What civilization do you think will be the most powerful?

[Crazy George]

Caesar / Sonereal

I knew there was a reason I kept coming back to these forums.

OK. New strategy.
If I find I have the Iroquois as my neighbors, I don't clear cut everything on the border. Instead, I leave just enough forests to aid in my own defense (i.e. at my choke points, etc.) and clear cut everything else.

I would anticipate that at some level of implementation, this strategy would have a noticeably dampening effect on the Iroquois ability.

Incidentally, if there are other counter strategies that might be implemented to thwart or reduce the effect of any of the other Civilization's abilities, I would be anxious to hear of them.

 

[Calouste]

A small empire might be easier to defend but it can also be a great disadvantage. Imagine this Situation:
You're playing as India, your empire consists of about six cities. You get attacked and your army is to small to hold the enemy back. Unlike other civs with big empires you can't take the loss of even one city and you can't try falling back into the heart of your empire in order to gather more troops. Other civs could just sacrifice some border cities in order to protect their more important core cities,India on the other side doesn't have this option.

India's larger cities will have larger combat strength and ranged attack values though, so defending will be easier. I don't think that with units about double the cost and double the movement building units during a war is going to have that much of an effect. The enemy will have reached your city before you get the unit out.

 

[Sonereal]

If I find I have the Iroquois as my neighbors, I don't clear cut everything on the border. Instead, I leave just enough forests to aid in my own defense (i.e. at my choke points, etc.) and clear cut everything else.

I would anticipate that at some level of implementation, this strategy would have a noticeably dampening effect on the Iroquois ability.

Forests on hills (until you can build forts) is a must. Then again, I'm not sure if ranged units get a bonus from firing from atop of hills but a ridge line of artillery with infantry support would probably damper the Iroquois movement advantage.

 

[Dragonflow]

India's larger cities will have larger combat strength and ranged attack values though, so defending will be easier. I don't think that with units about double the cost and double the movement building units during a war is going to have that much of an effect. The enemy will have reached your city before you get the unit out.

I forgot about the double movement, so retreating and building new units won't work. Still the loss of even one city is far more damaging if you play India. If you lose one city and you can't retake you'll have to sign a peace-treaty. In the case of India you'll lose 1/6 of your entire empire, other civs wouldn't suffer that much from the loss of a city.

 

[Celevin]

Not that I think it's the best civ, but I'm surprised that Persia is on the bottom compared to, say, Germany. I'm sure there's going to be some mean, mean strats for them. Afterall, they have an ability that's good for all ages and has a whole policy tree practically devoted to it. Moreover, they have a unique building unlike a lot of the civs, which is usually a greater benefit over the course of a game.

Persia is my second or third choice for my favourite civs this time around.

 

[ilikepies]

Arabia's ability seems amazing. That adds up to a large income bonus, and Arabia will probably control the entire world's economy once oil comes around, meaning more money/units/friends.. very versatile and powerful.

Rome, Russia, America, and Japan are all great. England is a bit specific but wonderful in some situations. India, Persia, Songhai, and France are pretty good. Iroquois is a bit underpowered sounding to me.... but:

I am incredibly disappointed by Germany and the Ottomans. Germany is supposed to be an incredible industrial civ, what the hell is this? A chance to get a bit of gold and a unit from each barbarian encampment. It would be different if you could make the encampments into cities or something but unless barbarians are going to be a huge part of the game (which would suck) then Germany is terrible. Plus the units barbs have are likely far behind... And Ottomans are even worse...

I want mah Germanz! Wah!

 

[Calouste]

Plus the units barbs have are likely far behind...

Barbs units will keep up with the most advanced civ in the game.

And we'll talk again about the Ottomans once you have been at the receiving end of a Janissary/Sipahi army:

Janissary
Movement: 2; Strength: 16; Ranged Strength: 0; Cost: 120; Required Resources: none
Technology: Gunpowder
Notes: Ottoman Unique Unit; replaces Musketman. Receives a combat bonus on the attack, and automatically heals all damage when it defeats a non-Barbarian unit.

Sipahi
Movement: 5; Strength: 22; Ranged Strength: 0; Cost: 220; Required Resources: 1 Horses
Technology: Metallurgy
Notes: Ottoman Unique Unit; replaces Lancer. +1 Sight range, bonus against Mounted units, penalty on defense. Can pillage enemy tile improvements at no additional movement cost.

