Discussion in 'Civ6 - General Discussions' started by kryat, Jul 28, 2020.
Quick and dirty but still informative... Hopefully
An update: with Japan now eliminated in the culture thread, he has supplanted Matthias as the most powerful in average ranking. However, Gorgo, Pericles, and Peter all might be able to sneak past.
Well, not all victories are equal.
It should be like
Science -- 20%
Culture -- 20%
Religious -- 20%
Diplomatic-- Not a real victory, fight me brah.
But in all seriousness, a civ only needs to be really good at 1-2 victory conditions. Korea is probably irrelevant for a religious or diplomatic victory, but it doesn't affect them one bit. The game is of course, extremely conquest biased.
If we were going by my wins, it'd be:
Well if you win 110% of your games, then I can't really compete with that.
It's only conquest based if you want it to be IMO. It may very well be the most effective way to get quick victories (and people can and will beat the "conquer your neighbor ASAP" drum ad nauseum), but that doesn't mean it's something that you *have* to do when playing by yourself.
The best way if we are being quants is to either get a “raw absolute score” that sort of conveys single player performance in terms of something like winning turn...
but this being CivFanatics imo the actual best way would be to take that raw power in each victory and figure out who could beat who across the entire space of victory conditions.
So something along the lines of “Civ A could beat Civ B in science but B could take A in culture first, thus A would lose ultimately.”
This would be almost impossible to work out though, because it would come down to how fast a domination Civ can blitz everyone else. Which depends. So then you are working with what in professional circles is termed “a flaming pile of garbage.”
I'm fine with using ranking, non-parametric statistics is a thing. But I am questioning the legitimacy of averaging is the right way to go since the ranking hardly follows any form of distribution.
Didn’t he just average the rank number?
You’ll never get anywhere with that because you need something that isn’t positional for your average to produce a ranking. Otherwise you’re totally losing the concept of how spaced out those rankings are.
One of the reasons I posted this thread when I did was to float the idea of averaging and see if anyone had better ideas what to do with the data (even if I don’t explicitly ask, this being civfanatics, people will share their opinions). I’ve had some time to see strengths and weaknesses, and had some time to think about how to visualize the data.
When I conceived of these framing of the elimination threads last year, the objective was to get past what was previously a pure subjective question: rank the leader abilities, UI, etc. But that troubled me. Can the Seowan truly be compared against the Pairidaeza? There was no “better at what?”
Of course not. I literally only have 1 domination victory out of 112 games since Gathering Storm came out. But this isn't about my preferences. I stay away from domination victories because I don't like to move lots of units around. It's not a factual argument in any sense.
But there's no way to spin it. Domination is just a more effective method, and any ranking just has to reflect it, if it wants to be taken seriously. Even in non-domination victories, military strength helps with emergencies, and there is no way to stop AIs from killing your city states or allies (or even you) without it
Btw the actual breakdown of victories for me is:
If you ask me, cultural victory is the only victory type besides diplo that actually can get hindered if you destroy other civs. Maybe.
Tamar being ranked 16th on one of those lists :') You were WRONG to underestimate Our True Righteous Meme Queen!!!
With the finish of the cultural victory elimination thread, here's the updated ranking using my weighted average methodology. Points=the inverse of finish placement, top victory counts for 4x points, 2nd for 3x, 3rd for 2x, 4th for 1x, 5th for 0x. I used the simple average as a tie-breaker. Japan, Russia, and Pericles Greece displaced Hungary from the top, while Gorgo surged into 5th place. Georgia is apparently better than Rome, Persia, Mongolia, and Korea. Here's the spreadsheet link with full details. There's also a tab on there to apply your own custom weighting by victory type.
Qin Shi Huang/China
Robert the Bruce/Scotland
Mvemba a Nzinga/Kongo
I kinda disagree with the whole premise of this list. Some grand strats like kill everyone can easily be diverted into others like make science. That's usually how I play my militaristic games. Go kill everybody on my continent and then put a campus down as soon as I can. Maybe it would be better to sail the ocean and take out the other continents, but mid to late game military turns take forever. It's easier to fly to space and use buffalo horn tactics on martians. ☺
Just saw this thread. I remember this being done for the RF elimination threads, so I appreciate that this one is starting to be done for GS as well.
