[NFP] Ranking Civs

[Lily_Lancer]

I'll do a personal ranking after the updates are released.

The Ranking will be based on current standard rules, which means if there are bugs, they'll be taken into consideration, as long as the bugs don't violate standard rules.

For example, in the current patch, the 1st Civ is Gandhi while the 2nd best Civ is Chandragupta, as the two Civs have the highest chance of born near Nalanda.

 

[Pietato]

 

[Lord Lakely]

Well, have fun doing that, dear. We'll be watching from the sideline.

Behind the plexiglass screen.

 

[pokiehl]

I'll do a personal ranking after the updates are released.

The Ranking will be based on current standard rules, which means if there are bugs, they'll be taken into consideration, as long as the bugs don't violate standard rules.

To me this completely invalidates your entire approach.

For example, in the current patch, the 1st Civ is Gandhi while the 2nd best Civ is Chandragupta, as the two Civs have the highest chance of born near Nalanda.

That is not true whatsoever. There is no such thing as "City-State spawn bias."

 

[Leucarum]

That is not true whatsoever. There is no such thing as "City-State spawn bias."

The true start earth map? Though in that case you are less in need of a ranking system and more in need of the forum cartogropher's map...

 

[bengalryan9]

"Ranking Civs... for my very specific playstyle where I approach everything in exactly one way and take advantage of every single exploit/bug because I just can't help myself" would probably be a better thread title.

Have fun!

Nalanda

You know, it may be possible for some people to get insane victory times by taking advantage of the Nalanda exploit... but is anyone who really sits there and clicks through the governor's screen and tech tree hundreds of times in one turn really a winner? That sounds awful to me.

 

[pokiehl]

The true start earth map? Though in that case you are less in need of a ranking system and more in need of the forum cartogropher's map...

from what I can tell of Lily, he doesn’t play TSL.

also I don’t get why he acts like the Nalanda exploit is some unavoidable disaster you can just use the new city state selector to deselect them and voila... no exploit.

 

[Duke William of Normandy]

from what I can tell of Lily, he doesn’t play TSL.

also I don’t get why he acts like the Nalanda exploit is some unavoidable disaster you can just use the new city state selector to deselect them and voila... no exploit.

Plus, just using exploits that are avoidable is just scummy. Although, I haven't actually heard of the exploits until some time before the developers removed the more prominent ones, still.

 

[pokiehl]

Plus, just using exploits that are avoidable is just scummy. Although, I haven't actually heard of the exploits until some time before the developers removed the more prominent ones, still.

I don’t think it’s scummy if you’re just doing it in single player - play how you want even if I think its not fun at all. What my point was is that he seems to let these avoidable exploits completely dominate the way he plays the game but he also simultaneously criticizes the game for having the exploits. It doesn’t make sense to me, nevermind the fact that it’s not even fun to use them.

 

[Duke William of Normandy]

I don’t think it’s scummy if you’re just doing it in single player - play how you want even if I think its not fun at all. What my point was is that he seems to let these avoidable exploits completely dominate the way he plays the game but he also simultaneously criticizes the game for having the exploits. It doesn’t make sense to me, nevermind the fact that it’s not even fun to use them.

Ahhh... That's a fair point. And yes, playing the game like that is no fun. I guess it's somewhat okay to do it in single-player, though I still detest using exploits.

 

[bengalryan9]

I am also going to rank civs in this thread. The Ranking will be based on current standard rules, but I completely ignore domination in favor of building, never make use of game breaking exploits, prefer civs with primary colors in their jersey, dislike civs with music that isn't in a traditional 4/4 time, and only play with leaders that have hats, beards, or weapons in their leader image (bonus points if they have a combination of two or three!). And if they rhyme with "Hongdolia"? Forget it, they're bottom tier.

This will be the most comprehensive list ever and I'm sure you all will love it and accept my word as gospel. I extend to you all a premature "you're welcome".

 

[Duke William of Normandy]

I am also going to rank civs in this thread. The Ranking will be based on current standard rules, but I completely ignore domination in favor of building, never make use of game breaking exploits, prefer civs with primary colors in their jersey, dislike civs with music that isn't in a traditional 4/4 time, and only play with leaders that have hats, beards, or weapons in their leader image (bonus points if they have a combination of two or three!). And if they rhyme with "Hongdolia"? Forget it, they're bottom tier.

This will be the most comprehensive list ever and I'm sure you all will love it and accept my word as gospel. I extend to you all a premature "you're welcome".

The Book of Ryan?

[DEVELOPER BEACH]
Hello!
My name is Elder Beach
And I would like to share with you
The most amazing book

[DEVELOPER GRANT]
Hello!
My name is Elder Busatti
It's a book about Civilization
A long, long time ago

[DEVELOPER BEACH]
It has so many awesome pages
You simply won't believe how much
This book can change your life

[DEVELOPER SHIRK]
Hello!
My name is Elder Shirk
I would like to share with you
This book of Bengal Ryan

 

[Leucarum]

from what I can tell of Lily, he doesn’t play TSL.

I was clutching at straws...

PS: Thank you for the mods!

