Civs from easiest to hardest

[Darkness]

Originally posted by alamo

The expansionist trait is generally a looser

Not on large or huge maps... Then it rocks big time!!!! You can get the entire ancient age tech tree from GH then...

 

[WackenOpenAir]

(deity only)

best traits:
1: religious 10 points for religious
2: militaristic 8 points for militaristic
3: industrious 6 points for industrious
4: scientific 4 points
5: expansionist 2 points
6: commercial (does it really do anything) 0 points for commercial

best UU: (only looking at unit)

mounted warrior 10 points
jaguar warrior 9 points
immortals 8 points
rider 7 points
samurai 6 points

best UU factoring moment of GA:
Rider 10 points
Samurai 9 points
immortals 3 points
mounted warrior 3 points
jaguar warrior 3 points

all the other UU's are not really helpful, or even a disadvantage.

-GA should be right when i have monarchy, rider and samurai are right there.
-only offensive units have any value for me.
-religious is almost a must have since EVERY city will build a temple and cathedral it's benefits will be huge.
-on deity, you have to fight, and you have to get early leaders for library and forbidden palace so militaristic is also very good.
-industrious is just nice.
-scientific isn't really that good since on deity doing science yourself isn't gonna get you very far anyway in early game, you have to fight and trade for tech. late game is less important if you can get a lead earlier on, you will overcome the more expensive libs in late game.
-commercial doesn't just seem to do much.

conclusion:
Japan: 29 points
China: 26 points
Aztecs: 23 points

(on very tight maps, you might prefer the ealy power over a usefull GA)

 

[WackenOpenAir]

oh one more thing. I don't really care about the bowmen and to a lesser extend the mounted warriors because i prefer to start out with science at 10% and upgrade 20+ warriors to swordsmen when i have iron working.

This way, i will get the techs when i defeat the first enemy, i will have very cheap units (in production) and thus can use all my production to build the maximum number of settlers (as food alows) while still building a formidable army.

My preference is to quickly build 8 cities in a circly around my capital while massing the warriors, the fight techs and leaders. Build a forbidden palace in the center of the conquered area.

 

[Bretwalda]

Well, I dont think it would count as cheating e.g. when I 'J' move my triremes (I mean galley, of course ) and they end up over ocean because computer stupidity...

Anyway, cheating is what I consider cheating and would ruin my gameplay... (I play for the fun, not for the score or boasting, y'know )

Originally posted by hoyatables
Reloading may be cheating for you...I'm still getting the ropes down and if I want to enjoy a game at a reasonable level, I sometimes reload.

 

[Peter Harris]

Commercial is useless in 4000 BC but if I play a non-commercial civ I really miss commercial from middle ages onwards. I think commercial is perhaps the most valuable trait in the industrial and modern eras (but the least valuable in the vital ancient age).

Overall I would go with what appears to be the consensus that industrious and religious are the two most usefull traits. I think Egypt is the strongest civ.

OTH The "best traits" depend on the individual players playing style, map setup, difficulty level and how crowded the map is. (I find the English are O.K. on a large uncrowded map)

EDIT. The UU may also effect ones evaluation of which civ is best for ones self to play. eg. Jaguar warriors effectively give the non-expansionist Aztecs some expansionist capabilities.

 

[civkiller]

I have to say - i disagree with all of you people. Egypt is awesome, and you MUST have a GA in the mid-ancient age to hoard a huge amount of units for the Middle Ages. Until I get Cavalry, i mainly depend on the boost from the ancient GA.

PS - Temples are a necessity. When you capture a city, after the defense should be a cultural imp. That way, the city has a much less chance of flipping, which is what I hate most.

 

[Arathorn]

I've said it before and I'm saying it again now. The original list was for vanilla Civ, before most of the patches. Certain things from the initial review are no longer true (e.g. your UU no longer breaks upgrade chains), which dramatically changes the landscape of the list. The traits were tweaked, with industrious being hurt and commercial being made frequently stronger (so that it's possibly the best trait now). The new civs (from PTW and C3C) aren't listed and are dramatically different.

At this point, the value of arguing what civ is weaker/stronger than another is pretty much nil. Long ago, certain civs were significantly stronger than others.... Now, though, there's an amazing amount of balance.

FWIW, though, I dramatically disagree with a lot of the opinions espoused in this thread -- religious the most valuable trait vs. deity? Commercial worthless? Such things smack of a fundamental lack of understanding.

Arathorn

 

[dgfred]

Get some Arathorn . I still enjoy reading these perspectives and
how different people are playing their games, although their reasons may
be off some .

 

[volfan37132]

Civs I like:

Aztecs
China
Japan

Lots of people seem to like Egypt. I have not ever played them.

Civs I do not like:

America
Russia
England
France

 

[expeliarmus]

And what has happened here with the Spanish??
If you made this list before Civ III Play the World, i think you should update it, there are now a lot of civs more.
But the list is still good.

 

[shadowempire]

The list seems fair. You said that you did not try all the civs yet. Either did I. But India up to this point is my most successful civ yet.

 

[Tomoyo]

Someone (cough) has to make a new one...

