Which Civ do you use the most?

[timerover51]

I really like Seafaring tribes myself. They especially make things nice for a 20k game.

Interesting, Spoonwood, finally something that we can agree on.

Yeah, this is the exact reason why I shy away from Carthage. I've had many an early golden age started with this Civ because some joker ROP raped me and my Numidian Mercenary beat him. The plus side to this is since you have a golden age you can produce an onslaught of units to teach the cheeky bugger not to mess with you.

That is one of the reasons that I made a mod with the Carthaginian Unique Unit being a Carthaginian War Elephant, available with Horseback Riding. Optionally, you could also make the available setting be Feudalism, and by then you probably are going to be either at Monarchy or Republic, and be able to take better advantage of the Golden Age.

 

[Fiddlin Nero]

Looks like quite a spread from everybody. I'm surprised not to see Egypt, my current favorite. I like to switch between Democracy and Monarchy with my warring so the religious quick turn-around is very useful. The industrious trait, IMHO, doubling worker efficiency has the most notable effect on the game.

 

[da3dalus]

I've never really used Egypt much before. I am a huge fan of the religious trait because of the short anarchy period and the cheap temples/cathedrals, but I think the benefits of seafaring outweigh those of the religous trait. (Albeit, only on continent or archipelago maps ^_^)

As for industrious, I've never found it to help me all that much. If I'm not mistaken, the effects of that trait were toned down somewhat in Conquests?

 

[MGS]

America, just because thats who im used to, and Germany

 

[Lord Emsworth]

Looks like quite a spread from everybody. I'm surprised not to see Egypt, my current favorite. I like to switch between Democracy and Monarchy with my warring so the religious quick turn-around is very useful. The industrious trait, IMHO, doubling worker efficiency has the most notable effect on the game.

Using upgrades should work well with Egypt. The possibility of building 20 shield War Chariots and upgrading those to Knights or Cavs ... tempting.

 

[timerover51]

I've never really used Egypt much before. I am a huge fan of the religious trait because of the short anarchy period and the cheap temples/cathedrals, but I think the benefits of seafaring outweigh those of the religous trait. (Albeit, only on continent or archipelago maps ^_^)

If the is the case, Da3alus, you might want to try the Spanish sometime, as they are Seafaring and Religious.

As for industrious, I've never found it to help me all that much. If I'm not mistaken, the effects of that trait were toned down somewhat in Conquests?

I believe that the effects were reduced from 100% to 50%, which does reduce the attractiveness of it. I do not think that it is possible to change that in the editor. I would have to check on that.

 

[Rodrig0]

I believe that the effects were reduced from 100% to 50%, which does reduce the attractiveness of it. I do not think that it is possible to change that in the editor. I would have to check on that.

And industrious gets even more useless the more you like to have slaves. It helps at the beginning, the first few turns when my first worker has a lot of work to do all alone, but as I begin to do war, I like to rush slaves out of cities recently conquered. So I tend to have A LOT of them, so I can use my national workers to join my cities and produce gold and be happy, and leave the dirty work to the maggots. And because slaves get no advantage of being industrious, the trait is wasted.

 

[timerover51]

And industrious gets even more useless the more you like to have slaves. It helps at the beginning, the first few turns when my first worker has a lot of work to do all alone, but as I begin to do war, I like to rush slaves out of cities recently conquered. So I tend to have A LOT of them, so I can use my national workers to join my cities and produce gold and be happy, and leave the dirty work to the maggots. And because slaves get no advantage of being industrious, the trait is wasted.

I do not use slaves to any great degree, so I cannot judge that. I think that the reason the trait bonus was reduced in Conquests is that they changed the rate of production for some of the governments to a higher rate. Adding the Industrious Trait bonus of 100% would really make some of the governments quite overpowered.

 

[SleeperLv]

3 of my top 5 games are with Egypt. For my playstile, industrious/religious and war chariots - mega early unit, that dont become absolete until knights?????? Thats just way too imbalanced I usually take over half of the world before birth of christ!

Also have china in top 5(on emperor - not monarch level) and some pretty cheaty diplomatic games with stuff like byzanties, sumers, babylonians... cheaty because - you can win game without having single military unit? And there are almoust no drawbacks? Aw comon......)

 

[Bowsling]

I like the Dutch and the Maya, the Dutch being because of their generally great traits, and Swiss mercs are great for filling an early army, then walking around pillaging any unit in my path. Also, I guess the AI has this thing about odds, but if they don't have iron or invention, they'll avoid the swiss mercenaries like the plague.
The Maya have two of my favorite traits, and Javelin Thrower + industrious = overkill.
I have this dislike for Germany, mainly because of terrible circumstances in a former game where I started on an island supporting three cities, and a two-tile island near my native island. I had horses, but no iron and I built the GLH, attacked a coastal Incan city with a bunch of archers, and they couldn't beat just two spearmen.

 

[Spoonwood]

A healthy cavalry army (with 3 units) can walk around and pillage for a long time and not get attacked. A healthy conquistador army can also do this... at least for a while.

 

[Gamemaster77]

I like the mayans. Their industrious agricultural traits are great.

 

[KevinRuddPM]

Same here, some of my biggest cities were Mayan.

 

[timerover51]

A healthy cavalry army (with 3 units) can walk around and pillage for a long time and not get attacked. A healthy conquistador army can also do this... at least for a while.