Though you can probably quibble with where a lot of civs ended up if you do a simple average of the results, in particular for me, I think Arabia, Brazil, and Georgia are too high (being 4th in Diplomacy, arguably the hardest victory type, should not factor as much). Korea and Aztecs should be a several, Netherlands somewhere in middle, and Macedon a lot of spots higher. (EDIT: Was referencing JesseS’s list vs the straight average list, so my original commentary was slightly off.)
I think a lot of players that vote tend to value late game bonuses / bonuses that look really good on paper / bonuses that lead to yield porn over those that consistently help you do well in the early game to snowball to win games quickly. To each their own, not trying to attack you. For me, I believe if it takes me 250-300+ Turns on standard to win, in reality I probably would have lost the game if I had been playing on MP (factoring Online speed difference, of course). Warmongering is also under appreciated. Even if not going Domination, the ability to easily take cities (at least 2-3 from the Ai, if not more) should not ignored. The ROI is too good.
Furthermore, I believe voters tend to be evaluating at Prince - King / Emperor difficulty and not necessarily Deity, let alone Multi Player. Obviously tier lists change depending on what level you are playing the game at. (EDIT: Originally, made a comment using Georgia as an example, however, I realized I was using JesseS’s list, which used a different weighing rather than just a straight average. Though Georgia is still a little high at #28 when using a straight average, it is not #14.)
I don’t want it to seem like I’m attacking anyone’s preferred play style. I definitely don’t want it to seem like I’m attacking anyone’s skill level at the game. Civ 6 is a game. Play it the way you want to play it, and have fun. In my Georgia games, I like being able dominate City States, and they are admittedly a fun civ to role play as (I used them as a substitute for Bukhara, imagining that I was the leader of a collection of Silk Road City States while going for a (slow and late) Diplo victory.
Feel free to object, but I personally think the weighing should be:
40% Domination - Tends to be the fastest victory condition. Even if you don’t go down this path, early bonuses to warring can often set you up to snowball for CV and SV in particular. Thus, the higher weighing should help early warring civs (though in the Domination elimination thread, late game civs like Ottomans and particularly Zulu got results that I felt were too high). The higher weighing also reflects that this tends to be the go-to approach for MP.
20% Culture - Tends to be the second fastest, particularly if you are specifically going for a fast CV to get all the early GWs to build lifetime Tourists early and prevent your opponent from getting an easy source of Culture to get too many defensive Tourists. Most players seem to like this victory condition due to the different ways you can with it. There is the risk that you have Russia, Greece, Rome, or another high Culture yield civ in your game, which can slow you down.
20% Science - Though it tends to be slower than the above two victory conditions, it is the most independent victory condition, being removed from how other civs are doing. If you are left alone, you can boom in safety. If you built an army to capture cities early, you can place them near your border and upgrade them if needed to defend yourself if another civ tries to attack you to slow you down. You can also pursue a SV while going for a Domination victory, something you can’t do with CV.
10% Religion - Actually can be quite fast on lower difficulty, but tends to be a slog on higher difficulties (more so than Domination because the AI still loves Religion) and you have a chance of being shut out from even being able to get this victory condition. Also, if I was playing against you and saw you were running away with Religion and converting my cities, I would declare war and condemn your units (which the AI doesn’t do), which is low risk for me, as I will have focused on a large army while you were building HS, Shrines, and Temples.
10% Diplomacy - Admittedly, I don’t go for Diploamcy often, but it is generally agreed this tends to take the longest. Too AI dependent in my opinion. Also, you will NEVER win a Diplo victory in MP.
(If you want to value a more peaceful approach to the game, you could take 10% from Dom and apply 5% to CV and SV each).
