[GS] June Update Tier List

So the most recent patch had a good bit of rebalancing in store for some of the weaker Civs, along with some much needed fixes (more production and rescaling of production/techs makes a very happy Jewel). This patch, in tandem with the previous one, really altered the status quo of the metagame, and in a positive way. I truly don't believe there are any genuinely awful Civs in the game; mediocre or underwhelming, sure, but no trash Civs. So I'd like to open up some discourse on who the best Civs in the game are. In the past, I've teased some tier lists without ever finishing them, so here I'm just gonna go ahead and open up with mine:

(EDIT: The obscured Civs are Cyrus & Tomyris, in that order left to right)

 

EoA in France the same as for England?

 

There's really not enough changes in the civ's relative spots for me to make a new chart, but yes there are no truly awful civs, though Georgia, Norway, and Frelanor is still a meme.

Rome seems really good with the new IZs, and I almost wanted to put England Eleanor as B but that's a bit much.

Russia is arguably top 3 with the excess GPP turning into faith makes them spew out of faith everywhere, and having a triple lavra with Religious Settlements is sorta broken.

 

Victoria's England definitely shouldn't be bottom tier

 

How do people rate Mansu Musa? I found him fun on lower difficulties but his starts are often so painfully slow I found him weak on levels where the AI is prone to attack on sight.

I want to try a pillaging game as Norway. I want it to be enough to have elevated him off the bottom but I'm not sure it has.

I'm also gonna say that I think Lautaro is really underrated. +10 strength vs civs in a golden age made for my easiest deity win to date...

 

It depends on the settings and the goal of your game. For the record I play almost exclusively on Huge Pangea maps on marathon speed.

If everything is permitted then Norway stands alone at the top. The Aztecs are second and then Russia and Mali are tied for third. On a side note Korea is **** and should drop to B or C. Georgia is better than Korea.

If just building and not conquering then Norway drops to the bottom. Russia is top, Mali second and then Pericles Greece is a close 3rd. Korea is still **** and drops down to B or C. Georgia is still better than Korea.

 

I don't notice French Eleanor on this list. Is English Eleanor meant to represent both?

 

Regarding your D tier:

Everytime I play as Lautaro, I go for the Crusader belief and attack during golden ages. +20 combat strength is one of the most hilarious things in the game. He also has a nice UI which boosts early culture.
The Khmer are also a hidden gem for culture victory and a very strong medieval war if you know how to play them.
I also really like India (both leaders). Stepwell is amazing for early growth and a lot of the times, their temples become absolutely insane with all the combined follower beliefs.

Haven't played the others in a while so can't really comment on them.

 

I find Kupe top tier due to his early game domination. Find a plains hill to start on with some forest nearby? Instant 4 production start plus the Tao's are still incredible.

Khmer I find are only good for one thing, missionary death to relic spam.

 

My opinion:

Germany down to C

Inca up to S

Kupe, Saladin and Japan down to B. Mali down to C (no more harvest pantheon? very early game faith not so good anymore)

Pericles and China up to A

Dido down to D, Cleo and Gitarja down to C

Sweden and Canada up to B

Eleanor (England) can stay at D, but France Eleanor up to C. Gandhi and Lautaro also up to C.

 

Ah tier lists. The most useless rating system ever conceived.

 

What's hard about making Civ tier lists, compared to competitive games, is there is no uniform way to play. The different map types give stark advantages to certain civs while punishing others.There is also the difficulty the game is played on, which affects the reliability of strategies/play styles. For example Spain can get +18 combat strength on their Conquistadors pretty reliably with a religion, but the higher the difficulty you are less likely to get a religion and have to sacrifice more opportunities to get one.

 

Excellent observation. When one sets out to make a tiered list, one should include their preferred map settings, victory condition, and difficulty level.

 

Aztec is still pretty much on top in all circumstances.

 

I just finished a game with Norway, their pillaging bonuses are insane. Definitely not bottom tier just on that alone.

 

I mean it's not really a case of whether the bonuses are good. All bonuses are good, and are geared towards one or multiple victory types. (it's actually surprising how competent Tamar is at diplo victory if she gets a majority religion in her cities, especially one she founded herself.)

It's really just a question of how easy it is to take advantage to them. I'll take Mapuche's +20 combat strength as an example. It is stupidly strong but look at its requirements:
- Mapuche SHOULD found a religion (this is optional but then it becomes entirely luck dependent)
- Mapuche's state religion MUST have crusade as a religious tenet
- Mapuche AND Mapuche's target MUST follow that religion
- Mapuche's target MUST be in a Golden Age.

Those are four really specific conditions, in order for them to steamroll with the most ridiculous advantage in strength found in the game. That's why they are a lower tier civ. Their bonuses can work really well, but require a lot of circumstantial set up, circumstances you often do not have control over. This isn't like Shaka and his Corps & Armies spam or Chandra's Territorial expansion blitzes, advantages whose regulation is near-effortless.

The same line of thought is also why Pax Britannica is a still a subpar ability: it's an ability that relies on 'bad' RNG, in that you cannot control your spawn location and thus are just as likely to get a 4-5 units/trade routes as you are to receive 1 or 2.

I think I should probably make an excel spreadsheet out of this in order to establish some sort of statistical tier ranking but i'm leaving on a holiday in a few days so I will probably forget. OH WELL.

 

Ehh, if you want to meme with Crusade, do Zulu; you can easily get 78 strength knights and requires zero luck. Well, I guess you could have no iron and have to use some cheap disposable unit... oh impis.

Spain, Poland, France, or Mongolia can easily stack those modifiers too. Of course Poland is the only of these that has a religious advantage.

And that's the main issue with domination civs.... everyone and their dog has bonuses to combat.

Personally, I always pick Defender of the Faith and consider it an inherent part of my Russia games. It means you can skimp on troops and expand freely, as well as forward settling and turning your defense into offense via ranged units. It also takes effect faster since your religoon autospreads to all your cities with a HS.

Oh btw, unless you're Arabia, when you go for religion you are inherently skimping on troops, so uhh well, that just goes better with it vs early aggression.

And yea, Mapuche isn't that bad.

If you want my actual opinions, I think the list is pretty good overall. I think Russia is S tier actually, Japan is good but overrated. I'm also not sure how France and Ottomans can be with Canada, they both have easy and substantial combat bonuses early on and that can never put anyone low; on the same note I think Zulu is a bit overrated. If you think Zulu is strong, that is fair, but if you think Zulu is good, you should also think Poland is good since they spike at literally the same time with Zulu being stronger but Poland being faster.

Also FYI people have been getting those really fast wins with Sweden.

 

What is considered a fast win?

 

~t150 normal speed or so, given by what people are posting.

 

One civ I’d like to challenge is Hungary, which always seems to be put in the top tier. If you look at the steam achievements win % for the GS civs, Hungary is down the bottom with Dido, clearly behind the likes of Sweden and Canada, which you put much lower down.

I must admit it’s not a civ I’ve tried yet myself but I’m wondering if it is harder for Prince level players to effectively exploit Hungary’s abilities