Which is better...........(poll)

[Harbringer]

A very hard choice indeed.......

 

[Tomoyo]

Why the Koreans and Americans?

 

[Harbringer]

because thats a hard one, they both suk, so i make a poll to decide who the lesser sukiest of the two.

 

[general_kill]

=X thought this was the off topic forum

i thought he was actually talking about in real life lol.

 

[Seth the Dark]

Radioactive monkey all the way!!!

 

[Richard Cribb]

America. Despite that its UU is not exactly great, its potential for early expansion is terrific.
Those who wants to play with Dubya as leaderhead and minuteman as UU should check out this mod:http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=111681
As for Korea, it is Ok but I for one find it quite tricky being only an average Emperor level player. And why play Korea except for the challenge of it when Greece is available?

 

[Tomoyo]

because thats a hard one, they both suk, so i make a poll to decide who the lesser sukiest of the two.

Why can't we pick some worse civ, like Portugal?

 

[Reno]

Why can't we pick some worse civ, like Portugal?

Because Portugal's UU is a lot better then the ones America and Korea have to offer.

 

[Tomoyo]

Because Portugal's UU is a lot better then the ones America and Korea have to offer.

I call anyone that's not Arathorn to the stand to testify for me.

 

[DS_Legionary]

Portugals UU is one of the absolute worst IMO. It lasts for way to short an amount of time to be effective. Now the American UU is almost as useless IMO also, but the Korean H'Wacha is one of the most underestimated UU's of all time. The Lethal bombard ability is the greatest in the game. To kill without risk is a great thing.

 

[Portugal]

Radio active monkey of course!

 

[soul_warrior]

i would have to vote Korea. fire cannon rocks!
and i agree there are worse civs - like portugal
but im an underdog kind of player. i like the losers.

 

[Beorn-eL-Feared]

H'watcha is a terriffic UU: infantry+hwatcha can march on and never be stopped by anything. Just make enough H'watcha (stacks of like 30) and 4-5 infantries to defend each, and nothing will stand in your way on emperor. You might need a few extra of both on demi+.

Portugal blows, and the F-15, even though barely useful, is much better than a transport that can attack. No one should attack with a transport.

 

[Tomoyo]

Portugal blows, and the F-15, even though barely useful, is much better than a transport that can attack. No one should attack with a transport.

*Coughcoughdromoncoughcoughcough*

 

[bmlb]

I prefer UU's that are later in the game, because I try to aviod wars untill I am technologicially advanced, so I have to go with the Americans. However, if you end up dead before Rocketry, then the F-15 doesn't do you any good (not that it's all that great anyway. ) I also really like both of Korea's charicteristics.

Maybe it's just because I'm biased, but I think I'll have to vote for America becuase the F-15 is still around when I do most of my fighting.

 

[Cam_H]

Like Luceafarul, I play a fairly average Emperor level game on single-player C3C, however I lean towards the Koreans (albeit I've played each only once) as I'm a bit of a fan of the Commercial trait. They are, however two very different types of Civs.

The Americans are brilliant starters, however their suped-up fighter 'plane towards the other end of the timeline I personally have found to be largely ineffectual. While on the UUs, I agree with the Civ review of the Koreans in that the Hwach'a sits in an awkward spot on the tech' tree for them, who are well served by pursuing the top-line techs that lead to cheap universities and reduced corruption-affected banks (and to Adam Smith's Trading Co. {if you're in to building Wonders}). I've found that trading through the bottom-tier can be super expensive if I'm lagging significantly in technology, and aren't the first to discover some of the top tier ones, so getting to Metallurgy quickly can be a real challenge. But maybe that's just me.

As the Civ reviews point out, the Korean traits tend to favour the mid- to late-game with a tendency to focus more on infrastructure, while the American traits are geared towards establishing its dominance in the Ancient Era - albeit somewhat map-dependant.

I'm surprised that bmlb ^ leans towards the Americans, as a Korean empire in half-decent condition by the Industrial Era can really start to assert its strength from then on.

 

[bmlb]

I'm surprised that bmlb ^ leans towards the Americans, as a Korean empire in half-decent condition by the Industrial Era can really start to assert its strength from then on.

