[R&F] Power Ranking the Civs (Rise and Fall)

[Lord Lakely]

Nubia is solidly second tier for me. The archers are great but I so often lose the cities I capture due to loyalty pressure and I don't have the melee power to flip them back and forth without stifling my economy.

Same with Scythia, whose bonuses are geared towards weak units; Horsemen really aren't all that and the Saka Horse Archer is utter rubbish. The most I get out of People of the Steppe is defensively, spamming horsemen when a crazy AI such as Monty or Genghis invades me and using them to block their units before they can reach my cities.

 

[Archon_Wing]

Russia is S because their early game is very good thanks to more chopping potential and fast pantheon. They're much stronger than Seondeck in the first 100 turns, which is the most important.

Seowon's come pretty fast and Astrology is not necessarily faster. By Rec History, Korea's having a significant advantage. Korea's actually ramps up very fast specifically thanks to the Seowon's boost to mines and farms.

Russia's ability to get a pantheon is strictly inferior to Indonesia's. In order to manage the +2 faith per turn, they have to settle in tundra and also work another tundra tile. Problem is that means you're working a terrible tile at the start of the game, because tundra tiles are food negative, meaning slower growth when it actually matters. Yes, you might get to start next to deer or something, but it comes at a significant cost. And Russia doesn't always start in the Tundra either.

This is why I think Russia's tundra ability is very overrated, and also why I think barring massive changes to the game that Canada runs the risk of being trash tier. The Lavra and the extra territory gain is what makes Russia good.

While I would accept Russia is more resistant to a rush than Korea, (you could rush defenders of the faith) my money is on Korea most of the time.

think the lavra just gives them such a crazy religion or culture game. Kongo gets 50% more GWAM points, but russia basically gets 2x and half of them come at the start of the game.

The thing is Kongo gets to store all the things they get, while Russia has like nowhere to put them.

Russia has to build both a Theater square and Holy Site and still have no campus. A bit rough on a civ that tends to be biased towards low food starts.

I always thought of this ability as more of a suppression ability. You stop people from going culture victory that fast so you can go for science/religion. But honestly, I don't think building Lavras for a culture victory is any good. You can rush the Great Lib though.

 

[MarigoldRan]

Russia's true synergy is:

Harvest Pantheon (faith on chops- normally the third Pantheon to be taken by the AI, which means Russia can get it reliably)
Cities start with extra tiles for more chops.
Reliably Golden Age in Classical or Medieval thanks to Larva.

This combo is why Russia is killer.

 

[Lord Lakely]

This is roughly what my tier list would look like. I play on King Difficulty, on maps at that are large size or better, so my definition of "strong" is different from what a poster such as Lily_Lancer (who plays on small maps either in MP or on deity) or Eagle_Pursuit (who is an active roleplayer) would be. For that reason, a few caveats about large & huge maps:

> Domination and Religious victories are significantly less feasable: Domination is only feasable on Pangaea or Island Plates maps if you play large or bigger, due to the capitals being further away. Religious victory is possible on large (I've done it!), but heavily reliant on luck. On huge it's mostly impossible
> Domination Civs are still powerful however because they can defeat opposing culture civs more easily and their military advantages allow them to build a large empire which is great for Science or Culture victory.
> Culture victory is insanely powerful. Usually you can stop a culture victory by roflstomping your opponent and taking their great works/Wonders. On large, it's significantly more difficult to stop a culture victory because everyone has more cities and very often the AI you need to beat is on the other side of the map, making invasion a pain. On Huge, this is often impossible, forcing you to abandon CV for Science Victory if you play a T3 or lower Civ.

Oh yeah about them tiers:

For this chart I went with looking at how specialized a civ is at winning a certain victory type on the map settings I just mentioned (King Diff, large/huge map size).

