Strong & weak civs, I need help.

[Ticio]

I have played recently with different civs to check the fun of the differents playstyles and bonuses and I found that some civs are too strong meanwhile others are lacking a lot.

Do they normally tweak civilizations or they will stick as they are now?

Before anything, I really like to play as a trade nation, but love to have defensive capabilities just in case.

These are the civs that I have played with. Maybe I will add more as I check others.

The last civ (The one I found to be, by far, the weakest) has a very long post, but I just wanted to explain why I think is a very bad civ.

At the end I made a new Thread exposing my concerns with this civilization, and asking some tips.

I'm sure they are even weaker civs, but with the games I have played online and against AI, I found that differences between the "Strong ones" and the " Weak ones" to be too unbalanced. So I'm, almost, forced to play with specific civs to be able to win (if the opponent choose an strong one).

So, I wanted to ask you if you have tips for the weakest ones, so I can use them on multiplayer without getting stomped. Because I really love the idea behind them, but I always loose whith them.


Strong civs I have played:

- Germany

The strongest one that I have played. +1 district is just insane by itself but adding the Hansa you will have insane production in all of your cities.

Even more, you are encourage to place Comercial disctricts (even more production and gold!) what gives you more traders. These traders will be insane, as you will always have more tiles as you have more districts.

The +1 Military card slot is always nice, and gives you versatility for military production (as if you needed more).

I played with them as it was like playing on Easy mode!


- Japan

A little hard to use at first, but as soon as you know the game better they turn quite strong.

+1 adjacency bonus for all districts is very strong. The best thing is that it forces you make clusters between cities and disctrics, what at the same time protect you from spies. I discovered how dangerous they are on multiplayer.

What is more, the 100% production towards encapments, holy sites a theater square make sure you:

- Are always a military foe, your are always on top of the civic tree and you can choose the religion that you need (choral music, or jesuit education for the science!)


- England

I copied the strategy of a friend that destroyed me on multiplayer. Of course with the Gathering Storm bonuses.

- Easy domination on water with the Royal Navy Dockyard, + a lot of merchants early on + traders for other continents.

- 30% on industrial zones it's already pretty neat (+ the internal trade you build quite fast ) but the 100% towards engineers and +2 charges are pretty strong.

Why? You put a new city, you put harbor (50% faster) new trade line to yout capital (More yields), then Production zone (30% faster), and you put an aquaduct, dam and/or canal, that makes an absurd amount of adjacency. THEN you put a coal power plant (and you can mantain double the quantity of them), and you can win whatever you like.

You will be on top of science, industry or whatever you need.

In addition you can use the engineers to put Railroads and multyplied your gold (even more), and with all the gold purchased for science or making faster coal Plants.

- Gran Colombia

We al know why, but I will wait until thenew changes to let them on the list or remove them!


-Mongolia

Very strong! The ability to add +6 CS per visibility point is incredible.

You gain one just by sending a trade route and spies can give you another, so it’s easy to have the bonus and make it stronger.

The ability to create instant Trading posts is also very strong. It allows you to gain the visibility bonus instantly just before a surprise attack, but also make insanely long trade routes since the start (With Hunza you can easily make tons of gold). Noting that trade routes become more and more difficult due to the increasing turns per era, this ability become stronger as time passes.



Weak Civilizations I have played.


- Maya

I add Maya to the weak civs. They are not "weak" per se in my list as the bonus are strong and well used can give you victory, but if you have a bad start... you are screw.

As they cannot change the capital like Dido, not even once, if they have a bad start they will have problems all the game.

If they had a way to do so, I will remove them from the weak civs.


- Spain

I wrote the reasons why they are the weakest of my list, but it become a very long thread.

So I will jsut add a new one with the informatuion, and requesting help on how to play them.


EDIT: I'm adding some civs after playing them! and removing vikings from the weak ones

 

[Victoria]

Do they normally tweak civilizations or they will stick as they are now?

They do tweak but seem to like to have a variety of strong and weak rather than balanced. I like this approach.

I wrote the reasons why they are the weakest of my list

There are weaker and often it is about them being weak early. When Spain get conquistadors they are not weak but you have to play through some eras to get to that stage. For the early game they act like a vanilla civ, nothing different. Try plying Mali early and you will find them weaker but later... oh my.

 

[Lord Lakely]

but-but CONQS ARE VERY GOOD!!! I'm sure marigold wouldn't lie to us.

