Two questions

[superunknown85]

Hi, I'm pretty new to Civ4 but I've been playing Civ2 pretty much since it came out (never liked Civ3), so I'm not new to the series.

Anyway, I was wondering about two things: first, does the leader you choose to play as make a huge difference? Are certain civilizations better at certain things than others, like war, culture, science, etc?

Secondly, I just finished an Epic game on a huge map playing as Frederick of the Germans on Warlord difficulty. I did pretty well, or so I thought. I was the greatest nation for most of the game, until Washington overtook me near the end and got a Space Race victory.

Still, I was a close second best and my civilization was rich, powerful, advanced, and cultured...and yet, the game still told me I had the leadership qualities of Dan freakin Quayle. What's up with that?

 

[AnitaGaribaldi]

Welcome to CFC!

You were Dan Quayle. You wasn't that well by your post. If you want to be Augustus Ceaser, you need to finish the game earlier. The AI launched at Warlord, I guess it was after 1900 AD. I think it depends on your score. The last game I finished I got a Augustus Ceaser, finish date 1560 AD, level Chieftain. It was a HoF (Hall of Fame) game, cultural victory, normal speed. I was giving myself a break from Monarch, the level I usually play. Read the articles from the War Academy. This site made me pass throught Noble and Prince really fast, but I did read a lot and followed the advices.

 

[Sisiutil]

Hi, I'm pretty new to Civ4 but I've been playing Civ2 pretty much since it came out (never liked Civ3), so I'm not new to the series.

Anyway, I was wondering about two things: first, does the leader you choose to play as make a huge difference? Are certain civilizations better at certain things than others, like war, culture, science, etc?

Definitely! I've based a whole series of posted games on that very idea, and a lengthy strategy article too. (Links in my sig.)

For example, financial leaders are generally better at technology research. Aggressive leaders are, as you might expect, better for warfare. You might think Cultural leaders would be better for a cultural victory--but not necessarily. Also, each civ has a unique building and a unique unit that you can leverage. Generally, though, yes, you definitely want to base your strategy, tactics, and the victory condition you'll pursue on the leader you choose.

Secondly, I just finished an Epic game on a huge map playing as Frederick of the Germans on Warlord difficulty. I did pretty well, or so I thought. I was the greatest nation for most of the game, until Washington overtook me near the end and got a Space Race victory.

Still, I was a close second best and my civilization was rich, powerful, advanced, and cultured...and yet, the game still told me I had the leadership qualities of Dan freakin Quayle. What's up with that?

You mentioned that you came from many years of playing Civ II (me too!). One thing I had to immediately get used to in Civ IV is that you can no longer milk the score the way you did in Civ II--that is, by conquering the whole world save for 1 city, playing through to 2050 with your spaceship timed to arrive that exact same year while building all the wonders and maxing out your population. Instead, Civ IV gives higher scores for finishing early. Which means you have to focus on one victory condition rather than trying to achieve all of them.

 

[axident]

Hi, I'm pretty new to Civ4 but I've been playing Civ2 pretty much since it came out (never liked Civ3), so I'm not new to the series.

Anyway, I was wondering about two things: first, does the leader you choose to play as make a huge difference? Are certain civilizations better at certain things than others, like war, culture, science, etc?

Secondly, I just finished an Epic game on a huge map playing as Frederick of the Germans on Warlord difficulty. I did pretty well, or so I thought. I was the greatest nation for most of the game, until Washington overtook me near the end and got a Space Race victory.

Still, I was a close second best and my civilization was rich, powerful, advanced, and cultured...and yet, the game still told me I had the leadership qualities of Dan freakin Quayle. What's up with that?

Welcome to CFC! I played Civ 1 and 2 a lot back in the day but Civ 4 was a rude shock in that maintenance penalties drove my economy through the floor. My first game was on Noble and I managed to win via conquest, but that was in large part due to my having read some key Civ 4 threads on here even before I purchased the game! I semi-isolated start on a small continent where I killed my neighbor quickly and then used my resources for teching, since I had no enemies to worry about other than barbs. I was also shocked to see that barbs could found cities.

Maybe Sisiutil is just humble but I'd recommend taking a look at those threads that are listed at the bottom of Sis's signature block (the so-called All Leaders Challenge). The threads are meant to discuss games that highlight the strengths/weaknesses of each particular leader. The marketplace of ideas in the form of various posters arguing over what the next move(s) ought to be = priceless. Also check the war academy, etc.

 

[superunknown85]

Thanks for the help.

So, if I wanted to be the most culturally and technologically advanced civilization, and the best-liked, what leaders should I play as? Frederick, Louis?

And what about militarily/technologically? Cyrus, Tokugawa and Roosevelt?

 

[axident]

Thanks for the help.

So, if I wanted to be the most culturally and technologically advanced civilization, and the best-liked, what leaders should I play as? Frederick, Louis?

And what about militarily/technologically? Cyrus, Tokugawa and Roosevelt?

Don't adopt a religion until the dust settles and you can side with the majority faction, if you are looking to be popular. Or alternatively, found a religion and spread it like crazy. Spread a shrine while you're at it. The differences in leaders are no so huge as to make or break a game, but they can make it easier to pursue specific strategies (e.g., Romans = early conquest/domination, financial civs for teching, any civ with Aggressive for early warmongering with non-Praet units). Also mil and tech are 2 different things; don't lump them together. Popularity has nothing to do with your traits but how you behave diplomatically. And all civs can get cultural victories, the cultural trait is nice but DEFINITELY not necessary.

