Fav Civ

[Zack]

Well, considering the technologies available in those 2 scenarios, I think the Mongol empire was way more impressive.

But consider how much land the British started with and how much more competition they faced.

 

[Camikaze]

USE BOOTCAMP! I'M TELLING YA!

Edit: Whoops. I thought the sever automatically uncaped the words when it was all caps, guess not. So, I don't mean to be offensive here.

When BtS came out, I already had Vanilla and Warlords for Mac, so if I was going to use Bootcamp, I'd need to, firstly, get Windows, and secondly, buy at least Vanilla for Windows.

 

[Edzako]

That's the traits of their leader (which you are named after ), not something about the Incas them self. Game wise their UU is kinda lame, either you abuse it and rush or it's almost useless, their UB is nice enough though, extra early culture is always appreciated.

As for all the comments about the Roman empire not being the biggest, it kinda depends on how you measure it. Pure size as in square kilometers it wasn't. But as in population-percentage, relative to the entire worlds population at the time, it was the biggest ever to have existed, which if you ask me is the right way to measure it. My first post stands though Persia is still the best there is

Roma wasn't biggest empire not in absolute, nor relative terms when you measure empire size by population, not even close. Even British Empire lacked to overcome China population and it had most of SE Asia (India, Pakistan, Bangladesh)

This is history. What science can prove when agriculture came about? Have you done soil samples? You base your ideas on things you've read in other places. What is science? What does it mean to subscribe to science? Science is but another religion. You choose to believe what you are told regarding this religion. It is no different than any other dogmatic faith.

I'm trying to be edgy? Ha! I could care less what people think of me. They are more like sheep than anything else. Labels are for those who wish to categorize everything. If you see me as "edgy" then so be it.

As to my original point:
Again, the only way you can know anything for sure is if you lived there and saw and heard and tasted and smelled the reality of the era. Even then, reality is only as the individual interprets it. People do not agree on the truth surrounding current events let alone events that occurred 10,000 years ago. What you read and study is only the widely agreed and accepted "truth" of reality.

I care not when civilizations began, only where they are going.


What evidence? Have you touched it? Seen it? Have you dissected it? How do you know this so called evidence is even true? Forget wrong. What about truth? Can you ever know if anything that you haven't experienced first hand is true?

EDIT: Just so you know, I'm not trying to say that agriculture etc. didn't start as you say. I'm only pointing out that the only things we have to go on require our BELIEF and TRUST.

sorry for tangent,
@the OP: Egypt rocks.

Actually people have done soil sample from that era, guess where they found that soil - on tools used for lands cultivation.

 

[Antilogic]

Arg. I really dislike when people talk about capturing wonders. You can't plan on a wonder being built close enough to you for you to capture it. IND helps you grab the wonders to boost whichever economy the map befits. If you have tons of food and production tiles, obviously you'll want to take advantage of a specialist/hammer economy and go for the Pyramids to boost those specialists.

If you don't have stone, you're basically 50/50 on intermediate levels for losing the 'Mids. With IND, it's more like 70/30 and if you have IND/stone you'll basically grab it every time. The same goes for The Great Lighthouse and Colossus for a trade/commerce heavy economy.

Now, if you choose to let the AI build those wonders and an AI that is on the opposite side of the pangaea (or worse yet on another landmass altogether), then you'll probably not capture the wonder in time for it to obsolete or become almost useless (besides Police State and 'Mids). You should never count on wonders, but allowing the AI to have them can be dangerous.

All true. Honestly, I don't build the Pyramids half my games, I end up running Monarchy until I capture it, and I still manage to pull it out. I don't count on wonders, as you put it. However, by capturing whatever wonders are near my territory, irrelevant of which ones they are, I deprive the AI of the bonuses. By the time the late-Middle or early-Renaissance rolls around, I'm able to target a few wonders without Industrious and succeed and building them, leveraging my early expansion. Thus, I tend to build more late wonders than early ones.

I looked this up, and was surprised to find that it was true. According to Wikipedia, the Mongols had 33.2 million square km in 1268 under Kublai Khan, and the British had 33.6 million square km in 1922 under George V. There's not any way to know exactly how big their empires were, so we can safely say that the Mongols (at the height of their empire) and the British (at the height of their empire) had roughly the same amount of land.

In other words - two biggest empires = British and Mongols EDIT: land wise

Of course, the Mongols had the largest contiguous empire, while the British outdid them piecewise. That way, they both get a #1 title and everybody's happy.

 

[Zack]

Of course, the Mongols had the largest contiguous empire, while the British outdid them piecewise. That way, they both get a #1 title and everybody's happy.

And then we all get together and have tea.

 

[bestbrian]

And then we all get together and have tea.

"After tea, let's say we all sally forth and give Genghis a jolly good thrashing. What's say?"

 

[Lincoln3457]

Screw America.

All Hail Egypt. The glory of an IND Ramesses (who almost always starts near Stone) and expandability of a CRE Hatshepsut. The beauty of a free UB in all cities (thanks to Stone => quick Stonehenge) allowing for a priest/specialist heavy economy and wonders galore!

All hail the glorious War Chariot and let them stomp the faces of all of Egypt's archer-heavy neighbors!

HEY!!! I hate Egypt! Whenever I see them in a game I destroy them so, SCREW EGYPT! All Hail AMERICA!!!

 

[Lincoln3457]

Biggest empire was Mongolia, oldest was China I believe. Egypt is second oldest.

Sorry, I knew what I said was off but I didn't come up with the answers, one of my students did (he usualy gets D's and C's, but wanted me to post these answers.

 

[Lincoln3457]

I like the Incas! Why aren't they in the poll?

Viva la Tawantinsuyu!

The Inca's are OKAY I guess, but they suck for me. I never play as them, and as I said earlier I didn't come up with the poll my student did.

 

[Zack]

Nice triple post, Lincoln.

 

[shatter_crime]

All hail the Praets!!!

 

[amishdemon]

viking rule their UB is sick free Nav. 1? how can you go wrong

 

[bestbrian]

viking rule their UB is sick free Nav. 1? how can you go wrong

Great Plains map?

 

[Gooblah]

What's with the poll?! There are 31 civs, y'know.

 

[amishdemon]

Great Plains map?

i never play them

 

[DMOC]

Yet another one of these polls?

Why did you spell "Samurai" wrong?

 

[bestbrian]

i never play them

No water. You'll realize how limited Rags is.

 

[ParadigmShifter]

Well he's still financial and aggressive is OK for early rush.

 

[bestbrian]

Well he's still financial and aggressive is OK for early rush.

It's like playing as the Americans (no UU or UB), but the American leaders are very strong to compensate. Take away water and Rags is pretty meh.

BTW: When do you sleep, Dude? Or at least leave your house?

 

[Zack]

viking rule their UB is sick free Nav. 1? how can you go wrong

Pangea? Great Plains?

Navigation 1 is not that great of a promotion. Compared to other UBs, I would say the Viking UB is very weak. Unless you're playing an Archipelago map, I don't see what's so great about the Viking UB.