Power ranking the civilizations

[steveg700]

Weird to see Kongo hitting these lists. It's such a poor design, it's amazing there isn't more outcry for it to be revised.

Playing games with them, you're basically sitting back waiting to see which neighbors will actually get around to spreading religion to my cities. I have no way to induce them. And if the beliefs being spread involve faith purchases, oh well. And if it involves bonuses for shrines, temples, or holy sites, oh well. And if a civ spreads its religion without ever getting around to using an apostle to add additional beliefs, oh well.

The bonuses for relics, artifacts, and sculptures is nice, but very much backended. I guess its the double GP points that appeal to people?

 

[Siptah]

Weird to see Kongo hitting these lists. It's such a poor design, it's amazing there isn't more outcry for it to be revised.

Playing games with them, you're basically sitting back waiting to see which neighbors will actually get around to spreading religion to my cities. I have no way to induce them. And if the beliefs being spread involve faith purchases, oh well. And if it involves bonuses for shrines, temples, or holy sites, oh well. And if a civ spreads its religion without ever getting around to using an apostle to add additional beliefs, oh well.

The bonuses for relics, artifacts, and sculptures is nice, but very much backended. I guess its the double GP points that appeal to people?

The relics/artifacts/sculptures bonus is super strong and has a lot of flexibility as well. It does seem to be one of the strongest 'peaceful' civs.

 

[steveg700]

Tier lists always make me think of fighting games, which then makes me imagine all the civ leaders having a massive brawl with each other. Hmm, I imagine Gilgamesh would come out on top in such a situation, at least if it was unarmed combat. If everyone had access to period-appropriate weaponry it would probably be Teddy or John Curtin since they'd be packing guns closest to modern firearms.

LOL. Not sure that a pistol offers all that much of an advantage over a hadouken. I think we'd be much more satisfied seeing Teddy pull out his "Big Stick" move.

The relics/artifacts/sculptures bonus is super strong and has a lot of flexibility as well. It does seem to be one of the strongest 'peaceful' civs.

It's worth nothing for a large portion of the game. You don't have a reliable way to get relics. You have to wait a good while to get sculptures (after Donatello, there's a glut of portraits, landscapes, and religious art), and even longer to get artifacts.

Basically, if you stumble into a goody relic early, then you're getting a major bump. If you don't, meh.

 

[Locke_Daemonfire]

Weird to see Kongo hitting these lists. It's such a poor design, it's amazing there isn't more outcry for it to be revised.

Playing games with them, you're basically sitting back waiting to see which neighbors will actually get around to spreading religion to my cities. I have no way to induce them. And if the beliefs being spread involve faith purchases, oh well. And if it involves bonuses for shrines, temples, or holy sites, oh well. And if a civ spreads its religion without ever getting around to using an apostle to add additional beliefs, oh well.

The bonuses for relics, artifacts, and sculptures is nice, but very much backended. I guess its the double GP points that appeal to people?

I actually think that Kongo is great design. Giving up one victory condition in order to have more focus on another has the potential to make for a very unique feeling civ. It's somewhat held back by the fact that getting a religion is nigh impossible in higher difficulties anyway. Their main strength is actually their extremely early neighborhoods, which are quite powerful. They allow for playing 'tall' which a lot of players do like, and makes them again feel more unique.

The great work bonus is kind of absurd if you get a relic in a hut early on, but otherwise I agree comes up late. Double GP points is actually quite a big deal, since you compete for GP's. Allows Kongo to run laps around the other civs for the relevant GP's.

 

[Kimiimaro]

Here's my reposted list, now with reasons. I also moved some Civs, and I'll probably move them later again. Please respect this is only my personal opinion based on my personal preferences and experiences.

Part 1:

24, Norway (Harald Hardrada)
Norway is, without a doubt, great naval civ. Both UA are offering naval bonuses. But navy in this civ has one big problem - it's nearly useless. You need only 3-5 ships to sink enemy units and wreck their coastal cities. Stave Church is slightly upgraded Temple and doesn't offer nearly any bonuses. Viking Longship is better Galley, but, as I said, it's useless, because it becomes obsolete soon and because it's close combat ship. Berserker is quite strong, but one good UU can't save horrible Civ from being horrible. Firaxis, if you'll make another naval Civ, like Dutch Empire or Venetian Republic, make it stronger. Please. Or at least improve naval warfare of the AI.

