Share your thoughts on each Civ Unique strengths

[TiVO]

I should throw out the caveat that I'm not what you would call a "strong" Civ player, I'm playing on the second easiest setting right now. But I'm enjoying England. I know the extra ship movement isn't really all that much, especially when compared to the other UAs and the fact that the AI doesn't seem to build ships, but I like building a strong, fast navy. It's fun for me, so that's what I go with (though I will say that extra movement is nice for getting embarked ships across the ocean faster).

I also like archers better than crossbowman, so aesthetically I enjoy the longbowman replacement for crossbowmen. And the Ship of the Line is just cool.

 

[Pyrofox]

Rome: Maybe it's the roleplayer in me but there's something awesome about naming your Legions(warriors, longswords etc as you upgrade them) 1st Legion, 2nd Legion & so on. Right now you need a promotion to rename your units so that encourages a barracks in Rome which leads to the 25% discount for future barracks building. Pretty useful UA but It renders the capital useless as a wonder builder if you want to take advantage of it & since the capital is usually your best wonder building city... A double edged sword in a way. The Legions combat wise are very effective & I love using them to build a road to a soon to be captured city as I prepare my forces to attack. Backed up by the Ballista which really kicks ass, you're military is very strong early game & you need to take advantage of your period of dominance.

 

[BARBEERIAN]

I'm really liking the Songhai. Triple gold from barb camps is just disgusting in the opening game. Each camp gives me 225 (marathon) and settlers cost 1010 to rush buy. It usually works out for me that 3 camps = a settler though (since the amount of time it takes to find/destroy 3 camps usually builds up enough gold for the difference. First settler comes out very quick, and the capital can focus on troops/buildings and continue to grow.

Then the Mud-brick Mosque and it's +5 for 0 maintenance really helps your 'cheaper' cities eat up tiles quickly and costs nothing.

 

[Martin Alvito]

Seriously? I think cossacks are the worst UU in the game.
Their extra ability is weak, and they upgrade to nothing, and have no price discount.
I think you dramatically over-rate Russia.
I don't find AIs willing to pay that much for extra resources, often they will pay nothing at all.

Keep some legacy Crossbowmen around to put a point of damage on targets before you smack them in the mouth. Then Cossacks become amazing. 30% of 25 is a ton at that point in the game.

Any cash is better than nothing, particularly in the early phases.

 

[Jaaboo]

England has some solid strengths, unless you're on a map with no water. Ships are good siege weapons and the Ship of the Line more so. Obviously on an Archipelago map, England has a massive advantage being able to swoop in and blister units & cities with cannon fire from their ships. Longbows also offer a tactical advantage which I like.

But basically, England comes down to, "There's no ship that can match the Interceptor for speed."

 

[Martin Alvito]

I'm really liking the Songhai. Triple gold from barb camps is just disgusting in the opening game. Each camp gives me 225 (marathon) and settlers cost 1010 to rush buy.

Now that's interesting. You get 75 per camp and Settlers cost 440 on normal IIRC. Another Marathon imbalance. Wonderful.

 

[Jaaboo]

You should get 90 per camp on normal speed.

 

[Kaar]

I've got three games down now, each as a different Civ. Even before going into it, I knew my first game would HAVE to be as Caesar, so I'll start with him...

ROME - Rome is a Civ that, I found, encourages large, developed Empires. It's a shame you can't build a Courthouse in Rome, but GoR is still fantastic without it. The UA definitely requires you to put a little more planning into your build order, as well as planning for other cities to take over Wonder-building duties, but as long as you make sure to build needed buildings in Rome first, you will soon find yourself with an excellent core of cities that you can either have specialized to certain tasks, or all working to be 'jack-of-all-trade' cities, as the terrain permits. I would highly recommend going for Liberty as your first Policy when playing as Rome, and push out towards multiple Luxury sources as quickly as possible.

Rome's UU's further reinforce a rush-then-turtle approach. I push for Ironworking as quickly as I can afford, after grabbing Calendar (if the associated Luxuries are near by). Playing Rome, you want to find your Iron sources as quickly as possible, and aggressively settle or, if needed, conquer for them. If you can, provoke a war by settling close, then push the advantage of your Legions and Ballista for as long as you can. Because of the Ballista's power and bonuses v. cities, I found I only ever needed one with my Legions, and never bothered to upgrade them until Cannons. Once you've secured a large empire, turtle up and develop your holding with Glory of Rome. From there, you can push all you want for whatever Victory you desire (though a large empire might make Cultural a little more difficult). My personal favourite SP's when playing Rome is Liberty, Piety and then Order.