Spain's problem is that they're too much of an amalgam of several core ideas that have very little synergy with each other. Treasure Fleet and the Mission provide bonuses if you expand to non-native continents, but you cannot control how close or how far these continents are from your starting location. El Escoreal provides bonuses vs Civs of different majority religions, but only works if you possess a majority religion yourself. Spain is a Civ that is peppered with many circumstantial bonuses, most of which beyond their control. I agree that they're mediocre at best. but worst of all, it makes them incredibly dull to play.


Norway's issue is that their bonuses are rather counterintuitive on the surface. There's pillaging, navies, a temple replacement, exploration? How does this even tie together?

The way I see it, Norway are an irreligious faithmongering civ - they have a very good building in the Stave Church (which grants extra production to coastal resources - this stacks with Auckland, Mausoleum, etc), but get no religious bonuses. I think Norway should attempt a Longship rush early, and use the momentum to expand and set up their infrastructure. Only your cities are good, build Holy Sites with Stave Churches to buff you coastal cities and build the Grandmaster's Chapel. Use your massive faith pool to instabuy a powerful land army and use it to raid and pillage even more, racking up science and culture. It's a rather unorthodox way of playing Civ 6, but they abilities synergize well enough that a smart player could use them to get ahead.

They're vikings. Be a viking.

 

[Ticio]

but-but CONQS ARE VERY GOOD!!! I'm sure marigold wouldn't lie to us.

Spain's problem is that they're too much of an amalgam of several core ideas that have very little synergy with each other. Treasure Fleet and the Mission provide bonuses if you expand to non-native continents, but you cannot control how close or how far these continents are from your starting location. El Escoreal provides bonuses vs Civs of different majority religions, but only works if you possess a majority religion yourself. Spain is a Civ that is peppered with many circumstantial bonuses, most of which beyond their control. I agree that they're mediocre at best. but worst of all, it makes them incredibly dull to play.


Norway's issue is that their bonuses are rather counterintuitive on the surface. There's pillaging, navies, a temple replacement, exploration? How does this even tie together?

The way I see it, Norway are an irreligious faithmongering civ - they have a very good building in the Stave Church (which grants extra production to coastal resources - this stacks with Auckland, Mausoleum, etc), but get no religious bonuses. I think Norway should attempt a Longship rush early, and use the momentum to expand and set up their infrastructure. Only your cities are good, build Holy Sites with Stave Churches to buff you coastal cities and build the Grandmaster's Chapel. Use your massive faith pool to instabuy a powerful land army and use it to raid and pillage even more, racking up science and culture. It's a rather unorthodox way of playing Civ 6, but they abilities synergize well enough that a smart player could use them to get ahead.

They're vikings. Be a viking.

I think I had the most fun with vikings, it was just insanely fun raiding my opponent al the time... I loved the screams of desperation through the headsets

And with Spain, you are totally right! I put my concerns in another thread and I think we have just the same opinion. Very funny bonus and quite interesting playstyle but just not worth it.

They do tweak but seem to like to have a variety of strong and weak rather than balanced. I like this approach.

There are weaker and often it is about them being weak early. When Spain get conquistadors they are not weak but you have to play through some eras to get to that stage. For the early game they act like a vanilla civ, nothing different. Try plying Mali early and you will find them weaker but later... oh my.

The thing is that you need a lot to get to the conquistadors in time, and you will lag on others ressources, making very hard to reach the other bonuses.

Is a little like they are mutually exclusive.

And if you survive to reach conquistadors (good luck, and you would have lost wonders and GP), you would be able to win only militarly then the other bonus are basicly worthless.

I know I seem obsessed with this civ, but I just don't understand how they did it so counterintuitive.I just thougth that i was missing something on the playstyle to make them viable.

 

[agonistes]

but-but CONQS ARE VERY GOOD!!! I'm sure marigold wouldn't lie to us.

Spain's problem is that they're too much of an amalgam of several core ideas that have very little synergy with each other. Treasure Fleet and the Mission provide bonuses if you expand to non-native continents, but you cannot control how close or how far these continents are from your starting location. El Escoreal provides bonuses vs Civs of different majority religions, but only works if you possess a majority religion yourself. Spain is a Civ that is peppered with many circumstantial bonuses, most of which beyond their control. I agree that they're mediocre at best. but worst of all, it makes them incredibly dull to play.


Norway's issue is that their bonuses are rather counterintuitive on the surface. There's pillaging, navies, a temple replacement, exploration? How does this even tie together?

