What are everyone's thoughts on Game 4? This one seems just as unpredictable if not more at first glance.
There is a lot of good insights in this thread.
We have seen 3 games in a row where an AI left alone with a lot of room to expand tended to run away and win.
Frederick, Pacal, Augustus all expanded to the mid-game without getting DOW'd.
They were all also coastal-ish civs that avoided getting flattened like most of the civs that started in the middle of the map.
Game 1
Game 2
Game 3
Next, look at the preview of Game 4.
https://sullla.com/Civ4/civ4survivor6-4-preview.html
In the south are 3 low peace weight civs with
Alexander,
Stalin, and
Brennus.
In the north are 2 high peace weight civs with
Hammurabi and
Elizabeth, 1 a bit above average with
Charlemagne, and 1 low peace weight civ with
Catherine.
Brennus is the most interesting because he won't attack at Pleased and gets massive +diplo with anyone sharing his religion given enough time.
Brennus (due to -1 starting diplo with all, +2 warmonger respect, and +0 peace weight) will start out with a
First Impression of +2 to +4 with Alexander, -1 to +3 with Stalin, +0 to +4 with Catherine, and -5 to -1 with Charlemagne.
If Brennus feels like stretching out to the far northwest, his First Impression will be -7 to -3 with Hammurabi and -9 to -5 with Elizabeth depending on the rolls.
Brennus doesn't mind
border tensions/stolen land tiles too much, so he usually only gives -1 diplo to his border neighbors.
Charlemagne and Brennus are the only 2 civs that start with Mysticism, and they both won't attack at Pleased.
This will be significant with anyone who shares their religion for 50 turns that they should both found.
They should also expand a bit slow at the very start without farms, roads, and mines, but deity bonuses mean AI can improve tiles very fast.
Charlemagne should have the more dominant religion with easy natural spread to England and Catherine, while Brennus will struggle to expand his religion beyond Stalin due to map distance.
Charlie also has rivers, so he won't crash his economy like Brennus might.
Hopefully Brennus sticks to his small river and settles south towards the fish and fur and later silver to keep his economy up.
Alex is the only true mad dog in the game with a constant thirst for war.
Hammurabi has bronze in his capital and Bowman (+50% vs. melee), so no early pushover there for Alex.
TLDR;
Brennus and Charlemagne should have religious conflict.
Alex could clobber Stalin/Elizabeth/Hammurabi relatively early if he settles bronze or beelines Iron Working.
Both Russias are in position for a good backstab when their neighbors fight.
Elizabeth might get lucky and avoid a fight long enough to really tech ahead since Hammy shares her peace weight and won't DOW at Pleased, but with 4 low peace weight leaders on the map her luck will run out sooner or later.
I like the two Russias, but Catherine might get squeezed if Charlie sends his holy city east, and Stalin is still surrounded ultimately even with his great land of corn and gold.
**Edit**
If I had to pick someone to win, (zooming out and looking at the overall resource map), I'd say don't listen to me because I haven't won at picking a single time yet
I probably want Alex for domination.
Pigs, rice, plains hill capital with an Iron hill and +27
per turn production. (Heroic Epic with marble too much to ask?)
That's swords + horse archers + jumbos easily.
Just need him to run over Elizabeth or Stalin!
Fishing and rivers should keep his teching afloat at the start of the game.
Charlemagne will eventually share vassalage with Alex for +diplo hmm
So hard to bet against Cossacks.
Wasn't there a past game where 2 Russias conquered the world?
