Save_Ferris
Admiring Myself
I'm surprised no one chose England, it would be my second or third choice. Sure, its UA is bad, but its UUs are really effective.
POLL: strongest civ in civ5
- Thread starter Jim Bro
- Start date
Fabiano1979
Chieftain
- Joined
- Sep 23, 2010
- Messages
- 75
Denmark its the strongest now IMO. Very easy to win a domination game with them.
All you need is a couple of catapults and 4 bersekers and you will conquer capitals on high difficult without a problem.
All you need is a couple of catapults and 4 bersekers and you will conquer capitals on high difficult without a problem.
The only thing I like about England is longbowmen, and even then I can think of better uu's. Might be the maps I play though
RD-BH
Human
Warring:
Ottomans
Reason:
Synergy of janissaries, non-iron cannons, and sipahi
Poke at 'em with your barb fleet,
Mow down improvements with sipahi,
Finish 'em off with janissaries.
Just make sure you invade before they have rifles.
Ottomans
Reason:
Synergy of janissaries, non-iron cannons, and sipahi
Poke at 'em with your barb fleet,
Mow down improvements with sipahi,
Finish 'em off with janissaries.
Just make sure you invade before they have rifles.
Polycrates
Emperor
- Joined
- Dec 15, 2006
- Messages
- 1,288
I'm gonna go with Inca.
Their UA is just amazing - leaves you absolutely overflowing with gold, is a considerable boost to worker efficiency, and is one of the very best warmongering traits (possibly even the very best) to boot.
Terrace farms can give a nice boost to food, and lets you make the most of a lot of (particularly high-production) sites that others simply can't get food for.
The UU is pretty weak, but it takes good advantage of the UA and is great for defending the kind of reckless overexpansion that Incas thrive on.
They're not as situational as people think either.
Their UA is just amazing - leaves you absolutely overflowing with gold, is a considerable boost to worker efficiency, and is one of the very best warmongering traits (possibly even the very best) to boot.
Terrace farms can give a nice boost to food, and lets you make the most of a lot of (particularly high-production) sites that others simply can't get food for.
The UU is pretty weak, but it takes good advantage of the UA and is great for defending the kind of reckless overexpansion that Incas thrive on.
They're not as situational as people think either.
Non-iron cannons? Are we playing the same Civ V?
Sounds like a mod to me, since I assume that most mods that change the Ottomans give them some sort of siege-related ability or unit.
jagdtigerciv
Prince
- Joined
- Sep 27, 2007
- Messages
- 468
Non-iron cannons? Are we playing the same Civ V?
I believe he was simply specifying that Cannons do not require Iron, making them a must-have beeline if you didn't get a Iron heavy start.
jagdtigerciv
Prince
- Joined
- Sep 27, 2007
- Messages
- 468
I completely agree. Siam, Persia, China and Babylon (if you know what you're doing) are easily the most powerful.
Siam's UA is probably one of the most powerful because it takes advantage of the extremely powerful city-states and their UB and UU are solid choices as well.
Persia's UA is handsdown one of the best, especially in the hands of high difficulty AIs and experiences players who manage to run non-stop Golden ages, moving military units significantly faster and running huge wealth incomes that can sometimes be impossible to stop.
Babylon for mass Great scientists by beelining Education with the Great Library (From Meriticracy) and saving your scientist from writing to scoop Civil Service. You can easily out-tech even Deity using this strategy.
China, has been argued already.
Ah, I read this as "cannons that are special because they don't require iron." My comprehension taker a serious dive when I'm sleep deprived.
Songhai and China in my opinion, because they're the best all round civs, good for science, war diplomacy or culture. There are others that are good, but they're good in one paticular field. I think those two are the civs you can pick, and decide to go in whatever direction and do well in.
Save_Ferris
Admiring Myself
Don't have the DLC, but I'd think Babylon would be good because it's one of the only science civs. Maybe Siam, but that's more culture-orientated.
snarzberry
Emperor
Siam, Babylon, Persia for limited conquest/peaceful games. Mongolia, Denmark, China, Japan for serious violent expansion/domination games.
Those are my favourite civs and I am especially loving the vikings right now but I think it's just the novelty. Playing with Denmark now and my early expansion was so successful that I have 500
250
by turn 200 with 19 cities.
Those are my favourite civs and I am especially loving the vikings right now but I think it's just the novelty. Playing with Denmark now and my early expansion was so successful that I have 500
250 by turn 200 with 19 cities.
snarzberry
Emperor
The design team would probably be happy with the results so far. 177 votes and 9 civs are in double digits. Good spread.
LAnkou
Breizh A Tao
I personnaly think that main strengh of a civ is it's UA...
i hesitate for a long time between France and Siam then i thought that the heart was talking with France because i'm a culture whore (even if i don't particulary like to aim for cultural victory), and maybe i was overranking culture in the game...
so i voted siam...
other good candidates for me would have been:
-songhai: i'm currently discovering them and the barbarian bonus is awesome...
-persia: very nice UA
i hesitate for a long time between France and Siam then i thought that the heart was talking with France because i'm a culture whore (even if i don't particulary like to aim for cultural victory), and maybe i was overranking culture in the game...
so i voted siam...
other good candidates for me would have been:
-songhai: i'm currently discovering them and the barbarian bonus is awesome...
-persia: very nice UA
In my opinion Egypt's UA is really only beneficial in the early game. Here's why:
Early on the wonder bonus (stacked with Aristocracy) is phenomenal. But depending on your victory condition, there are only a few wonders you actually NEED. It is nice to have Egypt and know you will pretty much get those early wonders.
But as the game goes along, personally I tend to somewhat beeline towards the next wonder I need. Usually this focus on getting the tech ASAP gives me the same edge that the UA would. (I do not want to run the numbers, I work with numbers all damn day and I am just going on "feel factor" here)
So in my opinion, Egypt is excellent for one and only one thing: OCC Culture.
My $0.02 on why Egypt isn't more popular.
Save_Ferris
Admiring Myself
I used to think Egypt was good, now I hate it. Here's why:
UA: Seems good, but 20%? If that means you can get 1 extra wonder (say, Stonehenge) in, the bonus would be equal to the bonus on four cities as France or four Mud Pyramid Mosques compared to temples. I'd say it's on par.
UU: Horrible: Horses are the one of the most abundant resources, and the UU has NO combat bonuses.
UB: Also horrible: Sure, a bit of extra gold is nice. But no matinence is nothing compared to China's paper maker. Also, you'd expect that it would give more culture. It doesn't. In fact, it gives less: +2 compared to the usual +3.
UA: Seems good, but 20%? If that means you can get 1 extra wonder (say, Stonehenge) in, the bonus would be equal to the bonus on four cities as France or four Mud Pyramid Mosques compared to temples. I'd say it's on par.
UU: Horrible: Horses are the one of the most abundant resources, and the UU has NO combat bonuses.
UB: Also horrible: Sure, a bit of extra gold is nice. But no matinence is nothing compared to China's paper maker. Also, you'd expect that it would give more culture. It doesn't. In fact, it gives less: +2 compared to the usual +3.
This is very true as well, good point. Their UU and UB leave something lacking.
And what is with the UB giving more of a bonus to whoever conquers you? It really seems like Egypt was designed to be an AI opponent. Almost like a glorified city-state.
