My civs tier list for Deity Single Player.

[Tiberiu]

Austria: caesarfox list his UA as the single best UA in the game on deity level. the most important advantage of Austria is always his science, as population is the most important way to improve your science and Austria has the cheapest way in the game to increase your total population. Austria also have a very special millitary advantage as you can gift your unit to CS and let them upgrade for you at a very cheap cost, without even need to research the required tech, and you can also gift unit to far away CS to "teleport" them, which is very useful for DomV, especially on continents maps. (Austria also help me win my first sub-200T SV and I'm also a big fan of her)

Well I am glad then that this elite caesar dude agrees with me on this. Not sure if I would put it above Poland's UA, but if there is a civ out of the other 42 who comes close, it can only be Austria.
About Special military advantage I would add the ability to get late game generals (often CSs have 1) so you can immediately use them for citadel bombing to effectively fight even when far away from the main army.
And getting 20.000 gold worth of buildings for around 1000 gold ( plus 5000 k worth of units) = 2500% profit rate for the investment. But yea, there are still people who dont understand strategy and give Austria the rating of 1 / 5 on this forum.

The Celts: God King at 5T or 10T is very game changing. Not to mention that you sometimes have even better pantheon choice. This is an advantage that Ethiopia never have.

I have used God King when building The Great Library with the Shoshone in my last game, so I guess I understand at some level that this pantheon has its uses but I am yet to understand how such small bonuses can be described like that. However I think the biggest part that I've maybe underestimated about the Celts is a unique feature compared to all other civs - the ability to build ToA and get a quick pantheon at the same time. With most civs building ToA decreases the chance of a religion but for Celts it's mostly the same. I am a bit on the fence, though, because I still think Ethiopia can get ToA and a religion in the same fashion and still retain a combat bonus.

 

[Tiberiu]

Ok come on you can't rank babylon at the same tier as sweden

And yet, here I am!

Castle on hill definitely gives a challenge, IIRC it's like 40 or 42 strength, so camel archers will be pretty much be at the point of damage irrelevancy, if you don't have them fully promoted, that is. They're still good though, so I'd say keep them at that rank

42 city strength means 17 damage for a Camel Archer. This is FAR from damage irrelevancy. Basically the city falls in what? 3-4 turns with 5 unpromoted camels and a horseman?

Byzantium is dependent on RNG, you don't even need religious civs to have all religions taken by I dunno, turn 70 - 100. If this does happen, it literally just negates the UA entirely. Plus - Religion is good, but not game changing, so you don't necessarily need one.

The risk exists but it's not severe as you make it out to be. There is no reason not to have a religion before they expire with Byzantine unless the particular scenarios I mentioned before. Civilizations having Mt.Sinai or Kailash are irrelevant since AI never works these tiles to get a pantheon. And I disagree that it is not something big. There are so many options for creating a much better religion... with 2-3 religious buildings, 2 good enhancers (itinerant + religious texts maybe), or 2 gold/happiness giving other beliefs.

 

[Bruhmoment]

Like you're gonna get 2 or 3 religious buildings
Isn't there a drop off point, like for crossbowmen? You get 40 strength then xbow's only start doing about 10 damage or like 5% of the city bar. Not sure about Camel Archers though, they have 3 more strength
Like I said, religion is good, but if I have to go out of my way just to find one, then no, of course I won't try. There's good combinations with byzantium, but you need lotsa faith for that

 

[vadalaz]

You can always bring a few Trebuchets or Cannons along if city strength is a concern. In my experience the bigger potential problems for XBs are hit-and-run Lancers/Knights, Muskets with Cover and unfavorable terrain.

Camels have superior mobility which helps with difficult terrain, and they shred Renaissance-Industrial units because they can focus-fire targets much more efficiently and stay out of range of most enemy attacks. They also have higher combat and ranged strength than XBs, so they hit harder and don't get hit as hard.

Another thing to note is that Chivalry is less of a detour from the Education path than Machinery, which can be important for science or culture games with midgame wars. If you're playing Tradition, you can ignore Construction and Engineering (sometimes even Masonry) until you have both Chivalry and Education. And your spy can steal Banking as well for a good Renaissance-Rationalism timing and/or fast Forbidden Palace.

 

[Tiberiu]

Germany: One of the civs that is largely misunderstood. Their UB is among the best in the game, giving you up to a 40% production boost, which is absolutely game changing and it WILL transform an otherwise mediocre start to a good late game. In my games, I usually get a 20-25% production bonus and that is also very, very good and sets you up for a smooth mid- and late game. It is basically like playing with Golden Age production all the time. On top of that, you have a luck based UA that sometimes makes it viable to go to war already in Ancient/Classical. The only other civs I do this with are the Huns and Egypt. I would take them any day of the week before Assyria, Zulu, Morocco and the Netherlands, just to name a few that are higher up on your list.

After playing Edge 118 I understand this point of view better now. Even if I was unlucky with the UA initially. But yea, the unique bank is better than I expected it to be. It's like the Hanse is better than the entire Rome UA. I have improved my opinion of Germany but still not on "Babylon" lvl, so I'll move them to A+ (Very Good) instead of just Good. A minor bonus that I neglected is that maintenance for land units. It's not much initially but during the game it gives some nice gold eventually.

