Most Disliked Civ to Play

[Krajzen]

^this.

Tomplum pretty much took the words out of my mouth

Yeah, exactly. While wars are cool (lol I am evil man ) ...in this game of course, not IRL, domination victory is unrealistic, not immersive, tedious and boring (and second half of domination game is basically "I already know I am the winner because I am total runaway, but I just have to conquer this last damn capital to fullfill victory conditions..."

(with the exception as the Huns, they are quite fun to play domination as).

Exactly, Huns are something which makes them surprisingly cool for domination I think this is because of their "strange", I mean original, unique properties which allow on ridiculously early rush.

Also hate playing as Greece, China and the Aztecs for the same reason.

Well, I still like these guys - Greece for city - states domination, China because Chu Ko Nu and Aztecs because of early barb hunting/floating gardens. Although I hate than Chinese who are really PACIFISTIC civilization, usually defensive and not putting giant effort on Warrior Codex, old and extremely advanced and culture - rich civilisation, in this game are basically warmonger civ :I

 

[HerrDoktor]

^this.

Tomplum pretty much took the words out of my mouth (with the exception as the Huns, they are quite fun to play domination as).

Also hate playing as Greece, China and the Aztecs for the same reason.

I also raqe quit at turn 1 when play as India and Venice for not allowing me to expand properly. No. Just no.

Aztecs can be good for any VC if you find the damn lakes to settle. Last game, I got Tenochititlan to size 40 by 1700s, without any food caravan (5 lake tiles plus Lake Victoria, which isn't buffed by floating gardens). Unfortunately, there's no "lake start bias", so I had to use the in-game editor to delete the starting settler and place me at the right spot. I could just use it to add lakes, as well, but that particular location was randomly generated from another game in which I was Poland, so I saved the map to try it as the Aztecs.

Culture from kills only make a big difference at early stages. Later in the game, it barely matters, so you can let warfare behind and use your acquired territory and, with some luck, lake metropolises to go for culture, space or diplomacy. In that particular game, I was even lucky to have Shaka as a neighbor, giving me free culture the whole game - two million impis can only go so far when your enemy has all defensive wonders and 10+ tech lead.

 

[Jon the Bastard]

I grew to like Persia during the last game, but ended up going so wide the UA was practically useless as I rarely got a GA.

Yeah, I found that to be the problem for me, too. The UA gives incentive to go to war during golden ages, but you reach a point where you can't take advantage of the UA because you've got too many cities. I'll still try him out again soon, I think. Want to see how he plays with BNW changes.

 

[jlim201]

I simply cannot bring myself to play Songhai. I have played everyone else at least once. They just seem very boring.

 

[Smokeybear]

I hate the celts. Having to have and leave masses of untouched forest tiles right around your first cities in order to take advantage of the civ's UA, seriously impacts your growth capacity. Mines? Nope- gotta leave those forested hills unimproved. Farms? Nope- gotta leave that forested grassland unimproved. If I want a really good early faith civ, I'll go with Ethiopia, whose UB is much better and doesn't force you to leave critical early resource tiles unimproved and useless.

 

[Depravo]

I hate the celts. Having to have and leave masses of untouched forest tiles right around your first cities in order to take advantage of the civ's UA, seriously impacts your growth capacity. Mines? Nope- gotta leave those forested hills unimproved. Farms? Nope- gotta leave that forested grassland unimproved. If I want a really good early faith civ, I'll go with Ethiopia, whose UB is much better and doesn't force you to leave critical early resource tiles unimproved and useless.

What I hate about Ethiopia is the vomitous colour scheme - which is annoyingly similar to the barbarians' into the bargain. I once lost a settler when I mistook a barb for an Ethiopian.

 

[Smokeybear]

What I hate about Ethiopia is the vomitous colour scheme - which is annoyingly similar to the barbarians' into the bargain. I once lost a settler when I mistook a barb for an Ethiopian.

Yeah, that can be confusing sometimes. Had barbs sneak right past me a time or two, lol! But I can live with that- the civs whose color schemes really annoy me, are Morocco and the Assyrians. Morocco's just makes me want to puke, and makes it very hard to pick out your units in some landscapes. Assyria's colors? Whoa. They're just wrong from an esthetic standpoint, and make my eyes cross. Light on light just does not work.

 

[Deadly_Nightshade]

Denmark.
Considering the interesting history of the Vikings, the UA is plain boring. They should instead get something like a gold bonus to pillaging.

 

[ObadiahtheSlim]

I hate the celts. Having to have and leave masses of untouched forest tiles right around your first cities in order to take advantage of the civ's UA, seriously impacts your growth capacity.

I don't mind the Celts. I just use that early forest faith to get a first pantheon and first religion. Then I chop the forests for better tiles and the . It's not like you can even chop those forests right away.

