Recommended Civ/Leader for multi-player?

I'm talking about NQ settings. CS, barbs, etc. No AI.

Then yeah, I have no idea how you have 5-6 CBs attacking an opposing civ averaging on turn 40.

Like, are you just going all-in and one basing it? You're supposedly opening Tradition after all. Are you just cranking out Archers, upgrading them and hoping to have enough gold somehow? You can't "move in" on a 6 CB by turn 40 plan on turn 25. Like, I've just never seen people do what you're proposing. I don't claim to be the best/see the best in action but I'm a little skeptical.

Discussin civs? Really?
Every civ can build CB and Xbows and that kinda enough.

Land and neightbour actions are 100x more important as civ, not to speak of skill which is like 1000x as important as civ.

I'd like to see some of your (non-duel) multiplayer and post-patch Diety games Tommy. Sincerely! I hear a lot of good things about you but the game selection on your Youtube channel isn't as diverse/current as I would like :P.
 
Best 3 civs for mp in my opinion are:
Arabs
Maya
China

Arabs uu is just as op as Mongolia's. Why I would choose Arabs is their desert start bias, and there ub is great for large empires. With petra being introduced to the game the Arabs can be extremely powerful. The only real way to defend against them is the GW and superior production.

Maya is a great civ to rush x-bows. Their ub gives them early tech advantage. First to second religion is a perk aswell. I've see a player with 7-8 x-bows at turn 55 with Maya. Which I'm sure was a fluke with a great cap but it's possible.

China doesn't need much explaining. Their library makes gold and their uu is arguably the best in the game.
 
Then yeah, I have no idea how you have 5-6 CBs attacking an opposing civ averaging on turn 40.

I have seen it and done it but imo it's not a good strategy. Mind you I'm speaking from a NQ point of view. Where you know ppl are teching hard. If your rush fails then your chances of winning fail along with it.

But to do this rush you settle 2-3 quick cities build an archer in these, build a few archers in cap and hold off construction till the last min. Bully a city state or 2 for gold. Pop construction, upgrade and away you go. 5-7 bows and a few scouts.

Personally I think its better to rush x-bows. 2 ways to do this effectively. The first is build nat col in your cap before expanding. I don't do this route unless I'm safe or there is no good land close by. By the time your done nat col your cap is 8-10 pop and all tiles are improved. You time your policies so liberty settler comes at proper time and then expand from there. With nat col and large pop in your cap it's likely you will beat your neighbor to x-bows.

2cnd way which I use often is spam early 4-5 cities depending on space and lux. Settle on lux if you have to. Build monument in all cities first for culture. Then go about your economy. I wont give all the details but use liberty great person for GS and most times you will be 7-10 turns ahead of your neighbor.(building oracle makes this much quicker) Don't forget to pick on the city states they love to give you gold:D
 
If you plan accordingly you can gather 4-5 CBs really fast but decide to not attack your neighbor immediately and focus on growth at the same time.

Don't forget to pick on the city states they love to give you gold:D

Do this instead :D

Barbs and cs can have a lot of influence on your game and some good and early units can let you the possibility to gain a nice edge over your opponents without attacking them. Scouting is very important. I like to start with 2 scouts on pangea maps(prefered maps for NQ games). If 1 scout turns into an archer you can let him back home while the other scout explore more deeply to search farther cs. The extra gold can be valuable later.
 
"I have no idea how you have 5-6 CBs attacking an opposing civ averaging on turn 40."

You are building 5 archers, with hopefully a scout being the 6th archer from a ruin upgrade.
It is easy to get the gold, with meeting CS, maybe a ruin, saving up, and the bullying:hammer:, which gets ample gold to upgrade (esp once you have most of the archers built.)
The assumption here is that you are exploring, you need to meet those CS for the gold gifts and bullying!

