Least Favourite Civ?
- Thread starter akashsara
- Start date
russelljimmies
Chieftain
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2012
- Messages
- 10
So much Japan and Ottoman hate
Least (Less worse)
5. Celts, Don't like the units and early religion is w/e to be honest
4. Siam, i like the ability but nothing else at all
3. Carthage, free harbors are cool but i just get bored when i play Carthage
2. Polynesia, good music boring everything else
1. Denmark, even with the patch these guys are still really boring
Most
5. Rome, cool units and a pretty neat ability
4. Aztecs, domination culture victories that is all
3. Ottomans, LOVE THE MUSIC OMGWOW and janissaries are cool
2. Persia, awesome music, awesome unit, awesome building, awesome ability
1. Japan, samurai
Least (Less worse)
5. Celts, Don't like the units and early religion is w/e to be honest
4. Siam, i like the ability but nothing else at all
3. Carthage, free harbors are cool but i just get bored when i play Carthage
2. Polynesia, good music boring everything else
1. Denmark, even with the patch these guys are still really boring
Most
5. Rome, cool units and a pretty neat ability
4. Aztecs, domination culture victories that is all
3. Ottomans, LOVE THE MUSIC OMGWOW and janissaries are cool
2. Persia, awesome music, awesome unit, awesome building, awesome ability
1. Japan, samurai
Magma_Dragoon
Reploid
- Joined
- May 10, 2008
- Messages
- 2,354
My most hated enemy is Hiawatha. He has settler dysentery. With his insane mobility, his elf soldiers dance around my armies and gain huge flank bonuses. And if he isn't at war with me, he's busy steamrolling 3 civs before I can even meet them.
fuzzatron717
Holy Warrior
Least favorite.
5. Korea UA decent the UU's are crap because there weaker than the generic
4.Siam colour not the greatest neither is the leader and I could never read the names of the cities.
3. Iroqois I hate forest starts even with there ability it takes forever to build farms.
2. Japan second worst civ period.
1. Aztec I know people like this civ but I find outdated because the I don't start wars until the late medival-early renassiance and thats if I even go warring which 1/10000 game.
Good civs no order Byzantium Russia America Netherlands and Rome. Favorite civ mod Canada.
5. Korea UA decent the UU's are crap because there weaker than the generic
4.Siam colour not the greatest neither is the leader and I could never read the names of the cities.
3. Iroqois I hate forest starts even with there ability it takes forever to build farms.
2. Japan second worst civ period.
1. Aztec I know people like this civ but I find outdated because the I don't start wars until the late medival-early renassiance and thats if I even go warring which 1/10000 game.
Good civs no order Byzantium Russia America Netherlands and Rome. Favorite civ mod Canada.
I'm interested to know more about Byzantium?
I just got G&K (50% off sale on Steam) and wanted to try my first G&K game. I was thinking Byzantium would be a good G&K civ on low diff, because on low diff I would be founding all the religions. Is that accurate?
I just got G&K (50% off sale on Steam) and wanted to try my first G&K game. I was thinking Byzantium would be a good G&K civ on low diff, because on low diff I would be founding all the religions. Is that accurate?
He is now just like any other random AI; ie. will declare war if you settle "too close" or are just weak or "winning the game in similar manner..."
Is there anything specific in one of the patch notes that proves this? To my knowledge, he had a high "friendly" rating and would be rather tolerant of you for a while. If this truly has changed, I'm curious as to when.
ekat2468
Warlord
Here is my list (Why all the hate for Siam and India, great cultural civs?)
4. Polynesia: Only on archipelago does their unique ability really do that much, moai are okay, but they kind of need a wide empire to build a lot of them to generate culture, and going wide doesn't result in a cultural victory. Maori warriors are only good for defense, which I can do with ranged units perfectly fine.
3. Germany: I usually play with barbs off, because I have had twenty trillion workers captured and had my cities pillaged, so the ability is nearly obsolete, and the cheaper land maintenance is only noticeable really early, none of the times I would go to war. I never use the pikeman class, other units are more powerful and better. the panzer is nice, but comes to late.