FRANCE - Not quite finished this game yet, but the UA definitely allows for aggressive early land grabs and SP-related development. The timing of their UU's can make defending such expansion a little more difficult though I found, especially since I started next to Babylon on one side, and Greece on the other. Of course, your mileage may vary. For SP's, I went with some of Tradition to take advantage of Paris's quickly-booming borders, and Unlocking Liberty only for the reduced cost of Settlers. I found myself spreading my cities out a bit more with France, since I knew their borders would expand towards tiles a little more quickly, so Oligarchy for defence, and starting Honour for the Barbarian warning is good.

Their UU's I'm honestly not a huge fan of though. Musketeers are good for what they replace, but overall, they require a little more forethought. You can't upgrade your Pikes or your swordsmen to them, and they have a very short lifespan before Rifling comes in (and lets you upgrade your other Ancient+ units). I only really built and used them to get the Steam achievement. Foreign Legion are more impressive for sure, but force a very aggressive campaign. On the defence, they're no better than regular infantry, which can really hurt if you're caught by a counter attack right after taking an enemy city.

PERSIA - Originally I started a game with them because my buddy wanted to try Greece, and I was trying to be funny. The result was actually quite enjoyable! Darius is a leader that I think a lot of people have written off because of the general 'meh!' attitude towards the current Happiness mechanics, but I think the power of Golden Ages is really underestimated. On top of the usual powerful bonuses to production, your military suddenly becomes a lot more mobile. If you plan your campaign timing to start with a Golden Age, this can allow you a brutal first strike against an enemy that never knew you were massing forces in the first place, and the combat buff will help make sure you can exploit the gaps you open in his lines. Darius also has some of the best synergy of any Leader between his UA and his UB. A Bank that puts more Happiness towards my awesome Golden Ages? Yes please! Also, I would call Piety a must-have Social Policy when playing Persia.

Their UU isn't half-bad either. Especially on larger maps, they'll allow for your exploring Spearmen to go after Barbarian camps a little more recklessly than normal, as the healing time is slashed in half out in no-mans land. It can also allow for more aggressive Ancient/early Classical-era campaigns, as you won't have to stop as long before moving on. This can also result in a more experienced army, as you won't be feeling quite as pressured into using promotions for insta-heals.

Anyways, that's my little bit of first-impressions, after a game as each of the above. I think my next game, I'm going to try Songhai for their Cultural boon of a UB. And please, feel free to critique/comment on my analysis!

 

[Druin]

I have only played as Siam, Egypt and Persia but here are my thoughts:

1. Babylon. I haven't actually played as them ... but tech slingshot -> domination isn't exactly a new concept and that is what the UA does. The UU just happens to be a defender for the duration of the slingshot gambit ... glad I bought the deluxe edition

2. Persia. I didn't expect them to be so good, but early game Immortals are actually immoral with +2hp/turn (+4 with medic, +5 with medic next to another with medic, +6 with medic in friendly land) and that x2 healing sticks with them as you upgrade your way to an invincible military. The first GA that you hit in 100% of games comes at around the same time as your initial Immortal offensive and +1 movement is no joke in an era of strictly 2 movement units. Then you build the +50% golden age length wonder (won't try to spell it) and save up GG's then time your second happiness GA with The Taj and 2-3 GG's and you can sail through the last 100 turns of an epic game in one long GA for a dom / diplo / space victory! Really strong.

3. Siam. The UA is extremely strong and, sadly, pigeonholes Siam into the patronage tree. But, none-the-less, maritime CS's being as they are, 50% more is just nuts for even a moderately sized empire. The UU is pretty strong as well as it acquires favorable odds against even it's age-specific counter, the pike man. The UB, while not HUGE is a generally useful building that gets better with the +1 rationalist SP. All in all, a very well rounded civ.

4. Egypt. The UA is straightforward. Build GL and Oracle for some slingshot action then soak up a couple extra wonders and leverage them for the win. The UB, as someone previously stated, is the real linchpin to the Egyptian civ. It removes the silly maintenance cost of the building it replaces and gives your empire MUCH needed free happiness. Plus, puppet cities will ALWAYS build them, usually as the second or third building. I found the UU to be pretty much useless. Horses are so easy to come by, being resourceless meant nothing, and 5 moves is cool, but you can't shoot THEN move so they still end up dieing to warriors most of the time.

 

[Celevin]

China has some hidden fun points. Never have I before took out a "mortgage" in Civ. I find myself often trading the AI gold per turn for gold, then using that gold to build Paper Makers.

