What kind of player are you?

[UWHabs]

I'm a warmonger/builder.

Generally expand to my 3-4 core cities. Then I turtle and build build build. When the time is right for me, I usually start my run taking everyone down in turn. I find it snowballs after the first guy, I'll have my standing army big enough, and my economy will be strong enough that my main cities can go back to just building whatever wonders or buildings I want as my army takes over the world (with an occasionally purchased unit coming along).

 

[blasto]

I like to rollplay based on the civ/leader I choose. But because of game dynamics it almost always ends up being me against the world, which is still fun. There is still something satisfying about going to war against a Civ because of insults and taunts from them, just to eventually have them pleading for peace once I kick their azz. Just to have them repeat and then I'll wipe them off the map completely.

 

[warmonger]

I'm a total warmonger. Go to war at the first opportunity, and stop when all are crushed.

Anything other than a domination win is just too much "end turn" clicking for me.

To prove how simplistic Civ V is I'm halfway through winning with all leaders using exactly the same strategy with very minor situational deviations. Unique units, unique abilities or buildings have very little influence.

Game set up is immortal, standard size, marathon (because I like warfare in the ancient and classic eras), raging barbs, random map.

I'm going through the list of leaders alphabetically and am currently dominating with Monty. I'm surprised at how easy it has been. Only ever build my capital and one other city. Never any more.

Doubt it would work on Deity but I might try when I finish the list on immortal.

 

[timtofly]

I go with the flow of the land and necessity. Trying to keep that "organic" spirit alive.

 

[svett89]

Depends a lot on what civ I'm playing as and what map type I'm on. On a pangea as any civilization with decent military capabilities I'll go scorched earth all the way, creating a massive puppet empire and eventually just sitting there hoarding cash after maxing out the tech tree. Usually I end up being somewhere in the middle though. Some expansive wars, but mostly just building up my empire and focusing on science.

 

[Nirosi]

Mostly I play on trade,because ==units rushing==.

 

[Timothy001]

Like others, it depends on Civ, map, and opponents. I always play random civs, random map, random size. If I come across any Militaristic civ, its warmonger time. Otherwise, you could end up dead. Currently in the middle of a game, Myself Hawii, vs Japan, ENgland, & Siam. 2 contenents, sharing with Japan. Saw the military build up, and was prepared for DoW. LOst 1 city near the end. Then took 4 of his cities, he sued for peace, offering all but Capital and Tokyo. Recently Siam and England have been fighting. England is friendly to me, while Siam is hostile. Thinking about sending the army to Siam.

 

[Rockstone]

Other than the early rush (getting that nearby second capital location with about 5 warriors, before the "target" Civ has a 2nd city), I develop my civilization (cities and techs). If I don't get declared war on me (sometimes that rush leads to this), I start my major war in the 15/1600's, with the appearance of macemen / musketmen. Usually a war that nets me 4 to 5 cities. These additional cities, when developped, provide the edge to eventual victory. Usually...

 

[NZL]

I chose other.
Currently, I'm working my way up the difficulty ladder and I want to attain each type of victory except "Time" on a level before moving to the next.

 

[spider1]

Generally, I play peacefully, but with a good military to back myself up just in case. There is no way you play Civ V without conflict, so you have to stay prepared for war even if that's not your game plan.