What Civilization do you use the most

[Yzman]

I used to like Bablon alot for a great culture game and I'm not very warlike. But now I seem to really like the Egyptians becuase industrious is just so good and religious keeps my people happy as well as letting me get out of a government quickly if needed.

 

[Sparhawk]

I tried editing the Civ's specialties on Marla's world and it works just fine. I'm playing the highest level now with Germany but with all the 6 attributes thrown in. It is still very difficult though, still can't keep the population happy.

 

[Redbled]

I've lost Diety twice since the first time I beat it, and the civ that seems the easiest to win on this level has so far been the Aztecs. You essentially get 3 traits in one. Religious, Militaristic, and Expansionist. Jaguar's are like having a scout and who cares about the nice goody huts. Easy to take over the nearest civ, although I usually wait for them to demand the 9 gold and territory map. Gets you off to a great start.

 

[GhengisFarb]

Iroquois for me, I like the monted warrior. Course I did give it hidden nationality............

 

[one_man_assault]

What is this?! Babaloyn, Iroquois, EGYPT?!!? Im not a culture freak and I dont like the thought of skipping along my empire looking at all the wonders ive built. Im not denieng the importance of culture but Id rather smash my oponnents than have them peacfully culture flip. I like to stay 2-3 techs ahead of everyone else and have a millitary poised along each of my nieghbors borders to explode into there territory if war occurs.
And nothing does this better than the German Panzer (when its first built) spend a couple of turns mass producing Panzers and send them along the border and attack while the pethetic Japaneese are roaming there lands with samuries and infantry. Usually I gain a continent duing this... Until Mechanized infantry when I play Germany during my Golden Age my millitary might is unstoppable

 

[Zoke0]

I LOVE the Americans. I think there very well rounded and easly can get a head start in the tech race with there scouts and build roads fast.

Although many like the Persians I trieid to use them but I always seem to have trouble with the tech race.

 

[Sim_One]

although the russians are by no means my favorite, i have found a nice strategy with them. being expansionist i get an early tech lead and being able to build cheaper libraries (so i reasearch literature as soon as i can) as a scientific civ so i get to keep that lead. to top everything off with a cherry, i get free monotheism once i reach the feudal age.

 

[Portuguese]

egipt and persia rule

Americans are very patritote too....
(3rd place... wow!!!)

japan and persia also good rated...

Good choices, but I don't play expansionistic...

Persia is really great: scientific and industrious rule. And the UU grants great victories in ancient era. Resistance is futile

 

[u-gene]

Not all of you like playing as Russians as I've noticed. Personally I'm prone to agree with most of you that Russians' benefits (in this game only ) are not very significant. Scouts seem to be good in the beginning of the game, although I never use them or explorers in Middle Ages or in Modern Era. I am not very impressed with Cossacks but their extra defensive point compared to Cavalry helped me a couple of times.

Nevertheless, I play Russians in 90% of all my games and I like it. I won some games on high levels but Deity. Deity is the next step.

P.S. Of course, it'd be great of Firaxis to correct spelling mistake in the name of one of Russian Great Leaders Zhukov (in 1.16 it was still Zukhov).

 

[InfStack_]

Greeks are great. Techs and $$$ come quickly! gotta love um!

 

[dsirirueng]

So far I've played the Chinese, Persians, Japanese (my very first game on chieftan) and Egyptians ... dabbled with the Americans and French, but didn't particularly get anywhere with them. I've had my most success with the Chinese and Persians.

As many have said, the great thing about the Chinese and Persians is that they may be the best triple-threats in the game -- both possess what's to me the most important trait, industrious; a genuinely useful "secondary" trait, militaristic and scientific, respectively; and both have really useful UUs. (To me, a useful UU is an offensive unit with an offensive advantage that comes neither too early or too late in the game, and doesn't hurt you in the upgrade department. Chinese Riders and Persian Immortals don't hurt you *too* much in upgrading, with Riders being better since they go up to Cavalry, while you may be stuck with too many Immortals kicking around later.) Other civs with the industrious trait either have IMO poorer secondary traits (Americans and French) or poorer UUs (Americans, French and Egyptians).

I'm also playing an older version of the game where you can't upgrade into your UU, but have to build them from scratch. There seems to have been some complaints about this on this forum, before whatever mods or patch changed this, but I actually use the restriction to my advantage ... or try to! With both the Chinese and Persians, I'm not really building all that many of their UUs' predecessors on the upgrade path (horsemen and warriors), so I don't really mind having to build a few extra from scratch to go on the offensive when they come around. Meanwhile, this means I can afford to let my horsemen and warriors stray really far from my borders, as I won't want to gather them back in for an upgrade for a looooooong time (riders not until cavalry, warriors ... NEVER).

So what I have is a terrific exploring, scouting and expeditionary force, from almost the beginning of the game. Especially with the Persians, I have absolutely no compunctions of sending every single one of my warriors to the ends of the earth as soon as spearmen are being produced in my cities, because I know I'll have the Immortals soon. So these guys cover the jungle and mountain exploring, and a couple of horsemen run around the 2-move areas.