The way I see it, Norway are an irreligious faithmongering civ - they have a very good building in the Stave Church (which grants extra production to coastal resources - this stacks with Auckland, Mausoleum, etc), but get no religious bonuses. I think Norway should attempt a Longship rush early, and use the momentum to expand and set up their infrastructure. Only your cities are good, build Holy Sites with Stave Churches to buff you coastal cities and build the Grandmaster's Chapel. Use your massive faith pool to instabuy a powerful land army and use it to raid and pillage even more, racking up science and culture. It's a rather unorthodox way of playing Civ 6, but they abilities synergize well enough that a smart player could use them to get ahead.

They're vikings. Be a viking.

I don’t normally play Norway, but all that early pillaging can be so fun!

 

[iammaxhailme]

I don't think Norway is top tier by any means, but if you play them very aggressively as they are designed for, I think they are actually quite good at a hybrid science victory via a lot of domination/pillaging science.

They do tweak civs occaisonally but usually just minor things

 

[Navelgazer]

The most notable tweaking I can remember was the nerfing of the Royal Navy Dockyard, which was truly unnecessary, but yes, they do make small changes. For instance, in R+F, they gave missions a +2 loyalty bonus on separate continents if adjacent to the city center. That was a very good idea, and one that allowed Spain to deal with the loyalty mechanics in a specific and flavorful way - plopping down a Mission first thing when settling on a faraway continent is exactly what playing as Spain should feel like.

That said, they're still weak and depend on things outside of their control. This bugged me in CIv5, where their ability basically meant they were a slot machine for whether you'd get a roll where you could buy a settler almost immediately, and it bugs me now, when their bonuses take so long to kick in, and are kind of a mixed bag - Conquistadors are good, and the mission is good, but the general issues with Naval Combat (particularly against the AI) means that the early fleets and armadas are underwhelming. I'd tweak them to give them a faith bonus for kills made by fleets, with a greater bonus for kills made by armadas. Since the Grand Master's Chapel is basically a given while playing Spain, this would fit into their gameplan nicely.

 

[Sostratus]

Strong civs I have played:

Given that you go on to list some production heavy civs, australia is IMO probably the best "get me more economic GAINZ" civ. Mostly because the district boosts from appeal are ridiculous, the +100% bonus production from DoW or libertaion is insane, and the outback station is an egregiously good improvement. And pasture culture bombs.
Otherwise I'm Germany all the way, even though i know it's not the best civ. And England for variety. Glorious Britain!

 

[Navelgazer]

And, of course, Gran Colombia is so bonkers that we should probably enjoy its heyday now before it gets a deserved nerfing.

Another good example of tweaking is Georgia, who they took from “absolute lowest tier” to “not strong but very interesting in a niche strategy.”

 

[Ticio]

The most notable tweaking I can remember was the nerfing of the Royal Navy Dockyard, which was truly unnecessary, but yes, they do make small changes. For instance, in R+F, they gave missions a +2 loyalty bonus on separate continents if adjacent to the city center. That was a very good idea, and one that allowed Spain to deal with the loyalty mechanics in a specific and flavorful way - plopping down a Mission first thing when settling on a faraway continent is exactly what playing as Spain should feel like.

That said, they're still weak and depend on things outside of their control. This bugged me in CIv5, where their ability basically meant they were a slot machine for whether you'd get a roll where you could buy a settler almost immediately, and it bugs me now, when their bonuses take so long to kick in, and are kind of a mixed bag - Conquistadors are good, and the mission is good, but the general issues with Naval Combat (particularly against the AI) means that the early fleets and armadas are underwhelming. I'd tweak them to give them a faith bonus for kills made by fleets, with a greater bonus for kills made by armadas. Since the Grand Master's Chapel is basically a given while playing Spain, this would fit into their gameplan nicely.

A friend of mine told me about the nerf, what was before? somethiong like each port in a New continnt gave them a trader or something like that??

And I completely agreed with spanish problems.
As I see it, the difference between the 2 "intercontinental" civs are that England receive "extra things" by going to other continents. They do not depende on it, but if they do they become even more powerful.
On the other hand, Spain is a weak civilization unless it reaches new continents but that's hard as they are weack... (They have no bonuses until they go to a new continent, but going to another continent is hard because they have no bonuses; they are like a snake biting its own tail.)

Given that you go on to list some production heavy civs, australia is IMO probably the best "get me more economic GAINZ" civ. Mostly because the district boosts from appeal are ridiculous, the +100% bonus production from DoW or libertaion is insane, and the outback station is an egregiously good improvement. And pasture culture bombs.
Otherwise I'm Germany all the way, even though i know it's not the best civ. And England for variety. Glorious Britain!