And a lot of the points made here were made a long time ago... Although Arathorn is dead-on in most (all) of his posts as usual...

 

[shadowempire]

yeah. I'm new to this site. I just joined like 2 days ago.

 

[Pentium]

on deity, you have to fight

No you don't. My first victory there is Diplo with Greeks.

 

[_davin_B]

I like to play on huge maps and build very large empires, so my rating system is basically the exact opposite of yours. My empire choices rate Industrious as the most important factor, with Expansionist and Commericial tied for second and religous and scientific tied for least useful.

Industrious is almost a requirement for my game, halving the worker output and adding the shields gives me more units, better cities and more mines faster then anyone else. This gives me a big leg up on other empires in getting to the wonders I want/need and gives me the production capacity to build the army I like to maintain.

I dont know why expansionist is so underrated. I love the American combo (dislike the UU, but you cant win all the time), scouts are a big advantage on the early map and most important to me is the goody hut advantage, I get 5-10 skills per game from huts with expansionist civs where as any non-expansionist civs I generelly get 1-3. I always take a big Civ lead with expansionist.

Commercial is my other favorite because of two reasons trade is always good and reduced corruption is almost essential to a large empire.

Religious to me is the most over-rated trait on this board. The ability to build quick temples is very nice for the early game, but overall I just dont switch governments that much to find the anarchy bit that usefull, and I find other traits to be much more usefull.

As a result of this my easiest top 5 are

1. French. IMO you really underrate the musketeer, I can quickly create an army of those units and very quickly have a balanced defensive and offensive force that can crush anyone without muskteers to defend. Yes two pikemen are better then 1 musketman, but 2 musketmen are better then one offensive unit and 2 pikemen because you have 2 to defend and attack and you only have to maintain 2 units. An army of musketmen will steamroll any city for a very long period. Support of some artillary and you can make some serious ground. The combination of Ind & Com is great for big productive cities and big productive empires.

2. Americans. The UU is a throw away unit, but overall it doesnt matter. Expansionist is a huge advantage, and combining that with Ind means that I very quickly can see the entire map around me, hit the most goody huts and can build all the mines/irragation/roads that I need. When I play as the Americans large empires with great infastructure is easy, and the goody huts & early road building allow me to build a 3-5 tech lead that I never relinquish in the game if I can help it. Pottery also lets me get to map making quickly and I can often use the combo of early map making and scouts to meet civs and trade my maps for their early tech leaving the goody huts to get me tech like construction and monarcy very quickly.

3 Chinese. I like the combo of Miltaristic and Industrious. The UU is ok, and Golden Age is pretty easy to attain. The shield bonus and quick workers mean that my empire will generally be strong, and the miltaristic means that I can have my units upgrade very quickly and crush any nearby enemies. This civ is very very good in the smaller maps and if I am playing on standard or less I either go with Chinese or French.

4. Persians. Immortals can give you some nice punch early in the game, and the combo of Ind & Scientific can be very nice. Problem of course occurs if you dont have any iron early in the game, but immortals can be the strongest unit for a very long time if you get iron enough and can give you a very quick edge.

5. Japanese. I like the japanese mostly because of the samuri although the Mil & Rel combo is fairly usefull allowing you to build up cities very quickly.

5 worst civs.

1. Egyptians. I just cant stand the egyptians, Rel is just not that usefull, and the war chariot is so useless, more often then not I could have had horsemen anyway by the time I would have used them, and they are just too weak.

2. Indians Just no real advantage to these guys at all. The UU is useless because iron and horses arnt THAT hard to get, commercial is nice, but no where near enough to offse their problems.

3. Aztecs. UU is just way too early and way too useless, I guess with Milt & Rel they can build alot of city improvements easily, but they will need to since they dont get any extra sheilds, their workers take forever to do anything, and they dont research very well.

4. Zulu. The UU is ok, but since they dont do alot of attacking they arnt very good for creating leaders and triggering GAs. Expansionist is nice, but miltaristic isnt that usefull, and half of the usefullness of the scout is eliminated by the UU which offer the speed of the scout but they can defend. The overlaping skills means that they dont get enough elsewhere. Would be interesting if they were Ind + Milt instead...

5. Germans. Milt & Scientific is one of the worst combos you could come up with, and the panzer is nice but comes a bit late. Overall not a very good civ.

I absolutely agree with you, My absolute favourite CIV is American - for the very reasons you mentioned. It's true that scouts have a tendancy to get killed (especially by barbarians) but at 10 shields each it doesn't take much to re-coup the investments. Just keep pumping them out, my first major objective (along with settlers). For saying it first (by a long shot), even though I developed this opinion without benefit of your comments - I salute you as the

 

[D0NIMATRIX]

Major

_davin_B, here at CFC posting at a long-dead thread is called a bump, and unless you have an opinion to add or another significant contribution, don't post. Not to say that your post was wrong, I myself have bumped.

Anyway, welcome to CFC!

 

[SleeperLv]

where are mayans?

 

[Spoonwood]

The list wouldn't have even made sense at the time, since it doesn't consider things like victory conditions, map type, opponents, starting position, etc. Here we have one thread I actually favor closing.