[GS] Has The King Been Dethroned?

[Tyroq]

So over in this thread: https://forums.civfanatics.com/threads/power-ranking-the-civs-gathering-storm.642590/ folks been talking about relative civ powers with the new expansion, and that got me thinking. Back in Vanilla, it was pretty obvious that Gilgamesh was the king. His abilities were so OP with that early war cart rush and the crazy ability to farm barb camps for goody hut rewards ALL GAME LONG. And of course those ziggurats were nice to put on tiles you weren't gonna use for anything else. Extra science is never bad. Strong alliances too.

Now with GS and the arrival of the Maori (the new OP civ on the block), I'm wondering how these 2 civs would stack up against each other specifically? Maori have the most flexible start ever made. They also have really OP Toas, bonus production and culture and faith. Given their flexiblity they're likely to get first envoy to a lot of city states, giving them some nice bonuses in the early game.

So I'm wondering if people have enough experience with these 2 against each other to say who's actually on top now? I know different kinds of maps will play a big part. Put Kupe on an island plates map and he might have the upper hand. Stick them both on a low-sea-level pangea map and it could go to Gilgamesh. But I'm really curious to see how they stack up, particularly in multiplayer. The AI won't be able to do them justice, so how would human players compare them?

 

[Sostratus]

Is this a duel to the death or putting both in a game with some other civs?
In a duel map Gilga can just rush Kupe once he lands. As with any civ, war cart rush (aka the donkey tank spank) is a death sentence.
As I see it Kupe needs to survive until he can get Toa, where he kind of auto wins against anyone. While the Maori can pick up some early envoys, they don't have this:

And of course those ziggurats were nice to put on tiles you weren't gonna use for anything else.

Ziggs are one of the best abilities out there. Especially if you start on floodplains. Just getting +2 science and +1 culture on a grassland tile or two or five, early on, is almost insurmountable.
The marae doesn't come until classical and until then maori's only eco boost is +1 prod on woods/rainforest and the fishing boats.

The only real chance is if kupe can settle some islands where gilga can't just rush him. But if you don't rush gilga, he will just run away with tech anyways. It's not hard to get the food to support a ziggurat spam city or two (domestic route+magnus).

Just the reality of having an ancient era domination advantage IMO.

 

[The googles do nothing]

low-sea-level pangea map

America is always tough in a dual situation like that because it's one continent.

 

[Victoria]

The khan can do the can can just as well.
Monty is #1 for early game surviveability
Nubia gets them archers pretty damn fast and their abilities gel well.

In Kupe’s defence, I settles on a 2 tile island one game and just raced away. All they need is sea resources and they will get god of the sea if they want it which is better than god of the forge to Kupe. I think this is a poor comparison, Gilga settles on the shore and a Kupe will take it with quads, Kupe goes inland and becomes a donkey carpet.

How does Nubia fare? That’s a bit trickier because donkey carts are certainly vulnerable to range.

 

[Tyroq]

The reason I started this thread was mainly to compare top tier civilizations strictly against each other. In the other thread people were discussing everyone, which is cool. But I'm really interested to see how the balancing for so-called "God tier" civs stacks up. It could be on a duel map, or in general gameplay who wins more often and how. It looks like nobody's voted yet. I would edit the poll, but all I can do is add more options, and the 3rd is already designed for other civs as a choice.

 

[Victoria]

and the 3rd is already designed for other civs as a choice.

We live and learn, people always do what you least expect.
TBH I struggle with top, which is why we have bands. Putting one before another is hard, different sizes, speeds, terrain and map type all also have an effect. How would Kupe do in a tiny inland sea? How about a Renaissance start? What civ would be top then? Certainly not Gilga. Hungary on prince is a completely different game to Hungary on deity.
I love Rome, but rarely play them because they are so strong but the legion nerf has done an interesting thing there.
People seem to like ‘Best’ which I seriously struggle with in my head.

The one thing about this thread I found interesting was you chose 2 civs with UU’s that have no maintenance and that is a big advantage early.

 

[Tyroq]

The one thing about this thread I found interesting was you chose 2 civs with UU’s that have no maintenance and that is a big advantage early.

I chose them because they've been the 2 civs I have most heard people complain about being OP. The fact that they both have UUs is probably a part of it, but it wasn't my reason for choosing them. I just wanted to get people's opinions on who they think is better overall. I've played both, and I have my own opinions, but I wanted to see what others thought.