The goody huts may not be as plentiful or as rewarding as with the expansionist civs, but you can really cover a lot of ground with this method, I've found, and get a pretty good take on the world map, early. (Obviously I don't play tiny archipelagos very often ...) One thing I've noticed -- I'm only up to Regent, however -- is that even the expansionist AIs don't seem to do all that much exploring compared to me. Their single scouts will do as much as they can (and pop a lot of goody huts, the bastards), but they don't seem to really put a priority on exploring the world as much as I do. Anybody else notice this?

 

[dsirirueng]

One more quick note about the Chinese rider -- it's really the Panzer, hundreds of years earlier and with a longer shelf-life ... not needing an upgrade until cavalry, while at least a good number of Panzers will be upgraded to modern armour quite soon after tanks come online.

This means the Chinese are blitzing for what should be their first major war in the early middle ages ... at a time when their industrious trait should have built up a decent military road network to hustle the fastest troops around down, not to mention to hustle Great Leaders (more due to militaristic trait) back up to do their Wonder work ...

Can't beat it, in my opinion.

 

[Ronald]

On standard size maps, I really like the Egyptians: industrial for quick infrastructure, religious for cheap temples and early culture and anarchy when switching goverments and then a UU I never use in the beginning, I only use it to get my GA exactly at the moment I want.

For HOF attempts (huge maps) I find the perfect combination are the Americans (expansionist and industrious).

For tiny maps and fast conquest, persian immortals!!!

 

[Moff Jerjerrod]

I like using the Germans the most. Their traits suit my early warfare style quite nicely. Although I do prefer haviing the religious trait, it's not too bad as the Germans.

 

[Arrian]

I've gotten into playing the Chinese lately. They are really perfectly set up for early warfare. They are similar to Japan in that they are militaristic, have a medieval UU, and have an excellent 2nd trait (industrious instead of religious). The combo of industrious and militaristic is great, and you can launch a VERY early archer strike as China, particularly if you have some forest next to your capitol (cut it down, and you have 1/2 an archer). The Rider is the best medieval UU hands-down.

dsirirueng,

I cannot overstate the power of upgrading from a predecessor unit to a powerful UU. In my most recent game, I discovered chivalry and *presto* had 30 or so Riders (standard map). Similar things can be done with warriors for Rome and Persia. I tend to use a mass upgrade of chariots to horsemen as well. Anything to save shields, which translates into saving turns.

-Arrian

 

[kb2tvl]

I can win panagea map games with a religious civ.... Or I have won...

Im still working on strategies for the other civs. In any case, Egyptians are one of the most powerful civs if used correctly.

War charriots can go into any developed region or across flat land. The key is to maneuver them correctly and to have a few horse to protect them while making your drive. Along the same lines, Egyptians can first build roads to the intended target and then send in their charriots.

I was very impressed with the sheer quantity of chariots you can build with a size 12 city! Just with sheer hordes you can really give a good beating to any unit up to knight/muskeeteers. I stopped my campaign with them once I saw cav starting to float around.


that said, Japaneese are probably one of my fav civs. Early on, you can start with low luxaries and focus on both city placement and iron.

Another fav are the indians. This is a no resource/no lux society where you can trade off iron, horse, luxaries. Trading both horse and iron can give nice cash infusions....

Aztecs are a very early ga and you have to take out a near by civ to have it worth it. Getting established cities and a future fp has some value though...

 

[The Persian]

greeks, because you have the strength of pikeman in the greek spearman, and persia, because they have swordsmen with the same attack power as longbowmen, knights, and samurai.

 

[Allemand]

I put the Egyptians in my games when I want a civ that's easy to beat up on. They do very well against the AI, but are an easy target for the human player. Oh, wait, that's true of all the civs.

Seriously, though, the War Chariot needs something more. It should have some advantage that the Horseman does not have.

 

[dsirirueng]

I had one early game with the Egyptians, where I was on a medium-sized island (big enough for maybe 20 cities total) that I shared with the Romans. So obviously, a major task was going to be to take out the Romans, cos "this island just ain't big enough for the both of us!"

So let's start rolling out the War Chariots, right? But wait -- Rome and two minor satellite cities are in a small patch of grassland that is completely surrounded on three sides by three-tile (or more) deep jungle and/or mountains ... with the ocean on the fourth side.

I had the industrious workers to build the roads ... eventually. Luckily they didn't have any iron for legionnaires by the time my chariots rolled up to the gates of Rome.

 

[Sunny]

Well, I would have played the Swedes all the time if the Swedish Mod Pack added the Swedish Civ instead of replacing the Germans ...

I really like to play the Americans on an Earth map (with correct start pos.), against european, asian and african tribes ... then you can build and expand on "your" continent without having any interfearence ...

The French are great to play to, as is the Romans ....
I also like the Japanese, Chinese, Russians and Germans.