1. We have added a Gift Upgrades feature that allows you to gift an account upgrade to another member, just in time for the holiday season. You can see the gift option when going to the Account Upgrades screen, or on any user profile screen.
    Dismiss Notice

[GS] Summary of Elimination Threads - Ranking of Civilizations

Discussion in 'Civ6 - General Discussions' started by Krajzen, Oct 9, 2019.

  1. monstercat

    monstercat Warlord

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2019
    Messages:
    142
    What really annoys me is a few civs like the Maori, and the Aztecs were obscenely weighted down by having 3 very good unique components, and 1 that was terrible, but gave them almost 3-4 times as many points as the rest of their civ put together. I think if you were to only take the top 3 UCs in every civ, then the results would a bit more realistic:

    7 - Greece: Pericles (02,04,01)
    11 - Aztec (04,03,04)
    13 - Maori (01, 02,10)
    25 - Ottomans (11,06,08)
    25 - Russia (05,18,02)
    26 - Greece: Gorgo (02,23,01)
    29 - Rome (05,05,19)
    30 - Indonesia (17,07,06)
    32 - Australia (07,12,13)
    33 - Persia (13,13,07)
    35 - Macedon (14,06,15)
    39 - Hungary (15,07,17)
    40 - Sumer (25,03,12)
    42 - Mali (18,20,04)
    44 - Japan (06,10,28)
    46 - Inca (22,15,09)
    47 - England: Victoria (13,20,14)
    47 - England: Eleanor (13,20,14)
    49 - Zulu (11,14,25)
    51 - Arabia (19,16,16)
    51 - Sweden (20,09,22)
    54 - Germany (21,28,05)
    54 - Korea (29,22,03)
    56 - Kongo (03,26,27)
    56 - Phoenicia (21,27,08)
    57 - Norway (36,02,19)
    57 - India: Chandra (15,10,32)
    57 - Brazil (12,11,34)
    58 - Nubia (17,30,01)
    60 - China (01,35,24)
    61 - Cree (18,32,11)
    61 - Netherlands (10,23,28)
    62 - Poland (23,21,18)
    64 - Mongolia (09,26,29)
    65 - Spain (36,09,20)
    66 - Scythia (16,08,42)
    71 - Egypt (19,31,21)
    78 - Canada (25,24,29)
    78 - America (18,29,31)
    81 - India: Gandhi (39,10,32)
    81 - Scotland (08,41,32)
    91 - France: Medici (40,12,39)
    92 - Mapuche (33,36,23)
    99 - Khmer (40,41,18)
    106 - France: Eleanor (40,27,39)
    107 - Georgia (36,37,35)

    So some of the top tier civs really are top by a long way.
     
    Last edited: Oct 12, 2019
    Krajzen likes this.
  2. Mr. Shadows

    Mr. Shadows Nomad of the time streams

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2015
    Messages:
    599
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Incheon, R.O.K.
    Those elimination games are entertaining, and it's interesting to see the results aggregated. To me this only confirms that those games are good for gauging the popularity of the bonuses rather than their strength. The compilation is less informative because you can't read the reasoning behind the votes and evaluate them for yourself. Lol @ Scythia buried down at the bottom of the list.
     
  3. Ownsya

    Ownsya Warlord

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2018
    Messages:
    215
    Gender:
    Male
    As inconclusive and misleading as these aggregated lists, I wonder if there is any kind of accurate generality that can be made from these results at all, even if it only applies to a subsection of the leaders. For example:
    1 - Let's take the top 10 who scored highly in all the categories, would it be accurate to say that with those civs you should have an easy time winning any type of victory regardless of the strategy you use? Are they good all-rounders?
    2 - Similarly for the bottom 10 or so, are they so poor in so many aspects that no matter what you try to do with them, there is another civ that can do it better?
    3 - For the civs in the middle, depending on the victory condition you pursue they can be better than the top ranked civs but for another strategy that can be much lower in the list?

    Just spitballing here to see if any types of conclusions can be drawn. It would be nice if something actually meaningful can come from this ranking game that was done quite systematically even if in a flawed way. Perhaps there's something in the collective conscious here?
     