 

[King Jason]

but unless barbarians are going to be a huge part of the game (which would suck) then Germany is terrible. Plus the units barbs have are likely far behind... And Ottomans are even worse...

Barbarians are going to be a huge part of the game. We've seen late-game shots where there are still several stretches and spots of land that is unclaimed by any civs. So even if visibility extends enought to block spawn points... it is entirely safe to assume that Barbarins will be around at least until the Rennaissance era. As opposed to being removed from the equation by around the mid-classical in civ. Obviously map size plays a part ~ but that's just like taking issue with elizabeth for being played on a map with a lot more land than sea.

Also, Barbarians have tech parity with the tech leader. So their units are always up to date.

I am much more skeptical about the Ottomans though, and decent UUs are no excuse for a poor SA. All things, UUs, UBs, and SAs (Why aren't we going with UA as the abbreviation, btw?) should be interesting and and powerful. If the design thought behind the Ottoman package was "strong UUs and thus a weak SA" then the power of the UUs should've been brought down to bring the SA up, at least in my opinion. Power in one period in time is not enough an excuse to condemn the civ to have a mediocre ability.

Both Greece and Rome have fine Special abilities, in addition to being ancient power-houses.

 

[PinkHammurabi]

Barbarians are going to be a huge part of the game. We've seen late-game shots where there are still several stretches and spots of land that is unclaimed by any civs. So even if visibility extends enought to block spawn points... it is entirely safe to assume that Barbarins will be around at least until the Rennaissance era. As opposed to being removed from the equation by around the mid-classical in civ. Obviously map size plays a part ~ but that's just like taking issue with elizabeth for being played on a map with a lot more land than sea.

Also, Barbarians have tech parity with the tech leader. So their units are always up to date.

I am much more skeptical about the Ottomans though, and decent UUs are no excuse for a poor SA. All things, UUs, UBs, and SAs (Why aren't we going with UA as the abbreviation, btw?) should be interesting and and powerful. If the design thought behind the Ottoman package was "strong UUs and thus a weak SA" then the power of the UUs should've been brought down to bring the SA up, at least in my opinion. Power in one period in time is not enough an excuse to condemn the civ to have a mediocre ability.

Plus, though I heard that Barb units only spawn from camps, it's possible there's an exception to Naval units? Which of course means they can spawn nearly the entire game (which makes sense honestly, considering the still-abundant piracy) and drop off land units.

I hope so, I like the idea.

 

[ilikepies]

Plus, though I heard that Barb units only spawn from camps, it's possible there's an exception to Naval units? Which of course means they can spawn nearly the entire game (which makes sense honestly, considering the still-abundant piracy) and drop off land units.

I hope so, I like the idea.

I think the Japanese should get a ninja unit with a bonus against naval barbs (pirates).

I agree that good UUs are no excuse for an awful special ability. Hopefully navies will be more important. I can see with large and ranged armies, plus citadels and forts, naval invasions will be more effective, resulting in a larger role for sea units and more pirates. This could result in England and Ottomans being decent (especially England). I hope so. I'm not sure how much 25 gold is but from what I've seen it isn't even enough to buy the tile that you find the encampment in, which is disappointing. If barbarian encampments are a rare event that causes a lot of danger, the Germans will be bad. If they are just like common occurrences that fill the empty parts of the world, Germany will probably be an excellent expansionist civ. Early game blitzkrieg?

It's a bit hard to value the abilities alone without considering the huge gameplay and style changes from IV to V. For example. the Janissary would be decent in Civ IV, but if it lost it would die anyways. With ranged attacks, and losses no longer automatically killing a unit, the Janissary becomes an excellent shock unit for leading an attack against archers or siege weapons.

 

[King Jason]

It's a bit hard to value the abilities alone without considering the huge gameplay and style changes from IV to V. For example. the Janissary would be decent in Civ IV, but if it lost it would die anyways. With ranged attacks, and losses no longer automatically killing a unit, the Janissary becomes an excellent shock unit for leading an attack against archers or siege weapons.

Well remember the Janissary needs to "defeat" (not sure it that means kill) a non-barb unit. Which actually makes it quite vulnerable to ranged bombardment. If you fire upon incoming Jans, it's that much harder for them to win against their targets.

 

[ilikepies]

Well remember the Janissary needs to "defeat" (not sure it that means kill) a non-barb unit. Which actually makes it quite vulnerable to ranged bombardment. If you fire upon incoming Jans, it's that much harder for them to win against their targets.