23, Spain (Philip II)
Insignificant, that's what can I say about Spain. Treasure Fleets offer small trade route bonus, that's okay, and allow me to combine ships into fleets and armadas sooner, which is nice, but still doesn't change the fact that navy is almost useless. El Escorial is the same. It offers me battle bonus agains enemy with another religion, which is good, and allows Inquisitors to remove heresy three times, which is fine only if you have annoying religious neighbor and if you're going for Religious Victory. Mission is insignificant UI. Conquistador can be decent UU if you have religion and enough faith to buy enough Missionarries and Apostles to increase their power.

22, Rome (Trajan)
I'm sorry, but I really don't like this one. All Roads Lead to Rome is one of the worst abilities in the game. Many people like Trajan's Columns, but I don't. It's maybe good for early expansion, but I almost never early expand, so when I settle, I usually earn enough money through foreign trade routes and Commercial Hubs to buy a Monument, so this is only "money saver" to me. Baths are great district, because extra housing and amenities are always welcomed. Legion is good UU, with slightly higher strenght and no need for Iron. Its ability to build Roman Fort is useless for me. But good UU and UD doesn't save Rome from bad bonuses. Maybe I'm playing it wrong, or maybe it's just not the right civ for me.

21, Brazil (Pedro II)
Magnanimous is interresting ability, but nearly useless, because Great People are often a small help, and there are only few game changing GP like Adam Smith, Carl Sagan, Wernher von Braun and few others. Amazon is somewhat good, because it can help a lot in creating worthy cities in jungle, but on the other way, jungle blocks you place for other things like farms. Carnival is decent, Carnival project isn't bad either. Battleship is crazily OP, and Minas Geraes, improved Battleship, is godly UU. While I say navy is useless, ships with giant firepower, full damage to cities and range of three are always velcomed. It's perfect unit for wrecking enemy coastal cities. Too bad it often won't save you from enemy armies, because most of your cities will be inland due the rainforest often not reaching to the sea... Together, Brazil creates interresting Civ, but not strong Civ. 20 more to go...

20, India (Gandhi)
India is probably the strongest religious Civ in game. And that's all folks. Both UA offer some interresting religious bonuses, but nothing more. Varu is quite good UU and Stepwell is quite good UI. In the other words, India gets this place for being strong in only one victory path and not offering any versatile bonuses.

19, France (Catherine de' Medici)
I just realised I was overetimating France for a long time, so that's the reason for it's long fall. Diplomatic access actually isn't very important in game, so Catherine's Flying Squadron is one of the weakest UA in game. But Grand Tour isn't. Wonder tourism can be strong if you build a lot of wonders, and doubled wonder tourism will make your Cultural Victory even easier, especially if you have production bonus on wonders of three eras. Chateau is insignificant UI, Garde Imperiale is somewhat good UU. Let's move to the next Civs.

18, Sparta (Gorgo)
Wildcard slot is good, but policy cards are only minor game changers, so it's not that good. Acropolis is good, because both Sparta's and Athens' main target is Cultural Victory. Hoplite can be great early game UU, because +10 combat bonus for at least one adjecent Hoplite is nothing to laugh at. But problem with Sparta is that you either have to be constantly at war - that means to be constantly hated, or let barbarian encampments live to gain enough of enemy units for minor cultural boosts. It's not really bad, it's just not the right civ for me.

17, Athens (Pericles)
Athens are better, because +5% culture boost per suzerain can be good if you manage to keep at least 4 suzerains thanks to using right policies in your wildcard slot. But it's situational, although less than Sparta. Let's move on another point.

16, England (Victoria)
British Museum is great UA to help me with Cultural Victory. Pax Britannica is insignificant to me. Sea Dog is kinda insignificant UU. Redcoat, on the other way, is great UU. Royal Navy Dockyard is kinda fine UD. I think this is good place for it.

15, America (Teddy Roosevelt)
Founding Fathers is one of the worst UA in game. Roosevelt Corollary, on the other way, seems fine, because +5 combat strenght is nothing to laugh at in any era. I don't build many National Parks, because Naturalist costs increddible amount of faith and I build Holy Sites only for my Religious Victories, so I often can't afford him and thus fully use this part of Teddy's UA. P-51 Mustang is horrible, Rough Rider is good, but the best part on 'Murica is the incredible Film Studio with double tourism bonus.

14, Japan (Hojo Tokimune)
Meiji Restoration can be fine and versatile ability, if it's used right. On the other hand, Divine Wind is weak to me. Electronics factory is decent UB and Samurai is fine UU, so I'll place Japan here.

