all beakers, as if you fall back on the tech curve, you were doomed to having a mediocre game. Good thing that Civ 5 managed to bring some fresh air in here.

I will always consider Babylon the best and the most versatile civ to play. Whining about the UU and UB is stupid, cause as I said, you can't expect Motherships or Giant Death Robot Mk. 15 from a civ that was founded around 3500 BC. It is also a misconception to think that Babylon is not a warmonger - being up on the tech curve makes you the most dangerous warmonger of them all. People who never tried the bowman rush are missing a lot too. It is devastating on difficulties up to Emperor. Bowmen and Walls of Babylon can save you from any warmonger's early rush on any difficulty while you tech up. Ok, it is not like the chariot rush, but you can do it sooner and effectively wipe a civ our 2 out of play. Even on Immortal and Deity, if you focus on Science in the early game, you will get to the Industrial units first and then you can easily go on the offensive.

Wonders? No problem. Being able to get to a tech associated with a wonder first already puts you in a commanding position. On difficulties up to Emperor you can get a number of the early game wonders, effectively slingshotting up to Philosophy and with a NC built between T40-50, you are really dangerous as you already get the most BPT of them all.

In the end, allowing the player to be creative and flexible in their own way is what makes Babylon so great. I do agree that it is much much easier from a player's perspective to get to an OP unit (like Longbowmen, CKN, Immortals, etc.), spam it and win wars, but if you play against a decent human player with Babylon, he will always be one step ahead of you. You can simply be sure of it - I really thought that early warmongering rules the MP games, but seeing a guy making the others look like utter fools with Babylon last week really made my day.

I don't really want to start talking about fastest game victories, cause there are only 2 things that beat Babylon to that:
1. Spain with GBR start.
2. Getting the Beakers bug...

 

[SammyKhalifa]

I just have a love/hate with Babylon. I'm not sure how to go. On one hand, there's no doubt they're powerful. But I can also honestly say that after my first game with them I have always "rerolled" if I get them trying for a random civilization. I think they're more for the "bean counter" type players whose goal is to shave another 10 turns off of their record win time or whatever. Nothing wrong with that but it's just not for me. My goal is to win or try some new thing, and I don't really care how long it takes as to me it's not a race. I'm not so sure that powerful=good. If a civ's ability was to start with 10 free techs of your choice and 10000 gold, they'd be really good but also unplayable. I mean, what would be the point?

 

[Gucumatz]

I have a similar problem sammy. I think Babylon/Korea are great civs... I just can't bring myself to play them though much because my style of play is focused on building momentum. With them I build it too quickly and often times feels somewhat boring playing them.

 

[Furycrab]

Actually, I would argue that Korea is considerably less flexible. You must play a tall strategy with Korea and grow high city which can support a lot of specialists. Babylon on the other hand can do just about anything they want. Hit the Renaissance shortly after turn 100 and the Industrial era 50 turns later. Crank out units to dominate your opponents...or build all the wonders before they research the necessary techs...or shoot for the stars! You can really attempt any victory condition and go either tall or wide with Babylon. The key is and with Babylon you are practically guaranteed to out tech all other civs even on the highest difficulty settings.

I kinda disagree on the whole being able to out pace everyone on every victory condition, but there's currently a significant bug with RAs that make sitting on your laurels much more powerful than almost every other way to grow your empire, which makes the Babylon "playstyle" very powerful. (You'll end up abusing of parts of the bug even if you don't know it, just know that being able to hit early information by 210-220 is not intended)

Personally I prefer Korea because it's easy to insert religion and culture into the mix and the UA will just keep on giving. I'm inclined to believe that it will tech a little faster once they fix the RA bug because you will be significantly rewarded for being able to finish Rationalism, something you don't need to do right now.