You brought up other era starts. I hadn't thought of that. Personally I've only done ancient era starts and never seen the appeal of starting later. But I can see how that would have an effect.

 

[Searing7]

I have a hard time seeing how Gilga could lose in a 1 v 1 vs Kupe assuming they started on the same landmass and an equal level of play. War carts are just too strong and I don't see how the Maori could get toas before being overwhelmed.

 

[chazzycat]

I'm not a very aggressive player...not big on early game rushes, so I think Dido has been the most powerful for me. Spamming settlers & harbors into a medieval free inquiry golden age is just so strong. As long as you don't miss the golden age it's pretty much game over. You'll be buying shipyards in the medieval era with all your gold and science coming out the wazooo. From there you win however you want.

 

[Sostratus]

Monty is #1 for early game surviveability
Nubia gets them archers pretty damn fast and their abilities gel well.

In the hands of a competitive human I can see fast+powerful archers being a real nightmare for any melee unit.
Do you think monty beats a war cart rush? Carts are about as tough assuming he improves his luxes, but faster and cheaper.
I do think the aztecs have a much better economy than nubia and outside of the opening turns, will bury the Kandake. Opening turnings the eagles may only have 28+1... but next era it'll be swords at +4, knights at +6, field cannons at +8... You just can't get enough production to overcome those advantages. (Similar reason why shaka is so stronk.)

 

[Victoria]

You just can't get enough production to overcome those advantages.

Or enough builders

 

[Sostratus]

Or enough builders

Why do you have much that I do not?! Do you want to see your people taken as slaves?

 

[Troy Bruckner]

The king is still king, but that king is Monty.

 

[BarbarianHunter]

I had no idea Alexander was sometimes referred to as Gilgamesh. Was there a new discovery of cuneiform texts I haven't heard about?

 

[gozpel]

If it's ONLY Gilgamesh and Maori, then Gilly wins hands down early. If Sumeria is too slow and want to be played like I mostly do, he can be in for a surprise.

That said, I think Nubia is well into the OP-department, especially early on. It is my fav civ to play as I like archers, not even on civ, even Skyrim and
other games that have archers. Get 3-4 Nubian archers out early and you counter everything, then you get a couple more and destroy everything.

I think it is trickier playing Nubia against Sumeria, especially on Deity, because of the movement of the warcarts.
But as some ppl already said, it is very map dependant.

 

[Arilian]

Are we talking about human vs human or human vs AI? 1v1 or normal maps?

Agains AI, Toa is quite stronger than war chars, as they are on the same tech as siege tower, so they can easily capture walled cities.
Also if you war charth rush an AI enemy, they will be mostly empty cities. In 1v1 that is fine, as you won anyway, but who plays 1v1?
Toa captures on the other hand will be juisy ones with districts and wonders.

 

[Tiger Genocide]

In the hands of a competitive human I can see fast+powerful archers being a real nightmare for any melee unit.
Do you think monty beats a war cart rush? Carts are about as tough assuming he improves his luxes, but faster and cheaper.
I do think the aztecs have a much better economy than nubia and outside of the opening turns, will bury the Kandake. Opening turnings the eagles may only have 28+1... but next era it'll be swords at +4, knights at +6, field cannons at +8... You just can't get enough production to overcome those advantages. (Similar reason why shaka is so stronk.)

The king is still king, but that king is Monty.

Gilgabro is a beast, probably still the best, especially in multiplayer. That said, if you are playing only the AI, Aztec seemed to be the fastest science victory civ, well before Gathering Storm at least. I have not tried it since GS came out.

Ottomans, Zulu, Hungary, and other T1/S Tier civs are nasty but not at turn 1. If they are still alive and kicking when their bonuses kick in a little later, they can become much more disgusting than Sumeria and Aztec.

 

[Sostratus]

they can become much more disgusting than Sumeria and Aztec.

I don't think any of them have a way to actually counter the aztecs if they expand into a second continent for luxes (probably after they kill their first or second neighbor.)
Certainly not hungary or ottomans - +5 str from ibrahim is less than what the Aztec boost will be, and even stacking the levy bonus with the GP building, +9 is still in the ballpark of what the aztecs will get on all their units.
I think zulu has a decent shot with early corps and +5, since Impis let you have a 41+15 strength unit for 250 production. Now, of course, the aztecs can build things like swords (cost 90) and just counter the Impi. It's less raw power and more, they get such an effective production advantage. Corps are powerful but are just about worth their cost before military academies.