2. Denmark: I generally see no point to pillaging because when I take that city, the tile will be less usable and I need to pull out a worker to repair that. England defeats the purpose of +1 movement, and 1 movement sea to land is not to useful, melee units not being able to be used for anything they couldn't do in the water, and siege units most of the time not being able to prevent them from being extrememly vulnerable, it is also quite useless when target city is not coastal. Berserkers are kind of worth it, ambhibious being something I never notice, the extra MP can be helpful, though not very. Ski Infantry are rarely useful when not fighting at the poles.
1. Songhai: How do you play them well? UA requires a steady stream of city taking to be proper, which is rarely able to be done when playing on higher difficulties. The UU I would scrap for the conquistador, which has it's advantages, with others, The production reduction is barely noticeable. Mud pyrmaid mosques are only good with G&K producing faith, the culture is barely noticable, it requires going wide, which is not good for culture, and the maintenance reduction is fine, but temples a building that is not on the top of my list of things to do.
4. Polynesia: Only on archipelago does their unique ability really do that much, moai are okay, but they kind of need a wide empire to build a lot of them to generate culture, and going wide doesn't result in a cultural victory. Maori warriors are only good for defense, which I can do with ranged units perfectly fine.
3. Germany: I usually play with barbs off, because I have had twenty trillion workers captured and had my cities pillaged, so the ability is nearly obsolete, and the cheaper land maintenance is only noticeable really early, none of the times I would go to war. I never use the pikeman class, other units are more powerful and better. the panzer is nice, but comes to late.
2. Denmark: I generally see no point to pillaging because when I take that city, the tile will be less usable and I need to pull out a worker to repair that. England defeats the purpose of +1 movement, and 1 movement sea to land is not to useful, melee units not being able to be used for anything they couldn't do in the water, and siege units most of the time not being able to prevent them from being extrememly vulnerable, it is also quite useless when target city is not coastal. Berserkers are kind of worth it, ambhibious being something I never notice, the extra MP can be helpful, though not very. Ski Infantry are rarely useful when not fighting at the poles.
1. Songhai: How do you play them well? UA requires a steady stream of city taking to be proper, which is rarely able to be done when playing on higher difficulties. The UU I would scrap for the conquistador, which has it's advantages, with others, The production reduction is barely noticeable. Mud pyrmaid mosques are only good with G&K producing faith, the culture is barely noticable, it requires going wide, which is not good for culture, and the maintenance reduction is fine, but temples a building that is not on the top of my list of things to do.
As the person above me says, all the civs that have strictly war-based UAs, UBs, and UUs aren't amazing as having an army of, let's say ship of the line, but nothing else to fall back onto when warring doesn't go your way. I'm not calling out England because they do get the spy, but let's say something like Germany, Japan, and even America aren't great imo. I also love to see what other people are saying, because it's quite interesting and seems to be based extremely different from person to person. I personally, love Poly. Of course p, on Pangea they can't do squat, but just try a game on an island map. Huge advantages just from all the ruins you find 
Least Favorite:
5. India -> Their elephant not hardcore enough, UB kinda bad. UA not interesting.
4. America -> I feel the excitement is only at later game with B17, for early 150 turn ++ is meh..
3. Denmark -> Can't feel the synergy with my style of playing
2. Aztec -> Starting place mostly with LOTS LOTS LOTS of jungle, hate that although the ability is great but still jungle start
1. Polynesia -> Boring, UU damn weak
Favorite Civ
1. England -> Best UU in game to dominate naval n land, 2 Spies is awesome
2. Mayan -> Easy science & religion, Fast GP as well
3. Sweden -> Can play for various type of VC
4. Babylon -> Free & cheap GS
5. Ottoman -> Just love them
Favorite AI Civ against with :
