Is there a generally accepted best civ(s)?

[zack_wilder]

topic

Also, is there a generally accepted best form(s) of government?

Thanks in advance!

 

[Bllasae]

a.) Kinda.
b.) Most people use Republic.

 

[Kadazzle]

There are generally accepted best civs, but it varies widely depending on who's view you're looking at.

The best form of Government in Democracy, in an online game it is very rare to see people who have unlocked it, not use it.

 

[MorteEterna]

There are generally accepted best civs, but it varies widely depending on who's view you're looking at.

The best form of Government in Democracy, in an online game it is very rare to see people who have unlocked it, not use it.

Republic is the best, and much more for chinese, obviously later one democracy is better, but:

3 pop = 6 science

Rush a settler, 4 science, new city = 10 science

Democracy = 9 science

2 pop = 4 science

2 science rushing a settler, plus the new city = 6 science

Democracy = 6 science but doesn't improve your growth

 

[folumfolum]

some could say ones with early advantages:

Arabs:
religion helping you with culture early on so you wont have to worry as much in the beginning
also Math cuz of catapults,
a few others, i seem to find it easy to start out with arabs and romans, though when using arabs, first thing you do is switch to desptism or you be geting any new technologys any time soon!
romans also, and greeks,

try to find that secret structure that automatically builds you the pyramid so you can have a go with every government,

tips:
-communism can be amazing if you build that thing that makes courthouses produce culture, then switch to communism, after you build a courthouse, and watch as you have a culture yet you still have the amazing city building speed, start by building an aquaduct after so its even speedier, its amazing then when all your cities our complete, switch to Democracy for speedy gold and tech

Despotism really isnt nescessary unless your the arabs, then switch from fundamentalism to despo for the needed science production from libraries and universities

republics good for expanssion, switch when you discover it so you can save your city workers and build more cities without losing pop from main city

monarchy only good when in need of culture (victory and . .. .. .. .)

if theirs anything i havent covered fully just ask!

 

[DucJulien]

I don't see why everyone hasn't screamed "Japan" "Democracy" at you.
Japan not only has an excellent feudal unit, (samurai) but also gets +1 food form all sea squares. If you like to camp dyes for megacities, like me, then it's positively perfect!
The drawback to Democracy is that you can't ever declare war. And if they offer you peace, you have to accept. And you never really want to accept, because they were the jerks who attacked you to begin with. They deserve to be exterminated for disrupting your peaceful technological and economic progress, amirite?

Yeah. Japan definitely though. Early game, I very much prefer Republic to Democracy, because I like to pump out settlers.

 

[bonafide11]

though when using arabs, first thing you do is switch to desptism or you be geting any new technologys any time soon!

How do you figure? You won't have any libraries for a few thousand years, so there are no drawbacks for using fundamentalism early. If you switch to Despotism early, you're taking away the Arabs early attack bonus, which is what makes them so powerful. There's no reason to switch out of fundamentalism until you have libraries, and the goal is to have captured so many cities by then that you don't need libraries.

 

[bonafide11]

I don't see why everyone hasn't screamed "Japan" "Democracy" at you.
Japan not only has an excellent feudal unit, (samurai) but also gets +1 food form all sea squares. If you like to camp dyes for megacities, like me, then it's positively perfect!
The drawback to Democracy is that you can't ever declare war. And if they offer you peace, you have to accept. And you never really want to accept, because they were the jerks who attacked you to begin with. They deserve to be exterminated for disrupting your peaceful technological and economic progress, amirite?

Yeah. Japan definitely though. Early game, I very much prefer Republic to Democracy, because I like to pump out settlers.

I played against someone on Xbox Live who says on their profile "Zulus and Aztecs are cheap!!!" yet he plays with Japan. It baffles me, I also think Japan is the most powerful Civ in the game too, and certainly anyone who plays with them can't accuse someone else of being cheap.

 

[MorteEterna]

I played against someone on Xbox Live who says on their profile "Zulus and Aztecs are cheap!!!" yet he plays with Japan. It baffles me, I also think Japan is the most powerful Civ in the game too, and certainly anyone who plays with them can't accuse someone else of being cheap.

Ehm, japanese imo are one of the worst civilizations (like tier 3 out of tier 4) and not the most powerful civ. Zulu are the most overpowered and noob civ. (and cheap)

 

[Terrapin]

I've only played a few times, but I did learn the hard way that Zulus make terrible neighbors. Their insta-heal armies are just brutal. But I cannot say how good they are to play. I like the Chinese. Combine extra city starting population with CoL (Which China can get as their ?first? or ?second? tech) and you get fast early growth. To my eye, and based on limited experience, The biggest limitation in CivRev is the relatively small amount of land. He who gets his cities down first wins.