 

[Nizef]

After playing Edge 118 I understand this point of view better now. Even if I was unlucky with the UA initially. But yea, the unique bank is better than I expected it to be. It's like the Hanse is better than the entire Rome UA. I have improved my opinion of Germany but still not on "Babylon" lvl, so I'll move them to A+ (Very Good) instead of just Good. A minor bonus that I neglected is that maintenance for land units. It's not much initially but during the game it gives some nice gold eventually.

As described above, my classification system is not as fine tuned as yours. When putting roughly 10 civs into each of my four categories, Germany land in the 10-20 range among 43 civs.

 

[cocls]

After playing Edge 118 I understand this point of view better now. Even if I was unlucky with the UA initially. But yea, the unique bank is better than I expected it to be. It's like the Hanse is better than the entire Rome UA. I have improved my opinion of Germany but still not on "Babylon" lvl, so I'll move them to A+ (Very Good) instead of just Good. A minor bonus that I neglected is that maintenance for land units. It's not much initially but during the game it gives some nice gold eventually.

Hmm... In most time of one game, we will only have 5 trade routes, even if we build hansa in all cities immediately after Bank, we will only enjoy +25% hammer in our cities. Don't forgot that internal trade routes also provide at least +5 hammers each, so we need to have 100 total hammers in our country to make hanse better than internal trade routes. This only comes very late in a game.
Rome UA however, start to work when you settle your first expansion. civilization 5 is a snowball game, so Rome UA is always much better than hanse.

 

[Tiberiu]

Hmm... In most time of one game, we will only have 5 trade routes, even if we build hansa in all cities immediately after Bank, we will only enjoy +25% hammer in our cities. Don't forgot that internal trade routes also provide at least +5 hammers each, so we need to have 100 total hammers in our country to make hanse better than internal trade routes. This only comes very late in a game.
Rome UA however, start to work when you settle your first expansion. civilization 5 is a snowball game, so Rome UA is always much better than hanse.

A thing that I like is that you can fulfil CS quests and still have your production increased. About what you said, yes, 5 x 5 = 25 production. But 25% production in all cities could very well exceed this number while also providing some gold. 100 hammers empire wide is basically nothing by the time we get to Banking. I don't really understand why you say it's "very late". It's in the Renaissance at the very beginning, or even Medieval on 6 cities with workshops.

later edit : (for the purposes of comparing Hanse with Rome UA, indeed, it can be seen as coming very late, my argument is about using Internal production vs external CS route.)

Here is an example from the edge 118 game I finished. In turn 138 I have 144 production empire wide on 4 cities (11 / 14 ./ 16 / 30 pop). that's without micromanagement to increase production. Save included

 

[beetle]

I didn’t think I would be in favor of Yet Another Deity Tier List, but this has been a fun read. Clearly, I need to play more Austria.
to @consentient for his tier list, as I think his approach is really the only way to be objective about this sort of thing. OTOH, the point really is to have a friendly argument. Being methodical then kind of defeats the purpose of these these threads!

That said, I think there are just three “tiers”: Poland, most everyone else, and Venice.

 

[Tiberiu]

Consientent's list sucks bad man. He does not understand this game.

 

[Bruhmoment]

Consientent's list sucks bad man. He does not understand this game.

Let's not start badmouthing anyone, shall we? You didn't play that much more than him

 

[Tiberiu]

Let's not start badmouthing anyone, shall we? You didn't play that much more than him

What? Sorry, you must be a bit confused my friend.

We are not discussing the person, but just his list, which is obviously profoundly inaccurate. It's not about who played more, buddy. You can play 10.000 games and still be bad at the game.

 

[Bruhmoment]

What? Sorry, you must be a bit confused my friend.

We are not discussing the person, but just his list, which is obviously profoundly inaccurate. It's not about who played more, buddy. You can play 10.000 games and still be bad at the game.

I found the passive-aggresive person, maybe learn how to phrase your sentences next time, mate?
You literally said "he", WHICH REFERS TO A PERSON!!!!
You weren't like this before, the hell is up with you?

 

[Tiberiu]

I just have to ignore you now. Not sorry! I'm not the right person to engage with this type of attitude. Good luck to you, and ignored.

 

[bobbobbybobbob]

I don't agree with @consentient list either. How can you @beetle say that his list is objective and this list is subjective? What is the difference between these two? I agree more with this list, but I wouldn't call my opinion fact either. In the end it is only preference even though one might argue that some civs are just objectively stronger than others.

EDIT: Austria is super strong. I would rate them as one of my favourites.

 

[bobbobbybobbob]

Let's not start badmouthing anyone, shall we? You didn't play that much more than him

That's a weak argument. So two players with equal amount of playtime is just as good? Clearly not as we see people here been playing over 1000 hours and still can't beat deity.

 

[Bruhmoment]

That's a weak argument. So two players with equal amount of playtime is just as good? Clearly not as we see people here been playing over 1000 hours and still can't beat deity.

