Personal interest in the nine newcomers.

[Talcove]

1) Portugal - I absolutely love trading, even without international trade routes, and getting double the amount of gold from international trade routes just sounds awesome. To add to that, I'll be able to get the resources of some city states without having to throw the gobs of cash I get from my trade routes at them. THEN there's the money you'll be getting from the Nau army!

2) Morocco - With a unique improvement that makes desert tiles desirable, nifty bonuses for turtling, and incentives for other people to trade with you, Morocco just looks boss. Getting culture and extra from international trade routes will help build up my empire, and because of the extra gold they get, other people will be more inclined to trade (And not invade) with me.

3) Poland - Not only will I be getting more social policies, and faster, but a unit that can push others back (Or deal extra) damage sounds great for defensive and offensive strategies. All in all it's a very well-rounded civ.

4) Shoshone - Founding cities with extra territory than usual takes away a big fear; that the AI will gobble up resources I want before my border can expand in time, or before I have enough to buy the tiles! The scouts that choose what to get from ancient ruins are also very awesome!

5) Brazil - It just isn't that interesting. It isn't a let down, but not a big exciter. It's not bad, but it's not that good. All it gets out of me is one big, "Meh".

6) Zulu + Assyria - I've never been too big on warmongering, but these two civs have a nice take on warmongering that will probably make me try it out a few times, though I do generally dislike war-centered civs.

7) Indonesia - While unique resources sounds nice, getting them just seems like quite the hassle, and we don't even know if the resource is unique to the game, or just the map. Furthermore, the randomness of the Kriss Swordsmen is just off-putting, especially when the 'promotions' turn out to be negative ones.

8) Venice - Double trade routes sounds AWESOME. Being able to puppet/buy city states is also good, though it is just a lesser version of what Austria has. What really gets me is the HUGE restriction of only being able to found one city, and not being able to annex any other or found others. It is just far too restrictive for my tastes.

 

[durfal]

This is tough before actually playing with the new systems. But based on the stuff I know right now I think this will be the list of civs in order of how I like to play. Which is by any means not the order in which I like the civs that are coming in though.

1 Brazil - Tourism sounds a cool system and since Brazil is the one to exploit this to the fullest I think I'm gonna like them.
2 Portugal - Trade is up my alley normally so probably Portugal gives me the best game play for that.
3 Indonesia - I like to play on Archipelago maps so they should work for me in that way.
4 Shoshone - I like the bigger territory for starting cities and the exploring thing of the scout.
5 Assyria - I'm not a warmonger but the science part sounds very interesting.
6 Poland - The extra social policies is very nice and the winged hussar seems cool.
7 Morocco - Seems ok, nothing fancy that feels me to be a must to play for me though.
8 Zulu - I'm not a warmonger so probably make them into culture which will be tough. But did it with the Huns so should be able to get it with them too.
9 Venice - Hoped for Italy but was OK with Venice. But really hate the only 1 city idea. I like to build large empires that overwhelm the others. And thats impossible here.

New France will come probably between Indonesia and the Shoshone on this list.

 

[EvenStranger]

I don't see how people can't love warmongering.

I'm all like "pew pew pew" even when I am playing a builder-heavy game.

 

[trexeric]

I don't see how people can't love warmongering.

I'm all like "pew pew pew" even when I am playing a builder-heavy game.

I don't like warmongering because of the 1UPT system. Anyway, in no particular order:
-Venice - Hmm, well I don't necessarily mind the idea of only one city (I'm not a huge fan of it, though) but it's growing on me. Even then, I don't think I'm going to play them often.
-Assyria - Not big on warmongering, but I love siege and science so I have a good feeling about them.
-Brazil - I'm a very cultural player so I think I'll like playing as them.
-Zulu - I'm not big on warmongering.
-Shoshone - I think I'll like them, since they will keep me occupied in the early game (when I get the most bored)
-Portugal - Eh, I dunno.
-Morocco - Iffy on them, too.
-Indonesia - they look like fun to me.
-Poland - Eh, I dunno.