I sadly don't have many dlcs yet
Only R&F and GS, but i'm planning to expand the list, as I'm really loving this game.

I made the list with the only civs I played, maybe i will expand it a little as soon as I try new ones.
Currently I'm playing with Hungary! Very fun and unique civ to play, for sure it has become one of my favorite civs (Very strong/very funny)

 

[Lily_Lancer]

Strong Civs I've played
Norway
It is still the best Civ, maybe second to Gran Columbia on land maps, but it has advantages on sea maps.

Spain
I love playing this, those divine muskets feel like god.

Weak Civs I've played
Germany:
About blank actually, except for the extra military slot. (+7 for CS? CS now start with 15 base strength and walls how can you take them down?)

 

[Victoria]

It is still the best Civ, maybe second to Gran Columbia on land maps, but it has advantages on sea maps.

played an island map with them last night. The fact the AI is still completely lost at sea makes them crazy good.

with Germany I find early second district placement is great and hanzas so cheap. For the walled CS archers do it, the +7 helps a lot. It also allows good promotion of them before you face a real civ, but yes, it is not fast.

 

[Drivingrevilo]

I sadly don't have many dlcs yet
Only R&F and GS, but i'm planning to expand the list, as I'm really loving this game.

Assuming you’re playing on PC @Ticio, I’d definitely wait on a Steam sale to buy the remaining DLC - it can get pretty expensive buying them full cost! If I had to recommend which one to get first, I’d say Australia (great Civ, fun to play) or the Alexander/Persia one (both really strong domination Civs, plus I personally really enjoyed the historical scenario). As to which is least necessary, it’s 100% Poland; she’s a underwhelming Civ with a very dull playstyle IMO, and the scenario is utter garbage.

EDIT: also, I agree with you about Hungary. I drew up a tier list for my mate who’s new to the game, and put Hungary in S Tier (the best). He was like ‘really, they don’t look that good?’; but after playing, he immediately agreed with me.

SECOND EDIT: I’m sorry moderator, but why have you edited my comment on the basis of ‘trolling’? Ticio has asked a genuine question, in good faith, and has stated his personal opinion - that Norway and Spain are bad, and Germany is good. Lily_Lancer has clearly come here in bad faith to be deliberately contrarian against Ticio, by stating the polar opposite of what he said. I called Lily_Lancer out to defend Ticio - and you’ve censored my post?? Seriously, man?

 

[Navelgazer]

Norway is fantastic if played to its strengths (pillage, pillage, pillage, use UB to boost productivity and faith-buy more units.) Spain has a fantastic UU (whereas Germany practically doesn't have a UU for realistic purposes.) The point is that these distinctions will ultimately have more to do with the player than with objective design.

So for me, for instance, a "weaker" civ like Brazil or Georgia, by being designed in a way that fits what I tend to do anyway, will be stronger than Hungary or Macedon would be in my hands, since I don't tend to play those ways.

 

[yung.carl.jung]

Strong Civs I've played
Norway
It is still the best Civ, maybe second to Gran Columbia on land maps, but it has advantages on sea maps.

Spain
I love playing this, those divine muskets feel like god.

Weak Civs I've played
Germany:
About blank actually, except for the extra military slot. (+7 for CS? CS now start with 15 base strength and walls how can you take them down?)

Norway is still a mediocre Civ even in the best of conditions. I like playing as them but pretending Norway is a Rome, Korea or Japan-tier Civ is just ridic. They literally have no bonuses for peaceful victories besides increased pillage yields and a super mediocre UB. None.

Also, saying Germany is "about blank" is just factually incorrect. They're a strong Civ by virtue of one extra district alone. All in all, pretty low quality bait. Also, Spain is a dumpsterfire civ, sadly. Shame because their bonuses could be good if they had even a sliver of cohesion.

 

[Jewelrunna]

Norway are one of my favorite Civs in the game, but I have to admit they're mid-tier in even the best circumstances. The fact that you can get a bunch of really good yields out of pillaging is surprisingly powerful provided you get the policy card that boosts pillage yield. I think they're currently one of the most underrated Civs in the game, but only because a lot of people still consider them in the lowest tier. I think they're respectably C-tier.

As for the S-tiers you're asking for, in my opinion the tier consists of the following Civs: Australia, Aztec, Germany, Korea, Nubia, Sumeria, and most recently, Gran Colombia. Arguably can stuff Scythia in there as well.

If you (or anyone) wants any input on why I think they're S-tier, or where any certain Civ would fall, I'll be happy to answer.

