What do you think your favorite civ will be in civ3?

[Whiskey Priest]

Unserfritz,pick up a bloody book. First of lets talk of your "sweep" of French history. You seem to forget their was a period between Waterloo and WW1. During this time France turned from a nation that was ravaged by war and complete poverty to nation that was considered to be the strongest in Europe (thats why the Germans focused so much poliical and military pressure on them). Secondly, your criteria for judging a nation is complete stupid, and your facts are wrong. A nations industriousness should be defined by what cars it manufactures? Stupid! (as for engineering, French Engines Dominated F1 circuits during the mid nineties, Driven buy such great drivers as Damon hill and my Fav Jacques Villneuve). You state that French are "a far cry from an industrious and commercial nation. At least a quarter (25%) if not more of the population is employed by the government. " your point being? are you saying that people who work for the government aren't indutrious? Well lets look at the two systems we are talking about. A free market nation, like the United States, employs very few public servents. A mixed market nation like say Denmark has strong social institutions manned by many public servents. Now I'll let you guess which naiton had a higher rate of growth over the past fifteen years. Well if you said the Americans YOU ARE DEAD F*@^ING WRONG. So if you want to talk about this subject, I welcome it. But I caution you, post Ideas based on misconceptions, stereotypes and second hand "facts" agian and you will be ridiculed to the end of time!!!!!!

GOD BLESS THE FRENCH REPUBLIC!!!!!!

 

[Dell19]

What about the Mongols?!?!?!

Anyway they get my vote even if they aren't on your poll
I am currrently using them alot on Civ 2 so I will probably carry on the trend...

 

[Karl Marx the Penguin]

Sorry to say Dell but the glorious mongol horde is not in the game.

Neither are the Spanish.
Or The Carthagians (I never thought they belonged in any case)
Or Vikings, or Celts.
The Sioux have been replaced by Iroquois (who represent all Native Americans.)

This Means of Course you can't be overrun by mongol hordes, while facing the Spanish Inquisition, while fighting the Punic wars, and defending yourself from the mighty north.

All I know is that it just became a lost easier to breathe in Europe.

I voted French, but I've already stated that in the first poll. I feel no need to go through that harangue.

 

[Knight-Dragon]

Originally posted by Whisket Priest
Industrious: adjective: Characterized by steady attention and effort

Industrious is a bad characteristic. All of these nations were industrious in their own way. The chinese were industrious TO THE END of defence (great wall), The americans are industrious TO THE END of commerce (global market dominance), The babylonians were industrious TO THE END of religion (building of religious structures and temples). Saying one nation is more industrious then another is ridiculus, their industriousness was merely focused towards different ends.

I think industrious here means manufacturing capability i.e. production shields. Anyway I voted for the Chinese. Well, it's the civ true to the game, existing in 4000 BC till now. Plus I'm Chinese.

 

[Erdrick]

Greeks

 

[WUM]

why the french??? for one extra commerce in centre?? No way!!!

i gave it more thought and concluded that Egyptians rule!!!

 

[JayKay]

Originally posted by WUM
why the french??? for one extra commerce in centre?? No way!!!

Yeah...i forgot that!! You're right!!

I wasn't thinking of the effects, i was only thinking on the theory of the name!!

Giving it another thought, perhaps the Persians and the Chinese are the Best.

The Chinese have the best unit of the two civs in question - the Chinese Rider (Attack - 4; Defense - 4; Move - 3) with two bonus (defense and moves) against the Standard Kights!!

So...the Chinese are the best for the military conquest!! (Militaristic and Industrous)

And the Persians for the pacific conquest!! (Scientific and Industrous)

I think that the Persians are probably the best choice cause a free advance per era and the bronze working advance from the beggining of the game is a chance not be wasted!! (Lets face it - the battlefield promotions and the reduced military improvement cost is not a very big bonus)
The reduced science improvement cost is more of a bonus in the Persians, thought combined with the industrous bonus will significally reduce the time to build them!!

So i think i'll go for the Persians!!

 

[WUM]

i´d stay with the egyptions!
on the industrious part, we agree.

when playing a peacefull game you want to boost your culture, i presume...
so you´ll build all the religious building for this. The earlier the better, because the older the improvement is, the more culture it generates, the better are the changes of swallowing enemy-cities.
the results are that you have a better change for really staying peacelful and you can expand anyway. Besides you do not have a scientific penalty against your opponents, so you will be the number 1-scientific civ anyway.