 

[Rick80]

For me:

1 Morocco (I love a desert civilization idea and I want try it)
2 Portugal (Feitoria is exciting)
3 Poland (Good UU and free social policies: ideal for watch new social policies)
4 Venice (Unique game-play)
5 Assyria (I think is the most interesting warmonger)
6 Indonesia (I'm curious about unique luxury)
7 Soshone
8 Zulu (I don't like warmonger civs, but better than Huns or Mongols)

 

[iconocast]

first on my play list

indonesia

morocco

native american civ, warrior scouts is what ive wanted since vanilla

 

[Guandao]

1. Indonesia-interesting to play, usually don't settle on other continents
2. Poland-policies, good for cultural victory
3. Brazil-the boost in tourism goes well for cultural victory
4. Morocco-money maker
5. Portugal-money maker
6. Shoshone-choosing stuff from ruins, getting more land around cities
7. Assyria-stealing techs from other civs
8. Venice-one-city only
9. Zulu-not a big warmonger

 

[Navelgazer]

Poland: Solidarity was amazing and underappreciated in the west, but this UA honors it appropriately.

Indonesia: It actually makes a lot of sense to travel the tradition track with them and keep tall, then deciding whether to use the happiness or gold from the unique resources.

Assyria: As I've said, beeline like crazy and use the UA to fill the gaps. This is not just a splice of Babylon + Huns - this is a new way of playing the game, and can be fascinatingly fun.

Morocco: Will probably be the best of the new civs on paper at least, but better get Petra to make it really worthwhile.

Portugal: Still the one I'm most personally into. The question is, will the UA and Feitoria work at cross-odds? You'll have to be careful, as you don't want to gobble up things from CSes that will keep you from getting your resource diversity bonus...

 

[CommunistCookie]

In no order:

Assyria - I like that the UA allows you to focus more on conquering than science, but they're essentially useless if you're not going domination.
Brazil - Looks like they're going to be the culture king so I'm sure I'll be playing them a lot. Their UU is a bit lacklustre, but I could see it being helpful in late-game wars.
Indonesia - Not very interested because I don't often settle on other continents, I also don't like the random element of their UU.
Morocco - I can already see Morocco being a favorite of mine. Others seem to think them bland, but I love how utilitarian they seem.
Poland - A well rounded civ, and I love the UA, but I'm having a hard time liking the Winged Hussar because it's a lancer replacement.
Portugal - Money and happiness, it's hard to not like Portugal.
The Shoshone - I'm not all that excited about them, but I like them. They're pretty well rounded and are going to be very strong early game.
Venice - Very interested in Venice. If their UA can make up for the whole one city thing I can definitely see them being a favorite because I don't like expanding much through settlers.
The Zulu - Meh, I'm interested in seeing them as an opponent, but not much else for the same reason as Assyria. Pure domination just isn't my thing.

 

[Viregel]

1. Portugal-Seem strong early on, and retain bonuses throughout the game.
2. Assyria-As long as their military is massive, they can do what they like.
3. Poland-Social Policy is very flexible, UU and UB work together well.
4. Morroco-Good trade bonuses, but has no desert start bias.
5. Brazil-They have little to help them from the start, but otherwise good.
6. Indonesia-Bonuses in most areas of the game, but nothing to help them win.
7. Shoshone-Good for early expansion and exploration, but nothing to help them later on.
8. Zulu-Can kill anything, but seem like a boring civ.
9. Venice-I wanted a civilization, not a city-state.

