I agree, one of the reasons that I said Russia. Regarding Denmark, they can be a good opponent and I would rank them well ahead of India and Polynesia (ugh).
Most underrated civ
- Thread starter Doctor Doom
- Start date
I agree, one of the reasons that I said Russia. Regarding Denmark, they can be a good opponent and I would rank them well ahead of India and Polynesia (ugh).
Optional
Deity
The better civs have bonuses that start early in the game and last throughout. That's where civs like Denmark and Ottomans lose out and civs like Maya and Ethiopia win.
I find Polynesia always ranked too low. The scary opponent bonus will last the game, free embarkation is handy for a very long time, whatever the map.
India gets perennially underrated, without fail they'll become a beast once they're past the first hurdles.
Yeah, Russia and Egypt in the bottom is strange, I've no idea what made people put them there. Okay, both Cossack and Krepost aren't great, but the unique ability makes up for it. Egypt is saving loads of hammers throughout the game.
I find Polynesia always ranked too low. The scary opponent bonus will last the game, free embarkation is handy for a very long time, whatever the map.
India gets perennially underrated, without fail they'll become a beast once they're past the first hurdles.
Yeah, Russia and Egypt in the bottom is strange, I've no idea what made people put them there. Okay, both Cossack and Krepost aren't great, but the unique ability makes up for it. Egypt is saving loads of hammers throughout the game.
The Maori warrior is "meh", but embarkation and crossing oceans with triremes? SCARILY game breaking some times... (esp since it allows you to access a whole expansion spot even on Pangaea maps sometimes) Also ridiculously good at bypassing barb/border blockades early game and helps a lot in fighting melee units (embark and they can't do a thing as you sail away) Also you can embark your settler on the 1st turn and found your capitol on a nearby island if the terrain is good enough. (no one will ever conquer it and barbs are not a problem)... cargo ships can go through oceans early game too so it helps a lot in reducing the distance traveled and allows you to make trades you wouldn't otherwise be able to.
I do feel that the scary bonus could be buffed to 15% (equal to GG) or 20% even...
The combat bonus to Moai is also meh and should be buffed similarly.
stormlefty4life
Chieftain
The Incas are not underrated...that is why you can not play them for HOF games
Deau
Emperor
I'm sorry but civ elimination thread has extremely little to do about min/maxing, strategizing and whatnot. I read through like the first 5 pages a week back and I was completely disgusted at some rationale for votes.
There's like a double standard or double interpretation of the thread purpose and far, far too many replies are flavour-based down/up votes or experienced constrained votes with no oversight (like people playing strictly archipelago or small island maps downvoting strong civs with 2 melee UU because they have 2 melee UUs or reciprocally, Pangaea players killing water civs - Again, same with VC targets, all culture flavoured civs were downvoted hard time because too many people Ignore that VC completely as it's more complicated)
Anyway point being, the civ elimination thread is a fun read but by no mean is representative of the true civ balance.
I think mayans had 0 votes up after like 100 posts and Venice was torn apart because people don't enjoy the complete playstyle shift (despite the fact that they're an extremely easy/powerful civ).
casualplayer
Warlord
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2012
- Messages
- 208
There are some civs that have a unique building that is just overwhelmingly awesome, clearly superior to the standard version. You're going to build it anyway so making Building+ feels great and is a huge advantage. Stele and Wats and Mud Pyramids and such. Then there are those civs that boost the resources you are going to improve anyway or the tiles you work anyway or the tech path you are going to follow anyway. The civs that are so good that they drop the difficulty. It's hard to play an actual Incan Deity game. Or Shoshone. Or Poland.
Then there are the civs that make you tweak your play rather than reward you for doing what you were going to do anyway. Those civs are usually not that popular. Venice gets a lot of guff because it is such a departure from standard operating procedure. Polynesia encourages you to crank out some Warriors, of all things, and also improve tiles with giant, stone heads rather than mines, farms and trading posts. Denmark wants you to swim at your enemies then crush them, drive them before you, hear the lamentation of their women. Indonesia wants you to immigrate to other lands in search of spices.
If you like the tried-and-true Archer-CB-XB tactic of course you love the Archer-CB-Longbow or Cho-ko-nu tactic and so England and China have a lot of fans. Personally I like to occasionally mix it up a bit and play the civs that make me look at the map differently.
Then there are the civs that make you tweak your play rather than reward you for doing what you were going to do anyway. Those civs are usually not that popular. Venice gets a lot of guff because it is such a departure from standard operating procedure. Polynesia encourages you to crank out some Warriors, of all things, and also improve tiles with giant, stone heads rather than mines, farms and trading posts. Denmark wants you to swim at your enemies then crush them, drive them before you, hear the lamentation of their women. Indonesia wants you to immigrate to other lands in search of spices.
If you like the tried-and-true Archer-CB-XB tactic of course you love the Archer-CB-Longbow or Cho-ko-nu tactic and so England and China have a lot of fans. Personally I like to occasionally mix it up a bit and play the civs that make me look at the map differently.
isau
Deity
- Joined
- Jan 15, 2007
- Messages
- 3,071
I would go with Sweden. They got such a huge buff in BNW due to all the extra great people running around.