It's the principle - if he plays longer that mean's he's a senior, and everyone knows the quote - respect your elders

I just have to ignore you now. Not sorry! I'm not the right person to engage with this type of attitude. Good luck to you, and ignored.

So this is how you handle your problems? That's a shame, I thought you were better than that...

 

[beetle]

How can you @beetle say that his list is objective and this list is subjective?

Because @consentient described a methodology and then let the chips fall where they may. Reasonable people could (and did) disagree with point assignments here and there, but there wasn’t any argument that the approach was invalid.

What is the difference between these two?

Not only this tier list, but a few others too. All of them (including this one) are so subjective that there does not seem to be any hope of to coming to a group consensus. That said, I would like to see some way to adjust for maps that are not Continents or Pangea. For example, on Small Islands, using @consentient’s methodology, civs like Carthage or Indonesia or Polynesia prolly should get +5 points or more.

Consientent's list sucks bad man. He does not understand this game.

I would be very interested to hear your explanation for this assertion.

 

[Tiberiu]

I will respond, and moving on, I would appreciate if this thread wouldn't get derailed into off-topic. Discussion about other lists belong in their own respective threads. I would also like it to be noted that it was never my intent here to discuss other lists or other people (I even stated so in the very opening post). I would hate to be seen as the bad guy here for simply wanting to state some opinions about civilizations in the game that we all enjoy so much.

I would be very interested to hear your explanation for this assertion.

I want to make it clear that I welcome constructive discussions with anybody and encourage mutual respect even if sometimes egos can get heat up. And that there's no need for any of us to take anything personally or hold grudges. But I am also not one who sugar coats things and sometimes I get perceived as harsh or unpolite. As the saying goes, if it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it probably is a duck. If something is bad, I will call it as such.

Similarly, I do not respect anybody who shuts down debate like the person in question does, who calls anybody who disagrees with him "Whiners" or "Fanboys" and says that if you don't agree you must ignore his thread and his list, who reports people and tries to shame them (and get warned by mods for it). It's a very bigoted, mindset. I prefer being civil over this, I do not respect this type of attitude and I am not ashamed to say it, hopefully there is still enough free speech here that I'm not breaking any rules for even mentioning this, only referencing facts and explaining myself, after all.

For the record, I am more than willing to recognize when I am wrong on something. It's called being an adult who makes progress through life. As we learn more, we can and should change our views and opinions accordingly as new evidence or data arises. I was underestimating Germany, I was wrong, happy to stand corrected, and I might also be wrong on a few others, even though I am confident that not by that much. I thank Nizef for that.

Now, onto some concrete examples, person stresses that "Ease of winning" is what is measured.

But then goes around and rates Venice with a negative score ( -7 ) Except that...Venice is super easy to win compared to a civ with no bonus. The most annoying drawback I can think of is that if you have Mt.Sinai or FOY or whatever in 8 tile range to you, you can't take it to boost the strength of your empire, and the Great Galleass leaves a little to be desired. The shared great person pool for engineers, scientists and merchants is a bit conflicting in that you want Merchants but you also delay the others by doing this. However even so, Venice remains preferable to a civ with no bonuses. If we disagree on this then I don't really know what else to say except that it is best to agree to disagree and move on, as there doesn't remain room to argue one way or another. Simple. I hold that being able to outright puppet a CS and get hold of all their belongings is very powerful, and compensates the drawbacks by a wide margin. Others can feel free to disagree.

A few others I wrote just skimming around.

> I refuse to take anybody seriously if they rate Winged Hussars and Caroleans with 1/5.
> Anybody who complains that getting a Religion on Deity is hard betrays the fact that they have not really mastered the game and should probably not be making guides. When you struggle to get a religion even with the Celts, you are not a good Deity player.
> Doesn't know the difference between melee unit and gunpowder unit and he spreads misinformation as a result. Riflemen obviously aren't melee units. They are a gunpowder unit with a melee attack. Game source files XML units confirms this.
> Decides randomly that conquering CSs is suboptimal play and trashes Mongolia UA as a result.
> Describes Polders as rubbish (he actually uses this word to describe it, yes) and gives Kasbahs 0/5, which is also fascinating (in a bad way).
> Doesn't get any of Assyria's bonuses and as a result thinks that it's a weak civ. I mean, tech stealing by city capture is almost enough on its own, the other bonuses are cherry on top.
> Absolutely trashes Austria, calls UA "underpowered".
> Gives Carthage Elephant rating 0/5
> Gives War Elephant 0/5... no comment. They're not even melee-attacking units so there's no excuse this time.
> Gives Cataphract -1 out of 5. Yes, like, it's only a horseman who shares all the advantages of melee units, after all. /S
> Doesn't understand Portugal Feitoria, trashes it, gives it 0/5 and calls everybody bad players if they use it.
> Doesn't use Kris Swordsman but rates them as 0/5 anyway because he never experienced Restlessness, Ambition or Invulnerability.
> Absolutely trashes Byzantium and Iroquois beyond any sensible commentary.

I hope this is satisfactory, I will say no more on this subject.

 

[Browd]

Moderator Action: It is long past time for folks on this thread to stop sniping at each other. Post in a civil and constructive manner, or infractions and thread bans will follow.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889