 

[TheMarshmallowBear]

Here's my order, along with what victory I'm plan on go for. I wanted my own thread but I think this fits here more, I honestly don't have a liking, all Civs seem fun one way or another (Except Assyria, because playing on Warlord makes their UA obslete, and Venice because I need to use my Settlers D

1 France - Culture (Me, against 9 new civs to see their leaderscreens, Cultural victory to try the new victory)

2. Shoshone - Diplomacy (Just to see how difficult the revamped Diplomatic Victory is, and I picked Shoshone because I love my Native Northern American civs. I also seem to always give Hiawatha and probably Shoshone a very peaceful gameplay.

3. Zulu - Domination (Time Score) - Seeing as I go for Huge Map, it's nearly impossible for me to get a Domination victory, so I just go berserk and dominate everybody with my gigantic score.

4. Poland - Science - I'm Polish, and I also want to get that achievement

5. Indonesia - Diplomacy - They were me initial Civ for Diplomacy but Shoshone kinda seem cooler. I don't think there is a specific victory they are suited for, especially since Gajah Mada seems more of a Warmonger type.

6. Brazil - Culture - Just to see how good they are at the Culture Game.

7. Morocco - Science - Probably would've gone for Diplomacy or Culture but I'd say I'd do too much of it.

8. Assyria - Domination (Time Score) - Same as Zulu really, although Science probably suits them more.

9. Portugal - Diplomacy - They will undoubtely get A LOT of gold and A LOT of happiness.. so.. yeah.. Diplomacy.

10. Venice - Culture - Left the Hypercube for last.

11. All-Stars - Hotseat - I wanna see how good Hotseat has improved, and gonna pick 3 Vanillas (2 males, 1 female), 3 DLCs (2 males, Isabella), 3 G&Ks (2 males, 1 female) and 3 BNWs (2 males, Maria I) and see how fun it is to play.

 

[Veneke]

1. Portugal - Very excited to play Portugal. Trade routes giving more gold for diversity is going to be sweet. The Feitora looks awesome and encourages playing friendly with the CSs and, indeed, protecting them - which I do anyway. The Nau just tops it all off by rewarding exploration and a naval focus. In some ways, it's a kinda bland Civ (with exception to the Feitora) but it falls so exquisitely into the way I play that I really cannot think of another Civ that would suit me better.

2. Venice - The serene hypercube Civ. I think they copped out with the Austria-esque UA and should have made it a flat-out OOC civ with an even stronger focus on trade, some espionage and more naval warfare. When I play them, I'll likely ignore the Unique Merchant/Puppets etc. As for the AI, if the CS puppets can be liberated then all's well. If it's a repeat of the Austrian UA in practice then, like Austria, I'll excise them from my games.

3. Indonesia - Polynesia 2.0 is my prediction; the AI is going to make a balls of this Civ but it'll be fun to play. Love the UA, UU and even have some interest in the UB. It doesn't make a lick of sense though, spread out the way it is across the tech tree, but random unique promotions for the Kris and unique resources all to myself? Count me in.

3a. Revamped Civs - I'm hoping that a few more Civs will get revamps like France. Depending on what happens here, they're probably next on my list. What follows below are Civs that I find interesting in one or two respects but not enough to sit down and play a game with them.

4. Morocco - An interesting Civ with a strong UA that's intriguing but I feel very little desire to play them. The UI looks strong, if limited, and the UU looks like they tried to do something interesting and failed.

6. Poland - I like the UA but a very uninspired UU and an uninspired UB to match it. That said, I imagine that the AI will manage it quite well, if only because it has nothing special it needs to account for in playing this Civ.

5. Brazil - Brazil is so low down on the list because I'm not terribly interested in it as a Civ. On the other hand, I expect this to be a beast of a Civ in the hands of the AI. Carnival screams powerhouse and the brazilwood camp looks very decent. The Pracinhas are a bit meh but synergize very well with the UA.

7. Zulu - A warmonger Civ I suspect that I'll enjoy fighting against. I typically leave my couple of wars until the early modern era and later though; and usually have it pretty light at that. Do you see those maintenance reduction bonuses? The AI might be god-awful at war but if the carpet of doom is big enough that won't matter. I do find it a little surprising though that the Impi is a pikeman and not a spearman but that's a very minor quibble.