 

[DogeEnricoDandolo]

I am also going to rank civs in this thread. The Ranking will be based on current standard rules, but I completely ignore domination in favor of building, never make use of game breaking exploits, prefer civs with primary colors in their jersey, dislike civs with music that isn't in a traditional 4/4 time, and only play with leaders that have hats, beards, or weapons in their leader image (bonus points if they have a combination of two or three!). And if they rhyme with "Hongdolia"? Forget it, they're bottom tier.

This will be the most comprehensive list ever and I'm sure you all will love it and accept my word as gospel. I extend to you all a premature "you're welcome".

This sounds like a much more useful list than "which civs can exploit current bugs the most".

 

[Duke William of Normandy]

This sounds like a much more useful list than "which civs can exploit current bugs the most".

Yeah, it's mostly Spawn RNG that Lily's list can rely on. How can we confirm this happens throughout multiple games, how do we replicate the results, how do we know the same seed isn't being used, etc.

 

[Jewelrunna]

I come back after a short hiatus from Civ to this thread, and I'm really confused why this forum in particular is so allergic to metagame discussion. Why do guys hate subjective rankings of Civs so much? It's a good way to facilitate discussion about the strengths and weaknesses of various Civs and it's a way to discuss what you perceive to be the metagame—what you perceive to be the best strategies in the game.

I am also going to rank civs in this thread. The Ranking will be based on current standard rules, but I completely ignore domination in favor of building, never make use of game breaking exploits, prefer civs with primary colors in their jersey, dislike civs with music that isn't in a traditional 4/4 time, and only play with leaders that have hats, beards, or weapons in their leader image (bonus points if they have a combination of two or three!). And if they rhyme with "Hongdolia"? Forget it, they're bottom tier.

This will be the most comprehensive list ever and I'm sure you all will love it and accept my word as gospel. I extend to you all a premature "you're welcome".

Every time one of these threads pops up, I see one of these comments that scoffs at the idea that there might be some measurable differences in strength between the Civs, and that some might be better than others. I really dislike the attitude that some people on this forum have that rejects the sort of the discussion centered around game balance and meta. Sure, yes, there's a lot of ways to play Civ and we can't really discuss it objectively; certainly not with the various rules you can play with. But if we assume a common rule set, just for the sake of argument, what's so wrong with plainly sharing opinions about the state of the game?

 

[Duke William of Normandy]

I come back after a short hiatus from Civ to this thread, and I'm really confused why this forum in particular is so allergic to metagame discussion. Why do guys hate subjective rankings of Civs so much? It's a good way to facilitate discussion about the strengths and weaknesses of various Civs and it's a way to discuss what you perceive to be the metagame—what you perceive to be the best strategies in the game.


Every time one of these threads pops up, I see one of these comments that scoffs at the idea that there might be some measurable differences in strength between the Civs, and that some might be better than others. I really dislike the attitude that some people on this forum have that rejects the sort of the discussion centered around game balance and meta. Sure, yes, there's a lot of ways to play Civ and we can't really discuss it objectively; certainly not with the various rules you can play with. But if we assume a common rule set, just for the sake of argument, what's so wrong with plainly sharing opinions about the state of the game?

The problem is that this ranking the OP is using isn't subjective. It's basically just using bugs/exploits that can be avoided and just ranking Civs based on how the RNG can be exploited. It doesn't take into account the various Wonders, Terrain, Features, City-States, and other stuff that should be accounted for. It only accounts for the bugs and exploits.

That is not true whatsoever. There is no such thing as "City-State spawn bias."

If they're using the Cultural Spawn basis, that might explain the Nalanda thing.

 

[Leucarum]

Why do guys hate subjective rankings of Civs so much?

I think we love to argue about them more than we hate them. And in this case it's basically a ranking of who is most likely to spawn next to Nalanda (which may well be true as a power ranking if you are using exploits to the max), which honestly, seems a bit on the silly side.

 

[mad hadder]

I come back after a short hiatus from Civ to this thread, and I'm really confused why this forum in particular is so allergic to metagame discussion. Why do guys hate subjective rankings of Civs so much? It's a good way to facilitate discussion about the strengths and weaknesses of various Civs and it's a way to discuss what you perceive to be the metagame—what you perceive to be the best strategies in the game.


Every time one of these threads pops up, I see one of these comments that scoffs at the idea that there might be some measurable differences in strength between the Civs, and that some might be better than others. I really dislike the attitude that some people on this forum have that rejects the sort of the discussion centered around game balance and meta. Sure, yes, there's a lot of ways to play Civ and we can't really discuss it objectively; certainly not with the various rules you can play with. But if we assume a common rule set, just for the sake of argument, what's so wrong with plainly sharing opinions about the state of the game?

I hear you on this, but I think most people in this particular thread are critical of the idea of making a tier list based around which civs can exploit a bug best. Doesn’t seem to be the most useful discussion of meta game.

 

[Duke William of Normandy]

I hear you on this, but I think most people in this particular thread are critical of the idea of making a tier list based around which civs can exploit a bug best. Doesn’t seem to be the most useful discussion of meta game.

That is EXACTLY what we are saying. If one particular bug is what you're ranking Civilizations and Leaders on, you are ignoring every other part of the spawn you get. Not to mention, when you research more Techs, the higher your Production Cost goes up. So even if you were able to reach the top of the Tech tree, you wouldn't be able to take immediate advantage of it because the Production Cost will be far too much. We also have to consider the Gold Cost of maintaining the Specialty Districts you'll need to achieve a Space Victory.