Authority Ethiopia with God of expand is very fun to play you know![]()
I'd probably argue that Russia does that strategy better

Authority Ethiopia with God of expand is very fun to play you know![]()
Im not comparing, I just wanna say its fun![]()
Yeah, but Byzantium does the same thing but BETTER. Reduced faith buy costs, bonus belief, and no competition for beliefs. The only thing I think Spain does better is they get their religion online faster via settling....and that's about it. I can buy cheap inquisitors for rival pressure.hmmm Spain, interresting mention. i wouldn't wait a civ like this to be picked. they can be played more ways, thought passive and peacefull they resigning on their huge faith income.
For me it's Spain. Isabella just doesn't have anything unique to offer to religion that the Celts or Byzantium don't do better.
No one beats Spain in raw faith output when Spain is conquering, she not only gets a ton of Faith on city capture but also saves Faith on Missionaries/Inquisitors. And the Mission gives a bunch of Faith that had clear synergy with her UA.For me it's Spain. Isabella just doesn't have anything unique to offer to religion that the Celts or Byzantium don't do better.
Just want to reiterate that the thread is more about interesting to play than raw power...as I can already see people getting out their balance pitchforks
Are you talking about my proposal? Because additional part of UA could make a civ more interesting to play.Everyone is going to have a civ or two they don't like. That does not mean that said civ needs a buff.
G
I'll agree, but this is a question can answer what civs may be lacking a niche at best and an idle opinion poll at worst.Everyone is going to have a civ or two they don't like. That does not mean that said civ needs a buff.
G
I wouldnt say Ethiopia is simple, It require lots of planing ahead and timing!It's good to have a boring civ like Poland, actually. When a new player asks what civ to play, we point them towards Poland and Ethiopia because they are plain simple, therefore they're perfect for learning the other mechanics.
Their ability to not receive religious conversion/pressure does seem a bit situational. If there's a religious powerhouse spamming pressure everywhere, it's a godsend. Otherwise, it does very little, it'll prevent a bit of religious unhappiness/Inquisitor usage at least.
Also, despite being able to buy naval units and her UB with Faith, I don't think she has any persistent sources of additional Faith income, I thought Missions gave Faith on citizen birth but the wiki says Gold and Food. All the more reason Isabella wants to go Wide, I suppose, and she has less Faith expenses from going Wide than another Civ would. It evidently does work well enough in practice since Spain tends to be an effective AI.
And speaking of a lack of persistent advantages, Conquistadors are strong (Knights are already very powerful for their point in the game and Conquistadors have another 5 base CS on top of that) but unlike most other UUs they don't have any promotions that can be passed on (except maybe Defensive Embarkation) so you need to make the most of them while they're around.
For me it's any purely or near-purely warmonger civ that makes me feel like Authority is the "only" way to go. I do occasionally enjoy the romp-across-the-continent-to-own-it playstyle, but very much my preferred approach is more peaceful after I've established "my turf" (obviously depending on the game what that means).
I wouldnt say Ethiopia is simple, It require lots of planing ahead and timing!