1. We have added a Gift Upgrades feature that allows you to gift an account upgrade to another member, just in time for the holiday season. You can see the gift option when going to the Account Upgrades screen, or on any user profile screen.
    Dismiss Notice

Which leader to play?

Discussion in 'Team Kazakhstan' started by donsig, Nov 15, 2008.

  1. donsig

    donsig Low level intermediary

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2001
    Messages:
    12,895
    Location:
    Rochester, NY
    I think it's a good idea to do some thinking about which leader we want to play while we think about game settings and map style.

    Since we don't know if we'll be isolated or have early contact we should consider a military type leader, protective if we want to be peaceful or aggressive if we want to be warlike. Industrious, organized, philosophical or spiritual go nicely with the former while creative, imperialistic or charismatic should work well with the latter. Not all these combinations have corresponding leaders but it narrows the list:

    Genghis Khan (agg. and imp.)
    Boudica (agg. and Char.)

    Qin Shi (prot. and ind.)
    Sitting Bull (prot. and phil.)
    Saladin (prot. and spir.)

    I'm a builder type of guy so my preferences are the three protective leaders in the order I listed them.
     
  2. coreybowman

    coreybowman Warlord

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2008
    Messages:
    102
    i like genghis khan too. i think a finacial civ might be best for this kind of game though... it should go the distance so i think its a huge advantage to be finacial sound.
     
  3. classical_hero

    classical_hero In whom I trust

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2003
    Messages:
    33,262
    Location:
    Perth,Western Australia
    WE need a leader that will synergise the traits and the UU and UB s we can get the best out of or situation. I seriously doubt that early warfare would be done so we should try and get a late UU so that we can put it to great use. ALso we need a UB that will help out near the start. One is Zara, since we get a cool UU and our UB makes good use almost right from the start and we could try something different in getting a cultural victory. We will be able to expand bigger since we have less costs than other teams.
     
  4. CommandoBob

    CommandoBob AbstractArt

    Joined:
    May 18, 2005
    Messages:
    8,231
    Location:
    Too near The Temple of Jerry Jones
    lurker's comment:
    Like classical_hero I don't expect much in the way of early conflict. Having your civ wiped out in the first 50 turns would be a bummer. So I think we can anticipate enough area to build a fair number of cities before we meet someone else. And very little danger of being overrun by someone by a CivIII-type Archer rush.

    Knowing that, we should plan for a mid-game Unique Unit (UU) that matches with a mid-game Unique Building (UB). An early UU/UB might come to soon to do much good and aiming for a late game combo just seems dicey. Especially when dealing with people.

    Beyond this little glimmering of intelligence (which is just restating what donsig and classical_hero posted earlier) I am no help.

    I'll watch, but I don't know enough of Civ4 to make worthwhile suggestions. :sad:
     
  5. cav scout

    cav scout The Continuum

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2008
    Messages:
    2,608
    I would recommend holding off on a leader decision until we know what kind of map and settings we will be playing with. Once we have an idea of what the game will look like we can then come up with a play style and strategy. This in turn should influence what leader we choose.

    With that said I will throw in my two cents now. I also believe that early warfare with other civs is unlikely (who knows about barbs though). I like financial civs- being able to keep your research going strong is important if warfare isn't going to take place until later in the game.
     
  6. classical_hero

    classical_hero In whom I trust

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2003
    Messages:
    33,262
    Location:
    Perth,Western Australia
    HEre are our choices that we can play with I will first list the UU/UB combo's to see which two gives a great synergy and whether they are in what ear, being either early, middle or late. Early being up to Mace/Trebs/ongbows area of units, middle being upto Cavs/ Cannons/Rifles are and late is anything greater.
    It will be best to try and get a middle era UU/UB combo if possible, but we could always get a great middle era UU with an early UB and it still will be good.

    so here are the middle UU/UB combo's
    England with the Redcoat(Rifle+25%gun) and Stock Exchange(bank+15%gold). Stock exchange is great with both Lizzy and Trish,and we know the power of the redcoat. Leaders. Elizabeth: Philo and Fin, Victoria, Fin and Imp, Churchill Char and Pro
    France. Musketeer (musketman +1 movement) and Salon (Observatory +1 free Artist). These two are lacklustre together, so I really see not much use for the French in this game. Leaders. Louis XIV, Cre and Ind. Napoleon, Org and Cha. De Gaulle, Ind and Cha.