Yes, but any unit will end up being fired on, and Jannissaries are a basic infantry unit. No matter what, your units are going to take some damage from arrows and that will hurt their chances of winning. With a normal unit, they will have to take more damage if they engage a target. With a Janissary, they either take some more damage or heal fully, which seems pretty good to me.

 

[JonoLith]

The counter to the Iroquois' forest walk ability is chopping down forests. Don't know how this will play out in neutral territory. But you can bet if the Iroquois are my neighbors, I'm going to clear cut everything in sight. One can only hope the AI will be smart enough to do the same.

That's just it, clearcutting like that takes time. Lots of time. You can't even start doing it until you have bronzeworking, and you can't safely move workers out into the forests to do it, because there are Iroquios there!

I hope you can see how badly I'm hoping the Iroquois special unit is badass!

I'll be frightfully disappointed if the way ranged combat works destroys the Iroquois. I do have high hopes.

 

[Dragonflow]

Why not simply kill the Iroquois with Archers, Catapults or any other ranged unit? This way you won't have to engage them in the forests.

 

[alanthreonus]

I think people are misunderstanding India's ability. I'm pretty sure unhappiness from number of cities is going to be less than unhappiness from population, so India's ability will give it positive net happiness, so it will be possible for it to support a large empire.

 

[Mango Elephant]

The More I think about it, the more I like the Germans SA. If barbarians are as numerous and powerful as everyone says, it would be quite easy for the Germans to get a large army fast. If you kill 6 barbs, you get (about) 3 units and enough gold to buy a couple hexs! Imagine taking out a barb hotspot, you'd get enough units to (maybe) take over at least a large part of one of your enemies empire! & keep in mind that apparently each unit in CivV will be more important than they were in CivIV. It's not as good as say, Japan's UA, but it's nothing to shake a finger at either.

 

[King Jason]

I was gonna look for some screenshots, but here's a video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o2aDeqEGpnQ

The guy pans across the world and one can see that there are huge swaths of forests, that appear to span 10 or more hexes. Obviously they're not everywhere and obviously the advantage may not exist for the whole game; but scouting, expansion, development, and early warfare all benefit from Iriquois' SA.

If there's a city you want to build on the other side of a 10-20 hex forest... without the SA, you might have waste time going through it or around it. With the ability, it's as if your crossing regular land.

Workers essentiall become civ4's indian fast workers in terms of forest. They can chop faster, as well as build roads and improvements on them faster.

Scouting leads to early benefits with barbs and ruins ~ where one civ might take 10 turns to get to the other side of a forest, where there's a ruin... you'd take 5 turns to get there.

In terms of Opportunity costs, The Native's ability may be more powerful than people think, and huge expanses of forest may be common in most map settings.

 

[alanthreonus]

IIRC, the Iroquois ability originally let them move twice as fast in forests, and that was overpowered, so the developers are obviously trying to keep things balanced.

 

[Bobbtjoe]

No, I think it originally was that trees acted as roads.

 

[ilikepies]

The More I think about it, the more I like the Germans SA. If barbarians are as numerous and powerful as everyone says, it would be quite easy for the Germans to get a large army fast. If you kill 6 barbs, you get (about) 3 units and enough gold to buy a couple hexs! Imagine taking out a barb hotspot, you'd get enough units to (maybe) take over at least a large part of one of your enemies empire! & keep in mind that apparently each unit in CivV will be more important than they were in CivIV. It's not as good as say, Japan's UA, but it's nothing to shake a finger at either.

I agree... after doings some thinking on the assumption that barbs will be the empty space between civilizations, Germany seems set up to be a good expansionist civ. If they use their army to kill barbs (which they should) they'll be able to get cash and free units. You can get the most out of a barb village by surrounding it with a few ranged units and kill them until you get the bonus and the village pops, giving you an extra 25 gold, meaning 50 gold and a unit. If you exploit it (which shouldn't be too hard considering that city-states ask you to take out barbs and you might have to yourself), you can build a small army early and quickly build up to a larger army and acquire territory, for free. This makes them big, rich, and powerful by the time the barbs start being filled in, and then you turn all your power and money into armies of landschnekts and panzers. I actually think increasing this to 100% would make it a very competitive power, since if what I just said works people will get the bonus anyways.

The Ottoman one worries me, but if it is raised to 100% it'll probably be good, and certainly interesting. Hopefully the gameplay is altered enough to make navies and the ocean a good way to fight and expand, even on pangaea maps.