Tier 1: Specialization in multiple victory types: the Civ in question excels at multiple victory types and is hard to beat once they get rolling. Peter, Saladdin and Tomyris are notable for being the only leaders that can reliably win a religious victory on huge maps.
Amanitore (Science & Dom), Frederick (Science & Dom), Johnny Curtains (Culture & Science), Peter (Culture & Religious), SunDuck (Science & Culture), Saladdin (Science & Religious), Tomyris (Religious & Dom)
Tier 2: Specialization in one victory type: The Civ excels at precisely ONE victory type. They're easier to cripple as a result, but still immensely powerful if you play towards their advantages. As I said above, religious specialization doesn't matter on large+, and military specialization is mostly useful to cripple stronger science & culture opponents, rather than win Domination victory.
Alex (Domination), Chandra (Domination), Gilgabro (Domination), Temujin (Domination), Montezuma (Domination), Gorgo (Culture), Perikles (Culture), Robert (Science), SHAKA ZULU (Domination)
Tier 3: Strong advantages towards multiple victory types: The Civs listed here are flexible enough to go for any victory type they want, but they don't get any *direct* strong advantage towards that victory type itself. You'll have to put in more effort than you would with T1 & T2. Personally, I find Civs in this tier to be the most fun to play as, because their flexibility and lack of direction stimulates a more creative approach.
CdM, Gitarja, Cyrus, Tokimune, Mvemba, Jadwiga, Poundmaker, Qin, Trajan, Billiemina
Tier 4: Strong advantages towards ONE victory type: A tricky category. These Civs actually have advantages towards two victory conditions: one in the early game, and one in the late game; However, because this tier list is for large+ maps, only the late victory type matters. Fortunately all of these civs are competent enough to make it work... most of the time.
Jaya (Religious => Culture), Lautaro (Domination => Culture), Dom Satan (Science/Religious => Culture/Science), Felipe (Religious => Science/Dom), Teddy (Dom => Culture)
Tier 5: Insignificant advantages: These Civs receive bonuses that are difficult to take advantage of or are insignificant in the long run. They aren't weak (there's no such thing as a weak civ in Civ6) just severely vanilla and heavily reliant on luck to gain an advantage over Civs in the other tiers. Note that Norway upgrade to T4 on water maps.
Cleo, Gandhi, Harald, Tamar, Vicky

 

[nzcamel]

Someone on Reddit shared a link on an easy way to make tier images: https://www.reddit.com/r/civ/comments/afeo5s/civ_6_ais_based_on_personal_experience/edy4xql/

https://tiermaker.com/create/civilization-6-leaders-rise-and-fall-with-dlc

Thanks for linking that here. I likey!
I'll contribute one; but it will come with the heavily emphasised caveat that it is just based on the way I play!

This is roughly what my tier list would look like. I play on King Difficulty, on maps at that are large size or better, so my definition of "strong" is different from what a poster such as Lily_Lancer (who plays on small maps either in MP or on deity) or Eagle_Pursuit (who is an active roleplayer) would be. For that reason, a few caveats about large & huge maps:

> Domination and Religious victories are significantly less feasable: Domination is only feasable on Pangaea or Island Plates maps if you play large or bigger, due to the capitals being further away. Religious victory is possible on large (I've done it!), but heavily reliant on luck. On huge it's mostly impossible
> Domination Civs are still powerful however because they can defeat opposing culture civs more easily and their military advantages allow them to build a large empire which is great for Science or Culture victory.
> Culture victory is insanely powerful. Usually you can stop a culture victory by roflstomping your opponent and taking their great works/Wonders. On large, it's significantly more difficult to stop a culture victory because everyone has more cities and very often the AI you need to beat is on the other side of the map, making invasion a pain. On Huge, this is often impossible, forcing you to abandon CV for Science Victory if you play a T3 or lower Civ.

Re Religious victory are you talking MP? I play at King+ on huge maps and I find religion the easiest victory to achieve, even not playing a Civ directly geared for it. Maybe it's because I play marathon? But I have heard others say similar things to what you are - that religion is really tough on huge. I guess I pretty much always try to get a religion, thinking that even were I not to go for a religious vic, the added benefits are worth it. This probably hampers me in other victory types to I guess...

 

[Cyberian]

@Lord Lakely
Nice Graph you have there. Only one who does not fit for me is Monty. With added builders and insanely fast district building and early economy he can go for multiples victory types. To me he fits in with Amanitore having increased production (especially due to fast push to economy in ancient times with extra builders and faster districts and infrastructure) and therefore I would also classify him as Dom+Science if you do it with her.

 

[Lord Lakely]

Yeah Science + Dom is what I usually do with Monty, but he gets no inherent bonuses towards Science victory the way Nubia does. Nubia's cheaper campuses and spaceports come at no cost, while Monty still has to spend builder charges, which he can use on other things, such as getting more mines or farms. In other words, Monty's bonus comes at a cost, while Nubia's do not, hence why Nubia > Aztec in casual games.

Of course in pro-games or MP Aztecs > Nubia because if you consistently spam charges on districts you will outproduce Nubia, but that's not what i'm basing my list on, so...

Thanks for linking that here. I likey!
Re Religious victory are you talking MP? I play at King+ on huge maps and I find religion the easiest victory to achieve, even not playing a Civ directly geared for it. Maybe it's because I play marathon? But I have heard others say similar things to what you are - that religion is really tough on huge. I guess I pretty much always try to get a religion, thinking that even were I not to go for a religious vic, the added benefits are worth it. This probably hampers me in other victory types to I guess...