 

[milk steak]

Another vote for Greece. Hoplites come extremely early and require no resources which is a huge boon. Companion Cavalry speaks for itself and is only 3 techs away from the start.

Their UUs provide a great early rush opportunity while their UA will help with nearly every victory condition.

 

[Martin Alvito]

China has some hidden fun points. Never have I before took out a "mortgage" in Civ. I find myself often trading the AI gold per turn for gold, then using that gold to build Paper Makers.

You should be doing that every game. Drain the coffers of the AI that is going to come knocking on your door. Fewer units to kill, and the deal cancels.

But you raise a point that I had not considered, which is that those Paper Makers let you take out bigger loans with the AI...

 

[SirBeegus]

What do you guys think about the Iroquois? I personally find them kind of weak.

Sure, the movement through forests/jungles as if they were roads in your own territory allows you to quicky defend your borders if need be, but perhaps the bigger benefit is moving workers around your empire. You save a few turns, but maybe it's the Civ4 player in me... I can't seem to keep many forests around, they're usually chopped.

Also the Mohawk (sp?) Warrior unit is just basically a swordsman with the rough terrain promotion (except they don't get the bonus when fighting in hills that the promotion grants you). I think they still require iron, right?

And the longhouse... again, if you have a heavily forested city ...maybe. But even if you have 3-4 forested tiles (that you're WORKING actively??), you're still gaining +3 or +4 production a turn. Chopping those trees would give you 90 - 120 production immediately, it'd take quite a while to break even (and seriously, besides camps and logging camps, why are you working so many forested tiles??).


What are your opinions on the Iroquois?

Not hugely impressed by the warrior, but the movement and longhouse are great! you do have to adapt your game play to their strength. If you typically prefer to build roads, as Iroquois, you don't have to for a long time, except to establish traderoutes. you save a lot of money with lowered road maintenance, and workers work more efficiently (they dont' need to build as many roads and don't waste so much time manoevering). If you like to chop forests, as Iroquois, you don't, or don't do it as much - you work the forest. In some 2/0/0 spots where you might put TP in another civ, as Iroquois, you irrigate more of those and build your TP on the forest. As was pointed out, 1/2/2 (forest with TP and longhouse) is pretty great. Trade with maritime city states for extra food if need be.

 

[Ahriman]

30% of 25 is a ton at that point in the game.

Its a promotion and a half. Not that much.

And crossbows are a waste of a unit by the time you get to military science. I'd rather have 2 rifles than a crossbow and a cossack.

Its not that the ability is *useless*, its that its weak compared to the advantages of nearly every other UU.

 

[Lyoncet]

I agree that the Iroquois' bonuses are often undervalued. I only played one game as them, but the start bias gave my first city 6 forest tiles in the first two rings, with the entire area to my east and south almost entirely forested. After clearing a few riverside forests for farms, I had three or four of what will probably be the best hammer cities you're ever likely to see in CiV, since even without Longhouse, it doesn't take long for lumbermills to outstrip mines in yield as well as availability. Plus, the forests-to-road bonus, IMO, is way undervalued. It's nice that you can set up really cheap trade routes, but on top of that it also frees your workers to do other things and allows you way better wartime mobility. Since it allows CIV-esque spaghetti roads, you can get to pretty much any tile quickly (it would cost a lot to accomplish that with roads) that not only give you movement bonuses throughout most of your empire at no cost, they also slow your enemies' armies to a crawl. And boosts your production if you have a longhosue. Of course, that won't help you as much on the offensive, but you can easily leverage that into an offensive advantage if you lure your enemies into your territory and then tear them to pieces (assuming they're close enough).

Other than that, mostly just echo sentiments of Greece being amazing (about right time!), India is amazing, Germany is freakin' sweet (again, about right time!) etc. However, I'd say that Arabia is pretty solid. Yeah, the Camel Archer got way nerfed between test builds and release (-1 movement, now require horse), but they're still very useful as the only ranged move-after-attack unit in the game. You miss out on knights, but the tactical potential of CAs means you can fill them in with longswords or what have you and do better than fine. The +1 gold per trade route is pretty weak, but getting double oil/calendar resources makes for some immense economic potential. Plus it gives an incentive and the means to get some big, sprawling empires, which is a type of play I enjoy. It also seems like the AI overvalues oil to an extent in industrial/early modern eras, since it gives some pretty great deals for your excess oil.

Plus, Harun-al Rashid is just cool.

Also, I think it's interesting how the sentiment shifted from "Dude Russia is going to dominate!" pre-release to "meh, Russia's kinda OK" now. And how Germany did the opposite. Not that I'd ever bring up the fact that that's what I'd predicted all along.