  4. bengalryan9

    bengalryan9 Warlord

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2018
    Messages:
    243
    Gender:
    Male
    I think that's what the next round of "new" elimination threads is out to examine, starting with the current diplomatic victory thread.

    To address your points, though, I'd say no. The Khmer are very good at a culture victory (through relics), and Scotland is very good at science. Korea, meanwhile, may be much higher on the list... but if you're playing them you're going for science regardless.
     
    Ownsya likes this.
  5. Mr. Shadows

    Mr. Shadows Nomad of the time streams

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2015
    Messages:
    599
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Incheon, R.O.K.
    The Ottoman clock in at #4 even though all of their bonuses are geared towards war. Meanwhile Scythia's decisively stronger war-mongering and religious advantages have them 11th from the bottom. I don't really want to argue the fine points of specific Civs in this thread but that alone tells me there's no rhyme or reason to this.
     
  6. Disgustipated

    Disgustipated Deity

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2006
    Messages:
    11,036
    Location:
    Las Vegas
    I don't plan on participating in that thread since so few civs are well suited for diplomatic victory. It seems kind of silly to me. I find the focus too narrow.

    I think this just shows bias against the religion game, myself included since I don't normally go for that (just finished a Russia game but I went culture). With a UI geared for faith, and a uu that just isn't that great, it's hard to rank them really high. It's really those double light cavalry that shine, and I don't even know how that works with GS rules (still on my to do list for my HOF) and horse resources. They are a civ split between those two strengths, and not that great at either.
     
    Krajzen likes this.
  7. Aurelesk

    Aurelesk Warlord

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2017
    Messages:
    133
    Gender:
    Male
    Most civilizations do not rely on their unique units at all. Basicly, only the ancient and classical do count now, and they have few exceptions:
    • Jong and Minas Gereas: you unlock them with civics one era earlier, and can be rushed, allowing to have a large window of effectiveness.
    • Conquistador and Janissary: for their uniqueness (stack CS & religion, half priced).
    Basicly, except for the top5, the value of most unique units are insignificant. You could create a mod in which a civilization have all the unique units except the top5: Eagle Warrior and Toa/Legion, War-Cart, Pitati and Hetairoi; and the civilization will not really perform really better (I exaggerate a little, but you understand the point).

    It is less true for UI, UA, and LA, but kind of work the same. Ranking from 1 to 48 do not have much sense, as UU from 30 to 48 are almost not useful. We could basicly rate with stars or tiers. For example:

    ☆☆☆☆✪ (-1/5 or Z tier) : Detrimental. Not having the ability or having the regular unit should be better.
    ☆☆☆☆☆ (0/5 or F tier) : Useless. Can be skipped and suffer no consequences. At least give some Era Score.
    ★☆☆☆☆ (1/5 or E tier) : Bad or highly situational. Not really worth it most of the times.
    ★★☆☆☆ (2/5 or D tier) : Mediocre or situational. Still great to have it neitherless.
    ★★★☆☆ (3/5 or C tier) : Nice. Not oustanding, but add a significant boost in most games.
    ★★★★☆ (4/5 or B tier) : Good. Going for it is always a good idea.
    ★★★★★ (5/5 or A tier) : Powerful. Ignoring this trait from the civilization harm you.
    ⍟★★★★ (6/5 or S tier) : Overpowered. In a way, you feel like cheating the game.

    If the UU, UI, UA, or LA are really overpowered, you can add more ⍟ like ⍟⍟★★★ (7/5 or S+ tier) or ⍟⍟⍟★★ (8/5 or S++ tier). Same thing if really detrimental: ☆☆☆✪✪ (-2/5 or Z- tier) or ☆☆✪✪✪ (-3/5 or Z-- tier).


    I want to try it with France:

    Spoiler :
    Unique Unit: Garde Impériale (☆☆☆☆☆) - Being out of the Melee line mean you need to hard-produce them. The continental bonus strength is weaker when the map is bigger, meaning it's mainly a homeland defensive trait, but still allow to conquer cities on the same continent. The General point on kill is rather gadget: having many General don't really have a use, and most of them don't really have outstanding bonuses. Furthermore, it have a really short window of usage and can't be upgraded into Infantry (have to wait to Mechanized).