    The Middle UU and early UB combos.
    Arabia. Camel Archer (knight no resources) and Madrassa (+2culture and can turn 2 citizens into priests). Leader Sladin, Spi and Pro
    Byzantine. Cataphract (knight+2power is not immune to first strike) and Hippodome (+1happy per5%culture +1 happy for horse). This is actually a good combo since we are using horses and we can extra happiness and if we need to use culture we get twice the happines that we would otherwise get. Leader Justinian I, Spi and Imp
    Ethopia. Oromo warrior (musketman + Drill11+2 +1 first strike, immune to first strikes) and Stele. The UU is awesome with all those bonuses which makes up for a lacklustre UB, well for MP anyway and the traits are not the best either. Leader, Zara, Cre and Org.
    Ottoman. Janissary (Musketman +25% against melee, archery and mounted units) and Hamman (Aqueduct +2 happy). Leaders. Mehmed II, Exp and Org. Suleiman, Philo and Imp.
    Spain. Conquistador (Cuirassier +50% against melee) and Citadel (Castle +5XP points for siege weapons). Leader Isabella, Spi and Exp. Now since we will need plenty of siege weapons Spain could be the choice we need since if we have barracks and Theocracy with the bonus of the Citadel we can hae a level 3 unit from the start and with that we can build both of the epics without even going to war with an opponent, which can be very powerful.

    NOw the only Middle UU/ Late UB combo.
    Russia. Cossack (Cavalry +50% against mounted units) and Research Institute (Laboratory +2 free Scientists). Leaders. Catherine, Imp and Cre, Peter, Exp and Philo, Stalin, Agr an Ind. While the UU is awesome, the UB is not that useful since it is highly unlikely that we would ever get to use it and it is out of the way of most research paths, so it is a civ I rarely use, but peter is a great leade to have with his traits.

    So if I were to choose a civ I would prefer to choose a civ with a fast UU so that we can overwhelm our opponents. MY pick would go to Spain since we could do with the extra XP for seige since they will be very useful in this game. But if you are more concerned about traits, then use that to influence your pick. My second choice would be Byzantine and the Cataphract and since happiness wil be an issue we could do with the UU.
     
  7. cav scout

    cav scout The Continuum

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2008
    Messages:
    2,608
    Well what kind of win do we want to go for?

    I've been reading the archives for the last MTDG and it looks like Team Epsilon got way ahead with science and became a powerhouse no one could challenge. I suspect Team 3 is going to try the same thing again this time, so we need to keep our eyes on them.
     
  8. Jimmy369

    Jimmy369 Warlord

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2008
    Messages:
    139
    Location:
    Manitoba
    I think a relatively balanced civ will be best. That way the other teams can't tell what we are up to until farther into the game. I like Charismatic leaders because they have a mix between a war boost and a happiness boost. I think Churchill, Cyrus, or Hannibal should be our leader. Churchill because he is Char and has a dual middle UU/UB, Cyrus because he has an early UU and easier Settler production, and Hannibal because he is Char and Fin, has a good trade based UB and a horse archer UU.
     
  9. cav scout

    cav scout The Continuum

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2008
    Messages:
    2,608
    I like Elizabeth--> $$$ and redcoats. I think this might be the top pick of some of the other teams though.

    Also, do we want duplicate leaders? I vote no myself.
     
  10. donsig

    donsig Low level intermediary

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2001
    Messages:
    12,895
    Location:
    Rochester, NY
    I also think we should avoid duplicate leaders.

    After reading classical hero's analysis I'm leaning towards Saladin or Churchill. I think we should be wary of choosing a UU that needs a resource. (Never mind this if all UU's need a resource. :lol: )
     
  11. CommandoBob

    CommandoBob AbstractArt

    Joined:
    May 18, 2005
    Messages:
    8,231
    Location:
    Too near The Temple of Jerry Jones
    I do not want a duplicate leader. I consider it unlikely to happen, but even so. :nono:
     
  12. Kaleb

    Kaleb Deity

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2004
    Messages:
    2,451
    Location:
    London
    The trusty Leader Picker comes in handy here!

    The only real use of a UU would be for managing barbs as they are on. But on Monarch I doubt they will be an issue.

    My vote goes for Victoria, Imperialistic and Financial give a boost to REX, general commerce and military. Plus you get Redcoat FTW!

    Wang Kon could be good for keeping a science lead. +10% on Universities, Financial and Protective works well. The UU isn't bad either as even though it's a Catapult you do sometimes use Cats right up until Cannons.

    Ze Germans UU is a great late-era unit. UB is also nice as you do get a lot of factories. We'll just have to hope we're still in the game by the late game... I would go for Bismarck if we were German.

