How very wrong you are. America is easily one of the best civilizations because of one word: Expansionistic. In the early game there is no better trait. With that first scout (and maybe more if you keep building them) you can zip around the map grabbing practically every Barb. Hut out there (unless your stupid enough to use America in an archipellago), and these huts usually yield a Civ. Advance each. In a matter of turns, you will have half of the Advances in that Era!!!! That's a lot. Add Industrious to that and you have a very prosperous civilization. Industriousness speeds up your workers to the point that every city is very well off when it comes to shields, food, and commerce. So what if their F-15 are utterly, utterly useless, you'll have tanks while everyone is still blowing off their own fingers with early forays into gunpowder, all thanks to that early lead you got with your scouts.
What Civilization do you use the most
- Thread starter Mr Mcs
- Start date
How very wrong you are. America is easily one of the best civilizations because of one word: Expansionistic. In the early game there is no better trait. With that first scout (and maybe more if you keep building them) you can zip around the map grabbing practically every Barb. Hut out there (unless your stupid enough to use America in an archipellago), and these huts usually yield a Civ. Advance each. In a matter of turns, you will have half of the Advances in that Era!!!! That's a lot. Add Industrious to that and you have a very prosperous civilization. Industriousness speeds up your workers to the point that every city is very well off when it comes to shields, food, and commerce. So what if their F-15 are utterly, utterly useless, you'll have tanks while everyone is still blowing off their own fingers with early forays into gunpowder, all thanks to that early lead you got with your scouts.
AceDragon
Warlord
The only point I would agree to is about the UU coming late. Isn't that useful ?!? I have two words for you, Air Superiority. The outcome of modern wars hang in the balance and as America you are king of the skies. F-15 began its rise to popularity around 1975, the Soviet fighter at that time was the Mig 25 Foxbat which are clearly dominated by the F-15. The F-15E version has the name 'Strike Eagle'
Sure eventually they (Soviets) came out with another mig later and we (America) came up with several fighter planes since then... F14, F16, F18, F-117 Stealth Fighter, F-22... Oi! Don't Forget the A-10... I really do resent the other civs having Stealth Fighters. Which other nation today has them because they made their own ? (sorry going off-topic)
I respect the F-15 for what it is, an Icon of Modern Military Domination.
It's not for everyone, I'll agree for you heavy warmongers you almost have your conquest victory before leaving ancient age. In Modern times, I don't allow other planes in my airspace and further my domination using bombers, stealth bombers to take very heavy fortified cities.
Also, Love the French. At first I resented them cause I thought that was the 2 America should have. Then I learned to use Expansionist to my advantage.
Watching the AI play her, Egypt just rules. Early military domination, industrious builders backed with religion.. Very formidible empire.
I could go on about my second and third favorites, I probably have 5 or 6
greenie
Warlord
I dont really have a favourite civ to play but I'm gonna echo a lot of sentiments here.
I'm not big on expansionism but it does have its' uses - like scouting out good territory for ur very crucial first city and future cities, goody huts and things.
I also agree with the Industrious trait - once you play, it is a huge advantage when you srat out, mining, clearing jungles and the like.... and cleaning up pollution and doing rail later in the game rules.
I usually play a cultured game, my motto is the best offense is defence (up until Cavalry!) so I'm normally Babylon, Egypt and others, but I usually split it up, and have been playing more militaristic civs of late....I'm missing out on getting Great Leaders
But I feel I must defend the Bowman. Although 2/2/1 stinks, they can have their uses. One game I started next to Persia, built one, attacked, had a Golden Age and this was all before they Discovered Iron. And by the time they did, it was too late for them, my swordsmen cleaned them up. As well as being good barbar killers, they aren't all that bad.
I'm not big on expansionism but it does have its' uses - like scouting out good territory for ur very crucial first city and future cities, goody huts and things.
I also agree with the Industrious trait - once you play, it is a huge advantage when you srat out, mining, clearing jungles and the like.... and cleaning up pollution and doing rail later in the game rules.
I usually play a cultured game, my motto is the best offense is defence (up until Cavalry!) so I'm normally Babylon, Egypt and others, but I usually split it up, and have been playing more militaristic civs of late....I'm missing out on getting Great Leaders
But I feel I must defend the Bowman. Although 2/2/1 stinks, they can have their uses. One game I started next to Persia, built one, attacked, had a Golden Age and this was all before they Discovered Iron. And by the time they did, it was too late for them, my swordsmen cleaned them up. As well as being good barbar killers, they aren't all that bad.
I used to like the Persians when i played the vanilla civ3. But now with the PTW expansion i have become really fond of the Carthaginians. With that Numidian Mercenary, it is more or less a buffer to being attacked by humans or the AI in the ancient age and early middle age.