 

[the_lor]

I'm a cultural player but France doesn't impress. My fave is Siam.

Siam's unique trait: "Father Governs Children: Food and Culture gifts from friendly City-States are increased by 50%."

I just started a game with Siam, small map, increased to 14 CS.

Want to know the most frustrating thing ever? Playing Siam, having 7 city states on your island, 5 of them ending up militaristic.

 

[Olleus]

China has by far the most underrated UA. Twice as many great generals, and each giving +45% combat bonus instead of +25%.

The first part of the ability means that any time you wage a war you should have a GG there. Either from the honour branch or because it takes laughably few battles to get one. Now if you have a GG and your enemy doesn't, you've effectively won the war. +45% is just so huge that it over shadows everything. You can attack a unit in forest, across a river and be equal to them. If the other civ does have a GG (very likely) then all of your units are still +20% than theres. That turns all of your units into UUs. Think about it a Chinese infantry supported by a general is just as good as a foreign legion supported by a general when fighting abroad, and better when fighting at home. It means Horseman have become stronger than Companion cavalry (but still slightly slower) and swordsman become stronger than legions.

The Chinese UA turns every single one of their unit into something which is as good if not better than UUs.. And thats assuming both sides have a great general. In reality, it's quite likely that China will have one and the other civs won't (more likely than the opposite anyway). Once you have enough GGs (2-3 depending on the size of your empire), you can burn them for golden ages. Therefore, the Chinese UA turns every single one of your units into a UU and gives you extra golden ages while warring. Its mentally good.

The paper maker is also solid, giving you lots of money to buy (and maintain) the happiness improvements needed to support your massive empire.

I would comment on the Cho-Ko-Nu, unfortunately every time I play as china I've won before I can use it.


When it comes to warring; China is utterly unrivalled.

 

[qyll]

My opinions of the civilizations I've played with:

Aztec

UA: Not great. It's very helpful in the early game when the only source of culture is your palace, but it fizzles out fairly quickly. Kills don't generate nearly as much culture as you would need for it to be reliable.

UU: Didn't use them a whole lot, but they were quite helpful initially.

UB: Terrible. Lake tiles are few and far in between.

China

UA: Excellent. The +20% potentially makes every unit a unique unit.

UU: Cho-ko-nus sound good, but I never got to use them.

UB: Paper makers are awesome. You'll want to have libraries in most of your cities anyway, and the extra gold is great.

France

UA: One of the best. Earlier access to policies means a better start, and that means a lot.

UU (musketeer): A better, cheaper version of the longswordsman. What's not to like?

UU (foreign legion): Not great. Just decent. That's all.

Persia

UA: Sounds weak on the surface, but is actually amazing. Get Chichen Itza and Taj Mahal and you'll spend most of the game in a golden age.

UU: Good, but not reliable enough for me to take cities with. Went for horsemen instead.

UB: Great. Any extra source of happiness is always welcome

Greece

UA: Excellent. Patronage is a must.

UU (hoplite): It's kind of a shame because both of Alex's unique units are so early that it's either one or the other. I went for CC's instead.

UU (companion cavalry): Broken. Perhaps the best UU in the game. Horsemen are already overpowered vs. the AI. Adding +2 strength and faster great general generation (GGG ) is ridiculous.

Rome

UA: Not bad, not great. Extra production of anything is welcome.

UU (legion): Fairly good. Reliable enough to replace horsemen and their road building ability is nice if you don't have enough workers.

UB (ballista): Great, but really expensive. Too risky for me to build many of.

 

[Lyoncet]

When it comes to warring; China is utterly unrivalled.

Very true. I didn't know it was x2 the GG rate, but that makes an already excellent, well-balanced Civ even scarier. Still, you do overlook the logistical aspect of using generals, since you can, say, do a Companion Cavalry blitzkrieg with their 5 movement points, but if you want to do an equivalent Chinese-Great-General-Horseman rush, you're going to be marching over there at 2 tiles per turn (or 1, in rough terrain). Still, the early 45% bonus over everyone who didn't go Honor is massive, and the 20% over other GGs is indeed noteworthy.

As an aside, if you end up having more than a few wars, you'll end up with more GGs than you can possibly use – especially if you go Honor – which can make for some extra golden ages (or… citadels?)

 

[Ahriman]

China has by far the most underrated UA. Twice as many great generals, and each giving +45% combat bonus instead of +25%.

Agreed, that extra 20% is amazing. And I don't think I ever fight a war without my units nearly always being within GG range.

excellent, well-balanced Civ

Excellent I agree with, not sure yet about well balanced.