    Charlemagne is also handy if we think we're going to be doing a lot of fighting. Two militaristic traits, plus a good UU and UB that come in middle game.

    The Ottomans also have a good UU and UB, of the two I prefer Suleiman.

    But overall, I still think Financial is such an all-round good trait to have considering we don't know what kind of map we are going to get!!

    The financial leaders are:
    Darius I - early UU, Organised (less useful on med-small maps) :thumbsdown: UB :thumbsup:
    Hannibal - early UU, sea-based UB :thumbsdown: Charismatic :thumbsup:
    Huayna Capac - early UU :thumbsdown: Industrious OK, and UU ok.
    Mansa Musa - early UU and Spiritual :thumbsdown: good UB :thumbsup:
    Pacal II - early UU :thumbsdown: UB ok Expansionist :thumbsup:
    Ragnar - sea based UB and UU :thumbsdown:
    Willem van Oranje - late, sea based UB, sea based UU :thumbsdown:
    Wang Kon - also ok but protective :thumbsdown:

    which leaves:
    Elizabeth
    Victoria
     
  13. donsig

    donsig Low level intermediary

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2001
    Messages:
    12,895
    Location:
    Rochester, NY
    If we must have the financial trait I prefer Mansa Musa, Elizabeth and Wang Kong in that order.
     
  14. cav scout

    cav scout The Continuum

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2008
    Messages:
    2,608
    Well we don't have to have financial... we could go with an aggressive leader if we wanted to surprise attack the first team we make contact with for example (we'd be a marked team though).

    The important thing is to figure out what our strategy is going to be and then select a leader that supports that. Are we going to go for cultural...space race?

    I personally think we should really try to get ahead with science (or at least not fall behind!). If we lead in tech we can shape the game and choose the kind of win we want to go for, if we fall behind we will just be reacting to the dominant teams.

    So I like Elizabeth for $$$, redcoats and great people. I'm open to whatever though if you guys know a better way to stay competitive with tech!
     
  15. Kaleb

    Kaleb Deity

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2004
    Messages:
    2,451
    Location:
    London
    The big problem we have is the lack of knowledge about many of the map variables. This makes it hard to know what traits will be best. There won't be any archer rush but there could be some early conflict or we may want to REX loads early. Or we may need to stretch far to get key resources, water may be a factor or it could be mostly land. Just so many factors that can affect our choices, hence why financial is so good as it's powerful trait for whatever comes. I totally agree with cav that our priority should be tech lead.
     
  16. Jimmy369

    Jimmy369 Warlord

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2008
    Messages:
    139
    Location:
    Manitoba
    While we worry about tech lead we need to think about what kind of economy we are going to try. If we want a specialist economy we need to have a leader capable of getting the Pyramids early. Otherwise go for a Financial leader, either English is good, but I do like Hannibal:dunno:.
     
  17. classical_hero

    classical_hero In whom I trust

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2003
    Messages:
    33,262
    Location:
    Perth,Western Australia
    We could also think of what techs we might want to start off with, since if we want to get a religion strait away we could try for a Mystic civ. but I don't see too much need for an early religion. We could always get one of the later ones.
     
  18. Indiansmoke

    Indiansmoke Deity

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2006
    Messages:
    4,124
    Location:
    Athens, Greece
    Hi all, I am the new addition to the team :)

    Regarding leader I firmly belive we must go for srong economic and developing traits.

    This will be standard size with 5 civs so early warfare seems impropable.

    Financial is a must IMO...so my choice in preference order would be

    Pascal
    V D Orange
    Darious
    Elizabeth
    Victoria
    Mansa
    HC
     
  19. Kaleb

    Kaleb Deity

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2004
    Messages:
    2,451
    Location:
    London
    the only real advantage of an early religion would be if we could also get an early Great Prophet and start generating some cash to help keep a high science rate.

    If we get Elizabeth or Victoria they starts with Mining with makes Pyramid building a bit easier. Obviously Elizabeth would be better if we want to run specialists.

    The more I think of it, the more I think we should be English. Still not sure if Vicky or Lizzie are best though...

    Yeah Hannibal is cool with Charismatic, but a sea-based UB and a UU that needs horses and is quite early... not so keen.
     
  20. Kaleb

    Kaleb Deity

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2004
    Messages:
    2,451
    Location:
    London
    Care to explain your choices??

    I can see Pacal being handy, Expansionist = cheaper workers, health boost with Ball Court happy bonus = happier, healthier cities. Pretty weak UU though.

    VD Oranje?? Given that we don't know how much a part the seas will play in this game I think that is a little risky
     

Share This Page