The Iroquois are also much misunderstood. Although obviously the map changes things for them, the benefit of leaving forests isn't just the city connections. It's that the forests work like a Great Wall that you can run quickly through, but enemies can't. This makes the Iroquois capital a serious pain to try to capture until Artillery.
The Iroquois are also much misunderstood. Although obviously the map changes things for them, the benefit of leaving forests isn't just the city connections. It's that the forests work like a Great Wall that you can run quickly through, but enemies can't. This makes the Iroquois capital a serious pain to try to capture until Artillery.
Don't feel sorry, it was especially posted for this non sense. But the 3 civs i named are good in any situation, which is my point.
SirWinston
Chieftain
- Joined
- Nov 7, 2012
- Messages
- 24
imho Denmark ...
Yes ... go and get fast education for your science boost. You have Pikemen and Composite Bowmen for defense...thats enough ... "Harald Bluetooth has entered the Medieval Era"...*Upgrade Swordsmen to Berserkers*
Yes ... go and get fast education for your science boost. You have Pikemen and Composite Bowmen for defense...thats enough ... "Harald Bluetooth has entered the Medieval Era"...*Upgrade Swordsmen to Berserkers*
PhroX
Deity
- Joined
- Jan 12, 2009
- Messages
- 2,679
imho Denmark ...
Yes ... go and get fast education for your science boost. You have Pikemen and Composite Bowmen for defense...thats enough ... "Harald Bluetooth has entered the Medieval Era"...*Upgrade Swordsmen to Berserkers*
I'd be far more worried about, say, Lizzy or Wu or Genghis getting thier medieval UUs....
SirWinston
Chieftain
- Joined
- Nov 7, 2012
- Messages
- 24
PhroX
Deity
- Joined
- Jan 12, 2009
- Messages
- 2,679
But those Units need more tech. Berserkers only need Metal Casting
Well, if it's lack of techs we're looking at, forget UUs - everyone can conquer perfectly well with CBs, and can still reach Edu pretty quickly. A 'zerk or two wouldn't hurt, but I really can't see it making a huge difference (and in the hands of Liz or Wu, those nicely experienced CB upgrade into an unholy terror....)
i don't really get how the Iroquois are that underrated. UB sucks. also how often are you not chopping Forests for w/e need at the time? agreed that Forest warfare is probably awesome at times, but enough to make them a secret top tier civ? or is it a secret mid-tier?
This is a good summary of the attitude most players have with respect to civ preference. Players have a good idea of how a generic civ can snowball most quickly, and civs that improve one of the elements of the generic build order are intuitively very good.
From a game balance perspective, the primary observation is that in order for a civ that encourages a deviant build order to be successful, it needs to improve the elements of that build order by significantly more than the mainstream civs are improving the elements of the generic build order.
Back on topic, I guess I would suggest Carthage, Portugal, Polynesia, etc for underrated. Cargo Ships and Lighthouses are really good.
Light Cleric
ElCee/LC/El Cid
- Joined
- Feb 5, 2011
- Messages
- 3,225
Denmark is a lot less underrated now with Berserkers being at Metal Casting. I used to hate it because you'd get to the Berserker and then boom 1 tech later there's Muskets already(And the AI's own Muskets). Although personally I've never liked the Ski Infantry, it seems like every damn time I try to use them I end up on Hills that negate their bonus.
I think there's also a lasting stigma from where Denmark really did suck, back when Pillaging didn't heal and all that.
One of the annoying things about them though is their coastal start bias and by extension often coastal luxuries which suck huge nuts to deal with.
I think there's also a lasting stigma from where Denmark really did suck, back when Pillaging didn't heal and all that.
One of the annoying things about them though is their coastal start bias and by extension often coastal luxuries which suck huge nuts to deal with.
Deau
Emperor
Actually wasn't Denmarka god-mode civ when they first came in? I thought they came in Vanilla when longswords rush was trivialized by liberty GS and bulb mechanics. You could literally run OCC or 2 city (settle 2nd city on 6 iron) upgrade a mere 4 berserkers and beat any AI down with with 4 zerkers at T50-T55.
Deau
Emperor
I actually have to disagree. Well, don't get me wrong, they're not awful civs but not significantly underrated. I think they put out way better in MP than SP so you are probably biased that way.
Production edge for Russia/Iroquois in the early game is great but for SP, their starting bias is a big growth cripple long term even though it comes with increased odds for iron. Similarly, Egypt UU is dominant for early rushes/barb quests, the UB happiness offsets the difficulty to trade lux:lux in MP as well as the lower gold yield from having to sustain a decent army.
Point being, I don't think they're significantly underrated in SP.
chazzycat
Deity
- Joined
- Oct 13, 2010
- Messages
- 2,918
But those Units need more tech. Berserkers only need Metal Casting
whoa, when did that happen?? brb, starting denmark game...
comatosedragon
Emperor
America, Songhai, and Japan.
America and Japan may be getting a little more love with the recent changes, and maybe more people like Songhai than I realize, but I usually have my best games as them.
America and Japan may be getting a little more love with the recent changes, and maybe more people like Songhai than I realize, but I usually have my best games as them.
Similar threads
