Nuclear Kid reviews all 18 civs

[slowcar]

I think it's a bit narrow-minded to rate civilizations based on their earth-map starting position. especially as this will lead to luis having only one city

anyhow, i like people rating stuff, good starting-point to get your own opinion in place. getting a rating from the immortal+ -league over here would leave oneself somehow silenced (still trying to get the same level of gaming as in acid03), maybe better to have banana-destroyers post their positions.

 

[Atlas]

I would like to see others' reviews (of civs and traits) in addition to Nuclear kid's. In fact Nuclear kid could do a review and then anyone/everyone could then do their own for that same civ/trait?

 

[luxmissus]

I would like to see others' reviews (of civs and traits) in addition to Nuclear kid's. In fact Nuclear kid could do a review and then anyone/everyone could then do their own for that same civ/trait?

I think this would be very helpful. I know I still haven't decided who I like best. I am enjoying Cyrus of the Persians. This may be because he works well with my more peaceful strategy.

 

[acidsatyr]

what else new is there to be said on triats and UUs?

 

[Nuka-sama]

I still need a request for thew next civ to be reviewed

 

[Brave Jay]

You can look at both ends of the spectrum, and on the high end you will see financial trait, and on the opposite end you will find expansive. There is even factual evidence for this: Just look at the trait that got nerfed with the patch (Financial: no more bonus to build banks faster) and the one that got built up (Expansive: used to be only +2 health and now it is +3). And still, even after that, Financial is considered the strongest trait while expansive is considered by many as the weakest. Firaxis would not have tinkered with the traits if they did not believe that financial was too powerful and expansive was too weak.

 

[netbjarne]

I'l like Cyrus to be reviewed.

 

[UncleJJ]

I don't think that it is Financial itself that is overpowered but rather the way that it can so easily synergise with cottages. On most maps and in most situations Financial encourages cottage spamming over all other growth and production strategies. That is an unfortunate consequence in my opinion.

Of course this could be fixed several ways and I favour lengthening the time cottages take to grow into hamlets, villages and towns. This might be a traint dependent thing so it would be longest for Financial and maybe shorter for Creative or Expansive.

To get some feeling for the effect this might have ask yourself this question ... "Would you still pick Financial if your cottages took twice as long to mature?" The other benefits of Financial would still apply to coastal squares and other commerce rich squares but that is no where near enough to warrant picking the traint.

 

[Nuka-sama]

I think it's a bit narrow-minded to rate civilizations based on their earth-map starting position. especially as this will lead to luis having only one city

I think not! it tells you if to play on the world map will be your type of map for a partecular civ.

 

[acidsatyr]

I think not! it tells you if to play on the world map will be your type of map for a partecular civ.

errr... what??

 

[I play 4 fun]

Just to put my 2 cents in on the world map location...

there are 5 power civs because of UU, location and resources/food.
In no particular order the 5 power civs for Earth map are

England, Persia, Japan, Egypt and Rome.

I play the Earth map alot online and i must say they are the best to be

 

[Galileo44]

@UncleJJ

Because finacially picks up the extra gold at 2 (Hamlet or cottage on river) this would only make finacial more powerful over other traits.

 

[slowcar]

just to get further OT:
on the worldmap i like the french best. start with stones and marble + being industrious you can really do wonders
the spaniards are an easy target because they have only iron, no bronze, and can't expand but with galleys. rome is easily beaten before they get praets and the germans have a nice lot of citys and are happy to become the next target of a stack of experienced troops and the new-build catapults.
alexander dies on the way and russia is next as they get nasty if one allows them to advance till cosacks.
and then the world map becomes pretty hard. one can do persia and eventually eqypt (hard enemy because they tech very well) but with the chinese at hand warmongering becomes more and more difficult as a large empire is expensive to maintain and the KI, at least on king, easily manages to tech faster AND to build more troops.
i managed domination on earth18/king a few times but its really hard work in the end, especially if you have space ship victory enabled.

oh, and for review i'd like katharina.

 

[turquoiseninja]

Yah, review Catherine next!

 

[Nuka-sama]

fine, ill do russia, then persia.

 

[Nuka-sama]

#1 Russia (Catherine only )
Prefered leader: Catherine
Favorite civic: Heredity rule
Agg. lvl: 2 (low)
Traits: Creative, Financial
Starting techs: Hunting, Mining
UU: Cossack
Other leader: Peter
FC: Police state
Agg lvl: 3 (Moderate)
Traits: Philosiphical, Organised

Traits

Catherine: I love financial, just love it. I use Unaversal Suffrage to upgrade all my units to Cossacks, riflemen, grenadairs, ect. to crush the competition! With the creative trait, I can get fast expanding cities, and a great defense boost. I can use it to help me get a cultural victory, or a domination. Combined well...
Grade A+

Peter: Philosiphical, Organised? I can't stand peter, he just sucks compared to cathy. He saves 1/2 the money I could easaly gain with Cathy.
Philosiphical seems to be the only trait for him.
Grade: D-

Uniuqe Unit:Cossacks are increadable when they come around. No one will probably have riflemen, maybe the best they'll have Grenadidars unless your lagging behind in tech. The industrial age is the age of warmongening for you.
Grade: A+

AI gameplay

Catherine:Ehh, ehh, ehh ok. she's stronger in higher levels than the other AI's, and in later ages (industrial)
Grade: B+

Peter: BOO! This guy is at the bottom of the heap, the low of the low.
He's the worst of all the AI.
Grade:F-

World Map: I like it for expansion, and Euro Warmongering. Enough Recources, but they're vastly seperated so you need to have alot more cities than Usual.
Grade: B

Catherine Final Grade:A+

Peter Final grade: F+

 

[turquoiseninja]

I agree mostly although mayhaps you are being somewhat harsh on Peter methinks? Catherine is an all-around better leader than Peter, (just like they were historicaly) but every leader can be played effectively; my friend is pretty good playing as Peter. And he still has Cossaks.

 

[Nuka-sama]

Well, I have never won a non space race win with peter, so i dont appreciate him

 

[turquoiseninja]

Well, I have never won a non space race win with peter, so i dont appreciate him

I don't really appreciate him either, I ALWAYS choose Catherine if I'm playing as Russia. I just meant that he is usable and POSSIBLY effective, just like any other leader.

 

[moggydave]

mig i suggest now holding back the reviews with warlord coming up soon. Lots of the existing leaders will be very different. Catherine in particular I think looses her financial trait and so will be a lot lot lot lot worse, and certainly no longer one of the best leaders.

Also I suggest that if you redo this after warlords, you write out a whole article with each and every leader in more detail and do them all in one go to make it an easier read for someone looking for a rview of a particular civ. Use word and spellcheck