Also, don't forget to have spare melee units, if you rush with CBs and 1 warrior, they will just kill the warrior and you can't take the city. After getting the CBs, I like making a few scouts, which will get there in time and be able to take the city... and also act like cannon fodder:crazyeye: and finishers for wounded enemy archers.:goodjob:

A lot of ppl who are new to MP will get surprised by this, and some will get :mad: angry at this rush. One guy was telling me I was playing poorly by wasting my resources on so many early CBs. Yea, but I got a free wonder and 2 free cities out of it... great investment!:lol:
 
1.Montezuma
2.Montezuma
3.Montezuma

Wars feed his culture a lot, if there are no wars he can sit back and outtech, outeco anybody with his crazy population.:cry:

A bonus of Aztecs is that the Jag can bully CS for gold as soon as you start meeting them! Playing Aztecs is like getting 150+ free gold early in the game! By the time the CS quests comes out they will have forgiven you as well!
 
"You won't beat a Korean player to a Science win"

My best science wins have been with:

Spain, Inca, Babylon

Spain - buying early settlers w/gold and working OP wonders... esp BARRIER REEF!!!
Inca - start bias (mountains for observatories, hills/terrace farms for crazy production)
Babylon - more great scientists!

Tonythebum (his handle, I am not calling him names) and I did a series of science duels, Korea vs Babylon where I had Babs, and I got him every time with the power of the extra scientists. Just so you know, we have logged many hours in the League and NQ.
 
"I'm extremely curious as to how some of the NQ people hit Artillery so quickly without being at the bottom of production/military demographics and such."

From what I know how to do, this Artillery rush requires Oxford and a great scientist, so there an opportunity cost involved - you can't use Oxford for something like nukes or bombers, and you have 1 less scientist bulb for those hard-to-get higher techs.

Of course, there are situations where "blowing the science wad" for Arty rush is well worth it.

Other than the science requirement, there are other requirements that are composed of many details - city and empire management, build order, tech tree/policy choices, etc. A huge requirement is not getting bogged down in unproductive wars early on, which eat up your resources without any return on them.
 
I have seen it and done it but imo it's not a good strategy. Mind you I'm speaking from a NQ point of view. Where you know ppl are teching hard. If your rush fails then your chances of winning fail along with it.

I probably didn't articulate my concerns well enough but that was was my primary fear. I fully believe that you could blindly go all-in on a CB strat and "hope to get there" but I don't know if it's consistent/worth doing against someone who is always going to be massing units and rushing Horsemen. It seems like an extremely risky endeavor.

My best science wins have been with...

Oh, I wasn't trying to argue that Korea had the fastest wins. I was just using them as an example of a civ who will generally beat a Mayan player in the long-run space race :P. I was just highlighting the fact that Mayan players typically struggle to produce relevant numbers of GSes since they're "forced" to produce so many random GPs throughout an average game. While their early game science lead is undeniable it doesn't persist throughout the entire game. People filling 4ish Universities + Public Schools with specialist slots, especially ones like Babylon and Korea and such, will still beat you in the end.

You are building 5 archers, with hopefully a scout being the 6th archer from a ruin upgrade.
It is easy to get the gold, with meeting CS, maybe a ruin, saving up, and the bullying:hammer:, which gets ample gold to upgrade (esp once you have most of the archers built.)
The assumption here is that you are exploring, you need to meet those CS for the gold gifts and bullying!

Also, don't forget to have spare melee units, if you rush with CBs and 1 warrior, they will just kill the warrior and you can't take the city. After getting the CBs, I like making a few scouts, which will get there in time and be able to take the city... and also act like cannon fodder:crazyeye: and finishers for wounded enemy archers.:goodjob:

A lot of ppl who are new to MP will get surprised by this, and some will get :mad: angry at this rush. One guy was telling me I was playing poorly by wasting my resources on so many early CBs. Yea, but I got a free wonder and 2 free cities out of it... great investment!:lol:

Off of how many bases are you doing this type of strategy? I must admit that I haven't pursued aggressive "bully" strategies in MP yet. All very good information to know about!

From what I know how to do, this Artillery rush requires Oxford and a great scientist, so there an opportunity cost involved - you can't use Oxford for something like nukes or bombers, and you have 1 less scientist bulb for those hard-to-get higher techs.

Of course, there are situations where "blowing the science wad" for Arty rush is well worth it.