 

[bonafide11]

Ehm, japanese imo are one of the worst civilizations (like tier 3 out of tier 4) and not the most powerful civ. Zulu are the most overpowered and noob civ. (and cheap)

I think you're crazy... Japan's +1 food in sea tiles is SO powerful. They can grow while doing research from the start, nobody else can do that, which allows them to go for horseback riding early, and then rush. The Zulu have no strength bonus, so if you have one archer in your city, you're sure to repel their attack. One warrior will often repel their attack as well. If the Zulu's early attack is unsuccessful, they're in big trouble. I don't see how that is cheap or overpowered at all. I think the Arabs are tougher to defend than the Zulu. Just defend your cities and you'll be fine against the Zulu, the Arab are strong enough that they can overpower your defense.

 

[bonafide11]

I've only played a few times, but I did learn the hard way that Zulus make terrible neighbors. Their insta-heal armies are just brutal. But I cannot say how good they are to play. I like the Chinese. Combine extra city starting population with CoL (Which China can get as their ?first? or ?second? tech) and you get fast early growth. To my eye, and based on limited experience, The biggest limitation in CivRev is the relatively small amount of land. He who gets his cities down first wins.

The Aztecs have the insta-heal armies, but you're right, both them and the Zulu make bad neighbors.

 

[MorteEterna]

I think you're crazy... Japan's +1 food in sea tiles is SO powerful. They can grow while doing research from the start, nobody else can do that, which allows them to go for horseback riding early, and then rush. The Zulu have no strength bonus, so if you have one archer in your city, you're sure to repel their attack. One warrior will often repel their attack as well. If the Zulu's early attack is unsuccessful, they're in big trouble. I don't see how that is cheap or overpowered at all. I think the Arabs are tougher to defend than the Zulu. Just defend your cities and you'll be fine against the Zulu, the Arab are strong enough that they can overpower your defense.

Are you kidding or are you a new player?

Not sure about the first.

Horseback in 5 turns, uhm, then, in 10 turns one horsemen?

Oh, wow, with luck I can have one horsemen unit in 3 turns (like a warrior).

+1 food is NOT POWERFUL. Zulu are the most overpowered and if you KNOW how to play they can do still much.

 

[bonafide11]

Are you kidding or are you a new player?

Not sure about the first.

Horseback in 5 turns, uhm, then, in 10 turns one horsemen?

Oh, wow, with luck I can have one horsemen unit in 3 turns (like a warrior).

+1 food is NOT POWERFUL. Zulu are the most overpowered and if you KNOW how to play they can do still much.

No, not a new player, been playing since it came out.

You can't compare horsemen with warriors, horsemen have stronger attacks! They can beat archers, warriors don't stand a chance.

The Zulu are powerful, I'll grant that, but not the most overpowered by any means. China and Japan are the most powerful, in my opinion.

 

[Kadazzle]

No, not a new player, been playing since it came out.

You can't compare horsemen with warriors, horsemen have stronger attacks! They can beat archers, warriors don't stand a chance.

The Zulu are powerful, I'll grant that, but not the most overpowered by any means. China and Japan are the most powerful, in my opinion.

I think you're missing something though, Bonafide. Zulu warriors are like horsemen, because of their movement bonus. When you say that the Zulu don't have an attack bonus, you're right if you're talking about a direct attack bonus, but wrong if talking about a indirect attack bonus. A Zulu warrior army is enough to over-run barbarians (Because of their over-run bonus). Because of the double movement, and the over-run bonus, a Zulu warrior army can reach veteran and infiltration in 1/4 the time it would take a regular warrior army.

Now, for what Morte was saying. It is very easy to get a Horsemen in 3 turns as the Zulu. You can get an army in easily under 8 turns. Because of the Zulu over-run bonus and their double movement bonus, the Zulu can get many, many, many huts and barbarian villages. All huts and Barbarians villages convert into gold and production. Gold and production is what the Zulus run off of. As a Zulu player, you only need to manually build a single horsemen, as you'll have more then enough gold to rush the other two.

As for saying that Japan is the best, I have to disagree with that. Japan +1 food is a very good bonus, but I believe you're looking at it at the wrong angle. Japan is a builder civ, and should be used accordingly. The +1 food on sea squares complements a building civ, and not the mention No Anarchy in the Industrial Era and Loyalty Bonus in the Modern Era. If you play Japan as a rushing civ, you're not playing them to their full potential. A rusher civ is a civ that has a high production, strong offensive units and a quick population growth. Under that description, the Zulus, Arabs and the Chinese are the best rusher civs. Japan only has a potential to get a high production and population, but that is luck based if you rush as them. If you peacefully build and tech, while taking advantage of unprotected and little-defense cities, you should win the game.

In my Egyptian Guide, I showed the difference between the Egyptian +1 Food on desert squares bonus, vs the Japanese +1 Food on Sea squares bonus. Both Egypt and Japan are mainly builder civs, while Egypt (If luck) can be a superb rushing civ. Now, back to the bonuses. Egypts +1 Food from desert vastly outweighs the Japanese bonus of +1 food from sea squares in the long run. Japan will get more out of their bonus before the Medieval era compared to Egypt, and Egypt's bonus will outplay the Japanese bonus Medieval past. Besides the fact that Egypt can settle in spots others can't, their bonus can be multiplied more times than the Japanese bonus. Japan's bonus can be multiplied using a Library, and a University. What about Egypt's bonus? Egypt's bonus can be multiplied by a Library, University and a Trading Post. This means that you will be getting 1(? Haven't played the game in a while, my Xbox broke and I'm awaiting its return) extra science per tile vs sea squares if you only have a trading post. It will double with a Library, and the gap will get even bigger with a University.