13, Sumeria (Gilgamesh)
Adventures with Enkidu is weak. I'm rarely participating in joint wars, because AI refuses to accept it from me, or it offers it to me in times I just really don't want to fight. And if we eventually fight in joint war, AI is usually doing nothing. Discount on CS armies sounds fine, but CS rarely upgrades their armies in my games so it costs ton of money to make them at least little bit useful. Epic Quest is kinda fine, because Extra Tribal Village bonus is always welcomed. Too bad you only get few more of these things. Ziggurat is kinda fine, because it can give you early game Tech and Civic lead. The best part of this Civ is the godly War Cart. It's seriously one of the most game changing UU in game. But the other civs are better...

 

[Kimiimaro]

Part 2:

12, Kongo (Mvemba a Nzinga)
Kongo is similar to Venice from Civ V. It can't do one thing, so it gets some incredible bonus as a compensation. Nkisi is seriously one of the most overpowered UA in game. Mbanza is great UD, Ngao Mbeba is fine UU. But I have to place it somewhere, and this is right spot.

11, Persia (Cyrus the Great)
Satrapies is great UA that makes my domestic trade routes much better, because of gold and culture. Advanced routes is weak bonus, but I don't mind here. Fall of Babylon may be good if you don't care about diplomatic penalties. Paridaeza is simply one of the best UI in game. Immortal seems like an Archer with doubled melee strenght, so he can protect himself quite well. If he could do melee attack, he would be one of the best UU in game. Without this ability, he's just good.

10, Egypt (Cleopatra)
Production is king, and Iteru is super useful with providing bonus production on districts and wonders of all eras. Mediterranean's Bride is also good UA. I often use foreign trade routes, so I roll in gold and buy buildings, units, everything I need so my cities are well developed. Sphinx is insignificant UI, but Maryannu Chariot Archer is quite good for me because of strong ranged attack (even if range is 1) and decent melee strenght and because it doesn't need horses to be built.

9, Scythia (Tomyris)
Scythia is great warmonger Civ, hands down. People of the Steppe allows me to train giant army in very short time and Killer of Cyrus is amazing ability that allows me to use this army to kill and not to care about health. Saka Horse Archer is also great - it's light cavarly, so I can spam it with People of the Steppe and it doesn't require horses, and that means even bigger spam. Kurgan is insignificant, but it doesn't mind - Scythia still reamains good.

8, Macedon (Alexander the Great)
Macedon is also an increddible warmonger Civ. Both Hetairoi and Hypastist are decent UU. No war wearines is incredible. 100% heal for whole army after capturing city with wonder is incredible. Eurekas and Inspirations are incredible. Basilikoi Paides is fine UB. Both Macedon and Scythia are great warmonger Civs, but I prefer versatile Civs, so this is the reason for 9th and 8th place.

7, Arabia (Saladin)
The Last Prophet means I don't need to worry about annoying AI stealing all great prophets before me, and bonus science for foreign cities following Arabian religion can be pretty good if you are playing on large maps. Righteousness of the Faith seems like quite good bonus. Madrasa is very good UB and Mamluk is one of the best UU in game, because healing on end of every turn is super OP. Together, Arabia is fine very good Civ for Religious victory and Science victory.

6, Poland (Jadwiga)
Poland is incredible Civ. Stealing room from your annoying neighbours is too good. The worst policy turned into the best policy is also great. Lithuanian Union is amazing. Sukiennice is simply one of the best UB in game. Winged Hussar is also seriously OP UU. This is simply amazing Civ for me.

5, China (Qin Shi Huang)
Ability to spam every early game wonder is incredible. Bonus charge for builders saves me a lot of money and production through whole game. Improved Eurekas and Inspirations allow me to be little bit far ahead in Techs and Civics. Great Wall is kinda weak - I haven't built any in my games as China. Crouching Tiger is somewhat good UU to me.

4, Russia (Peter the Great)
So, I have lots of saved money/culture with the bonus territory, I can catch the scientific/cultural civs with foreign trade routes, extra faith and production from tundra means there isn't place where I wouldn't want to settle, Lavra generates GA, GW and GM points and expands my territorry whenever I use a GP, Cossack doesn't need any resources, can move after attacking and has bigger combat strenght than cavarly... Yep, Russia is definitely OP.