Other than the science requirement, there are other requirements that are composed of many details - city and empire management, build order, tech tree/policy choices, etc. A huge requirement is not getting bogged down in unproductive wars early on, which eat up your resources without any return on them.

Very interesting ^^. I might have to try that in one of my future games. I've always played Mayans and they seem like they would be well-suited for that type of rush. The extra science and easy GS both seem like they would support that strategy quite well. Not getting stuck in wars was obvious but I hadn't considered Oxford. Using that to pop Artillery instantly does seem sweet. Thanks for the tips :D.
 
"Oh, I wasn't trying to argue that Korea had the fastest wins. I was just using them as an example of a civ who will generally beat a Mayan player in the long-run space race :P. I was just highlighting the fact that Mayan players typically struggle to produce relevant numbers of GSes since they're "forced" to produce so many random GPs throughout an average game. While their early game science lead is undeniable it doesn't persist throughout the entire game. People filling 4ish Universities + Public Schools with specialist slots, especially ones like Babylon and Korea and such, will still beat you in the end."

Yes! I hear what you are saying now. Maya "waste" several great people early so get less great scientists. In a game that is not going into the higher eras those extra great people are incredibly powerful. But like you said, it means Mayas are short on GS later.

"Off of how many bases are you doing this type of strategy? I must admit that I haven't pursued aggressive "bully" strategies in MP yet. All very good information to know about!"

Depends. With Montezuma I did it with 1 city, it grew fast, I had great land, and I could pump out an archer 1-2 turns before I did the rush. With many civs I go strict liberty (if I have a neighbor) and then have like 3-4 cities before doing the rush. First build is arhcer in each city, combined with capital get enough units. The "bully" technique can get you as much gold as El Dorado if you have enough CS nearby and you do it right.
 
Silverfuturist pretty well summarized my thoughts.

About the artys+cavs rush :

For this approach you need 4 cities. Or 3 very big ones. You need approx 160 beakers around the turn 105 to run a fast rush(approx 118-120). Earlier the better. With no wonders, that give you the possibility to gain 2 gs in 23 turns. 134/6 = 23.

You need(no gs points wonders) :

2 universities, 1 rush bought for 2nd best city. Hard build 1 in capital around the turn 90 to finish it around 95. If you can build a garden before, that gives you 134/7 = 19 turns to get a 2nd gs. What you need is to start gs production in 2nd city so your 1st gs will appear in : 67/6 = 12 turns. Then your 2nd will appear later from your capital. Hard build other universities in other cities and try to finish them before the turn 105.

So that makes 95 + 19 = Turn 114. Of course, this can be faster but i often get Machinery before Education for survival puproses.

Since that the gs gives the average of last 8 turns of research(105 + 8 = 113), you should finish all universities ASAP to get maximum of beakers from them.

You should have time to build horse units and trebs/cannons between all this. Try to build a stable and build all your horses from that city.

I made a 3 cities approach yesterday for fun with AIs but no trades. Was semi clustered behind mountains so even a human couldn't reach me right away. Got dynamite at the turn 107 with 8 artys but had no horses :lol:

I teched Civil Service right away and upgraded 5 early pikemen(this gives a large soldier demo number). I theched towards MC to build unis faster. Skipped Machinery this time and relayed on pikemen only. With Machinery that would be around 112. Then i bullied every cs around going back and forth with my army.

Also had 4 crossbowmen. My cities were at 20-14-13. I let you guess which tree i took for this approach ;)

If only i can make a video someday...maybe another AI test with no trades? Now that a new expansion is coming these shaved and brutal approaches can be revealed :cool:
 
Spain is like walking into a casino, full of guys playing blackjack, walking straight up to the roullette wheel and putting it all on lucky number 7. If you win, you win big.

Except that it isn't that uncommon for Spain to find one or two wonders first, resulting in 500 or 1000 free gold.
 
Hi,

I personally like Rome. Their UA is just great, i mean.

