The Babylonians
- Thread starter Ision
- Start date
Doc Tsiolkovski
Deity
Zardnaar said:
Done.
And as you see, that is a pre-C3C review without real update.
And that again is the crux: Some Civs were widely percieved as very strong in pre-C3C days (Babylon, Egypt, Persia). However, they are far from that in C3C. Either the trait was toned down, or other Civs can do the job better.
Persia is still a good Civ due to the UU; but Egypt and Babylon are third tiers in my book. The ygained nothing in C3C except for the defensive bombard.
But, in C3C exactly those things the Babs suck at (fast exploration and contacts with moving contact trading to PP, Alphabet for Curraghs, corruption fighting with the new model) became the really crucial ones...
Still, the level matters. Up to maybe Emperor, you can keep up in research early without trading, without growing like mad, and without the commerce bonus from SEA and COM.
On the higher levels, this is futile. With such a Civ, your best bet is a minimum run on Writing...but you need Alpha for that. And no, Alpha isn't easy to come buy, since you need Alpha to make contacts(Curraghs!).
Maybe Babylon is really the only Civ that can be considered a 1st tier on the easy levels, a 2nd tier on the mid, and a third tier on the hard ones.
You mention triggering the GA early medieval - of course, that is the best time for a GA. But, wouldn't you agree that those Civs with a medieval UU can do that job better?
I am simply not convinced anything you list as strength of Babs couldn't be done substantially better with Sumeria or Celts or simply owning the ToA.
The core problem is:
Babylon is a fine Civ if you dictate the game. You can build lots of structures to secure your lead.
But Babylon is a horrible Civ if you need to catch up (and that is something you have to do already at DG right from the start). No trading opportunies. No killer UU. No Commerce in general. Slow expansion.
Zardnaar
Deity
I agree with what you're saying. However high difficulty settings are for the elite players and thats a whole different game scene. On Sid theres what maybe 3 1st tier civs (Dutch, Sumeris, Iroqous?). I would rate Babylon myself as a 1st tier civ up until Emperor level as I think their traits still offer a bit at this level. At the highest difficulty I would still rate them as 2nd tier but only because I think I could find 10 worse civs.
Ansar
Détente avec l'été
Doc Tsiolkovski said:You mention triggering the GA early medieval - of course, that is the best time for a GA. But, wouldn't you agree that those Civs with a medieval UU can do that job better
Like the Dutch, reasearch Feudalism and win a battle against AI and poof, Golden Age.
josephstalin
Kremlin Highlander
Well, played with Babs, I'm pretty peacful, but I can get away to Persians, Ottomans, Egyptian, Greek, Korean without problem. Strange...
Ansar
Détente avec l'été
Actually, I got hooked on Egyptians. 
Archbob
Ancient CFC Guardian
Babylon is really awesome. I don't have a problem with treasury actually because the cheap happiness buildings give me the option of putting science at very high while still maintaining a very high tax rate(Usually around 70/30). In late game with bargaining, I have science maxed at 100% and have positive 300 or so gold income. There is no better science civ in the game. Certainly top Tier all the way through Emperor. I'd place them high 2nd tier on difficulties above that because they don't have the commercial trait.
Jopedamus I
Immortality is reality
Sumeria is better in every way than Babylonia. Babylonians main problems: Slow expansion and lousy UU.. Yes, it might be good below emperor but so are all the other civs too... 
Archbob
Ancient CFC Guardian
The UU isn't a "domination" UU but its not lousy. 2/2 has a significant advantage over 2/1. Once you conquer a city with the bowmen, you don't have to build a spearmen to defend it. The bowmen can defend quite well in the ancient age. The unit is also clutch for keep chokepoints like mountains/hills/ etc. Its a pretty effective unit for sieging cities.
I'm playing this Civ on emperor right now and ancient age conquest is pretty easy.
I'm playing this Civ on emperor right now and ancient age conquest is pretty easy.
Jopedamus I
Immortality is reality
It IS a lousy UU. You don't need spearmen in this game. It also comes at wrong time.
Archbob
Ancient CFC Guardian
Yeah, the only trouble is the early GA it sets off, but otherwise I actually like this UU, I can use it for attacking and defending. It is much better than the 2/1 Archer.
Doc Tsiolkovski
Deity
Uh, not that I'd agree with anything else you wroteFallen Angel Lord said:
but that is blatantly wrong. Greece, Korea and especially Byzantium are way better for research. For several magnitudes.
Archbob
Ancient CFC Guardian
Early to mid game, Babylon easily out-researches any other civ. I have the vanilla Civ III, not C3C so Byzantium isn't an option nor korea. Seafaring is a dependant trait anyways, if your playing on pangea, its pretty useless.
Jopedamus I
Immortality is reality
FAL@ How can YOU put Babylon in any tier when you have just vanilla Civ III and have missed over 10 civs and new traits?! Yes, in vanilla Babs are great civ but not anymore.
Zardnaar
Deity
Doc Tsiolkovski said:Uh, not that I'd agree with anything else you wrote
Greece, Korea and especially Byzantium are way better for research. For several magnitudes.
Got to agree here.