- Old imba Austria -> Challenging
- Siam -> I feel threaten against bunch of stampy
- Mongol -> You'll feel the early DoW pressure
- France -> Their existence haunts you after medieval era
- Any Civ who play very wide
5. India -> Their elephant not hardcore enough, UB kinda bad. UA not interesting.
4. America -> I feel the excitement is only at later game with B17, for early 150 turn ++ is meh..
3. Denmark -> Can't feel the synergy with my style of playing
2. Aztec -> Starting place mostly with LOTS LOTS LOTS of jungle, hate that although the ability is great but still jungle start
1. Polynesia -> Boring, UU damn weak
Favorite Civ
1. England -> Best UU in game to dominate naval n land, 2 Spies is awesome
2. Mayan -> Easy science & religion, Fast GP as well
3. Sweden -> Can play for various type of VC
4. Babylon -> Free & cheap GS
5. Ottoman -> Just love them
Favorite AI Civ against with :
- Old imba Austria -> Challenging
- Siam -> I feel threaten against bunch of stampy
- Mongol -> You'll feel the early DoW pressure
- France -> Their existence haunts you after medieval era
- Any Civ who play very wide
ense7en
n7
Huns. Extremely one dimensional civ that is rendered impotent in a hurry if you cannot get an early rush successfully pulled off.
Germany. Not a bad civ, and the AI seems to thrive with them in nearly all my games, just lacking a flavor i find appealing.
Denmark. Not constantly warmongering? Then this civ's UA, and UUs aren't going to help much.
Japan. Again, a purely war-based civ. Extremely strong UA in the hands of the AI.
Celts. Love the colors with this civ. Nice UU and UB.
But i find the UA irritating as it means i have to try to settle cities by forests, and then NOT work the forest tiles? WTF.
That drives me insane. I think it needs to be changed to be more like the Iroquois UA and at least let me make lumber mills or trading posts on the forest.
So the theme obviously for me is that i don't really like civs that require a pure war focus, unless they have a really fun UU to do so.
Not that i don't go to war, i do, generally a lot in every game, but i dislike being forced to play toward domination in all games basically, unless i really wanted to from the beginning.
Germany. Not a bad civ, and the AI seems to thrive with them in nearly all my games, just lacking a flavor i find appealing.
Denmark. Not constantly warmongering? Then this civ's UA, and UUs aren't going to help much.
Japan. Again, a purely war-based civ. Extremely strong UA in the hands of the AI.
Celts. Love the colors with this civ. Nice UU and UB.
But i find the UA irritating as it means i have to try to settle cities by forests, and then NOT work the forest tiles? WTF.
That drives me insane. I think it needs to be changed to be more like the Iroquois UA and at least let me make lumber mills or trading posts on the forest.
So the theme obviously for me is that i don't really like civs that require a pure war focus, unless they have a really fun UU to do so.
Not that i don't go to war, i do, generally a lot in every game, but i dislike being forced to play toward domination in all games basically, unless i really wanted to from the beginning.
- Joined
- Aug 12, 2010
- Messages
- 16,937
Siam: A little on the boring side and I don't like the color scheme. The UA is very passive and the UU is powerful, but I'm just not that into it. Maybe I should try it again since G&K.
India: The UA is an equation. The UU doesn't improve the ChArcher enough to make me want to use it. The UB is useless until the industrial age.
Babylon: The UB and UU are boring and the UA has been significantly weakened since G&K.
Polynesia: I don't like the UI. I feel like I sacrifice other imrpovements to get that culture. The UA tends to promote expansion, but the UI tends to promote a tall cultural strategy, so the civ feels kind of bipolar. Plus I have issues playing against Polynesia. When they are on the map, I have to play nice with them or else they bias civs on other continents against me before I even meet them.
Rome: Subtle UAs annoy me. To take advantage of it I have to build buildings in the capital, but IT'S ROME!!! I want to build wonders there or units, not forges and stables! Plus I'm usually not very aggressive, so siege UUs don't do much for me and neither of the UUs pass their uniqueness on when upgraded.
America: THe UA is subtle like Rome's. Also, familiarity breeds contempt.
Germany: The UA is kind of weird for me. I like to hunt barbarians, but it ends up saddling me with a huge army and I'm just not that aggressive. So I delete units to get money out of them and I feel like I'm wasting the UA. ALso, the Landsknecht is boring.
India: The UA is an equation. The UU doesn't improve the ChArcher enough to make me want to use it. The UB is useless until the industrial age.
Babylon: The UB and UU are boring and the UA has been significantly weakened since G&K.