Every civ has it's good and bad sides, but in the end 25% raw hammer advantage which works for your economy is crazy. :goodjob:

Uniqe Units can only work for a while, same goes for uniqe buildings, but 25% hammer advantage will work for you for the whole duration of the game.

Best Wishes,
Yoruus
 
Any civs with science boosts is strong.

Babylon is arguably the best.
Maya is great.
Korea is good if they get a good start; otherwise they might be done for before their UA can matter.

Spain is often auto-win if they can find an early natural wonder.

I personally dislike Babylon and Spain in MP as they are both brokenly powerful with a decent start and a competent player behind them.

Inca is great if they get the appropriate terrain.
Aztecs the same, with the appropriate terrain.

Huns are ******** if you have close [less experienced] neighbors and flat terrain.

Tabarnak's list is pretty much bang on [obviously].


Really though, a good player can do well with any civ.

The unfortunate part of MP is how ridiculously vital a good start is.

A bad starting location pretty much means you lose.
There's no catching up like in single player if you have good neighbors.

I often move for a few turns (including sometimes right beside neighbors unintentionally) if i get a garbage start since settling in place on crap = game over from turn 1.
 
The unfortunate part of MP is how ridiculously vital a good start is.

A bad starting location pretty much means you lose.
There's no catching up like in single player if you have good neighbors.

I disagree on some of these points. I saw some players doing incredible damages with only 3-4 cities against dozen cities empires.

You can tech as fast(or faster than) as a 3x empire than yours until the industrial/modern era. What you need here is to tech to artillery before they do.

Tall empires are incredibly strong in mp...more than i thought(after some strong testings).
 
I disagree on some of these points. I saw some players doing incredible damages with only 3-4 cities against dozen cities empires.

You can tech as fast(or faster than) as a 3x empire than yours until the industrial/modern era. What you need here is to tech to artillery before they do.

Tall empires are incredibly strong in mp...more than i thought(after some strong testings).

When i say as good start, i mean a good resources/luxs/terrain around your capital.
Going tall is fine; i said nothing against that.

For example, player A gets a river to put their capital and another city or two on.
Player B gets no rivers anywhere.
Player C gets a river but they are completely buried in jungle and almost all their luxs are in jungle, and few hills around.

Player B is screwed unless they have way better resource/luxs around the areas, which is highly unlikely.

Player C is screwed as they will need two billion workers to get any use out of their tiles, and will have no production.

Don't get me wrong, i've done just fine with poorer terrain, but if you have good player vs. good player, the person who rolls the best starting terrain always gets the advantage (rivers particularly are too strong, which it sounds like BNW will be fixing).
 
Tall empires are incredibly strong in mp...more than i thought(after some strong testings).[/QUOTE]

Hey Tabernak! I want to play a 3x3 strategy with the person in back going tall, while those in front spam cities - esp if the front civs get bonuses for extra cities (like France, Maya, Arabia.) Aztec/India in back would be ideal, but you can't pick where the civs spawn on a map. I would like to see you handle the tall-ness. With 2x2 skirmish league settings, the early production and cities on that map might not bode well for a tall empire, but 3x3 skirmish I have seen it work. Of course only "pro" players I am interested in for this.

Yesterday I had a random civ game where I got India, and going tall really worked out well. However, in my capital I had 3 resources that were improved by stables, iron for a forge, and lots of river. The early Nat College, Iron Works and Heroic Epic was killer, plus finishing Trad and getting 3 honor policies before turn 100 was essential. I was making a unit per turn, #1 in production, and I defeated a league player who spammed cities. However, I did get several CS allies, very key cuz I got 4-5 Companion Cav which tipped the tide. Also, the player was far enough away that he didn't rush me (he had a closer neighbor), but not too far that I couldn't rush him. Plus, he didn't know my undercover handle... okay maybe not the best example but the tallness was really powerful that game.
 
Have never been able to finish a MP game because of disconnects and out of syncs, but the civs that have been very good are China, Germany and Attila.

It usually comes down to being able to field a bigger army. Both field it and build it quickly, so both economy and production. Especially if you have a good UU. But a good player knows that they know, so they usually push earlier.
 
Back
Top Bottom