Recommended Civ/Leader for multi-player?

[Tabarnak]

I forgot to say that tall empires are competitive only in some occasions. FFA games with cs are more suitable for tall empires because of land shape and fewer tiles to defend. Like i said you must tech to artillery ASAP and capture some cities at a point where a larger empire will outrun you through time.

I think there is nothing to say about teamers and duels. Liberty and large empires will almost always win because tactics are largely focused on big and cooperative armies.

@ense7en : Of course there are starting spots that can really hurt Sometimes you just feel very unlucky...

 

[ense7en]

what true?

1. having op civ a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h means autowin
2. good starting land means autowin
3. Playing tall vs huge means autowin
4. being tommy means autowin

I ll go with 4.

LOL @ your ego...

 

[Yalish]

LOL @ your ego...

He's somewhat more abrasive on the forums than he needs to be, but his ego with regard to civ is fairly justified.

 

[Yoruus]

what true?

1. having op civ a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h means autowin
2. good starting land means autowin
3. Playing tall vs huge means autowin
4. being tommy means autowin

I ll go with 4.

Hah... it's only true in 90%.

Y.

 

[Gucumatz]

Nice to see Yoruus on the forums outside of NQ~

Also another note on bullying city states. If you can get a warrior upgrade to a spearman try and find the nearest city state you can to bully, because you will normally have enough strength to bully for cash. That spearman can change your initial strategies to go more bully focus (say you add in another warrior and those 2 units go spelunking for cash)

 

[tommynt]

Quote:
Originally Posted by tommynt View Post
what true?

1. having op civ a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h means autowin
2. good starting land means autowin
3. Playing tall vs huge means autowin
4. being tommy means autowin

I ll go with 4.
LOL @ your ego...

just sad that no1 figured what was my intention behind this, definatly not brag about how good i am - u all know anyway ..

In end u guys have to figure that 1. 2. 3. is just never true, in end it comes down to players skill and how the game progress - and great players know how game might progress before.

Lets imagine player a spain finding 2 early nw - +8 faith and +10 gold - arguable 2 of the best ones - not too far but not totaly close - obviously a clever player will buy settlers from the gold and settle both sites and work the tiles. now he got 2 great sites at turn 15 - both tiles have no grow so a good choise might be to start a granny to have the city grow later.

In turn 40 player b attacks the +8 faith city with 3 composite bow and 2 warris, the comp bow coming from spain cap and the rush bought archer are just not enouzgh to defend the city.
5 turns later player c takes the other city -

player a lost

 

[ense7en]

Yes, i realize what you are saying.

The way you post just amuses me because it come across as exceedingly boastful.

But we all do know you are a fantastic player, so i suppose it's justified, as mentioned.

 

[scheva007]

Im making a group to play my first mp civ V game (with g&k). What civ do you guys recommend. Im not a very military player, and i like high empires with lots of cultures. My opponents are gonna be greece, huns and egypt (and 2 more possibly). I was thinking of ethiopia to get a good headstart, being able to defend myself, and get a religion early on