Polynesia: I don't like the UI. I feel like I sacrifice other imrpovements to get that culture. The UA tends to promote expansion, but the UI tends to promote a tall cultural strategy, so the civ feels kind of bipolar. Plus I have issues playing against Polynesia. When they are on the map, I have to play nice with them or else they bias civs on other continents against me before I even meet them.
Rome: Subtle UAs annoy me. To take advantage of it I have to build buildings in the capital, but IT'S ROME!!! I want to build wonders there or units, not forges and stables! Plus I'm usually not very aggressive, so siege UUs don't do much for me and neither of the UUs pass their uniqueness on when upgraded.
America: THe UA is subtle like Rome's. Also, familiarity breeds contempt.
Germany: The UA is kind of weird for me. I like to hunt barbarians, but it ends up saddling me with a huge army and I'm just not that aggressive. So I delete units to get money out of them and I feel like I'm wasting the UA. ALso, the Landsknecht is boring.
I probably have Gandhi the MOST when I have chosen random for my civ.
And, probably my LEAST favorite. Haven't played with them, but just what the civ's perks are, I don't like.
I'd have to follow with Polynesia, Korea, Dutch, and Sweden. No particular reason, no particular order. Just ones I have refused to play as so far.
Zezima
Professional Troll
In no particular order:
Iroquois
Denmark
India
The ones I hate fighting against the most are:
Siam
Spain
Iroquois (absolutely the worst by far)
Mostly based on their attitudes and behaviors, not their UUs and such.
Iroquois
Denmark
India
The ones I hate fighting against the most are:
Siam
Spain
Iroquois (absolutely the worst by far)
Mostly based on their attitudes and behaviors, not their UUs and such.
GreenRoomGames
Chieftain
5 Egypt, UA is unusable on deity. It seems as though It's UA exists to remain competitive with the AI, it doesn't do that at all. If you're going for a wonder an extra 20% won't make a difference one way or the other. Unique building is good for happiness though.
4 England has gotten a buff as of late with it's extra spy, but it's still very weak without the use of it's ship of the line or naval bonus. There is too much dependance on the navy for a pangea, or even continents map. The longbowman is fine, the extra range is useful against cities but its usefulness is confined by its sight when it comes to units.
3 Oda Nabunaga's UA is largely useless when dealing with ranged or flight units and mediocre with melee. It's samurai is good but becomes obsolete so quickly it's barely worth building. The Zero fighter's +33 against other fighters is rarely useful.
2 Polynesia is, just like england, very dependant upon an ocean spawn. Outside of archapelago there is very little use for them.
1 Ghandi's terrible UA is the stuff of legend so that pretty much ensures it's number 1.
4 England has gotten a buff as of late with it's extra spy, but it's still very weak without the use of it's ship of the line or naval bonus. There is too much dependance on the navy for a pangea, or even continents map. The longbowman is fine, the extra range is useful against cities but its usefulness is confined by its sight when it comes to units.
3 Oda Nabunaga's UA is largely useless when dealing with ranged or flight units and mediocre with melee. It's samurai is good but becomes obsolete so quickly it's barely worth building. The Zero fighter's +33 against other fighters is rarely useful.
2 Polynesia is, just like england, very dependant upon an ocean spawn. Outside of archapelago there is very little use for them.
1 Ghandi's terrible UA is the stuff of legend so that pretty much ensures it's number 1.
1) Gandhi: I recently tried a Duel map with him, and even there his UA limited how quickly I could get my last two cities, which were cities #3 and #4 (I was playing Emperor, however; a lower difficulty might be better for Gandhi, but still...)
2) Oda Nobunaga: Not the worst when I can get a good amount of iron without too much trouble. But nothing says rage like only having 4 iron and having had to ally a CS or trade for half that measly amount.
3) Theodora: Very good at King on down, or on Duels (where you are guarenteed a religion can be founded by you), but rage-inducing when on Emperor and up where you maybe build 3 shrines, get a pantheon that doesn't increase faith because you have nothing to use faith-increasing pantheons on, and don't even found a religion. Beyond that, the Dromon is not exactly great unless playing at a slower speed than standard, and the cataphract is respectable but nothing more than a little above average (mounted units getting defensive bonuses is occasionally handy, though.
