What civ to play?

DaveShack

Inventor
Retired Moderator
Joined
Feb 2, 2003
Messages
13,109
Location
Arizona, USA (it's a dry heat)
The votes are tallied for world settings, and we have:

C3C, Standard, 70% continents, temperate, (missed poll for wet/dry?), flat, raging/restless barbs.

Now we need to discuss what civ to play. We can do this three ways -- choose a civ directly via (several rounds of) polling, choose traits and then a civ, or just go random and make what we can of the civ the RNG gives us.

For roleplay purposes I would prefer we don't go random, but have not formed an opinion beyond that yet. What are you in the mood for?
 
I would like to see us be Greece and go for a SpaceShip victory... Space Ship is quite doable on some sort of 5CC variant, we just need to research fast and broker trades

edit: Another plus, is there is no use for us to be in aggressive wars as they do no good...
 
Let us have Random for once that would increase suspense, and is fair to all.
 
Stuck_as_a_Mac said:
:twiddles thumbs:
@GA - I think Stuck likes that combo ;)
 
Greece is nice for a spaceship victory, but Korea is also. Korea has better artillery (H'wacha cannon), thus I must advocate for them.
 
I was going to say Greece before any of you did. i really was. anyway, playing as Greece would be fine with me. :D
 
greece is fine but korea sounds better. only problem IMO is that we will probably be attacked a lot to to our low city amount and hoplites would be great to have, the H'wacha has deadly bombardment and going to war probably won't be all that often so we can't take advantage of it's skills.
 
the hoplite is as strong as a pikemen but doesn't need iron, which can be very helpful.... If we happen to not have iron in our 5 city area, hoplites are like pikemen that don't need iron

Making Greece a great idea for our game
 
Hmm, hadn't thought about planning ahead to be lacking resources.

Are there any other UUs which don't require the resource which would normally be needed for the unit it replaces?

It would be wrong to assume that we'll automatically be targets due to low city count. I think population goes into the power equation, and so does unit count and strength. In my 5CC game (I know, too small a sample to be statistically significant) there were few demands and when I refused they often walked away instead of declaring.
 
Don't we have to know what kind of 5CC we're going for before choosing this? 5CC,5CC+1,5CC+2?

Also, the victory goal should be decided first. With such limited cities, civ choice is very important to make the best use of traits and UU. If we go for conquest we would want an entirely different civ than for space, 20k, 100k, and diplo. In fact, each victory warrants a different civ selection.
 
MeteorPunch said:
Also, the victory goal should be decided first. With such limited cities, civ choice is very important to make the best use of traits and UU. If we go for conquest we would want an entirely different civ than for space, 20k, 100k, and diplo. In fact, each victory warrants a different civ selection.

Or, we could pick a civ to get its roleplay characteristics, and then approach victory based on that civ's strengths. ;)
 
The war Elephant is a good UU, but we can simply trade for resources we don't have. REL is one of the worst traits, and COM trait really only benefits large empires...which we will not have. :p
 
semi-disregard my last post. I was pointing out India's deficiancies, but really all civ traits are weakened similarly by only 5CCing. :blush: I would absolutely want the MIL trait if we were going for conquest though.

There seems to be a lot of support in this thread for Greece. Seems like a good choice for one of the more peaceful victories.
 
Back
Top Bottom