==Typical Rome Rant Propaganda ==
Lastly and most importantly, as my favorite civ, though Rome did pretty well and averages out to be in the top third, I think they should have ended up in the Top 10 at least. I believe they didn’t do as well as they should have in the CV thread in particular and the SV to a lesser extent. Even in the Domination thread, I think their early advantages should have made them be Top 5 (I was still lurking and didn’t vote until closer to the end of that thread, so I wasn’t able to help). The meme of “they are a generalist civ” makes some of players think they should just be slightly above average.
Their free Monuments in particular are either considered a ground breaking (though boring) bonus (I am of this opinion) or a nice to have that does nothing in the late game. They really should rewrite Trajan’s Column as “Always get Code of Laws in 7 Turns instead of 14-15 Turns; get Agoge and Colonization 30 turns earlier allowing for about 450+ “free” / earlier Production; get Political Philosophy earlier by about 25-30 Turns as well, i.e. - Turn 45-50; save 60 Production / 240 Gold for each city you settle, allowing you to produce/ buy more military units or settlers; have an army at least twice as large at the same point in the early to mid game compared to playing as another civ; have 1.5 to 2x the number of cities at the same point compared to playing as another civ; and generally snowball so far ahead ahead that you’ve won the game before other civ’s late game bonuses even matter”.
I might be biased, but I truly think Rome is sometimes undervalued due to the fact they admittedly have straight forward, boring bonuses that don’t seem to carry over to the late game. The point is to use these early bonus to snowball to get the better techs and civics that provide better yields, build / lock the price of Districts earlier when they are cheaper, get Great People early, deprive other civs from getting those GP, etc. Rome does this better than all other civs save for Gorgo. Furthermore, Rome consistently gets all its bonus save for Legion (due to Iron requirement, and even then, you can often find a work around).
Rome consistently gets me some of the fastest Domination victories, usually within 5-10 turns of each other. I’ve only won faster as Hungary, Persia, and Colombia (only 3 games so far, but yeah, they need to be nerfed).
I’ve won my fastest CVs with Rome, consistently as well (one game with Gorgo did tie and my best Pericles game was 2 turns behind). Yes, faster than Sweden, Russia, Brazil, Kongo, Egypt, etc.
I’ve won my fastest SV ever with Rome, thanks to CivTrader6’s videos, back when those exploits were available; obviously, those exploits are no longer available. In the current game, they are my third fastest (Sumeria and Aztecs were faster, and I was lucky with Sumeria by having a section of a Tundra where I was just farming Barb camps ... for AzTECH, their builder bonus to districts is OP for Science). Korea may have godly Science yields, but they tend to be slow in the Culture yields early to mid game (their % bonus is barely noticeable), so their civic development is slow.
Well, the good news is that, if you apply your custom weighting, Rome ends up #5, just behind Hungary, Japan, Maori, and Australia.
I can't really contest the rest of the post, but I think Diplomacy can be won pretty quickly on standard setting single player sessions ime. Guessing what the AI wants or who will usually brute force a resolution isn't where most DV points come from, they're actually earned most often from competitions (such as aid requests) and the DV wonders (Statue of Liberty, Potola Palace, Mahabodhi Temple). If you really want to brute force resolutions though, the new Pagodas give a lot of punch too.
JesseS made a wonderful spreadsheet that allows you to play around with the weighing of the rankings. If I apply the weightings that I personally feel reflect the meta (again, please feel free to disagree), the results look to be an actually pretty reasonable tier list for the most part. There’s some outliers, but it is a better reflection that a straight average, in my opinion,
Also, it doesn’t hurt that Rome comes in at #5 with my weighing, haha.
JesseS, thanks for your effort on this. I also pretty much agree with your personal ranking for the most part as well.
It makes sense that Hungary is very strong all around. I've recently discovered how good it is and more importantly how fun it is. It is map and city state dependent but that's what makes it fun. No 2 games are ever the same. Whereas something like Russia, I like a lot too, but it's mostly the same all throughout as you're skewed into doing same things.
Separate names with a comma.