3, Australia (John Curtin)
Land Down Under is simply incredible. You can create high population cities, incredibly strong districts and steal enemy lands through pastures. Citadel of Civilization is also great - doubled production in all cities allows you to build an army in very short time to beat the enemy invasion. Outback Station is very good UI and Digger is great UU.

2, Aztecs (Montezuma)
Aztecs are incredible Civ in fastbuilding any newfounded city with district building boost, which makes Legend of the Five Suns one of the best abilities ever. Tlaotani seems like fine ability that can very well increase amenities and military strenght. Eagle Warrior is great UU, but it can capture only other civs units and his ability disappears when you upgrade him to Swordsman. Tlachtli is weak and uninterresting, but that doesn't change the fact Aztecs are super civ.

1, Germany (Frederick Barbarossa)
One bonus district is simply the best UA ever for me. It allows me to pursuit every victory type with free Campus/Theater Square/Encampment/Holy Site, and still have my empire happy, or have enough of gold/culture/science... +7 combat strenght towards CS isn't very good, I know, and military policy is the worst policy card, but still. U-Boat isn't bad, but it's naval unit, so I won't use it for most of time. But we still have Hansa - one of the best UD in game. Hansa gives you production, and production is king, and it gives you more production from adjecent Commercial Hubs, the must build district. Germany is the best civ for me.

 

[Morningcalm]

I have come around to liking Kongo's design as well (though I have residual misgivings about Mvemba a Nzinga/Afonso getting the Nkisi ability since Afonso typically destroyed spiritual objects that offended Catholics, and that would have included local animist items, including the nail fetish nkisi).

Nzinga is one of the few AI I find difficult to beat (peacefully) on higher difficulties due to Kongo's huge culture generation (which makes them difficult to beat in culture) and their huge population (for high science bonuses). I think Kongo's GP bonus is actually better than Pedro's GP bonus, though Pedro's GP bonus applies to all GPs (and not just Great Writers/Artists/Musicians/Merchants). Their huge food and gold bonuses from the M'bamba are pretty awesome too, though they do require destroying wood/rainforest tiles.

Conclusion? They should be higher rated than 12 I would say--at least top 10, IMO, due to their strong UA. That they can't get a religious victory isn't a huge obstacle given that you could win a cultural/domination victory instead (or science, if you like that path).

 

[steveg700]

The relics/artifacts/sculptures bonus is super strong and has a lot of flexibility as well. It does seem to be one of the strongest 'peaceful' civs.

I actually think that Kongo is great design. Giving up one victory condition in order to have more focus on another has the potential to make for a very unique feeling civ. It's somewhat held back by the fact that getting a religion is nigh impossible in higher difficulties anyway. Their main strength is actually their extremely early neighborhoods, which are quite powerful. They allow for playing 'tall' which a lot of players do like, and makes them again feel more unique..

It may be unique design, but that doesn't really mean it's good design. It's not an issue of giving up a victory condition that makes the leader ability a case of (objectively) flawed design. Rather, it's an issue of not being able to build holy sites, which means Kongo is incapable of benefiting from many of the follower, founder, or enhancer beliefs and *none* of the worship beliefs--either directly incapable by virtue of lacking the requisite district or building, or indirectly incapable by having a faith income for purchases. They're reliant on other civ's voluntarily foisting beliefs on them, and being powerless to do more than hope that those beliefs will actually be meaningful. The leader ability gives up more than it gains, even if you take founding a religion off the table. Understand that a vanilla civ getting a secondhand religion spread to them will frequently prosper from it more than the Kongo.

Ideally, these drawbacks would have been accounted for in some way, such as by having Mbanzas generate faith. That would make way more sense than spawning apostles that wind up turning into ersatz scouts in the frequent even that the religion they promote is worthless to the Congolese.

As for building tall, if you're getting extra great works from double GP points, then you actually have to build wide in order to have more theater districts.

Nzinga is one of the few AI I find difficult to beat (peacefully) on higher difficulties due to Kongo's huge culture generation (which makes them difficult to beat in culture) and their huge population (for high science bonuses). I think Kongo's GP bonus is actually better than Pedro's GP bonus, though Pedro's GP bonus applies to all GPs (and not just Great Writers/Artists/Musicians/Merchants). Their huge food and gold bonuses from the M'bamba are pretty awesome too, though they do require destroying wood/rainforest tiles.

Sorry, but that seems a rather hasty conclusion that focuses on (perceived) gains rather than the total package.