 

[JayKay]

Originally posted by WUM
i´d stay with the egyptions!
on the industrious part, we agree.

when playing a peacefull game you want to boost your culture, i presume...
so you´ll build all the religious building for this. The earlier the better, because the older the improvement is, the more culture it generates, the better are the changes of swallowing enemy-cities.
the results are that you have a better change for really staying peacelful and you can expand anyway. Besides you do not have a scientific penalty against your opponents, so you will be the number 1-scientific civ anyway.

Define "...scientific penalty against your opponents..." please!!

 

[WUM]

i mean simply what i said: there is no scientific penalty.

when your civ is scientific you will get a bonus, but when it´s not scientific you do not get a penalty. In civ2 i usually am scientifically superior anyway so i do not need the bonus. That way i rather have other bonusses. So i choose the Egyptians for the other bonus!

Maybe when i can´t be superior on the scientific level anymore in civ3 because on Deity-level it seems to be *very* hard to win, i presume because of harsh cheating by the AI, i might try to play with an scientific civ.
but as long as i can be scientifically superior, i do not need the bonus and rather have another bonus.

Hail the Magnificent:

 

[JayKay]

Originally posted by WUM
i mean simply what i said: there is no scientific penalty.

when your civ is scientific you will get a bonus, but when it´s not scientific you do not get a penalty. In civ2 i usually am scientifically superior anyway so i do not need the bonus. That way i rather have other bonusses. So i choose the Egyptians for the other bonus!

Maybe when i can´t be superior on the scientific level anymore in civ3 because on Deity-level it seems to be *very* hard to win, i presume because of harsh cheating by the AI, i might try to play with an scientific civ.
but as long as i can be scientifically superior, i do not need the bonus and rather have another bonus.

Hail the Magnificent:

Exactly...you'll have to use a Scientific Civ in higher difficulty levels!! That we agree!!

But even in lower difficulty leves i don't see that the lower production cost of religious improvements (does not include Wonders - I think) can be very advantageous, as you already have a production bonus to all things (improvements/units/Wonders) with the Industrous factor; and perhaps you can take more advantage with the free advance for each era and reduced science improvement cost (Scientific)!!

However if the lower production cost includes wonders perhaps we should think twice!!

P.S.: Is Small Wonders or/and Large Wonders considered an improvement in Civ III?

 

[WUM]

i´m not so sure if i *need* a scientific civ on higher levels. It is very well possible above prince-level since the AI will cheat more vigorously.. But i want to experience this first. In civ2 i hardly ever have scientific problems.

so i reckon i do not need a scientific civ at least up to prince-level. I want to build the religious building cheaper and because of that faster and earlier because of their cumulative culture-value!

I think this will be VERY important in a peaceful civ3-game.
So an early production-bonus and cheaper religious buildings will give me status so trading becomes easier (and with it: making a lot of money). Also absorbing enemycities without battle will be great. So the bigger my culture, the better my civ. Al this of course only in a peaceful game.

i know Wonders are something else as improvements. I guess this will be the same for small wonders.

 

[JayKay]

Well...i guess i'll just have to play and see!!

This is still a very preliminar discussion and we'll have to see how the game behaves!!

 

[stravaig]

I would have sworn that just a couple weeks ago there /were/ no Scientific and Industrious civs. I scoured that chart. Sheesh, do I ever feel imperceptive!

Well, make mine Persian!! I've always been science-boy and throwing Industrious into the mix just seems like overkill. I was convinced there were no Scientific and Industrious civs just because it would be imballancing!

- Stravaig

 

[joespaniel]

I voted Germans.

Just because I like 'em, not for any "game-specific" reason.

Sometimes I edit in the Prussians as my tribe.

I do play the Americans sometimes, but have to change the city names to more colonial ones. Otherwise, no matter where I put the cities, it looks weird on the map to me.

The French, Russians and English are OK. I'm stuck on European tribes.

I'm German-Irish-Polish, ,what can I say...

Americans are mutts.


BTW-Anyone thinking WhisketPriest might be 'French'-Canandian

 

[MindRunner]

Originally posted by Sukenis
I think many of you are missing the point of this poll/thread. It is not "Which Civ Will be The Best in Civ 3" it is "What do you think your favorite civ will be in civ3?"

First Off: The Portuguese should be there from the beginning. And if they were, they would be my obvious choice.

But they are not.

This way, my favourite Civs are the Egyptians and the Babylonians, for the ancient ones, and the English and the Germans for the modern ones. These are really the ones I've ever liked to play with, so far.