4) Ramses II: As GreenRoomGames said above me, their UA is not very good on Immortal or Deity. Depending on your terrain, even Emperor games may not be easy for hard-building wonders. The UB is good, the UU is decent (again, nothing great unless playing epic or slower), but the UA which is so overpowering on Prince is miserable on Immortal and Deity. Like Theodora, Ramses II has a UA that rocks on lower levels and fails on the upper levels.
5) Nebuchadnezzar: Babylon, once average on vanilla, is pretty miserable on G&K. The quickest UU in the game to be out-teched (Bowmen become Composite Bows in no time), a UB that is little more than a 5% boost on the standard Wall, and a UA that is pretty good in all reality.
Honorable mentions:
Spain - A knight replacement that acts as a scout is not so great unless its a huge map or you have no place to build a navy. Tercios are pretty good units, and are a reasonable unit even to rush to in some situations. But the UA is so hit-and-miss as to be like going into games blindfolded. Maybe I'll get 1200 gold in the early game this time. Maybe next time I'll get 300 gold all game until I research Satellites, when I'll get another 200 after things are pretty much decided.
Arabia - UA is alright, though double oil is a pretty late bonus. UU is basically a more powerful, slower Keshik that can only hit and run in completely open terrain. The UB, though, is either extremely potent (start location has 3 different luxes in it, and 2 other different luxes occur not too far away) or comically bad (start location has 2 different luxes in it, and the same 2 luxes not too far away; nothing like 14 Cotton and 14 Wine to really limit who you can trade with in the early game, when you only can see the three other civs on your continent).
2) Oda Nobunaga: Not the worst when I can get a good amount of iron without too much trouble. But nothing says rage like only having 4 iron and having had to ally a CS or trade for half that measly amount.
3) Theodora: Very good at King on down, or on Duels (where you are guarenteed a religion can be founded by you), but rage-inducing when on Emperor and up where you maybe build 3 shrines, get a pantheon that doesn't increase faith because you have nothing to use faith-increasing pantheons on, and don't even found a religion. Beyond that, the Dromon is not exactly great unless playing at a slower speed than standard, and the cataphract is respectable but nothing more than a little above average (mounted units getting defensive bonuses is occasionally handy, though.
4) Ramses II: As GreenRoomGames said above me, their UA is not very good on Immortal or Deity. Depending on your terrain, even Emperor games may not be easy for hard-building wonders. The UB is good, the UU is decent (again, nothing great unless playing epic or slower), but the UA which is so overpowering on Prince is miserable on Immortal and Deity. Like Theodora, Ramses II has a UA that rocks on lower levels and fails on the upper levels.
5) Nebuchadnezzar: Babylon, once average on vanilla, is pretty miserable on G&K. The quickest UU in the game to be out-teched (Bowmen become Composite Bows in no time), a UB that is little more than a 5% boost on the standard Wall, and a UA that is pretty good in all reality.
Honorable mentions:
Spain - A knight replacement that acts as a scout is not so great unless its a huge map or you have no place to build a navy. Tercios are pretty good units, and are a reasonable unit even to rush to in some situations. But the UA is so hit-and-miss as to be like going into games blindfolded. Maybe I'll get 1200 gold in the early game this time. Maybe next time I'll get 300 gold all game until I research Satellites, when I'll get another 200 after things are pretty much decided.
Arabia - UA is alright, though double oil is a pretty late bonus. UU is basically a more powerful, slower Keshik that can only hit and run in completely open terrain. The UB, though, is either extremely potent (start location has 3 different luxes in it, and 2 other different luxes occur not too far away) or comically bad (start location has 2 different luxes in it, and the same 2 luxes not too far away; nothing like 14 Cotton and 14 Wine to really limit who you can trade with in the early game, when you only can see the three other civs on your continent).
sufficiency
King
- Joined
- Feb 6, 2013
- Messages
- 682
My hatelist:
Greece: Dice-roll civ. Not as bad as Spain, but between Greece and Siam, Siam is way better pass the early game because you can pledge + ascetics -> friends forever. By that point influence decay is not as crucial. So all there is left is to hope you get a good quest that will allow you to ally a religious CS in the early game.