Rid yourselves of any notion that all the leader UA costs them is an option for religious victory. They lose more, as I outlined above. In addition, getting double points for some GP's is mitigated by not having faith with which to purchase them. Like I said, the leader UA is actually more a handicap than an advantage.

As you guys play devil's advocate for Kongo, it just comes out sounding worse and worse. Leaves me wondering how much of these rankings are concluded without the benefit of experience, rather than just "on-paper" analysis. Certainly a comparison to Civ V Venice is only valid at a very superficial level.

The Mbanzas are decent, the UU is good. The double GP's can be exploited. But man, there is a lot of room for polish.

 

[Morningcalm]

Sorry, but it sounds like you're leaping to a rather reductive conclusion that focuses on (perceived) gains rather than the total package.

Get the notion out of your head that all the leader UA costs them is an option for religious victory. They lose a lot more. For instance, getting double points for some GP's is mitigated by not having faith with which to purchase them. Like I said, the leader UA is actually more a handicap than an advantage.

As you guys play devil's advocate for Kongo, it just comes out sounding worse and worse. Leaves me wondering how much of these rankings are concluded without the benefit of experience, rather than just "on-paper" analysis. Certainly a comparison to Civ V Venice is only valid at a very superficial level.

The Mbanzas are decent, the UU is good. The double GP's can be exploited. But man, there is a lot of room for polish.

That's a pretty hostile reaction. Their leader UA may not be amazing, and the inability to win religious victory is a handicap, but they get much needed bonuses in other areas that make them very strong for the remaining victory options they have. I frankly like that they have a distinct shortcoming, as it makes them an interesting civ to play, and it isn't ultimately a huge handicap due to their immense bonuses in other areas.

I completely disagree with you when you say that:

Ideally, these drawbacks would have been accounted for in some way, such as by having Mbanzas generate faith.

Giving mbanzas faith generation would have been both 1) not true to what mbanzas are, and 2) would make Kongo too rounded out in faith for the disadvantage to fairly offset the huge GP bonuses Kongo gets.

Besides, faith can still be gained as Kongo without holy districts. There are policies that give faith, along with relics (notably Kongo has a 5-slot palace), and besides, I don't use faith in most of my games to buy Great People anyway. I prefer to buy campus buildings or units with faith, and the faith purchase costs for Great People is enormously high such that you would rarely be able to buy more than a handful anyway (and I doubt many high level players use faith to buy Great People except when desperate).

Kongo's UA, UU, and UB are very solid despite a weaker leader ability (with Apostle generation). The bonus food and gold you swim in (let alone production and culture) is easily enough to make Kongo one of the strongest peaceful civs in the game, though with their swordsman, they aren't slouches in combat either. And they get production bonuses from relics/sculptures/artifacts. Given the ridiculously high district costs, many have concluded production is king in Civ VI (I don't agree, but I think its importance is hard to overstate otherwise). Kongo has a peaceful way to get production bonuses that flexibly allow it to build units/wonders/districts as needed while pursuing a peaceful victory.

And I didn't compare Kongo to Venice. I have, however, played them many times, and I find them to be one of the stronger peaceful civs in Civ VI, in part because their bonuses come into play fairly early in the game (as opposed to in the Industrial/etc ages).

 

[Locke_Daemonfire]

It may be unique design, but that doesn't really mean it's good design. It's not an issue of giving up a victory condition that makes the leader ability a case of (objectively) flawed design. Rather, it's an issue of not being able to build holy sites, which means Kongo is incapable of benefiting from many of the follower, founder, or enhancer beliefs and *none* of the worship beliefs--either directly incapable by virtue of lacking the requisite district or building, or indirectly incapable by having a faith income for purchases. They're reliant on other civ's voluntarily foisting beliefs on them, and being powerless to do more than hope that those beliefs will actually be meaningful. The leader ability gives up more than it gains, even if you take founding a religion off the table. Understand that a vanilla civ getting a secondhand religion spread to them will frequently prosper from it more than the Kongo.

The false assumption you are making here is that building Holy Sites is in any way good. Unless you are going for a religious victory, there is essentially no need to build them. In fact, getting a religion at all has generally been deemed not worthwhile in part because of the weakness of the beliefs. I consider the founder belief and apostle acquisition abilities to be nothing more than flavor text, which is distracting you how Kongo actually plays.

As further evidence, it's been said that Kongo is a relatively strong AI precisely because all the others waste time and district slots making Holy Sites. Personally, except for the couple of times I have done an RV and maybe my first game, I have never had the inclination to build one.