    Unique Infrastructure: Château (★☆☆☆☆) - They are highly situational. They come too late to be a way to produce Culture as a way to climb the civic tree, so it is just a way to milk more Tourism by building wonder, but need you to sacrifice valuable rivers tiles. Some Château can be surrounded by many wonders and yield a lot of Culture, but you rather want to put a Theatre Square than a Château.

    Unique Ability: Grand Tour (★☆☆☆☆) - +20% Production toward some Wonder is nothing to laugh at, but saving a couple of turns is rather meaningless. Basicly, it allows to have 6 wonders when others civilizations have 5. Doubling the Tourism from wonders is rather insignificant: they produce very few Tourism by themselves. Building all the wonders are more harmful than beneficial, because all the Production you put in them could go for Theatre Square or military units, allowing to get Tourism from Great Works or by exploiting stolen wonders.

    Leader Ability: Catherine's Flying Squadron (★★★★★) - Spies are valuable. They are an incredible catch-up mechanic and a way to harm a runaway civilization, something that France need as they do not have early game bonuses (industrial unit, medieval~industrial ability, renaissance infrastructure). Catherine allow to get 1 more than anyone else, and start with a free Promotion, so less likely to get killed. Furthermore, the extra diplomatic level allow to get a +3 CS, something helpful for conquest or defense.

    Leader Ability: Court of Love (★★☆☆☆) - A weak but fun ability that grows stronger when the game lasts. The power of this ability come mainly from cities fliping directly toward your civilization rather that Great Works having Loyalty pressure. You need to go all out on Theatre Square, Pingoracle, and slots-wonders to make the Loyalty pressure work in the early game, putting you at risk to being conquered or restraining you too much from expanding. So it is better to play this ability passively: waiting an neighboring civilization to go on a Dark Age, send the Spies and move the Great Works on the border or/(and?)... go to war, starve the cities and pillage out all the EC/WP and the luxuries, and wait the city to flip to you with conquering or suffer diplomatic penalities.

    Overall: France is a weak civilization with, somehow, fun mechanics with their leaders. Catherine allows to use and abuse more Spies while worrying less about them being killed while Eleonor allows to use and abuse the Loyalty mechanic and annex your neighbor without conquering it.
    Saddly, the Château have very few use, except as Tourism generator in the late game with Flight, while France's ability is rather weak mostly because few wonders are really worth the struggle (in the time period the ability production works) and because the tourism do not have a use outside of the cultural victory. Even if the Garde Impériale isn't weak, being out of the Melee upgrade line is harmful, have a really short window and can't upgrade into a Infantry make that unit really hard to use.

    Catherine's France: 7/20 - An odd mix between Tourism with minor military bonuses. This is a rather a mediocre civilization but give some opportunities in conquest. You have to use the spies to make this civilization works.
    Eleonor's France: 4/20 - Pretty bad overall, with a high focus on Great Works as a weapon. It allows to have a lot of fun on lower difficulty with the AI willingly not willing to do something against you.


    The main problems: everybody will want to do it, nobody will agree on the same thing (because everybody experience the game differently), and it is a less convenient than the elimination thread.
     
    Last edited: Oct 12, 2019
  8. bengalryan9

    bengalryan9 Warlord

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2018
    Messages:
    243
    Gender:
    Male
    It's certainly not the one I would have chosen, but it is what it is.

    At the very least I expect it will be morbidly entertaining, because you just know we're going to end up with a handful of total headscratchers in the results.
     
  9. Mr. Shadows

    Mr. Shadows Nomad of the time streams

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2015
    Messages:
    599
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Incheon, R.O.K.
    Every military and religious unit Scythia makes heals 25 when they defeat another unit, and gets a bonus against damaged units. That makes them top tier for war mongering even without their (very powerful) 2-1 cavalry bonus. Their UU is mostly for era score. They might just be the best war mongers in the game.
     
  10. Disgustipated

    Disgustipated Deity

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2006
    Messages:
    11,036
    Location:
    Las Vegas
    Playing Korea right now, first time since R&F, and yes they are as broken as they've always been. Didn't understand the downranking of Seowon. It's still ridiculously powerful. I'm playing one difficulty level higher than I normally do, and it's still like I'm in easy mode. It's almost like this civ is cheating, that's how powerful just that one district is. And yeah, the aggregate rankings put them in the middle of the pack when they belong in the top 5.
     