Portuguese
Vassalising Spain
Originally posted by Kevinicus
I prefer the Romans with their great advantage in the ancient.
I wonder why so many choose Persia though
Simple: +1 attack better than +1 defense
We are attacking and the objective is to go with so many UU that they don't stand a chance!!!
Jokanaan
Chieftain
I use German because they are scientifics and militarists!!!
Best attributes!
Best attributes!
Cannibis_sativa
Chieftain
- Joined
- Jan 8, 2003
- Messages
- 2
Normally Americans (IMHO F15 should be more powerful). Indust is nice although dont much care for expansionist myself.
Cannibis_sativa
Chieftain
- Joined
- Jan 8, 2003
- Messages
- 2
If you look at the stats of the F-15 and Jet Fighter you will notice that the a/d/m are both 8/4/6 giving the F-15 no edge in air to air combat.
The adv of the F-15 is that it has 2 higher in bombard than a normal jet fighter effectively making it an air-superiority weapon as well as a mediocre (at best) bomber.
IMHO the F-15 could be better. It has less impact on gameplay than other UUs in thier 'appropriate' era. If you like gigantic world wars in industrial - late era games, the F-15 is adequate (nothing more).
It seems when they were making the UUs they tried to tailor it to the civ it belonged too. It would only make sense that the Americans would have a later-game air superiority weapon, thats what the Americans have been doing since WW2.
As far as the Mig 29 vs F-15, this is very debatable. IMHO, the edge is going to go to the F-15 here ... in RL it has proven its worth in combat over the Mig 29 and every other soviet fighter it has encountered. America also trains thier pilots well, with the latest technology, making them arguably the best in the world. Therefore IMHO the F-15 should have a *slight* advantage in attack, one point or two points extra max (imho).
The UU I would have liked to seen for the Americans is an air-refueling tanker. For every air-refueling plane in your fleet, you get to make one unlimited range bombing attack on a one - to - one basis. This might throw balance off a bit though =(
It would be nice to have a 'militia' like infantry that moves 2 spaces ... but its not very American. Since they were making an attempt to be somewhat historically accurate with UUs, an American unit of this type wouldnt make sense (whether it adds balance or not). America has never had a unit of that type in its history ... in fact American militia of old has performed miserably (like most militia) on most accounts.
As far as keeping up with the scientific and religous civs, well, thats why you have an F-15
IMHO the Russians should get the indust era tank (T-34) over the German Panzer. Germans could get a a fast moving Infantry(indust era), perhaps showing Germany's ability to swallow and hold land.
-Cannibis Sativa
"Shop smart, shop S-Mart"
CommiePlanner
Warlord
I like that the american unique unit comes late in the game having the golden age at this time helps build your nuclear arsenal. Nukes arent for every situation but they are really fun. I play americans alot especially whenever I up my difficulty (currently trying out emperor), the expansionistic trait is nice for popping goody huts and finding future sites for cities. I play a early builder style and late war monger style most games and the americans are well suited for my play style.
Iroquois rock if you like early warfare. Expansionist means they scout out the best targets, and get lots of goody huts.
Religious is a must for any warlike race and to ensure
happiness and cultural expansion. Plus the Mounted Warrior is
an awesome early war machine. You can get screwed if you don't get horses, which might make Aztecs better. But expansionist makes that unlikely. Once you get 10-20 Mounted
warriors built you will take over 1-2 nearby civs and gain the advantage you can ride to victory by the end of industrial or so.
On a small pangea map you really have it made with Iroquois.
Religious is a must for any warlike race and to ensure
happiness and cultural expansion. Plus the Mounted Warrior is
an awesome early war machine. You can get screwed if you don't get horses, which might make Aztecs better. But expansionist makes that unlikely. Once you get 10-20 Mounted
warriors built you will take over 1-2 nearby civs and gain the advantage you can ride to victory by the end of industrial or so.
On a small pangea map you really have it made with Iroquois.
Cursed_Wolf
Full Time (Air)guitarist
I usually play with a random civ but I think I like the Russians best.
I'm not much of a warmonger, I usually go for a cultural or diplomatic victory so Scientific comes in handy for earlier wonders and expansionist is good for getting lotsa techs from barb huts.
I'm not much of a warmonger, I usually go for a cultural or diplomatic victory so Scientific comes in handy for earlier wonders and expansionist is good for getting lotsa techs from barb huts.
Sarevok
Civ3 Scenario Creator
I play the USA because for some reason, i am the fastest with them.
Originally posted by Portuguese
Simple: +1 attack better than +1 defense
We are attacking and the objective is to go with so many UU that they don't stand a chance!!!