Saying Japan is one of the best civs is untrue. Everyone has opinions, but I believe as a rushing civ, the Mongolians*, Aztecs, Zulu, Chinese, Egyptians and Arabs are better. What about as a building civ? England, Egypt, Greewks, Zulu (Yes, Zulu are even hell-a good at being peaceful builders) and Spanish are better at being peaceful builders. In my opinion, Japan is an ordinary mid-level civ. There has been countless times were I've played Japanese players and won, because a) They didn't know how to build peacefully properly and b) They tried a rush that was way too late, because Japan can't consistently pull off rushes like other good rushing civs can.

 

[Kadazzle]

Republic is the best, and much more for chinese, obviously later one democracy is better, but:

3 pop = 6 science

Rush a settler, 4 science, new city = 10 science

Democracy = 9 science

2 pop = 4 science

2 science rushing a settler, plus the new city = 6 science

Democracy = 6 science but doesn't improve your growth

(Sorry for the double-post)


Morte, you're right about this, but you're forgetting the fact that most players unlock Democracy once they're done, or near finished expanding. You can still expand using other government types.

 

[MorteEterna]

(Sorry for the double-post)


Morte, you're right about this, but you're forgetting the fact that most players unlock Democracy once they're done, or near finished expanding. You can still expand using other government types.

I know, but you can use republic and expand until you have got many cities, like with spanish. Then, I research democracy getting 0 turn of anarchy.

------

And, japanese as I said in my opinion are one of the worst rushers (maybe the worst). Only if you defend and use their bonuses then you can win, but saying they are the best means you didn't play enough.

And, I started playing the game since the release and I played like 1200 games, then, I have experience about the civilizations of this game. I hate japanese, I would prefer mongols or indians.

 

[Terrapin]

I have a problem with Kadazzles Egypt v. Japan analysis. Actually, two problems. One is that Japan's sea squares are more valuable right at the beginning of the game. One of the constants in all versions of civ is that early growth has a multiplier effect which snowballs as the game goes along. The other issue is that there are just a whole lot more sea spaces than desert spaces. Japan is sure to be able to use its bonus from the very beginning of the game and in virtually every city. Egypt, unless it is dead lucky, is only going to have one or two desert spaces and not even in every city.

Another thought has occurred to me. That is that you guys, like good gamers, are focusing on civs with predictable bonuses which can always be put into action. What occurred to me is that any of these civs could get buried by one of the two civs whose initial bonus depends upon luck. One is the Indians with their ability to use any terrain right away. Obviously, most of the time, this bonus sucks because you only get to work one special terrain and it is usually a common one, like fish, which you can get the relevant tech for early. But what if Gandhi catches a break and lands on a whale, oak trees and gold? One quick settler later and another lucky city location and India could just plain run away and hide! A similar analysis applies to the Mongols. The suck unless Genghis gets lucky and finds three or four barb villages in a row. All of a sudden, he has four or five cities and can rush and build simultaneously.

 

[Kadazzle]

I have a problem with Kadazzles Egypt v. Japan analysis. Actually, two problems. One is that Japan's sea squares are more valuable right at the beginning of the game. One of the constants in all versions of civ is that early growth has a multiplier effect which snowballs as the game goes along. The other issue is that there are just a whole lot more sea spaces than desert spaces. Japan is sure to be able to use its bonus from the very beginning of the game and in virtually every city. Egypt, unless it is dead lucky, is only going to have one or two desert spaces and not even in every city.

This, is why I posted this:

Now, back to the bonuses. Egypts +1 Food from desert vastly outweighs the Japanese bonus of +1 food from sea squares in the long run. Japan will get more out of their bonus before the Medieval era compared to Egypt, and Egypt's bonus will outplay the Japanese bonus Medieval past.

Egypt's bonus outplays Japan's in the long run. In the middle of the map, and around the map, there is always desert. The flaw in your argument is, is that you say that there is more Sea squares, which you're right about. But what you don't take in account is the fact that when you build a city, you're not only going to be using sea squares or desert squares, but a combination of sea/desert squares and production tiles. This makes the fact that there is more sea squares than desert squares irrelevant, because a city of 5 population will only be using 3 sea squares, or 3 desert squares, not 5 sea squares or 3 desert squares, as production is need in a city. I also stated in the quote above, that yes, Japan does better then Egypt in the beginning game.

 

[PiMan]

Egypt can be far better than the Japanese, even in the early game, with a little luck.
If you get a handful of desert squares and your free wonder is a Colossus, then you get tons of food and trade for your first city.