Now the Huns. Their UA is pretty bad. Faster time to ? For a situational bonus that's pretty bad.

 

[njmfff]

I don't mind the Celts. I just use that early forest faith to get a first pantheon and first religion. Then I chop the forests for better tiles and the . It's not like you can even chop those forests right away.

yep, that's what their UA is for. Get pantheon on turn 3, get GP on turn 30, another one on turn 50, then either chop forest or turn it into lumber mill.

Only, my luck is usually terrible with those start bias civs, I get plains with no forest with Celts, no lakes with Aztecs on ANCIENT LAKES map, grassland with Morocco, Arabia and Egypt, landlocked naval civs like England, no horses with Mongols... well you get my point.

 

[ObadiahtheSlim]

There is no lake starting bias.

 

[DarthSheldonPhD]

Hands down, the Iroquois. The UA is conceptually average, but horrible in practice because culturally-acquired tiles don't focus on connecting cities with forests, so every dime saved in road maintenance is spent on tile purchases needed to connect cities, usually end up costing you more in the long run. Spend 80 gold to save 1GPT for 3 turns before spending 85 gold to save another 1GPT. The movement bonus would be an incredible warmongering asset but alas, it only works in your own territory. Garbage UU because the devs decided that swordsman-based armies should stink. While their position in the tech tree is midway between spears and pikes, the advantages of civil service and it's prereq techs means that swords are unlocked around the same time as pikes, often later. So why build a resource-dependent unit when a resource-free unit that's stronger is available? And back to the Iroquois, removing that resource dependency still only gives you the option of making an unlimited number of an inferior unit when a superior one is available. (side note: the solution to this is to remove the longswordsman from the game. Longswordsmen are too close to their upgrade anyway. Then give the longswordsman's stats to the swordsman. Not overpowered, you're limited in the number that you can build, and makes having iron mean something.) And top off the Iroquois with the worst UB in the game. You either end up with less production than you would have with the default building, or go out of your way to get more production by keeping the forests and stunting your growth - forests are food negative (<2) tiles that need to be fed by the farms that you can't make because you'd have to chop the forests to farm them, so your options are a UB that's worse than its default or a vicious cycle.

 

[njmfff]

There is no lake starting bias.

Yeah, but on Ancient Lakes map they spawn very often, and often within range of your starting position... but not for me.

 

[Talcove]

America is just... Boring. Of all the Vanilla Civilizations, they are the most Vanilla. Something that could make them more interesting is if they could buy tiles in the 4th and 5th ring. Now THAT would be at least somewhat unique, and fit within their theme of Manifest Destiny.

 

[Walter R]

America is just... Boring. Of all the Vanilla Civilizations, they are the most Vanilla. Something that could make them more interesting is if they could buy tiles in the 4th and 5th ring. Now THAT would be at least somewhat unique, and fit within their theme of Manifest Destiny.

I think this is a really good idea.

 

[Pilsener Grease]

Yeah, I agree, Indonesia seems like a pretty fun civ to play, even though I haven't really tried them out yet. I am particularly excited at trying out the Kris Swordsman, which is why I abandoned a recent game I started as them, because I got one of those "no iron" starts.

The other thing to note about the kris swordsman is that once you manage to build a couple with beneficial promotions, you can then upgrade them throughout the rest of the game. Some of those unique promotions are pretty powerful -- I presently have one rifleman that awards a combat bonus to nearby units and another that gets a +30% Combat Bonus when defending & +20 HP when healing

 

[Krajzen]

Hands down, the Iroquois. The UA is conceptually average, but horrible in practice because culturally-acquired tiles don't focus on connecting cities with forests, so every dime saved in road maintenance is spent on tile purchases needed to connect cities, usually end up costing you more in the long run.

EXACTLY! EXACTLY! EXACTLY!

Also, all this forest random tiles and random roads look just ugly

Longhouse also is worse than normal workshop, and Mohawk Warrior... Well... Nice bonuses, but it replaces SWORDSMAN.

The only thing in which Iroquis are truly good is defending their cities in deep forests (with mohawk - based infantry). Yeah, that is Vietnam. Still, I don't like this civ very much, and I hate Hiawatha AI.

 

[Bad Wolf]

Gotta be Indonesia - you just never know whether you're going to be able to take advantage of their UA or not, which is very bad from a design perspective.

 

[Smokeybear]

Gotta be Indonesia - you just never know whether you're going to be able to take advantage of their UA or not, which is very bad from a design perspective.

Or if a large percentage of their UU's are going to suck, as well. Take a big damage per turn hit just for standing in enemy territory? Lovely.

 

[PenguinPower]

Definitely Siam or Songhai - though I have to say I really enjoy the Songhai's track on their diplomacy screen.