  11. bengalryan9

    bengalryan9 Warlord

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2018
    Messages:
    243
    Gender:
    Male
    One of the things that kind of bugs me
    It finished top 3... that's even better than last time (despite campus adjacency being easier to get now).

    It's good, but I feel comfortable saying that the Acropolis and Lavra are both better than it.
     
    Last edited: Oct 13, 2019
  12. Mr. Shadows

    Mr. Shadows Nomad of the time streams

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2015
    Messages:
    599
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Incheon, R.O.K.
    Part of the problem is that those threads ask us to consider each bonus in a vacuum, when in fact it's the way they synergize with each other that makes them powerful. Technically we're not supposed to consider that Monte can use the builders his Eagle Warriors capture to rush districts, but that's what makes him so strong. Tomyris doesn't just get 2 horses for the price of one, they both heal after victories and get a bonus against damaged units. Individually none of Alexander's bonuses are over-whelming but when you put them together you have a war-monger that can spend all his hammers on an early Great General and troops because he doesn't need to build districts. Trajan's free monuments work with free roads and trading posts to encourage you to build a lot of cities, and also give you dibs on the Coliseum (which can be chopped in by legions) so you can further leverage them. Discussing each bonus one at a time doesn't tell us how strong they really are.
     
    Last edited: Oct 14, 2019
  13. God of Kings

    God of Kings Ruler of all heads of state

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2012
    Messages:
    5,207
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Toronto, Ontario, Canada
    Don't forget the "tall poppy syndrome" (taking down strong civs just for being strong) and the "grudge effect" (continuously taking down a single civ for personal reasons and not gameplay reasons).
     
    Mr. Shadows likes this.
  14. Lily_Lancer

    Lily_Lancer Emperor

    Joined:
    May 25, 2017
    Messages:
    1,730
    Location:
    Berkeley,CA

    The scoring system is good. However the example is not good. Since infantry needs oil , I'd like to give Garde Impériale a 2 star instead of 0. Catherine's France is, actually not a bad civ. At least above average.

    Also notice that those points do not simply sum up, but having a great one is better than having lots of 1 or 2 star ones.

    If you really need to sum, a 5-star shall be at different magnitude in number than a 4-star, so as a 4 vs. 3, or sth. On each level the numbers shall double if you need to sum.


    For France like to score like: (if we really wish to sum up all uniques instead of using a better way)
    Garde Impériale: 9
    Château : 3
    Grand Tour:4
    Catherine's Flying Squadron:55
    Court of Love:10

    So Catherine's France: 72/100 Eleanor's: 27/100
     
    Last edited: Oct 20, 2019
  15. Tabarnak

    Tabarnak Pô Chi Min

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2010
    Messages:
    5,884
    Location:
    Québec
    For multiplayer France is a great civ. Early spying and war bonuses make this civ a great opponent in human hands.
     
  16. God of Kings

    God of Kings Ruler of all heads of state

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2012
    Messages:
    5,207
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Toronto, Ontario, Canada
    How about squaring or cubing the star ranks?
     
  17. Aurelesk

    Aurelesk Warlord

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2017
    Messages:
    133
    Gender:
    Male
    I should rename to make more clear how each ranking means. But this system is just a draft. If it have potential but lack something, do not hesitate to improve it !
    Garde Impériale and the Infantry have roughly the same Combat Strength. You could argue that the Garde Impériale is a Niter Infantry with a 20% discount that can earn some General point, and I roughly agree. But saying Garde Impériale is good because the Infantry is bad, it is like saying the Maryannu Archer was bad because it replaced the Heavy Chariot.
    All unique units that are not replacement should entire the unit line upgrade. That will make them way better. For me, the Garde Impériale is too situational. That is why it have 0★ : it do not matter. It isn't bad, it just doesn't have a use. I will suffer no consequences to skip it and will not make me win the game faster.

    You have to be not afraid of giving no stars. No stars just mean it doesn't have a use, not meaning it is bad.

