TIP's for choosing a good dependable leader

[King Eli II]

First of all i tried many different civ leaders and all went down the drain so finally i read my manual a lil more and i found that montezuma is aggressive and spiritual which means no anarchy which is freaking awesome because in the middle of a game it really messes with you and he gets faster building rates on temples and barracks so go aahead and try it its cool.

 

[scienide09]

As you play more, you'll find that different leader traits can be exploited in different situations. Financial is great for large civs or coastal maps, aggressive for warmongering, industrial for builders, etc.
But you're right, aggressive and spiritual can be a powerful combo, and fun to play.

 

[DangerousMonkey]

Here's my all-inclusive guide for picking a good Civ leader. First, does he have the Financial trait? If so, it's probably a good civ. Second, does he have a decent Ancient or Classical age UU? If so, it's probably a good civ. Does he have both the Financial trait and a good Ancient or Classical UU? If so, it's definately a good civ.

Obey these rulse and you will never go wrong.

 

[Toshiro126]

The best thing about playing Monetzuma is you don't have to deal with him as an AI opponent. He's a major pain in the butt!

 

[TCGTRF]

Here's my all-inclusive guide for picking a good Civ leader. First, does he have the Financial trait? If so, it's probably a good civ. Second, does he have a decent Ancient or Classical age UU? If so, it's probably a good civ. Does he have both the Financial trait and a good Ancient or Classical UU? If so, it's definately a good civ.

Obey these rulse and you will never go wrong.

Hmmm. Tokugawa is an awfully good leader to take and he doesn't fall into either of your criteria.

The thing about the Financial trait, especially coupled with the Organized one, is that it allows a strategy very similar to the ICS used in Civ 3 (the Catherine Cottage Spam). It is not therefore surprising that it would seem pretty easy to folks who have come from that game.

All of the traits available in the game have extreme advantages that become more and more obvious as you go up in difficulty level.

Tom

 

[rickmc]

toku is very good but after using him for a couple of games I am thinking that romans are better.
toku requires 1 extra tech to get starting chopping
toku requires 3-4 extra techs to get to UU. By that time you can be facing longbowman instead of archers as well as more and more axeman.
beelining for maceman hurts your tech tree more than beelining for praetorians.
romans enable you to knock out 1-2 civs before you would even get your first UU with toku.

 

[bahman]

J. Washington is defenetly the best choice. For two stron reasons. That one extra commerce plust less upkeep accomolate during the game and give you a big advantage after mid game or even in starting depending on the situation. The late game just is so strightforward. DOn't worry about wonders, if you have stone and marble close, you can get the most casue you discove the related tech first. You also have uphand in units so specific units do not count etall. It is just so easy to win a game if you are a patient guy.

 

[Elrohir]

Guys, there is no "best choice". They are all different, suited to different situations and playing styles. I think any s earch for the "best leader" is going to fail, what the best choice is for you may not be for me, and vice versa. It is really very dependant on how you play.

 

[chewbaccad]

Guys, there is no "best choice". They are all different, suited to different situations and playing styles. I think any s earch for the "best leader" is going to fail, what the best choice is for you may not be for me, and vice versa. It is really very dependant on how you play.

Exactly. I pick the same leader every time I play... his name is "Random"

 

[EverNoob]

toku is very good but after using him for a couple of games I am thinking that romans are better.
toku requires 1 extra tech to get starting chopping
toku requires 3-4 extra techs to get to UU. By that time you can be facing longbowman instead of archers as well as more and more axeman.
beelining for maceman hurts your tech tree more than beelining for praetorians.
romans enable you to knock out 1-2 civs before you would even get your first UU with toku.

While your facts are true, you are using the same strategy on 2 diff civs that require slightly diff strategies.

Toku starts with pottery open to research, and can build roads already. You get your "lost" turns (6-7 turns?) back from earlier pop rushing. Nobody ever said you should beeline to the samurai. Also because Toku is Aggressive, new units built with barracks can start with nifty promotions like medic or shock.

I think most civs are good, you just have to find out how to play them and what game settings (map type/start era/etc...) they are good on.

 

[Lord Chambers]

This thread should be in the articles forum.

 

[King Eli II]

i dont think so because it is tips for choosing a good dependable leader

 

[Muz]

I'd like to think that Sid is above allowing any leader to be the best. IMHO:
Industrious - A tiny bit better at building wonders
Aggressive - Good for wars with people who focus on horses, guns, as it gives the fortification skill 1 promotion early
Spiritual - Nice as it saves me a years of anarchy, especially since changing government types is a lot more common in Civ4
Philosophical - 100% more GPps are nice
Organization - IMHO, almost useless as civics are cheap
Financial - Hmm.. dunno, can't see the effects

 

[Roxtar]

My highest priority is Spiritual. Not only do I have no anarchy, but I can change my state rel AND my civics in the same turn. With non-Spi civs you have to do one, wait for the anarchy to end, & THEN do the other.

