Do you hate any civs so much you never play them?

[starrywisdom]

I've been playing Civ since 1991 so for me a well-fought loss can be more fun than an easy win.

Stick it on a higher difficulty? Playing on some of the higher difficulties, even with your favorite civ, with specific map conditions still isn't 'easy'.

 

[binhthuy71]

Stick it on a higher difficulty? Playing on some of the higher difficulties, even with your favorite civ, with specific map conditions still isn't 'easy'.

Hmmm, maybe "easy" wasn't the right word. Maybe "foregone conclusion" would have been more appropriate. As I mentioned, I've been playing V for less than a month. I started on Prince and I've leveled up roughly every three slam-dunk wins so I have a ways to go to reach the top. So far, AI bonuses are becoming more difficult to overcome although I'm certain that with my meager playing ability they'll become impossible any time now.

 

[spider1]

Nope, don't hate any civ enough to NEVER play them. I always play them at least once just to check 'em out and to get the silly achievement. But there are a lot of Civs that I don't play but that one time because they just don't fit into my style. I don't hate them though, just don't want to play them.

 

[Lose]

I'm picky about whom I play as. I typically wont play as non Europeans.

whys that...

 

[RD-BH]

The human sacrificing Aztec.
... Oh, and France.

 

[vonbach]

whys that...

Because its my game and I'll play whom I please.

 

[ButSam]

I used to refuse to play Monty because his UA and first UU seemed like a rip-off to me, but now with the synergy with the honor track I will try him soon.

I am not likely to play the Arabs until I've played the others, not really sure why, just not a big fan of their combo, although I can see how it could work.

I vary it up, trying them all at least once, but occasionally go back to Nebby, Alexander, Catherine, and Washington. (Washington isn't top-tier, but is good; people don't give him enough credit on here. Certainly better relative to other civs than America in Civ3 or Civ4 was relative to the other civs. +1 sight for all land units is actually very nice for finding goody huts especially, but also for fighting wars and finding city-states easier.)

 

[Inspector Javert]

At first I thought playing as India would be a bad idea because their UA is a double edged sword unlike the other Civs but now I think that it's a pretty cool civ so long as you don't over expand, it's good for a small focused empire which is kinda my playing style so me and Ghandi are a perfect fit.

 

[Teutorian]

The American bonuses play better than they sound. America is a pretty good civilization in the hands of a human player.

 

[Teutorian]

Eh'.... Not a Gandhi fan. I prefer to smash him.

 

[Misterboy]

I'll play 'em all, and always switch it around. But for some reason Washington annoys me. Not the Civ so much as Washington. He just always seems so smug

 

[Teutorian]

haha. Washington is one of my favorite leaders to encounter in Civilization V. Great voice acting. I love when he says all skeptical like, "I trust you're a friend of liberty?"
lol.

Yeah, Washington is smug but nothing tops Queen Elizabeth in that department.
Hello, your highness! Care to trade some cotton for some wine?
"Of course not!"
Oh... Okay then!

 

[Mercade]

The fun is in the variety, so I'm going through the list to play every leader at least once.

 

[WeneedmoreCivs]

Or maybe on certain maps you refuse to play them (england on pangea? lol).

I don't get all the England hate, I love the longbowmen and their range bonus. Sure, you miss out on the sea-based things, but at least they have a UU that actually serves a purpose.

 

[Jim Bro]

THE AZTEC I just can't stand them.

 

[starrywisdom]

I don't get all the England hate, I love the longbowmen and their range bonus. Sure, you miss out on the sea-based things, but at least they have a UU that actually serves a purpose.

Quite a few of the UU's are actually quite good... The 'sea based things' are absolutely /useless/ on multiple map types - as such thats why you see the 'hate'. The completely situational UA makes a very annoying civ if you play on random map types or some specific map types.

 

[Mods]

No because I don't judge or hate nations for something stupid that happened before I was even born and that totally didn't affect me at all

 

[cman2010]

I hate civ 5 so I dont play it.

Moderator Action: That's a fine opinion to have, but I'm not sure what it has to do with this thread.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

 

[aatami]

I refuse to play european civs other than the more exotic ones like Scandinavians (even though we only have Denmark-Norway, still waiting for Sweden and Finland) and such. It's just that I find them very dull and uninteresting.

 

[Silly Boots]

Alexander... his voice just has always bothered me. "Alexander say ne!" or something like that. And then four turns later he DoWs you and rushes with enough CCs and Hoplites to surround your capital completely.