IMO, the immortal i over kill in the ancient age. the best defender in the ancient age is spearmen and an attack of 3 is just fine. but the defense of 3 really great since with Legions only real threat of having the ai get back your city is by culture filps. immortals are threatand by archers, horsemen, swordsmen AND culture flips.
PRIMEMOVER
Warlord
I'll go with one of the more understated civs so far in this thread...China!
For my understanding of the game, the two traits central to victory are militaristic and industrious for this very simple fact...
To win the game by any method, one must 'overwhelm' or at least 'out do' one's opponent. It's a quantity game whether it be culture, land, money, etc. So he who has the most wins!
What's better than having the ability to add to your own empire (industry) and taking away from another's empire (military)?
Those who prefer the religious attribute mention the flexibility it gives them in changing modes (i.e. comm, democracy), but I find the greatest flexibility in being able to focus on growth (industry) or destroying an opponent's growth (military) and doing so without having to do much in the way of revolution (the republic is a happy medium). Also, the advantages to religion (i.e. cheap temples, etc.) I believe, can be overcome later on through the increased capacity for growth via workers and overall greater city production. In addition, the cash flow issue can't be overlooked. The capacity for amassing huge cash flow allows one to build an overwhelming military presence or stopping on a dime and throwing that wealth into rushing cultural growth or research.
Flexibility and diversity is the name of the game if you want to increase your chances of success at higher levels against multiple AIs.:die:
For my understanding of the game, the two traits central to victory are militaristic and industrious for this very simple fact...
To win the game by any method, one must 'overwhelm' or at least 'out do' one's opponent. It's a quantity game whether it be culture, land, money, etc. So he who has the most wins!
What's better than having the ability to add to your own empire (industry) and taking away from another's empire (military)?
Those who prefer the religious attribute mention the flexibility it gives them in changing modes (i.e. comm, democracy), but I find the greatest flexibility in being able to focus on growth (industry) or destroying an opponent's growth (military) and doing so without having to do much in the way of revolution (the republic is a happy medium). Also, the advantages to religion (i.e. cheap temples, etc.) I believe, can be overcome later on through the increased capacity for growth via workers and overall greater city production. In addition, the cash flow issue can't be overlooked. The capacity for amassing huge cash flow allows one to build an overwhelming military presence or stopping on a dime and throwing that wealth into rushing cultural growth or research.
Flexibility and diversity is the name of the game if you want to increase your chances of success at higher levels against multiple AIs.:die:
PRIMEMOVER
Warlord
religious or industrious...
religion allows you a greater foothold on establishing yourself culturally early...but as I stated above...you need the flexibility to flex your muscles militarily and industriously to not only build items of culture (industry and religion), but to eliminate the compeition's ability to promote their own culture by tearing down their infrastructure. The key is the quantity of cities established and their internal growth...if you have more cities you can use those extra cities to build culture...the fewer the opponent has, the less culture they build, pure and simple. I've found that to take out cities requires not simply a strong military, but one that can overwhelm an opponent quickly so as not to drain your own treasury and industry goals. Hit quick, hard and eliminate or sue for a peace with a crippling peace treaty!
You can aim for simply waging war culturally, but depending on your opponents, you can' t focus on this to the exclusion of your own safety.
religion allows you a greater foothold on establishing yourself culturally early...but as I stated above...you need the flexibility to flex your muscles militarily and industriously to not only build items of culture (industry and religion), but to eliminate the compeition's ability to promote their own culture by tearing down their infrastructure. The key is the quantity of cities established and their internal growth...if you have more cities you can use those extra cities to build culture...the fewer the opponent has, the less culture they build, pure and simple. I've found that to take out cities requires not simply a strong military, but one that can overwhelm an opponent quickly so as not to drain your own treasury and industry goals. Hit quick, hard and eliminate or sue for a peace with a crippling peace treaty!
You can aim for simply waging war culturally, but depending on your opponents, you can' t focus on this to the exclusion of your own safety.
hmmm.... nobody uses China except for me??
well.. 1 thing i can tell u is.. those raiders are great..
and they become vet or elite really quick.. plus if u have a good roading network.. half a dozen raiders inside my zone of control can pretty much look after all my cities (except for my front line cities) so i can spare most of my forces on the assult toward the enemy's capital. any enemy units slips through my front line force will get picked off by my raiders with ease (i love their high movement pt).
well.. 1 thing i can tell u is.. those raiders are great..
and they become vet or elite really quick.. plus if u have a good roading network.. half a dozen raiders inside my zone of control can pretty much look after all my cities (except for my front line cities) so i can spare most of my forces on the assult toward the enemy's capital. any enemy units slips through my front line force will get picked off by my raiders with ease (i love their high movement pt).
Similar threads
- Poll
