[BTS] Leader Tier List Comparison

[Gwaja]

My definition of what a "best leader" is, assuming we are talking Deity? I'd say that the "best" leader is the one that makes it the easiest for any average Joe player be able to jump into Deity and have the most probability of actually pulling off a win. After that, I'd consider how much I personally enjoy playing as that leader, but that's purely subjective within my own preferences. Therefore, if I were to pick MY "S" tier, I'd restrict it to Huayna Capac and Mansa Musa.

What got me started on this thread was mainly due to my strong personal opinion on the Egyptian leaders and to certain extent, Tokugawa and Burger King.

Unique buildings should definitely be considered in this ranking. Shaka's Ikhanda has great synergy with his Aggressive trait, and is not dependent upon a certain map type, making it one of the best unique buildings and propels him into a solid "B" tier in my book. Mr. Featherhead's Sacrificial Altar is, hands down, the best unique building in the game in my opinion, so even if I think that Jaguars belong in the "F" tier of all unique units, I'd put much more value on his building in my final evaluation of him.

 

[Noble Zarkon]

Look I love war chariots I do. But most of the time I don't get pasture resources and can't justify the risk of rushing AH. And then the one game I do get pigs and rush AH, horses are nowhere to be found. The stars align maybe 20% of the time. Iron on the other hand? Going to have iron or be able to acquire it north of 90% of the time when you factor in that both Romans are IMP. Self-teching IW is still stupid with Rome and that's where people go wrong. Just push to construction and trade for IW. Qs and WCs obsolete to spearmen. Praets obsolete to infantry. The Romans are the best civ on pangaea because Praets wipe the map

On the lower levels waiting for IW just takes too long and on the higher levels waiting just lets the AI build up too much. Also with HOF style of play 5 minutes in and you know if you have horses or you need to throw the map away....

 

[drewisfat]

Praetorians > War Chariots > Quechuas, maybe we should tell the HoF guys about this find

This appeal to absurdity hinges on imagining I said WCs > Qs, when if anything I said the opposite. HoF players are aware that Praets are OP though.
Deity #1s
Inca: 53, Rome: 37, England 19, Egypt 14, Persia 13.

On the lower levels waiting for IW just takes too long and on the higher levels waiting just lets the AI build up too much. Also with HOF style of play 5 minutes in and you know if you have horses or you need to throw the map away....

My comment about generally not finding horses was in relation to standard play before HoF got brought up. That said, any competitive record grind is going to involve a bunch of filters for perfect conditions, and a 90% filter of non-BFC horses is certainly not trivial even if it's 5 mins in.
Ultimately I prefer using arguments instead of HoF data, because the HoF has always suffered from far, far (like 100x) too many records compared to the number of players actively challenging them. Anysense went on a tear with Rome and that's why they're so high, but that shouldn't discount that he's proven the consistency of Praets is viable for a variety of records. Inca #1s are heavily buffered by a bunch of small map victories that are essentially Q-locked, so I figured a better analysis could be done focusing on one record (or one type of record) and I'm familiar with std/normal/deity non-cheese victories, as that's what I always play. Rome is strong there. I think a perfect Rome game outperforms a perfect Inca game. It's an apples to oranges comparison, early rush vs a long-term unit, and the worker steal improvements have made developing traditionally and then pushing out a lot stronger than it used to be. WCs are basically an apples to apples comparison with Qs, you rush down your neighboring AI(s) and then transition to elepult with both of them, but Qs are faster/cheaper than WCs and there's no horse filter.

 

[BornInCantaloup]

the worker steal improvements have made developing traditionally and then pushing out a lot stronger than it used to be.

I don't know about improvements (I'd refute) but you're quite right that a choke/multi-steal contends extremely well with early city captures. I won't quote your last post about worker steals.

On my not understanding you, this has just happened to me in some other thread. Maybe I read wrong, it's possible. I present you my apologies if that was the case, peace.

 

[PPQ_Purple]

Leader and Civilisation should not be separated. Otherwise "financial best, protective worst, the end".

Financial is nice but I'd always rather take industrial or spiritual. Free civic/religion conversions are a big bonus and so is 50% extra wonder production which can mean the difference between having all of them and having none.

 

[Noble Zarkon]

I'm familiar with std/normal/deity non-cheese victories, as that's what I always play. Rome is strong there. I think a perfect Rome game outperforms a perfect Inca game.

Sounds like an idea for a gauntlet or a GOTM .

Incas are definitely better on smaller maps etc and I think every HOF player knows Rome are strong. The Quecha snowball just gets started so fast it's hard to beat, Rome has the advantage it doesn't care if the AIs get metal.

 

[Noble Zarkon]

Rome is strong there. I think a perfect Rome game outperforms a perfect Inca game.

Would it make a difference which Roman leader you had in a face off?

 

[Fippy]

I checked my HOF entries with Hatty @drewisfat , looks like the Large / Epic game finished in 140BC.
Epic speed surely makes a difference, but i'm not sure Praets would be faster.

An ideal HOF Hatty game (i think she's much better than Ramsy for that..border pops are so important) would be starting with WCs (obviously ), and then using the quickly gained territory for masses of HAs. Captured workers chop huge armies of them, and losses are just made up for with new cities. WCs still good against stray Axes.
I think this can be done, like dozens of Cavs can take out AIs with Rifles. Elepult just needed if an AI manages to get invincible defenders, otherwise too slow.

 

[drewisfat]

Would it make a difference which Roman leader you had in a face off?

Yes, I think wonder greed has higher potential, so Aug. Theorycrafted for conquest, you build oracle -> feudalism. IMP/IND the best traits you can have for that since the capital is literally building like settler, settler, oracle, settler at the critical point. And feudalism is a big way Rome can catch up to the rushboys. They have to conquer every city at least of the initial targets, Rome takes 1-2 and it's onto the next. Probably fail on getting feudalism ~60% of the time, but the early wars are a lot more consistent because vassalage + ignoring hill cities. Praets very good for capitulating, since you'll take fewer casualties (-warscore) and have higher military power (so keeping a bunch of 1-2 city vassals doesn't make the last AI resistant to capitulating).
For domination, dream is settle on stone and build stonehenge. 30 for a perfectly timed golden age, and if even one of your cities otherwise needed a monument, you recoup the hammers immediately.
Julius' ORG doesn't have the same tactics available, though it's obviously going to be superior on huge maps and can even pull its weight on a pangaea rush since generally you're pressed for land and are dependent on some seafood.

If you make a gauntlet to go after the 1 record I hold I will lose all semblance of sanity and work/life balance to hold it lol.

@Fippy impressive game no doubt! Doesn't even look like micropangaea or agg ai? Still looks really solid, especially sitting next to a 1620AD normal win lol.