Which other trait I want depends on what vic I aim for. If I want Culture I choose Ind (Gandhi). If I want Conquest I choose Agg (Monty). For all else I choose Phi (Saladin).

 

[DangerousMonkey]

Hmmm. Tokugawa is an awfully good leader to take and he doesn't fall into either of your criteria.

The thing about the Financial trait, especially coupled with the Organized one, is that it allows a strategy very similar to the ICS used in Civ 3 (the Catherine Cottage Spam). It is not therefore surprising that it would seem pretty easy to folks who have come from that game.

All of the traits available in the game have extreme advantages that become more and more obvious as you go up in difficulty level.

Tom

Sorry man, I hate to break it to you, but Tokugawa is actually pretty bad. The Organized trait is a joke, his starting techs are lackluster, and his UU is mediocre at best. His only saving grace is the Agressive trait, which is fairly good. You can do way better.

Also, bahman, Washington isn't bad, because he's financial, but he isn't that good. The American UU is embarassing, and though his traits arn't horrible, you can do much better.

The sad fact of the matter is that on a standard game with standard settings some civs are just plain better than others. People may tell you that "every Civ is best in it's own way," and maybe that's true in some game designer's fantasy world, but it just ain't reality. Some Civs are horrible and some are good. Of cource, of the good Civs some are better in this situation or that situation, but the fact remains that some Civs will always be worse than some other Civs in all conditions.

 

[Sahkuhnder]

Zhahz made a handy leader picker helper here.

 

[katank]

Power of various traits

Aggressive - Free combat promo allows immediate access of things like medic and cover promo, add in 1/2 price barracks allows for wicked early rush.

Financial - You are a teching machine. Build a cottage on a river and you instantly have a 3 commerce tile. All coastal tiles are 2 food 3 commerce (self sustainable science). Cheaper banks aren't as useful but financial is huge esp. on maps with lots of water.

Spiritual - Saves turns on anarchy. Allows MM of civics to extreme degree. Also allows religion swaps to help diplomatically with little penalty. 1/2 price temples also help solve early on happiness problems

Industrious - 1/2 price forges are insane for production. You can easily outproduce the AI early on and have a huge advantage militarily. Help in grabbing early wonders doesn't hurt either. Intentionally losing out on useless wonders for huge gold refunds works well too.

Expansive - Cheap granaries are good for whipping and cheap harbors gets extra trade in. On higher difficulty levels, the health bonus really shines as you can afford to cut more forests. Everyone knows the power of the chop rush.

Philosophical - Great GP production and cheap universities can help with teching.

Creative - Next to aggressive, probably the best warmongering trait. Free 2 culture means you don't need to research mysticism and get obelisks/stonehenge. This makes the rush a little faster and helps conquered lands assimilate faster. Cheap theaters/colliseums are also powerful border pushers and make bumping up the culture slider to counter war weariness more effective.

Organized - Great on higher difficulty levels and good for large empires. Civic costs get pretty high with lots of land. Cheap courthouses also help you get back into the black. Allows you to run possibly prohibitively expensive (on higher difficulty levels) but powerful civics like vassalage and organized religion.

As for Tokugawa, I really like his trait combo. He's aggressive and hence has a good axe/sword rush. Beeline for bronze/iron and then research pottery/writing/code of laws. With cheap courthouses and good FP placement, you will have consolidated enough to get to civil service/machinery. Your experienced axes/swords turn into insane samurai which can trash longbows with a little help from cats. Alphabet along the way allows for tech extortion. By the time your samurai fueled expansion is over, you should have by far the biggest empire and crush all with the weight of your demographics.

 

[Koffee510]

Well, for me, expansive is a MUST for any civ. if you don't have expansive, you'll be 2 health short compared to the guy that does, and he'll be throwing out graneries to make people to fill up those health spaces. then he'll have insane production+ability to make more cities.

Aggressive is good for me too, being that pound-for-pound, your units willl 80% of the time beat some other unit exactly the same as yours, only you'll have combat I. That's why i hate fighting these people, because i usually opt for Bismark or Victoria (people who can expand and hurl out units), and it gets annoying that these aggressive people are hanging on. The only way i know how to beat them is making more units then they can