I am playing Spain for the first time, and I am trying out your idea of a Conquistador army. I must admit that the mobility is awesome. I am still getting it up to the combat zone, however. They would be very useful in another game that I am playing as the Dutch, on a huge continent map. I am on the same continent as the Aztecs, with no iron and no horses, but a monopoly on ivory. I am depending for cavalry on the Statue of Zeus. The conquistadors would make a very nice supplement.

 

[SleeperLv]

I like the Dutch and the Maya, the Dutch being because of their generally great traits, and Swiss mercs are great for filling an early army, then walking around pillaging any unit in my path. Also, I guess the AI has this thing about odds, but if they don't have iron or invention, they'll avoid the swiss mercenaries like the plague.
The Maya have two of my favorite traits, and Javelin Thrower + industrious = overkill.
I have this dislike for Germany, mainly because of terrible circumstances in a former game where I started on an island supporting three cities, and a two-tile island near my native island. I had horses, but no iron and I built the GLH, attacked a coastal Incan city with a bunch of archers, and they couldn't beat just two spearmen.

That's because youre not supposed to attack like that with germany. At least in general. They are scientific and militaristic, militaristic yes, but they dont have anything for early game. Like industrious, agricultural, no early UU, no early alphabet. So they need some higher level units before they attack. And also they lack in mobility. I mean, you attack with medieval infantries/horseman or smthn a target thats far away, but because you're focusing on science, by the time medieval infantries/horseman or smthn get there you already might have knights, so you take 1 city, turn back, upgrade all your units and attack again... My belief is that they are same as ottoman, scientific industrious. Eventhou they have industrious, until siphai(8/3/3 cavalry replacer), they are pretty weak. And also no early golden age, so with those kindof civs imho its pretty hard to play like that. You take a risk, if you lose - youre put yourself in waay worse position compared to what other early civs could be.

P.S. Yeah i also like Maya, i think by the traits itself they should be most powerful civ in game!! But in reality it appears that they are lacking a lot of different stuff. For example theyr Javelin Thrower are good unit for capturing cities/defending, but far not the best. Tech tree by itself forces you to make warrior code early on, when instead you could make bronze working and iron working(Swordies vs Javelins) and you can upgrade them only to longbowman. I think Three-man chariot, War chariot(egiptian chariot - my favorite, Mounted warrior(probably best UU in entire game), Zulu imp, Dromon and few others are much better then Javelin Thrower. And also usually scientific civs are usually ahead in techs, seafaring in contacts=wealth(more gold, more everything). So when i play Mayans, i am almoust always in middle of everyone, only when my cities become crazy big, then i start to lead. But thats usually isnt happening so soon. And also i often get stuck on 12 population, due to lack of cathedrals/hospitals/colliseums in my cities(on Monarchy lack hospitals, on Republic lack cathedrals/collieums.)

So i dont know, they look really awesome at first, but i've played like 10 or more games with them and usually dont get as high score in the end as i would expect.... With egyptians i usually get such and overkill))) I mean that just should NOT be happening. They conquer so friggin fast! Oh man)))

 

[Spoonwood]

I thought this a "use most" not "best" civ thread. On the "best civ" idea for the Maya and the Ottomans, check the HoF. They both excel for certain game types.

 

[Bowsling]

That's because youre not supposed to attack like that with germany. At least in general. They are scientific and militaristic, militaristic yes, but they dont have anything for early game. Like industrious, agricultural, no early UU, no early alphabet. So they need some higher level units before they attack. And also they lack in mobility. I mean, you attack with medieval infantries/horseman or smthn a target thats far away, but because you're focusing on science, by the time medieval infantries/horseman or smthn get there you already might have knights, so you take 1 city, turn back, upgrade all your units and attack again... My belief is that they are same as ottoman, scientific industrious. Eventhou they have industrious, until siphai(8/3/3 cavalry replacer), they are pretty weak. And also no early golden age, so with those kindof civs imho its pretty hard to play like that. You take a risk, if you lose - youre put yourself in waay worse position compared to what other early civs could be.

Did you not read most of the post? I didn't have Iron, and I had four cities, no more. Attacking that Incan city was do-or-die, because otherwise I would have gotten out paced on every level without access to the main continent and it's resources. I realized I'm not supposed to attack like that as Germany, but why don't you give a three-city island starting location without seafaring and with three tiles of sea connecting the island?
Also, what Spoonwoood said. Because of that experience I don't play the Germans, not that I think they are particularly bad.

 

[SleeperLv]

Did you not read most of the post? I didn't have Iron, and I had four cities, no more. Attacking that Incan city was do-or-die, because otherwise I would have gotten out paced on every level without access to the main continent and it's resources. I realized I'm not supposed to attack like that as Germany, but why don't you give a three-city island starting location without seafaring and with three tiles of sea connecting the island?
Also, what Spoonwoood said. Because of that experience I don't play the Germans, not that I think they are particularly bad.

Okey dokey. Its not like i'm trying to, i dunno, accuse you of something or whatever you might think. You did what you thought was best, good for you! Just sharing my expirience, thought you might be interested;P

 

[Snarkhunter]

I thought this a "use most" not "best" civ thread. On the "best civ" idea for the Maya and the Ottomans, check the HoF. They both excel for certain game types.

Along those lines, probably Maya & China. But I've been deliberately branching out & trying different civs for quite a while. I feel I should try all, yet at the same time, some are so unattractive to me that when the time comes to roll a new start, well, I just pass them by. I guess I've used about half by now.

kk

 

[KevinRuddPM]

Why is everyone bad mouthing carthage? I had quite a big army of Numidian Mercenaries in my Golden Age.