And of course, the aztecs have a very very powerful economy thanks to ultra fast district building, so it's very hard to out boom them. Sumeria is similar: even after warcarts, they still get the advantage of all those ziggurats. When zulu and hungary hit medieval, gilga can be an era ahead and still capable of breaking their armies on his demigod abs. I think if survival is on the table, better to be korea or someone with a super strong eco so you can actually have some sort of advantage rather than try to take on the aztecs' military with contemporary units.

 

[Tiger Genocide]

I don't think any of them have a way to actually counter the aztecs if they expand into a second continent for luxes (probably after they kill their first or second neighbor.)
Certainly not hungary or ottomans - +5 str from ibrahim is less than what the Aztec boost will be, and even stacking the levy bonus with the GP building, +9 is still in the ballpark of what the aztecs will get on all their units.
I think zulu has a decent shot with early corps and +5, since Impis let you have a 41+15 strength unit for 250 production. Now, of course, the aztecs can build things like swords (cost 90) and just counter the Impi. It's less raw power and more, they get such an effective production advantage. Corps are powerful but are just about worth their cost before military academies.

And of course, the aztecs have a very very powerful economy thanks to ultra fast district building, so it's very hard to out boom them. Sumeria is similar: even after warcarts, they still get the advantage of all those ziggurats. When zulu and hungary hit medieval, gilga can be an era ahead and still capable of breaking their armies on his demigod abs. I think if survival is on the table, better to be korea or someone with a super strong eco so you can actually have some sort of advantage rather than try to take on the aztecs' military with contemporary units.

Those are good points and I hope to try that in multiplayer someday soon against some guys I know that can take advantage of that, but Ottomans siege weapon buff plus Ibrahim is basically classical early med period and is so nasty it is filthy. I do not think Aztec can realistically get to another continent that fast, especially if constantly harassed. They might be there tech wise, but not have all the units out ready to be there yet. Aztecs would need to kill an Ottoman neighbor first chance, but if there was someone between them, the Ottoman snowball of siege weapon death could stop them. Same goes for Zulu with early Impi corps. I have had a few Ottoman games now, because they are so intriguing, and I found that using horsemen is a good synergy with the catapults. A few archers to whittle Aztec melee units helps too. Lots of civs you do not really need balanced unit types, but with Ottomans it is actually optimal to bring a few of each type into battle. As with many things, placement on the map in relation to which enemies matters tremendously. A fractal map can help civs like Aztec out more than Pangaea and ending up in the center in rainforest.

I agree on Sumeria. Even after the warcart phase, they have such a science lead, it really does not matter. It's so common to see them with knights before anyone else it is ridiculous. Pre-GS, the knights were a given, now with the stockpile system, I have yet to see how much slower that can happen. Probably depends on the map luck. Korea may be able to keep up tech wise with Sumeria, but I doubt anyone playing Korea had ~5-10 heavy chariots waiting for upgrades into Knights. Korea is not that strong defensively compared to other civs. Not uncommon to see dudes try and get Defender of the Faith just to discourage aggression. It's not like dropping a holy site first hurts your science game as Korea.

 

[Sostratus]

but Ottomans siege weapon buff plus Ibrahim is basically classical early med period and is so nasty it is filthy.

"What would happen if catapults ascended to trebuchets?" Play ottomans and find out...

They might be there tech wise, but not have all the units out ready to be there yet.

Serasker only applies when you're attacking districts; even with the Great Turkish Bombard boost, catapults still hit units for -12, making them a bit negligible. The problem is going to be fighting the army to get to the aztec city. Your disadvantage is having to spend titles on ibrahim instead of another gov (aztecs could even use Victor to counter!) and that you need to spend production on siege units. Even with the card, that's still 80 prod per catapult, while other classical units under Agoge etc are in the 60ish range. 3 catas is 4 extra regular units aztec can push out.
And if you get falconer, you're only evening the advantage the aztecs have inherently. Plus, falconer only applies to the city Ibrahim is in, it doesn't actually assist you on offense like serasker does.

It's a production issue mostly. The aztecs/sumer economy bonus is what gives them the leg up on other warmongers (who normally are the answer to eco boomers.)