And the new characteristics are making me very worried, because the Civs with the best ones, are the ones which I like the less (Persians, Greeks, French). :-(

I hope this will not spoil the pleasure of the game, but I guess that I will have to play with Civs that I don't like if I want to have any change of winning the way I'm used to: Commerce, Science, followed by growth.

 

[joespaniel]

I think you can change the characteristics with the editor.

 

[Peteus]

You can also turn off the special characteristics if you don't like the way they change or "unbalance" the game. But I like 'em all! I'm sure I will like some better than others, but I'll only figure out which when I get a feel through experience.

I like industrious, because I'm a perfect-core-cities type rather than an aggressive expansionist. At the same time though, I'm a big proponent of a few powerful military units, which will make the "armies" that result from faster battlefield promotions very attractive to me (in fact, it sounds like being the first to put an army in the field will be an overwhelming advantage while it lasts, in close quarters.
Result - Chinese. Which is just fine, because their special unit looks like it will dominate the middle ages. Which will be a bigger deal if the ages are better balanced than they were in Civ II, where ancient times dragged on for 4-5000 years, the age of sail flashed by in about 10 turns, and then the modern age basically took over immediately for the last third of the game, playing-time-wise.

Yet - I voted Aztecs!
I think I like their combo best. I anticipate playing by building a small elite military force that nearby civs will fear (Militaristic - Armies and cheap city walls), while emphasising culture above all (Religious - allowing me to build the most ancient and venerated temples in the world.) I hope that will prove a winning combination for me!
I am leery of the Aztec special unit though. It will be a great cheap explorer and hut-popper, but my first hostile contact will probably trigger a precious golden age (assuming I win the fight!) prematurely. 20 turns of "King Richards Crusade" in every city will be a much bigger deal with 15 size 8 cities than with 1 size 2 city (advantage Chinese again)! On the other hand, there may be a point in the early game where a golden age could mean temples in 4 cities being built 1000 years before they would have been otherwise (because of the expanded timeframe per turn), which depending on how culture is calculated, could be the key to cultural victory.
Oh, and one last plug for religion - that no-anarchy government switch (Statue of Liberty) provides a nice advantage, especially strategically in the mid-to-late game to bounce between Democracy (pacifist building up) and Communism (for an orgy of unfettered conquest!) Assuming of course that that stuff works relatively the same way we are familiar with, and I assume it does.

All that said, I'm going to get a terrific kick out of trying each of the combinations! And opening "negotions" with whoever this strangely familiar gal from Thunderfall's recent post is... Mysterious Babylonian Art Page
I know Hammurabi...and she's no Hammurabi!

 

[Big_Time_Charlie]

I think those with a commercial slant will have a nice little advantage throughout the game as a whole. Some things like Military slants will be excellent in the first few ages but I think for the long term strategy it all comes down to money at the end of the day. If you look at what is being added to Civ 3 there is a huge amount of change with the introduction on economics (war/peace) and money supporting units etc. Plus the need for trade and resources seems very intresting. Gone are the days of maximising shields, more focus on establishing trade and commerce to not only run your civ but also your armies I think will be a major advantage to those who can do it well , from the game start to finish.

With borders and all that too, eastablishing an empire and getting hold of resources quickly wiil also be important. You cant build up your core cities and then start looking to set up cities close/inside other peoples lands anymore, seems establishing your borders quickly I think will be important to get a decent grip. Civ 3 will also result in more of the Ai civs surviving for longer than they presently do, establishing a decent size civ with a number of resources will be key or just expanding far enough to create a buffer to keep others out so you can later expand within will be what I expect to do. Trying to wage war across the globe will be difficult, as with so many options open to win I think this might in fact be the hardest way to make progress in the game even though I know they have overhauled the military side a lot.

therefore based on these comments I will go for theeeee

English as your best bet for long term suitability !! But I would say that being English myself. Have no idea what there special unit will be, but with all the other civs ive seen so far having their special untis in the early parts of the game, I think the English will have a nice advantage if the golden age thingy pops up half way to 2/3 through the game.

Of course the most played and popular Civ will be America, particularly with the present situation and the release date what it is!

Well then thats me done

Laters

 

[ChrTh]

I like the Persians. Sure, Alexander whupped them, but they held off the Romans. That's pretty impressive!

Although I think I might create a custom Civ for the Parthians, and give them a Horseman/Archer unique unit.