8. Assyria - Another warmonger Civ that will be fun to play against. Nice to see some old-school tech looting return though.

9. Soshone - Never been a fan of American Civs in general and they seem to have done them in such a way as to make them very newbie friendly; pick your ruin bonus, get extra land, have some defensive bonuses and what looks like a flavourful but mediocre cavalry UU top everything off to something that I really have no interest in playing. I can certainly see the attraction though, especially if you're starting out or progressing a difficulty level or are finding the early game somewhat difficult.


Slight aside:

....

Portugal: Still the one I'm most personally into. The question is, will the UA and Feitoria work at cross-odds? You'll have to be careful, as you don't want to gobble up things from CSes that will keep you from getting your resource diversity bonus...

Doesn't resource diversity work at a local level? In other words, only the resources in the immediate vicinity of the city are counted?

 

[mortynv]

Here is my list:
1. Shoshone- Love them already. I love the early game and to make my civs huge so they are right up my alley. Also I am from the Great Basin and most of my Native American knowledge is based in the Shoshone and Paiute tribes. I also like having all the victories open to me and not get locked in to a certain type of win.

2.Zulu- Zulu's have a sweet spot for me since I do like to be a warmonger at times. I will try and play them like the Aztec's though (my all time favorite civ in 5) and try to get a lot of culture as well that way I will have options.

3.Brazil- Like I said I like huge civs but I love to play the culture game. I can't wait to flip cities because all I will do is make sure every city has max happiness to put the pressure on.

4. Poland- I like the free SP and they are opened ended for a victory but other than that meh.

5. Assyria- Overall just meh to me since I will hope to have a tech lead for my units so stealing a lower tech.

6. Indonesia- Not the biggest trader so all of the civs that trade are on the bottom for me as I like to take my resources than trade for them. I do like how the cities can't be razed that is why they are first for me.

7. Portugal- Mainly for stealing a CS's resources. That will be fun.

8. Morocco- Don't like being in the desert even if they UB makes it better.

9. Venice- I hate playing small and you can't get any smaller than Venice. I like to play big with all my civs so I really don't ever see myself playing as them again after I get the achievement and even then I will try and end that game as fast as possible.

 

[Navelgazer]

Doesn't resource diversity work at a local level? In other words, only the resources in the immediate vicinity of the city are counted?

I hope you're right about that (though it will take a small amount of the challenge from playing Portugal away.)

 

[phaethon16]

1. Morocco- I'm going to enjoy sitting on a big pile of money, with my culture adding up too. I never build forts so a UI that gives me dozens of mini forts on deserts is amazing for me. Combine with a killer desert unit and you get my favorite new civ.
2. Brazil- I like playing the culture game the best, and Brazil gives me an excellenet new option and I love Pedro's leader screen. Brazil's inclusion also gives me hope for other Latin American inclusions, and I just love that.
3. Portugal- One of the things I hate about playing defensively is keeping a large standing army costs a lot of money. With Portugal, that will not be a problem because of how much excess money they will be making.
4. Assyria- In the late game, I usually ignore a lot of cheap techs to get to the CN tower, so all I have to do is pick on one civ with Assyria and I get all those techs that everyone else has free. Plus, the library is amazing.
5. Indonesia- Indonesia has a of subtle , but slightly strange benefits that I'm going to enjoy experimenting with. I've always wanted to do an archipelago map with super small islands, and Indonesia will suit tbat wish nicely.
6. Venice- It sounds interesting, but I think it's too similar to Austria, and Austria is better. The Great Galleass looks a little lame truthfully, and Merchant of Venice just doesn't compare to diplomatc marriage. The trade routes are cool though.
7. Poland- It looks cool, but I will probably enjoy beating Poland as Russia more than actually playing them.
8. Shoshone- In my eyes, the Shoshone will only be interesting for the first quarter of the game, and the Pathfinder is cool but overrated.
9. Zulu- I like war, but only if it's coupled with something else, like how China has the paper maker. I can easily see why other people would love the Zulu, because they're awesome, but they don't offer me anything but war, which I don't love.