That's a valid point I didn't consider. Yes, I can see that it's easier to get a solid faith econ on slower speeds (this was the case in Civ5, which I always played on Epic), but I have no experience with that myself. On normal though, it's really tedious and easy to miss a religion if you don't invest into the early Holy Sites (plural). I've never won religious on Huge, only on Large and my one religious win was on a map where I had zero religious AIs spawn (no Arabia, Russia, Indonesia, Brazil, Australia, Khmer or Japan).

 

[Cyberian]

@Lord Lakely
OK I get your argument and agree that it highly depends on playstyle so probably your ranking is fine. I dow on one enemy in ancient area within the first couples of turns after initial scouting wears out and keep that war going (deity or immo) to get about 10-20 workers from that war depending on circumstance and including stolen. Using those for early districts is extremely good instead of letting them sit for later cities or develop land I don't yet work on.

 

[Archon_Wing]

Harvest Pantheon (faith on chops- normally the third Pantheon to be taken by the AI, which means Russia can get it reliably)

Not from one I've seen. It's usually gone right after Earth Goddess. I've also failed to get either pantheon even after meeting a religious CS off the bat, and even after popping a faith hut. Maybe it's different on the speed you play? I play on normal speed and these pantheons go completely out of your control even below deity. I do not consider Harvest part of a standard game play besides maybe Indonesia. And any civ is strong with harvest anyways.

I play on King Difficulty, on maps at that are large size or better, so my definition of "strong" is different

Oh yea, this is something that literally everyone ignores. Maybe it's because some people only play on various settings, but lower difficulties have a different tier ranking due to the slower pace of the game. In general, conquest is not as efficient simply because you have less cities to capture in the first place. That doesn't make it harder because relatively speaking you don't need to capture as many things to win. But it does make things slower. This is multiplied further if you play slower speeds or larger maps. It is also true that CV is easier as well since the AI accumulates culture very rapidly on higher difficulties. It's just sorta funny this is a concept that even some "advanced" players fail to grasp.

It doesn't mean the list should be different anyways, but the difference in strength is different.

The bad civs are still bad though.

 

[BarbarianHunter]

I love elimination threads and was thinking of starting another based on the raw power of the entirety of a civ. I decided against it however, as even I’m sick of them (and I love them). So here’s my piece…

Spoiler :

PS, yes I know. I just don't like Korea for whatever the reason. They should probably be higher.

Disclaimer: Any comments are generally more applicable (but not strictly limited to) large and very large maps, deity level, habitual warmongering, moderate finish times, standard (or slower) game speeds, and a build oriented, non-project, somewhat relaxed playstyle.

 

[Archon_Wing]

EDITED: Posted links to posts with the tier images in them in OP

I love elimination threads and was thinking of starting another based on the raw power of the entirety of a civ.

I dunno man. The fact that Macedon, China, and Korea was rated so low on that leader civ ability one makes it hard for me to take that seriously.

PS, yes I know. I just don't like Korea for whatever the reason. They should probably be higher.

lul same. I also have a bias against Korea; me thinks Australia is superior. But just my personal tendencies. I also have a bias against Spain for being so boring; at least Tamar has memes.

 

[BarbarianHunter]

I dunno man. The fact that Macedon, China, and Korea was rated so low on that leader ability one makes it hard for me to take that seriously.

Wait a minute, China was #3 and Macedonia #5 in the leader ability one. This only highlights the need for a wholistic/aggregate elimination thread! Thinking...

lul same. I also have a bias against Korea; me thinks Australia is superior.

But Austraila actually is superior .

 

[Archon_Wing]

lol whoops, meant civ ability.

But I dunno, I just never take them seriously.

 

[MarigoldRan]

Not from one I've seen. It's usually gone right after Earth Goddess. I've also failed to get either pantheon even after meeting a religious CS off the bat, and even after popping a faith hut. Maybe it's different on the speed you play? I play on normal speed and these pantheons go completely out of your control even below deity. I do not consider Harvest part of a standard game play besides maybe Indonesia. And any civ is strong with harvest anyways.



Oh yea, this is something that literally everyone ignores. Maybe it's because some people only play on various settings, but lower difficulties have a different tier ranking due to the slower pace of the game. In general, conquest is not as efficient simply because you have less cities to capture in the first place. That doesn't make it harder because relatively speaking you don't need to capture as many things to win. But it does make things slower. This is multiplied further if you play slower speeds or larger maps. It is also true that CV is easier as well since the AI accumulates culture very rapidly on higher difficulties. It's just sorta funny this is a concept that even some "advanced" players fail to grasp.