Byzantium: playing Byzantium on Immortal is seriously anti-fun. First, if I am playing Byzantium and I am not close to desert/tundra/wonders/gold/silver/wine/incease/stone/marble, I restart because there is no chance I will get a religion (in which case I will be playing almost a blank civ with no bonuses). If I do start with those, I have to get a shrine early, and pray to god that no one else will take them and I will be able to found my Pantheon early enough that I won't get too behind. THEN I have to pray that Ethiopia, Celts, or Mayans aren't around me and take over my entire region in religion before I can even get mine started.
Japan: no iron near you? Good luck playing blank civ.
I have to mention the Egypt thing again. On Emperor/Immortal Egypt is very strong. You can ICS with Egypt with ease because Burial Tombs gives 2 happiness and have no upkeep. You just need to stick in Piety opener somewhere so you can build Temples at half time. It's like ICS with Ethiopia - once it works, you don't really care what your UA is.
Greece: Dice-roll civ. Not as bad as Spain, but between Greece and Siam, Siam is way better pass the early game because you can pledge + ascetics -> friends forever. By that point influence decay is not as crucial. So all there is left is to hope you get a good quest that will allow you to ally a religious CS in the early game.
Byzantium: playing Byzantium on Immortal is seriously anti-fun. First, if I am playing Byzantium and I am not close to desert/tundra/wonders/gold/silver/wine/incease/stone/marble, I restart because there is no chance I will get a religion (in which case I will be playing almost a blank civ with no bonuses). If I do start with those, I have to get a shrine early, and pray to god that no one else will take them and I will be able to found my Pantheon early enough that I won't get too behind. THEN I have to pray that Ethiopia, Celts, or Mayans aren't around me and take over my entire region in religion before I can even get mine started.
Spoiler :
Japan: no iron near you? Good luck playing blank civ.
I have to mention the Egypt thing again. On Emperor/Immortal Egypt is very strong. You can ICS with Egypt with ease because Burial Tombs gives 2 happiness and have no upkeep. You just need to stick in Piety opener somewhere so you can build Temples at half time. It's like ICS with Ethiopia - once it works, you don't really care what your UA is.
India seems like it's a hassle to play with.
I have the most fun playing as The Netherlands so far, though I suppose I could be biased as I'm Dutch myself. I always tend to get great terrain with them (grassland bias I believe) and usually also some floodplains or marshes. In case I got floodplains I try to go for Petra to get an insane city going. Through conquest I usually get some more alluvial tiles before I even have polders.
The UA serves me well as I can sell of all my luxuries for gold and yet keep lots of happiness. Then there are the Sea Beggars who start of with Logistics when you have a barracks and armory. Logistics allow you to attack twice and move out of the way for your second sea beggar to attack so you can often take over a city before they got the chance to destroy any of your ships. Add to that the supply promotion and you can take most coastal cities. It's also fun to take over enemy ships and upgrade your Beggars to Destroyers, keeping all promotions.
I find that the Dutch can work well with both a Tradition start and a Liberty start, which is nice, since the terrain and the proximity of other civs determine that choice. Liberty allows you to get more luxuries and more alluvial tiles, while tradition works well with polders.
I have the most fun playing as The Netherlands so far, though I suppose I could be biased as I'm Dutch myself. I always tend to get great terrain with them (grassland bias I believe) and usually also some floodplains or marshes. In case I got floodplains I try to go for Petra to get an insane city going. Through conquest I usually get some more alluvial tiles before I even have polders.
The UA serves me well as I can sell of all my luxuries for gold and yet keep lots of happiness. Then there are the Sea Beggars who start of with Logistics when you have a barracks and armory. Logistics allow you to attack twice and move out of the way for your second sea beggar to attack so you can often take over a city before they got the chance to destroy any of your ships. Add to that the supply promotion and you can take most coastal cities. It's also fun to take over enemy ships and upgrade your Beggars to Destroyers, keeping all promotions.
I find that the Dutch can work well with both a Tradition start and a Liberty start, which is nice, since the terrain and the proximity of other civs determine that choice. Liberty allows you to get more luxuries and more alluvial tiles, while tradition works well with polders.
Similar threads