 

[Zednaught]

My choices are mostly based around what new styles of play seem most interesting to me.

1. Portugal- The new trade mechanics are the most intriguing to me, and Portugal seems based around exploration and trade. I like how all the parts of this civ work together well.

2. Brazil/France- Looking forward to the new culture mechanics, and one of these Civs will be my second choice. Depending on how things turn out, my third choice could be whichever of these two I don't pick.

3. Shoshone/revamped UA civ- if the pathfinder is not nerfed, this civ has the potential for a very strong and flexible early game, followed by a midgame spent defending a sprawling land empire. If it's something akin to the Maya great person bonus, well, I'll give it a pass. If another Civ has an interesting enough revamped UA (and there's plenty that deserve one) I'd choose it.

4. Venice-it remains to be seen just how powerful trade routes or the new merchant will end up being, but they certainly seem to make for a unique game. I definitely want to give them a try.

5. Poland-they kind of take up the niche that France used to have, and the ability to get some extra policies, particularly as the game goes into its later stages, might be nice. I've already done an immortal game as France, though, otherwise I'd rank Poland higher. Using cavalry across a wide empire might be fun. A solid, though unspectacular, civ overall.

6. Indonesia-I'm not clear yet about how the whole unique resource works exactly, but it might be fun on the right map.

7. Morocco- there's a lot to like about them. I think that other civs' trade route abilities are a little more interesting, but the desert bonus abilities seem pretty interesting. A low ranking from me, but still seems quite fun.

8. Assyria- Seems like quite a powerful civ, but the focus on warmaking is a little too much for me. Warmaking is very powerful, and I like this twist on it, but I find that being on the offensive so long makes the games drag on.

9. Zulu- extremely powerful civ, with all the elements working well together. Again, not enthusiastic about a completely warlike civ, but I am looking forward to seeing them as an opponent.

 

[EricTheGreat12]

1) Zulu
I have read abou them lately and they have been fascinating. I hope to play many games as them and the Impi seems like a good looking and an awesome ability unit. UA looks usefull,especially since I like playing as a warmonger civ (10/10)

2)Portugal
In every game I play, I have four key criterias:
-Gold
-Diplomacy
-Happiness
-War

With Portugal,it seems as if all of criterias are filled (except for warmongering). The UU is perfect for money and XP so I like it. The UI helps me with the diplomatic factor with city-states.The UA makes me take advantage of the trade routes, just like Morroco. (9,5/10)

3)Morroco
I look forward to trade routes, and this civ seems to take advantage of it. I like how they take advantage of the desert tile, especially since their Kasbah can give me a good advantage. The UU seems boring and bland like the Comanche Cavalry. The UA seems to take 100% benefit of trade routes (9/10)

4)Indonesia
Their colour is a good mixture and the random promotions give Indonesia a very interesting taste. UA looks OK (8/10)

5)Shoshone
I like spending a lot of diplomacy and action during the end of the game, but all of their stuff come at the beggining so I don't think that they are the most exciting civ. The Pathfinder seems to be usefull during the early game but the Comanche cavalry is boring and pretty much useless (besides the fact that they're cavalry). Their UA is boring (7,5/10)
Finally a new Native Americain CIV

6)Assyria
Stealing a tech is an interesting UA, but the UB seems thine and the UU is powerfull but can only attack cities. (6/10)

7)Brazil
I've always been a warmonger, so a Culture civ is something that doesn't interest me. The UI looks useless and the ability that the UU has is pretty stupid to me. The UA just makes the civ worst. (5/10)