It doesn't mean the list should be different anyways, but the difference in strength is different.

The bad civs are still bad though.

The first two are Forge, then Earth Goddess. Then Harvest. Large maps, standard number of civs, epic speed.

 

[Weraptor]

immortal difficulty, personal bias

 

[DWilson]

I just want to add that unlike what was said on a previous thread, the Nubian Pitati Archer is not on the same level as the Arabian Camel Archer (or it's well matched rival the Mongolian Keshik) of Civ V, as it doesn't come with that ultimate ability of being able to move after firing. The greatest strength of those units was that they were literally unstoppable for most AI. They could move into range (if needed), shoot, then move out of range, making the opponent seriously struggle to be able to return fire.

 

[Disgustipated]

I'm not going to make a nice little table like that, I don't have the skilz , but I do want to share my civ of the week results in this thread (I already mentioned it in the Russia civ of the week thread). Again, personal bias. And like I mentioned there, ideally I'd have to play each civ at least 5 times to get a good average (more when comparing different victory methods). Cultural victory can be the most skewed when civs like Kongo and Russia are in the game (and Greece and Brazil as well) or not.

And I should note I played my Japan game badly. I know I can do much better. This is why I will share my overall impression, because Japan should be top 10 for sure, even though for some reason I did poorly in my cultural victory with them for some reason. Also note I don't play ideally, I don't use chopping exploits with certain policy cards. I also like to grow my cities big, even if that is not ideal. And I continue building districts/buildings even after my game winning districts are down, otherwise I would grow bored out of my mind running projects over and over. All civ of week games are King difficulty to keep a relatively even standing with ai and allow building of wonders (for civs like France to utilize their ability), and ensure 100% victory since it's easy to win on King. King difficulty, standard size, epic game speed, mostly continents (though Netherlands and Spain are fractal).

My overall scores (updated since I commented earlier in the thread, but it's easier after looking at their raw performance). I know people above rate one trick ponies like Scythia high, I will not. I can't stand Scythia. I rate civs that can play well without going to war (hence the lower score for Nubia) as well as civs that war well, but I try to be somewhat balanced.
S: Australia, Scotland, Korea, Greece (both), Russia
A: Germany, Kongo, Macedon, Netherlands, Japan (my score below is a fluke and some bad play by me admittedly), Brazil
B: America, Arabia, China, Poland, Persia, Mongolia, Zulu, India (Chandragupta), Aztec (I know everyone else rates them high, but they don't have high yields like my S and A civs), Rome, Nubia, Sumeria,
C: Spain, Khmer, Mapuche, Indonesia, France, Cree, England, Scythia
D: Norway, Egypt
F: India (Gandhi)
G: Georgia (though they are good at religious victory when utilizing golden age dedication- see below)


Civ of the week scores (turn of victory): King difficulty, epic game speed, standard size map
I seem to be missing Nubia. Hmmm

Science
1: Scotland 382
2: Korea 394 and 399 (I played them twice in an effort to try to get faster)
3: Netherlands 408
4: Brazil: 416
5: Germany: 419
6: Arabia 436
7: China 451


Cultural
1: Greece (Pericles) 347
2: Russia: 351
3: Australia: 361
4: Kongo: 373
5: America: 375
6: Spain: 378
7: Poland: 381
8: Brazil: 384 (for some reason I thought this was higher in another thread discussing Brazil, my mistake)
9: Khmer: 384
10: Mapuche: 397
11: Persia: 403 (I did not use their UI as well as I should have I feel like)
12: Indonesia: 405
13: Aztec 426
14: France: 426
15: Cree 432
16: Romans 438
17: England: 446
18: Sumeria 453
19: Norway 464
20: Japan 500 (I feel like I could have done this much better, I played them poorly)
21: Egypt 505
22: India (Gandhi) 528


Domination victory:
1: Macedon: 273
2: India (Chandragupta): 294
3: Mongolia: 316
4: Zulu 354

Religious victory:
1: Russia: 276
2: Georgia: 278
3: Scythia: 289
4: Indonesia: 410

Score victory: Just kidding

 

[Archon_Wing]

I'm not going to make a nice little table like that, I don't have the skilz

The site is actually very user friendly. All you need to do is click and drag til you're done; click done, save picture.

 

[Pietato]

Georiga needs its own tier - Firaxis Drunk tier.

 

[Pietato]