Power ranking the civilizations

[Disgustipated]

We've all seen power rankings of sports teams, it's time to power rank the civilizations.

It's all a matter of our opinion. I'm playing as Persia for the 2nd time, and boy is this civ crazy OP. I suppose if you never go to war it would be an average civ (their tile improvement is pretty cool though). It's like Blitzkrieg warfare. I just annihilate everything in my path. My current game I'm so far out ahead I think I have no choice but to make them #1.

#1: Persia: see above
#2: Australia: So powerful I won't even play them anymore. It feels like cheating
#3: Rome: I discovered how superior they were when I played a game against myself using another civ
#4: Germany: I just find they do nearly everything a little better (except religion).
#5: China
#6: Aztec
#7: Macedon
#8: Kongo
#9: England
#10: Arabia

honorable mentions: Russia (I think maybe they should be in the top 10, but I'm not sure where), Scythia, Sumeria, India.

I'm only going to rank 10. It's hard to really sort which ones are better than others the further down the list you go. Even 8 through 10 I had trouble deciding who to place in those slots. Arabia I should rank higher, but I admit I have not played a full game with them yet. But on paper they look like they should be in the top 10.

Feel free to share your power rankings. If you want you can divide them up by victory conditions, but I see no need to do that. I prefer to rank them for how well they dominate games overall.

 

[magha77]

1- Australia...the outback station is enough, but the appeal bonus and prediction/defensive bonus. Sheesh.
2- Macedon...for warmongering. Just not fair.
3- Greeks (both)...culture victory
4- Germany...the hansa!
5- Persia
6- Scythia

 

[Turrdy]

1. Germany - +1 district for every city is nice and the hanse is also pretty cool.
2. Aztec - rushing districts is cool and +1 strength for every luxury makes pretty much every other UU obsolete (if you have more than 10 luxuries)
2. Brazil - has the most overpowered and longlasting UU in the game. and the other bonuses are nice too.
4. Egypt - too many times a perfect placement of a district has been blocked by some of those god damn floodplains. those are reasons enough to play Egypt.
5. Norway - why does nobody like Harald? embarking with no additional movement cost is pretty convenient.

disclaimer: i don't have the dlc (except for Aztec), so I can't judge on those.

 

[Kimiimaro]

Ok... Here is my list from weakest Civ to strongest. I'll give reasons tomorrow.

24, Norway
23, Spain
22, Rome
21, Japan
20, Brazil
19, India
18, Kongo
17, England
16, Sumeria
15, America
14, Athens
13, Sparta
12, Egypt
11, France
10, Scythia
9, Persia
8, Macedon
7, Poland
6, China
5, Arabia
4, Russia
3, Aztec
2, Australia
1, Germany

 

[stinkubus]

Surprised to see Rome so low, otherwise nice list.

 

[Victoria]

Power rank?, never done it. It's a pretty crazy thing to say x is better than y when they have completely different abilities and targets.

 

[Kimiimaro]

Surprised to see Rome so low, otherwise nice list.

Thanks. I just really don't like Rome. I think roads are ridiculous and free monument isn't that great as many people say. Legion is decent with slightly higher strenght and with no need for iron. Baths are great - free amenity and 2 housing is always useful. But Legion and Baths don't make up the fact the bonuses are bad. It's surely great Civ for early expansion, but I almost never early expand. I'm more tall player than wide player - 3-5 well developed and strategically placed cities are usually enough for me.

 

[Amrunril]

This is essentially what this thread (Current civ and Leader Abilities Elimination Thread) did. While everyone will disagree with some of the results (I'd argue that Rome, China and Scythia came out too low), it's probably as close to a consensus as you can find.

 

[AJ22PIZZA]

Are we moving from elimination games to tier lists?

 

[Kimiimaro]

This is essentially what this thread (Current civ and Leader Abilities Elimination Thread) did. While everyone will disagree with some of the results (I'd argue that Rome, China and Scythia came out too low), it's probably as close to a consensus as you can find.

Oh, I remember how I was fanatically protecting France and Poland from their deaths. And of course the infinite upvote/downvote war about Rome. I wonder if another thread will come with new SE Asian and African civs.

 

[UWHabs]

The more I play, the more I seem to like just about every civ. They each seem to play to a certain strength, and just just makes it really hard to compare.

 

[TurboJ]

Well..

Top 5 for me would include Persia, Rome, Sumeria, Germany and Sparta. Can't imagine doing a full list though; many civs are just specialized, not good or bad per se.

 

[Victoria]

I really really like Hojo, a very underrated civ IMO at 21/25. That civ is so flexible and plays to a human players advantage which is lots of districts. It's just insane to compare these civs that rationally... there was another thread which was a deity comparison which makes more sense because it is domination based.

 

[isau]

You can tell which civs I think are weak versus strong by looking at my Combined Tweaks mods and seeing which civs are heavily changed from the originals. Although sometimes for me "weak" is different from "missing its fun potential."

 

[empresskiova]

1. Scythia: When you can get a 2:1 deal on Horsemen and Horse Archers, 50% heal on kills, +5 DMG to wounded targets it doesn't matter how strong +100% production is for 10 turns, how good Warcarts are during era, or if you can get an extra district early. This is a perma-banned civ for a reason. These are effects that last all game long (Cavalry and Helicopters) or until you own your own supercontinent and feel like its game over anyway.

After that, it'll probably be subjective. But Scythia is absurd. Note: Haven't played Persia/Macedon yet, so I can't judge them.

 

[Eliminator_Sr]

My top 10 are

#1) Aztecs (Also absurdly good - easy mode.)
#2) Scythia (agree with above - there won't even be a middle game if you have horses near the capital.)
#3) Germany (Best builder civ)
#4) Sumeria (War Carts out of the gate)
#5) Australia (Best mid to late game civ)
#6) Arabia
#7) Rome
#8) Macedon
#9) Russia
#10) England

Worst 3: Norway, India, and France

 

[Noble Zarkon]

Ok... Here is my list from weakest Civ to strongest. I'll give reasons tomorrow.

22, Rome
18, Kongo
11, France

I would swap France and Rome, and push Kongo higher as well.

 

[Katakanja]

Are we moving from elimination games to tier lists?

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.

 

[Kimiimaro]

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.

That's, without a doubt, interresting. I just imagined it. But if it was a real fight, Philip II would win the with his annoying furious swinging with his silver sword. Here:

Then Gilgamesh would tear him apart with his own hands.

 

[PYITE]

This is essentially what this thread (Current civ and Leader Abilities Elimination Thread) did. While everyone will disagree with some of the results (I'd argue that Rome, China and Scythia came out too low), it's probably as close to a consensus as you can find.

It would be nice if the last post of an elimination thread had a rankings list based on elimination order or maybe the results of all elimination threads could be posted on a single thread.