 

[Sisiutil]

Thanks for the help.

So, if I wanted to be the most culturally and technologically advanced civilization, and the best-liked, what leaders should I play as? Frederick, Louis?

And what about militarily/technologically? Cyrus, Tokugawa and Roosevelt?

The most technologically advanced leaders will typically be those with the Financial trait.

The most militarily advanced leaders will usually be those with the Aggressive trait.

Going by that logic, Ragnar oughtta kick some serious tail.

However, other factors come into play. It's my opinion that, when used properly, Augustus Caesar is by far the most potent leader in the game. I find that when I play as Augustus it feels like I've dropped a level in difficulty. Yet his traits--Creative and Organized--don't really seem all that powerful. Rome's real power, though, comes from their UU, those awesome Praetorians (which really should be called Legions, but whatever).

Here's how all of Augustus' characteristics combine. He starts with Mining, which gives him a leg up on bee-lining towards Iron Working and enabling his UU. (I usually research BW -> The Wheel -> Iron Working when playing as Rome. I'll found my 2nd city to claim copper and build Axes for initial defense from barbs.) The Creative trait almost guarantees that you'll have iron within your quickly-expanded borders, or will be able to claim it quickly and without wasting hammers on things like Stonehenge and monuments; you can build Workers and Barracks instead. With a handful of Praets on hand, you're ready to head out and rush your first victim; cultural defenses will be low enough and the Praets powerful enough that Catapults won't be needed until later. Now you need Code of Laws, which green-lights those cheap Courthouses from Organized. Cities cost maintenance, but courthouses (and the Forbidden Palace) make the maintenance costs cheaper, allowing Augustus to afford his early empire.

Short version: don't just base your impression of a leader and resultant strategy on the traits, as important as they are. The other characteristics (UU, UB, starting techs) also come into play, along with things specific to each game such as the map, location of resources, and opponents.

 

[superunknown85]

So would choosing either Washington (Financial, Organized) or Huang (Financial, Industrious) be good choices for having a culturally and technologically advanced Civilization?

Also, what role does the "favorite civic" play in the game? On this site it lists the favorite civic for each leader; will I get penalized for, say, playing as Huang and choosing Universal Suffrage over Police State?

 

[axident]

So would choosing either Washington (Financial, Organized) or Huang (Financial, Industrious) be good choices for having a culturally and technologically advanced Civilization?

Also, what role does the "favorite civic" play in the game? On this site it lists the favorite civic for each leader; will I get penalized for, say, playing as Huang and choosing Universal Suffrage over Police State?

The combination of traits and UB and UU is important, not just the traits. I agree that Octavian is the strongest early rushing leader. I don't start with a Praet rush, just an axe rush, but my 2nd offensive stack is made up of those axes and some newly-minted Praets. The veteran axes are nice to deter enemy axes from seriously mauling your Praets, as Praets would still win but not by much. Cultural means not having to pause to build libraries or monuments or Stonehenge, and Organized helps you keep your empire's maintenance under control with lower civic cost and cheaper courthouses.

Culture has nothing to do with traits. Culture is primarily religion based with some uni/libraries/etc. thrown in, that +2 creative bonus isn't enough. Industrious is nice for building wonders and getting cheap forges = cheaper everything else, but it kicks in a bit later in the game. And some people never even bother building wonders except Great Library and maybe a few others, anyway; in fact most of the advanced players on Immortal/Deity don't go wonder-crazy. If you want a small tech boost early on, I'd recommend Mansa Musa or one of the English civs that has Financial, and build some stock exchanges while you're cottagespamming. Philosophical also sounds weak but getting an earlier GS for an Academy, or stuff like that, is really powerful.

Question 2: It means that an AI running that leader will sometimes ask you to switch to their favorite civic and be happy if you agree and ticked off if you don't. If you're already running that civic, you get bonus diplo points.

 

[Sisiutil]

So would choosing either Washington (Financial, Organized) or Huang (Financial, Industrious) be good choices for having a culturally and technologically advanced Civilization?

Also, what role does the "favorite civic" play in the game? On this site it lists the favorite civic for each leader; will I get penalized for, say, playing as Huang and choosing Universal Suffrage over Police State?

Ah, you're playing vanilla Civ (no expansion pack). Yes, either of those leaders would be quite strong technologically, and Financial is also good for cultural wins as well.

The favourite civic has no impact directly on your civilization; it affects diplomacy. Other leaders will give you a diplomatic bonus for running their favourite civic, and this bonus will grow over time. They may also ask you to switch to their favourite civic (and will correspondingly give you a diplomatic penalty if you refuse).

 

[Admiral Kutzov]

So would choosing either Washington (Financial, Organized) or Huang (Financial, Industrious) be good choices for having a culturally and technologically advanced Civilization?

sounds to me like you're going builder. try asoka or gandhi. get an early religion and open up the borders, but don't neglect that early war with Monte..

 

[axident]

sounds to me like you're going builder. try asoka or gandhi. get an early religion and open up the borders, but don't neglect that early war with Monte..

That early war meaning you bribing Monty to beat up Mansa Musa. Don't forget that the OP is trying to be popular, too, even with psychos wearing shrunken heads.

 

[Admiral Kutzov]

That early war meaning you bribing Monty to beat up Mansa Musa. Don't forget that the OP is trying to be popular, too, even with psychos wearing shrunken heads.

yeah, that's the ticket.