Do you attribute the Korean "half-decent condition" to their being scientific? If so, I have to agree with you. My only response to your comment can be from my last post

Maybe it's just because I'm biased

and my signature! Maybe I'll just have to give the Koreans a little more of a chance!

 

[Cam_H]

Do you attribute the Korean "half-decent condition" to their being scientific? If so, I have to agree with you.

(Repeats credentials ... 'average' Emperor player, no Sid-level zen master! Happy to be corrected by a Sid-level zen master.)

I think that the 'scientific' trait pretty well infers that you're doing your own science to at least part keep up with the AI, rather than relying almost entirely on trading or demanding techs through the game. As a scientific empire, you will probably research the rarer aspects of the tree and line up trades for the rest.

While I'm no devoted advocate of the scientific trait, its cheap libraries can help with culture flips, and it's a handy trait for cultural victories. The free techs at the start of each era are a good plus, but at higher levels it's less likely that you'll be a technology leader, and you'll often just pick up techs that most other civs will already have, so it's of limited trading value - albeit at least you'll be trading at a more advanced level of the tree. The improved chance of picking up a great scientific leader is nice, but I wouldn't think that it warrants selecting the trait over some others. I think the higher the difficulty level, the less potent this trait becomes.

The 'commercial' trait lifts the optimum city number by one-quarter to one-half (as I read it, contingent on difficulty) thereby acting to counter the extent of corruption and waste in larger empires. Extra production shields and science / cash / luxury help with managing medium to larger empires, especially those with a sound infrastructure base where improvements such as marketplaces have a multiplier effect.

It was as much if not more so the 'commercial' aspect of the Civ, plus the lethal bombard and the possibly late but not absolutely horrendously late golden age (just before Cavalry) that I thought put the Koreans in a reasonable position for expansion from then on.

By a 'half decent' position, I was envisaging a Civ that had good access to key resources and some luxuries, 'say' 30-ish fairly well developed cities on a standard or large map, not too far behind in tech', generally a reasonable military, probably sitting in The Republic for much of the game, at least an OK reputation, and so on. Maybe sitting third or fourth in terms of score.

With a good infrastructure developed with a commercial focus, the human player is increasingly in a position to begin to exploit the weaknesses of the AI as the game progresses from the late Middle Ages. Stacks of doom, bombardment, initiating dog piles, wonder pre-builds, and so forth can be more effectivly engineered with more advantageous outcomes in the latter part of the game than earlier on, where arguably the AI's advantages are more pronounced at the start.

With the opportunity to be closing in on tech parity with the top AI Civs and Communism in the not-too-distant future, Korea with its UU, free Industrial Age tech' not far away, likely Golden Age (if not already triggered), and 'commercial' trait bonuses can set itself to strike a blow in the Industrial Age provided that it's established a competitive position to that point.

Admittedly the Americans' 'industrious' trait is great when railroads kick in, as faster workers building railroads allow for all of the bonuses that stem from railroaded tiles to be delivered back to the empire, but also vastly improved mobility when waging war.

So I guess I'm saying that the Koreans' punch tends to be focussed more in the late Middle Ages and early Industrial Age, and can expand from there. Conversely, the Americans, despite their Modern Age UU, tend to have a strong start to the game in the Ancient Age with their 'expansionist' trait playing a significant role, added with the 'industrious' bonus shields and fast road connections and mining / irrigation working to establish a sound and ideally large base.

As a player who tends to wage wars in the later game, it occured to me that the Koreans' traits may have suited your style to some extent.

 

[slightlymarxist]

I prefer Korea. The Hwach'a is really pretty good since it has lethal bombardment. And Com/Sci is synergistic. Think about Greece.

But it's a personal choice. Both are builder variants. America starts off faster because of Exp. Korea is better for longer games IMO.

 

[eldar]

Hey, until COTM11, I would've said the Radioactive Monkey! However having played with Hwach'as properly... they're cool. Don't knock them! Lethal bombardment from the mid-MA? Hmm, nice. They can sink ships too