As for building tall, if you're getting extra great works from double GP points, then you actually have to build wide in order to have more theater districts.

The optimal play for Kongo is to build tall and wide, as there is no penalty for doing so. Being able to grow many large cities is obviously better than many small cities. The ability to grow tall early, however, is particularly useful for times where you get pinned in. Also, many people just like playing peaceful and tall, so Kongo would be more powerful for their playstyle.

You have it in your head that all they lose is an option for religious victory. They lose a lot more. For instance, getting double points for some GP's is mitigated by not having faith with which to purchase them.

Building Holy Sites for faith generation in order to purchase GP's is extremely inefficient. Yes, buying GP's with faith is a little cheaper than with gold, but the Commerce Hub provides more gold per building, in addition to a trade route and GM points.

As you guys play devil's advocate for Kongo, it just comes out sounding worse and worse. Leaves me wondering how much of these rankings are concluded without the benefit of experience, rather than just "on-paper" analysis.

I'm not playing devil's advocate for Kongo. I honestly really like their design, and I'm not surprised that others enjoy them as well. I don't have them that high because I believe that the strongest civs are the ones with strong early military (eg. Sumeria, Scythia), but I would consider them above average.

 

[steveg700]

That's a pretty hostile reaction. Their leader UA may not be amazing, and the inability to win religious victory is a handicap, but they get much needed bonuses in other areas that make them very strong for the remaining victory options they have. I frankly like that they have a distinct shortcoming, as it makes them an interesting civ to play, and it isn't ultimately a huge handicap due to their immense bonuses in other areas.

Faith can still be gained as Kongo without holy districts. There are policies that give faith, and besides, I don't use faith in most of my games to buy Great People anyway. I prefer to buy campus buildings or units with faith, and the faith purchase costs for Great People is enormously high such that you would rarely be able to buy more than a handful anyway (and I doubt many high level players use faith to buy Great People except when desperate).

Kongo's UA, UU, and UB are very solid despite a weaker leader ability (with Apostle generation). The bonus food and gold you swim in (let alone production and culture) is easily enough to make Kongo one of the strongest peaceful civs in the game, though with their swordsman, they aren't slouches in combat either. And they get production bonuses from relics/sculptures/artifacts. Given the ridiculously high district costs, many have concluded production is king in Civ VI (I don't agree, but I think its importance is hard to overstate otherwise). Kongo has a peaceful way to get production bonuses that flexibly allow it to build units/wonders/districts as needed while pursuing a peaceful victory.

And I didn't compare Kongo to Venice. I have, however, played them many times, and I find them to be one of the stronger peaceful civs in Civ VI, in part because their bonuses come into play fairly early in the game (as opposed to in the Industrial/etc ages).

When you go to the trouble provide detailed explanations, and those explanations seem to be disregarded, that rankles, no point in denyin' it. Please don't take that general irritation personally.

The UU is about the only unique that I can regard as early (which, to my mind, is pre-medieval era). You assert that there are other ways to earn faith, but is that a fair rebuttal? If you don't have holy sites, is the odd policy or trade route or incense plantation going to cut it? If someone spreads a belief that lets you buy campus and theater district buildings with faith, how much can you jump on that? Someone spreads a belief that gives you housing or food from holy sites. you're missing out. IME, those perceived advantages get diluted.

I guess for you guys the discussion begins and ends at getting works of art twice as quickly and early neighborhoods, to which I guess I just have to say "to each their own" an be on my way, having said more than my piece.

The false assumption you are making here is that building Holy Sites is in any way good. Unless you are going for a religious victory, there is essentially no need to build them. In fact, getting a religion at all has generally been deemed not worthwhile in part because of the weakness of the beliefs. I consider the founder belief and apostle acquisition abilities to be nothing more than flavor text, which is distracting you how Kongo actually plays.

As further evidence, it's been said that Kongo is a relatively strong AI precisely because all the others waste time and district slots making Holy Sites. Personally, except for the couple of times I have done an RV and maybe my first game, I have never had the inclination to build one.

I'm aware of musings on the topic from some members of the Committee for Generally Deeming Stuff, but as much I hate to contravene their august authority, I've often found that holy sites can be empirically useful when equipped with the proper pantheon, follower, and worship beliefs. I will concur that founder beliefs are generally underwhelming. I am content to get religion secondhand, but all of this only adds up to Kongo being even more disappointing. See examples above.

 

[Zuizgond]

Another 'rank the civs' thread?