    Off-topic: The Infantry isn't a well thought unit. It requires Oil, but Oil is a bottom technology and the Infantry is a middle technology. You either came at Replaceable Parts and I suggest to push toward Chemistry and go for AT-Crew for an Oil-less and cheaper units with the same Combat Strength, you either came to Refining and I suggest you to push toward Combustion and go for Tanks, a +10 CS faster unit for just 10% more expansive, as going for Replaceable Parts and Refining is going to take longer that push to Chemistry or Combustion.

    The same thing happens to the Battleship: it needs Refining (a bottom technology) but Coal and all prior naval units are top technologies. The Battleship isn't bad, just out of reach. Or Biplan (top tech): you will not have the needed Oil (bottom tech). Or Helicopter (bottom tech): you will not have the needed Aluminium (top tech), but kind of a bad example because Helicopter is the latest unit.

    All units line should require at most 2 strategic ressources. For example, Heavy Cavalry need Iron and Oil, and Light Cavalry need Horses and Aluminium. The melee line should only go for Iron and Niter, with Infantry needing Niter and Mechanized Infantry needing Iron.


    Saying "above average" means that, out of the 42~45 civilizations, at least 20~22 of them are worst than Catherine's France. I want to know what are those 20~22 civilizations.
    The main benefit of Catherine is roughly: +3 CS and a more reliable Spy game. It's powerful, but all other abilities aren't.

    In my head, 10★ out of 20 is average. It means half of them will be below, and half of them will be above. Having 7★ out of 20 is below average. Useable but somewhat weak. If all civilizations are over 10★, then we do not have an answer at the question: ranking the civilization.

    Putting a 72/100 for Catherine's France is, for me, equivalent to say that Catherine's France rank is between the 10th and 15th for the best civilizations in the game.

    I wanted to create a ponderation, by diminuing the value of UU and UI, while increase the value of UA and LA. Except early UU are gamechanging meanwhile the districts is what make some civilizations work. So I wanted to create some exception: having a powerful UU only help for domination? Well, no: having more cities allow to get technologies and civics faster, so winning others victories faster. In other hands, some civilization have weak UA / LA but are great because of their UU or UI.
    I end up to not put a ponderation and considere each bonus equal, allowing to go over 5/5 if the bonus is too powerful (Eagle Warrior, healing on kills, free wild card...).

    I do not want to create a system when you know the final result and just retweek the value for each abilities to match the final result. On the contrary: you should be able to rank each ability individualy and then manage to see the final result as close as the overall strength of the civilization.
    Maybe I should add some new ranking: Synergy. For example, the Aztecs would have a high Synergy ranking with Builders going for districts and luxuries, and Eagle Warrior going even stronger with Combat Strength per luxuries.

    @Lily_Lancer (answer for below): I do not know why you think I disagree with you on that. I agree! Catherine's abiltiy is powerful! As a way to train the spies, I do the +2 level mission then steal gold / reduce loyalty as they are the safesr. Catherine's spies are more reliable because they start with a promotion, allowing to have +1 level & further (depending of the promotion). That way, Catherine can get a spy to level 3 and get +2 diplomatic visibility, useful for conquest. But I am not a great conqueror, so I use her spies more like a catchup mechanic, as I will have an overall weaker start. I agree that conquering neighboor is really powerful way to win every victories and +9CS is nothing to laugh at. But, you know, I am diplomatic and nice player (or more likely: lazy).
    But I probably misjudged how powerful Catherine's abilty was. Maybe it's overpowerful and should have 1 or 2⍟.
     
    Last edited: Oct 20, 2019
  18. Lily_Lancer

    Lily_Lancer Emperor

    Joined:
    May 25, 2017
    Messages:
    1,730
    Location:
    Berkeley,CA
    Nope. Her Spies have high initial levels. You know, Spies are mainly used for "Listening post" for +3 CS, and it is really risky trying to level them up, they're also busy on "listening post" so there's no time for them to level up. So they tend to maintain level 1 and their "Listening post“ provides +3 throughout the game.

    However, as Catherine her spies have higher level and can gain +6 during "Listening post", this sums up Catherine's initial +3 to be +9 if the enemy doesn't spy on you. Even if he does spy on you with "Listening Post" you still gain +6.

    +9 Combat Strength is really powerful. And Catherine can achieve that after researching castles and finding one of your target's cities.
     

Share This Page