Greece: jack of all trades civ?

[Xen]

Greece seems like its going to be a very civ to play; powerful UU's that can lead to early domination of the battlefield (That companion cavalry is something that even the Romans will fear- and certainly everyone else until pikemen come around.)

But its special ability, the Hellenic league looks like a fantastic trait to have - while you dont secure the bonuses that the patronage tree offers (such as the free great leaders), it effectily means that in order to get the general bonuses from city states you dont have go patronage; freeing up a social policy slot, and allowing you to aim for really any strategy you choose, in terms social policies. Having your cake, and eating it too, so to speak!

I'm quite excited about the Greeks in civ5- past iteration of them haven't been all that 'fun' for me (my ultimate civ4 civ was Romans+ Augustus, though using the Byzantines with Augustus as the leader was perhaps even more potent because of those wonderful cataphracts)

But I think Greece may end up being 'My' civ in the game - the Romans are a very close second, followed by the French and Americans... but the Greeks look like the might beat all comers, for me at least - because it looks like any strategy will be viable for them to go with, given that they never really have to worry about city state relations.

 

[Tomice]

Generally, any Civ with early UU/UB and UA that works through all ages seem powerful. I wouldn't say the greek are the best, though, it's far to early to judge this.

But what WILL be fun is that many strategies will be tailored for certain civ's, so the strategy guides might have a load of variety in them. I just hope the AI uses their strenghts well!

Can't wait to try it!

 

[Mannu]

You could play the Greeks that way, but I think most people will enhance what they already do best by maxing out the Patronage tree. If that's the case you are pretty beholden to servicing your relationships with your League.

 

[CleverFool]

You raise a valid point TC, but bear in mind if you're "the Jack of all trades, you're the master of none." The Greeks definitely start off in a strong position with their early UU's, and should be able to target any particular victory condition, but that doesn't mean they'll be as good at doing it at other Civs. Egypt can still out wonder your, Japan can still outfight you (that SA seems just nasty), etc. What's more by the time you realize what to target it may be too late to use your UU's to their maximum advantage.

But from the sounds of things their SA is quite strong and should allow you to easily take advantage of City States. I could see the Greeks trying to befriend as many as possible, while Siam tries to maintain relations with fewer, closer States. Should be interesting to see how it all works in the end though.

 

[Souron]

I disagree that greece is a good general strategy civ. It seems diplo victory focused. Fight some early wars, get a bunch of adjacent city states, then poor money into them for the rest of the game.

America I think is good for general strategy. It it the Jack of all trades.

Arabia too, though it's gold focused, gold is useful for every victory type.

Rome and India, are focused on large and small civs respectively, but don't suggest a victory type either.

 

[stealth_nsk]

I disagree that greece is a good general strategy civ. It seems diplo victory focused. Fight some early wars, get a bunch of adjacent city states, then poor money into them for the rest of the game.

To get diplo victory Greece should maintain relations with far city states as well. Which probably means be ready for war or extreme diplomacy with their neighbors.

If you decide to just go with near city-states, you could look towards other wins, though Siam looks better for this.

 

[LegioCorvus]

It bothers me never seeing the full quote for "Jack of all trades."

Jack of all trades, master of none, though ofttimes better than master of one

 

[Jamuka]

In SMAC the diplo civ, UN, ended up being the jack of all trades. Of course every other civ was very polarized.

 

[ShaqFu]

It seems like the generalist civs are going to be America, Rome, and Germany. I'm including Germany since their UA/UU (well, one of two) give free/cheap units - a nice benefit to your military, but nothing that really pushes you in one direction like Hellenic League or Bushido. A civ theme of "save hammers on units" can be used in any number of strategies (less military production means more hammers for wonders!)

 

[Goldflash]

BE A MAN. PLAY A RANDOM CIV EVERY TIME.

That is all.

 

[Xen]

BE A MAN. PLAY A RANDOM CIV EVERY TIME.

That is all.

You really mean "be a gamer" - a concept I have no love for.

 

[Louis XXIV]

I don't think they're quite jack of all trades, but they are close. The trick is being aggressively friendly with City States. If you fail this, you fail Greece. If you succeed, you can have food (from Maritime) and science that would go with it, culture, and military. The only thing Greece seems to lack is gold (which you'd have to spend a lot of). This could mean a Trading Post spam economy. They're also one and done militarily. After the ancient age, you could be tangled in City State wars, but you won't have any combat advantages.

Overall, I'd say they're going to be a fun civ, but not quite a jack of all trades (too focused on ancient and too focused on diplomatic peace with city states).

 

[SuperSmash5]

I don't know about jack of all trades. Greece doesn't have any particular strengths in the science or culture departments. I think Greece will end up being a dual-strategy civ. You can play them militarily or diplomatically or some hybrid of both. I don't think Greece is just the diplomatic civ. I'm willing to bet that those UUs are some of the most overpowered in the game (though I still have a suspicion that the later UUs will be much better than they were in Civ4, early UUs were always more reliable).