 

[Morningcalm]

When you go to the trouble provide detailed explanations, and those explanations seem to be disregarded, that rankles, no point in denyin' it. Please don't take that general irritation personally.

The UU is about the only unique that I can regard as early (which, to my mind, is pre-medieval era). You assert that there are other ways to earn faith, but is that a fair rebuttal? If you don't have holy sites, is the odd policy or trade route or incense plantation going to cut it? If someone spreads a belief that lets you buy campus and theater district buildings with faith, how much can you jump on that? Someone spreads a belief that gives you housing or food from holy sites. you're missing out. IME, those perceived advantages get diluted.

I guess for you guys the discussion begins and ends at getting works of art twice as quickly and early neighborhoods, to which I guess I just have to say "to each their own" an be on my way, having said more than my piece.

I don't agree with the idea that Kongo-supporters ought be lumped into the "you only like them for the great works of art and early neighborhoods" basket. I have pointedly referred to Kongo's food, production and gold bonuses, in addition to their strong swordsman unit and the fact that their bonuses are early--let's be clear, none of Kongo's bonuses apply ONLY in the Industrial Age onwards (unlike, say America, who has a UU and a UB from that era onwards). To quote someone I have heard from recently, "When you go to the trouble provide detailed explanations, and those explanations seem to be disregarded, that rankles, no point in denyin' it."

On a more serious note, as to your specific implications--"early neighborhoods" in and of themselves sound underwhelming, and would likely not be that great. What is great is the mbanza, which has food and gold on top of it. Similarly, when you say "getting great works of art twice as quickly", that sounds underwhelming too. But double Great Merchant points in addition to the Great Artist/Writer/etc bonuses, which feeds into (pun totally intended) the Kongo resource bonuses for Great Works of Sculpture/Artifacts--THAT is good. There is a synergy among several of Kongo's bonuses that is simply lacking in many other civilization designs.

 

[Victoria]

@Kimiimaro
Egypt 10 England 16, lol. Egypt rolls in money while the RNDY is kinda ok?
One suggests one has not played much England or not well.

Maryannu chariot? Overly expensive late to get, upgrades to knight unit is just meh. I have played about 20'games as Egypt. The district discount is good, the gold is OK but not significant. People struggle with understanding how this civ gels and they are right, it has some generalised benefits but not much strength in a particular area.

Rome 22? I mean Really? For many people it's no1

Gorgo 18? Christ... continually at war is a complete fallacy. Killing just 1 warrior gives more than 6 turns with of culture initially but only 1/6 of a turns culture by turn 80.... it's a very very VERY strong 50 turn start and no reason to use it after that. It gets you to the acropolis tens of turns before anyone else and then you get it at half price.

They are your choices but they certainly seem to be formed without full appreciation of how the abilities are correctly used, and to be fair we are all still learning because few people have played 20 games with each civ.

The value of such a thread is to discuss, to learn, appreciate others views. Certainly we will not all agree on a list because we all have a bias. What may be better is to have a list for each VC and rank them within that.... that would clarify the position of such civs as Egypt in a clearer light.

Bottom line, agressive civs, especially early aggressive civs are more powerful based on game design. With this in mind I have no idea how Rome is 22, Kongo is a master at cultural and good at science victories.... Japan, it sounds like you have not even played them. Not disagreeing with the placing just the experience.

@Disgustipated , you list is fine and you are right, it's hard to rank.

 

[Arent11]

Well, first of all, we would have to establish what we mean by "strong". Since domination/conquest is overbearing in Civ VI & higher difficulties are basically about surviving the first onslaught of ais, I would rate domination civs highest & among those the domination civs that have *immediate* advantages from turn 1.

Something like this:

Tier A (Domination Civs, especially immediate advantages):

Scythia
Aztecs
Macedonia
Persia
Sumeria
Rome
America

Tier B (Domination/production/builder civs):

Germany
Gorgo/Greece
China
Australia

Tier C (Everything else):

...

 

[Kimiimaro]

Egypt 10 England 16, lol. Egypt rolls in money while the RNDY is kinda ok?
One suggests one has not played much England or not well.

Maryannu chariot? Overly expensive late to get, upgrades to knight unit is just meh. I have played about 20'games as Egypt. The district discount is good, the gold is OK but not significant. People struggle with understanding how this civ gels and they are right, it has some generalised benefits but not much strength in a particular area.

