The worst civs (this one will be full of arguing)

[Allemand]

I agree with God

Americans have the best traits for the larger maps. None of the UUs have a major impact on the game, they're just nice to have and give you a good feeling about your favorite civ.

The civs are remarkably balanced in traits and UUs combined. I wouldn't say any should be called the worst, although some are better on certain maps (large or small) and some would better fit a person's style than others.

As for that Impi, it beats the well regarded Jaguar Warrior in every aspect except price, and the price ain't bad. In the first era the Impi is a great defensive unit on larger maps because it can move fast to reinforce threatened cities, where a regular foot unit couldn't make it. Against restless (or raging) barbarians the Impi is great. For example, in my latest game a massive barbarian uprising spewed about 80 barbarian horsemen into my territory in one turn. About 40 of them attacked one frontier town in the next three turns. Another 16 attacked another town on the other side of my empire. In this kind of situation you want to move defensive units very fast, and the Impi would be my first choice until Knights come along.

 

[BiatchGuy]

sure, the Unique Units have an impact on the game..

those Immortals are enough deterrence for me to hold off going to war with Persia until I have knights.

 

[Sullla]

I must say that the English are definately the worse civ. Their civ traits are not particularly useful, and their UU is essentially worthless. That being said, no civilization is worthless in Civ3, and I have won games with almost every civ. The game I played with the English was, in fact, a lot of fun and I encourage players to try out all of the civs at one point in time, if only to avoid becoming dependent on certain civ traits like religious.

Sanaz stated above:

Industrious is useful for early development(France and America), but not as good as religious, militaristic, and scientific civs.

I have to heartily disagree with this viewpoint. Industrious is a VERY strong civ ability, almost unfairly strong, and just as good as the religious attribute. Faster workers mean:

1) You can get by with fewer workers, resulting in fewer population drops from producing workers, which = faster growth.

2) The faster workers put down irrigation/mines/roads at twice the speed, greatly increasing early food, shields, and commerce. This is an advantage that cannot be overstated in importance.

Overall, the industrious ability is far better than scientific or militaristic, which makes the Americans and French stronger than the English. The French do have a more workable UU too, so they are not really that bad at all.

 

[IronicWarrior19]

Englih iz the worzt. They suckz on all settingz.

 

[allhailIndia]

I tried playing a bit with every civ and found that America sucks!!


I like Indians, Persians and Greeks especially since I go for either scientific and religious traits and a string UU in the Middle Age.

Japs are also good

 

[Allemand]

BiatchGuy, the Immortals shouldn't deter you any more than the Swordsmen, which are just about as good as a deterrent if you don't have Knights.

A very powerful trait on larger maps is Expansionist. Scouts can find at least half a dozen Settlers as well as all the techs in the Ancient Era, giving the Expansionist civ a very strong start. The English are Expansionist, giving them a good start then the Commercial trait kicks in later to keep them going. Nice orange color, too. The English aren't that bad.

 

[God]

Industrious is a good trait on larger maps where resources are further apart.

Early on I am rushing my wokers over to link up some iron for swordsmen. It could take 20 turns without industrious. It really helps then. Later in the game Industrious wears down when you can work pretty fast with replaceable parts and democracy.

 

[Sixchan]

A very powerful trait on larger maps is Expansionist. Scouts can find at least half a dozen Settlers as well as all the techs in the Ancient Era, giving the Expansionist civ a very strong start. The English are Expansionist, giving them a good start then the Commercial trait kicks in later to keep them going. Nice orange color, too. The English aren't that bad.

And on a watery map, their UU isn't that bad. I didn't like the Orange, personally, and changed it so I could invade the Americans with Redcoat Riflemen!

 

[WarlordMatt]

America isn't very good, their UU is not even appropriate for U.S., I mean the F-15? It should be the Minuteman or something. But I have found out that America does well early in the game often; they usually have a lot of cities.

No offense, newfangle, but Babylon always seems to do the worst in my games. They usually have trouble building enough cities to keep up with other civs and even their Scientific attribute dosen't always keep them ahead in techs.

 

[Lt. 'Killer' M.]

The worst civ (unless i play them) is definately India. That Gandhi guy is soo agressive he always bites off more than he can chew - die, india, die!

 

[Paalikles]

the bottom line is - what kind of player are U?

US kind of kicks in late with the UU - but there shouldn't be any problem with a modern UU - if compeditors are aggressive enough, you will have yourself a good fight till the end.

In my games, the AI has loads of their ancients (UU's) even in the modern era - and they pack quite a punch sometimes too...kind of strange really

I have had good sucess with both Babylonians & Greeks - won every kind of victory, except diplomatic (which I actually was aiming for the whole time - DOH)

I suppose anyone could use any civ - the game is a challenge in itself (for me it is anyway, but I haven't played it much since I got it) - it's only a matter of adjusting the civ to the settings of the map.

I try to stay away from large maps - therefore I never go for expansionist civs
haven't tried many civs with the new patch though, so I m not sure if I am allowed an opinion...yet

I don't actually care much about strenghts & weaknesses of UU's - I got my elite cavalry creamed by a veteran warrior yesterday

Choose a civ according to your own preference, your game settings, and your victory conditions - there are no BAD civs...I think...well...errrh...just those pesky Zulus and their Impi's...arrrgh...they're all over...

 

[Ribannah]

Originally posted by newfangle
We all can argue until the doom of man about which civs are superior (Persia, Babylon, Greece for me, a passive science kinda guy). But what about theeeee WORST civs. For the sake of reducing flames against me, I won't comment about which ones are the worst, I'd rather someone else start off.

just kidding, I think Iroquios and Zulu are the worst, seeing as how they aren't even civilizations (no cities- not that they're savages). But I suppose my favorite civs would be considered the worst for an aggressive player.

*Start of flame*

Iroquois towns counted up to 4,000 citizens, comparable to European towns of the time. They were laid out with clever urban planning (good defensive location, double to quadruple palisade, grid placement of buildings).

*End of flame, starts flaming Firaxis *

While the Iroquois UU is historically inaccurate and the city and
leader lists are a mess,

**

they do pretty well in the game. I don't really like to play the Zulu, but the AI seems to do relatively fine with them.

 

[BiatchGuy]

Originally posted by WarlordMatt
America isn't very good, their UU is not even appropriate for U.S., I mean the F-15? It should be the Minuteman or something.

yeah, I was thinking that..
I haven't been the Americans yet but it seems that the Unique Unit comes a little too late in the game to do much good.. A Revolutionary-era UU would be cool. Didn't the revolutionaries invent guerilla warfare or something like that?

 

[SvenSlayer]

"Englih iz the worzt. They suckz on all settingz."

The English are certainly bad in the game, which is a pity, since they seemed to have conquered half the world in real life (maybe this is because ships weren't made important enough in the game).

BTW Has your "s" key stopped working, or are you from Latin America?

 

[chiefpaco]

The modern age is not that bad to have a GA. If the Americans are at war & trigger one, they will have extra production during the time when they're building the Space ship. Sounds good to me. I also use Jet Fighters for the occasional bombard, so I wouldn't say the F-15's bonus is useless.

Expansioninst & industrious are great qualities for the beginning, when it is hardest to keep up with the AI. I rarely have a quick & well-planned empire as I do early on with the Americans. A few scouts will likely find a couple techs & maybe a settler. The double-speed workers build roads to luxuries & resources quickly.

The English have much less help with the useless Commercial ability & a UU that is a bit worse. Their best point is their starting techs. They are closer than anyone to Map Making.