 

[Lily_Lancer]

Norway is still a mediocre Civ even in the best of conditions. I like playing as them but pretending Norway is a Rome, Korea or Japan-tier Civ is just ridic. They literally have no bonuses for peaceful victories besides increased pillage yields and a super mediocre UB. None.

Also, saying Germany is "about blank" is just factually incorrect. They're a strong Civ by virtue of one extra district alone. All in all, pretty low quality bait. Also, Spain is a dumpsterfire civ, sadly. Shame because their bonuses could be good if they had even a sliver of cohesion.

I'd like to say, in my games, Norway is better than Rome, Japan or Korea, even on online speed where pillage is the least powerful. On standard or slower speeds Norway is much better than them. The first thing you need to know about playing Norway is don't care for diplomacy, just declare war on all Civs and non-ally CSs and make sure you have enough units to pillage them again again and again.

 

[yung.carl.jung]

IThe first thing you need to know about playing Norway is don't care for diplomacy, just declare war on all Civs and non-ally CSs and make sure you have enough units to pillage them again again and again.

That's how I play ALL civs..

but even then I strictly doubt that you get better results with norway than with Korea for Space Victories or Greece for Culture. if you want to prove me wrong, go ahead

Norway are one of my favorite Civs in the game, but I have to admit they're mid-tier in even the best circumstances. The fact that you can get a bunch of really good yields out of pillaging is surprisingly powerful provided you get the policy card that boosts pillage yield. I think they're currently one of the most underrated Civs in the game, but only because a lot of people still consider them in the lowest tier. I think they're respectably C-tier.

As for the S-tiers you're asking for, in my opinion the tier consists of the following Civs: Australia, Aztec, Germany, Korea, Nubia, Sumeria, and most recently, Gran Colombia. Arguably can stuff Scythia in there as well.

If you (or anyone) wants any input on why I think they're S-tier, or where any certain Civ would fall, I'll be happy to answer.

exactly. norway is a middling civ which is extremely strong at its one trick pony. they're super underrated, because most people think they're bad. even for a DomV, they're certainly not the strongest. less so for all other VCs.

I mostly agree that the Civs you name are strong, but how comes you don't mention Rome, Japan, China or Greece? These are imho S tier just for their intense adaptability. The bonuses are always very strong irrespective of VC, few Civs have that. I don't see Gran Colombia getting a faster Space or Culture victory than any of those, neither Scythia. They are S tier for Dom and Religious VC, not so much for the others.

 

[Lily_Lancer]

That's how I play ALL civs..

but even then I strictly doubt that you get better results with norway than with Korea for Space Victories or Greece for Culture. if you want to prove me wrong, go ahead

Are you at war with everyone simultaneously and pillaging >5 tiles per turn? (which means you shall keep an eye on at least 15 tiles)

Do you intentionally pillage city states?

Have you ever tried to independenize your own cities in order to pillage them?

 

[Jewelrunna]

That's how I play ALL civs..

but even then I strictly doubt that you get better results with norway than with Korea for Space Victories or Greece for Culture. if you want to prove me wrong, go ahead



exactly. norway is a middling civ which is extremely strong at its one trick pony. they're super underrated, because most people think they're bad. even for a DomV, they're certainly not the strongest. less so for all other VCs.

I mostly agree that the Civs you name are strong, but how comes you don't mention Rome, Japan, China or Greece? These are imho S tier just for their intense adaptability. The bonuses are always very strong irrespective of VC, few Civs have that. I don't see Gran Colombia getting a faster Space or Culture victory than any of those, neither Scythia. They are S tier for Dom and Religious VC, not so much for the others.

Rome and Japan are A-Tier, China and Greece are B-Tier. I'm considering bumping Greece up to A-Tier after the Acropolis buff, but I haven't had the chance to touch them.

Some quick explanations are Rome is pretty much guaranteed a good start because of Trajan's Column and the Legion is very strong, but they lack any insane bonus that really lasts for them throughout the whole game. Very strong, but not absurdly so. In Japan's case, Meiji Restoration seems innocuous on the surface, but is secretly one of the best abilities in the game. Divine Wind is really useful as well, but the Samurai and Electronics Factory are just pretty good at best. Very adaptable and strong, but not obscenely so. A-Tier for both. Very strong, just not as good as the S-Tiers in my opinion

And with China and Greece, it's kind of the same reason. Both have one S-Tier worthy bonus (The First Emperor and Plato's Republic), but everything else just ranges from pretty good in a general sense to good in specific situations. Though again, for Greece I need to reexamine them post-buff.