Well, the problem why Egypt is higher than England is because Egypt has generally better abilites to me. Maryannu Chariot Archer is maybe expensive, but it doesn't require horses, it has decent melee strenght and big ranged strenght. And I generally prefer ranged units. And because I'm enthusiastic Wonder builder, the boost to build Wonders of all eras sooner is gift from heaven to me.

Rome 22? I mean Really? For many people it's no1

For many people. Not for me. Rome is great early expansion Civ, but I very rarely use early expansion. I create my capital and sometimes one city in early game, I build districts, wonders and buildings, army and economy and I found second/third city somewhere in mid game, when I have enough money to buy the monument in the start, so this is only "money saver" to me. Roads are ridiculous. Baths and Legion are great, but it doesn't save Rome from worthless bonuses. Plus I am tall player and Rome encourages players to play wide. Am I playing it wrong? Maybe yes. Or it's just not the right Civ for me. As I said, it's also about personal preferences.

Gorgo 18? Christ... continually at war is a complete fallacy. Killing just 1 warrior gives more than 6 turns with of culture initially but only 1/6 of a turns culture by turn 80.... it's a very very VERY strong 50 turn start and no reason to use it after that. It gets you to the acropolis tens of turns before anyone else and then you get it at half price.

I just dislike the game style that Sparta offers to me, because I'm mostly peaceful when I'm going for culture. I'm maybe underestimating it now. I'm going to give it second chance in the future and then I'll maybe move it up little bit.

They are your choices but they certainly seem to be formed without full appreciation of how the abilities are correctly used, and to be fair we are all still learning because few people have played 20 games with each civ.

What does "correctly used" mean? Everyone has their playing style, someone goes wide, someone goes tall, someone is warmonger, etc. etc. Everyone can use the abilities in their own way. For example, Sparta can be used for Cultural Victory or someone can use it to gain Civics faster in Domination Victory. Now which is the correct way to use it?

Japan, it sounds like you have not even played them. Not disagreeing with the placing just the experience.

To be honest, you are right with Japan. It's one of the Civs I didn't try yet and I'm going to try. That's why I said I'm going to move Civs' positions in the list.

 

[Victoria]

What does "correctly used" mean?

Using a civs abilities to their best advantage is what I deem correctly used here.
For example as Gorgo I may never start a war, just kill lots of barbs first to get very high culture for my acropolis. The culture killing thing has huge value at turn 10 but not so much value at turn 100

 

[Kimiimaro]

Using a civs abilities to their best advantage is what I deem correctly used here.
For example as Gorgo I may never start a war, just kill lots of barbs first to get very high culture for my acropolis. The culture killing thing has huge value at turn 10 but not so much value at turn 100

If that means "correctly used", it can also mean playing the game in a way I don't like to get these advantages (Rome, for example). And that's why one of the points in my list are personal preferences.

 

[Victoria]

If that means "correctly used", it can also mean playing the game in a way I don't like to get these advantages (Rome, for example). And that's why one of the points in my list are personal preferences.

Fair enough, all opinions respected. I hate playing top tier civs anyway as I do not like the OP advantages either, but I understand how they are played. All I was saying was your interpretation of Gorgo for example was incorrect. You like to play peaceful, so do I, you say Gorgo is not good because they always have to be at war... I say, "incorrect"

There is nothing wrong with learning and getting things wrong, I do it all the time, that's why I am on this site, to learn.

 

[Eliminator_Sr]

For many people. Not for me. Rome is great early expansion Civ, but I very rarely use early expansion. I create my capital and sometimes one city in early game, I build districts, wonders and buildings, army and economy and I found second/third city somewhere in mid game, when I have enough money to buy the monument in the start, so this is only "money saver" to me. Roads are ridiculous. Baths and Legion are great, but it doesn't save Rome from worthless bonuses. Plus I am tall player and Rome encourages players to play wide. Am I playing it wrong? Maybe yes. Or it's just not the right Civ for me. As I said, it's also about personal preferences.

You clearly have an anti-Rome bias which shouldn't really enter into a power ranking. You not playing to the strengths of a certain civ doesn't make those abilities ineffective or 'worthless' - the majority of the community is finding plenty of uses for them. I've seen you say that roads are ridiculous many times but you never really state why (note that you also get free trading posts so it's not just roads). The roads also help propel your legions right to the doorstep of the enemy and speed up conquering which directly translates to more turns with more cities in the early game. It's not the most exciting ability - I'll grant you that, but it clearly has usefulness.