8)Poland
Oh lord where do I start, this civ is a big dissapointement. I only seem to think that Social Policies give you an advantage in the begining only, so the UA keeps on getting worse as the game goes on. And I have said this before and I'll say it again: the Winged Hussar's special ability sucks. Im not the biggest fan of cavalry so neither does the UB interest me. (3/10)

9)Venice
Out of all the civs in CIV 5, this was the worst choice ever: their UA is bad considering that I LOVE expanding, so this UA is garbage to me. Plus, the 'only able to puppet or raze cities option' is horrible considering I love to annex cities and have complete control over my empire. The special Galleas unit seems ok, but the merchant of Venice,and their 'Puppet city option', only makes their situation worse. TBH, I don't think that this civ is worth it: I would liked something more like Vietnam or Canada (0/10)

TBH, I will end up playing all of them; except for Venice, Assyria, Poland and Brazil. I don't think that Brazil is a good civ also because I rather have a diplomatic war in the World Congress than fight a Culture game against a civ who's pretty bad-ass at culture

 

[Viregel]

1) Zulu
I have read abou them lately and they have been fascinating. I hope to play many games as them and the Impi seems like a good looking and an awesome ability unit. UA looks usefull,especially since I like playing as a warmonger civ

2)Portugal
In every game I play, I have four key criterias:
-Gold
-Diplomacy
-Happiness
-War

With Portugal,it seems as if all of criterias are filled (except for warmongering). The UU is perfect for money and XP so I like it. The UI helps me with the diplomatic factor with city-states.The UA makes me take advantage of the trade routes, just like Morroco.

3)Morroco
I look forward to trade routes, and this civ seems to take advantage of it. I like how they take advantage of the desert tile, especially since their Kasbah can give me a good advantage. The UU seems boring and bland like the Comanche Cavalry. The UA seems to take 100% benefit of trade routes

4)Indonesia
Their colour is a good mixture and the random promotions give Indonesia a very interesting taste. UA looks OK

5)Shoshone
I like spending a lot of diplomacy and action during the end of the game, but all of their stuff come at the beggining so I don't think that they are the most exciting civ. The Pathfinder seems to be usefull during the early game but the Comanche cavalry is boring and pretty much useless (besides the fact that they're cavalry). Their UA is boring
Finally a new Native Americain CIV

6)Assyria
Stealing a tech is an interesting UA, but the UB seems thine and the UU is powerfull but can only attack cities.

7)Brazil
I've always been a warmonger, so a Culture civ is something that doesn't interest me. The UI looks useless and the ability that the UU has is pretty stupid to me. The UA just makes the civ worst.

8)Poland
Oh lord where do I start, this civ is a big dissapointement. I only seem to think that Social Policies give you an advantage in the begining only, so the UA keeps on getting worse as the game goes on. And I have said this before and I'll say it again: the Winged Hussar's special ability sucks. Im not the biggest fan of cavalry so neither does the UB interest me.

9)Venice
Out of all the civs in CIV 5, this was the worst choice ever: their UA is bad considering that I LOVE expanding, so this UA is garbage to me. Plus, the 'only able to puppet or raze cities option' is horrible considering I love to annex cities and have complete control over my empire. The special Galleleas unit seems ok, but the merchant of Venice,and their 'Puppet city option', only makes their situation worse.

You have just reminded me that Venice cannot annex cities. I don't know why they did this, but I doubt that I will be playing Venice often, if at all. Poland, however, can be an amazingly good civ; if they stay quite far ahead in Science, they can get an ideology before anyone else, giving them an additional two free tenants, and giving them a good chance at any victory. However, without horses, Poland is awful.

 

[MadDjinn]

However, without horses, Poland is awful.

and that's the case with a lot of civs that have map based U*s.

 

[EricTheGreat12]

9. Venice-I wanted a civilization, not a city-state.

Finally, someone that agress with me that Venice isn't meant to be in BNW as a civ