Worst Civ in the Game??

[beetle]

Denmark. I know their ability to disembark and move after can sometimes decide the outcome of a battle and be super useful at times... They're fun to play, don't get me wrong. It's fun sending an army with berserkers and workers to raid and pillage enemy cities, crippling their economy. And who doesn't love sending in catapults and trebs in from the coast and setting up and firing at the same turn? Delicious.

Checking the stinking badges, I realized that I had not won a game with Denmark. Nor have I won a Dom game at Deity, where I still struggle most games, so my work is cut out for me. What map type generally works out best for Denmark? I am thinking archipelago or fractal, is that about right? I want to make this easy on myself, so I will reroll if no convenient iron, and I will be picking soft opponents. (If it turns out to be to much of a cakewalk, I will try again with stronger opponents. Try not to judge me.)

 

[CraigMak]

Venice, Gandhi, Iroquois, Denmark. Those are the bottom 4 IMO.

Venice: You can only make units from 1 city. Enough said here, war is auto lose.

Gandhi: They can not rapidly expand, can not take cities. They are tough to get rolling. Elephants are good though.

Iroqious: Their workshop is far worse than the normal one and that's an incredibly important building.

Denmark: The only thing they can do is a Berzerker rush. Aside from that they have no useful abilities. Granted Berzerkers are crazy good.

 

[reddishrecue]

Mongolia: lots of denouncements from ai by taking cses uu.
Russia: early krepost is tough.
Carthage: war elephants don't keep fear when upgrading to knight.

 

[CraigMak]

Mongolia: lots of denouncements from ai by taking cses uu.
Russia: early krepost is tough.
Carthage: war elephants don't keep fear when upgrading to knight.

Uh No. Mongolia is an OP civ. Keshiek are free win mode.

Russia is a very strong civ as production is king.

Carthage is meh but not the worst.

 

[GPuzzle]

Russia is a very strong civ as production is king.

Russia has a very strong start if they can get 2-3 resources, so long as they don't end up screwed by stuff like Tundra.

That said, they are one of the select few that can pull off Tundra Starts, on top of having one of the strongest starts in the game.

 

[CraigMak]

Russia has a very strong start if they can get 2-3 resources, so long as they don't end up screwed by stuff like Tundra.

That said, they are one of the select few that can pull off Tundra Starts, on top of having one of the strongest starts in the game.

Even if their cap isn't that great, Russia can salvage it by expanding in an area with ample horses and iron. It's common for Russia to have expansions with production that is on par with their cap while for other civs that is a very rare and remote possibility.

Come war time that production is an unstoppable force.

 

[reddishrecue]

Uh No. Mongolia is an OP civ. Keshiek are free win mode.

Russia is a very strong civ as production is king.

Carthage is meh but not the worst.

Keshieks are fine.. they could be better than samurai even...

Russia could go broke from over producing..

Carthage.. ?? Another civ that could remember its leader, Dido ? (Elephants don't forget)

 

[Salvatierra]

I normally don't like to think that a civ is just bad, even if their bonuses are very situation and luck based, so a bad civ for me is one that it has to be bad on almost every imaginable situation and for me...

That price goes for the Iroquois, for all the things mentioned before, very situational UA you could use it for realigning you units faster and sending some kind of ''surprise attack'' within your borders or use it on a rather offensive way when you took an enemy city and you need to build up quickly a defensive line for battling the enemy waves that want to recapture the city, the workshop replacement is fine on the early game , but having in mind that civ V doesn't have much benefits for wide empires, especially in the early game, and having in mind that the most common strategy on civ is science based, that building would just get obsolete ''at zero point'', the same thing goes for the UU it's fine, but it just get obsolete almost immediately, anyway.

 

[CraigMak]

Keshieks are fine.. they could be better than samurai even...

Russia could go broke from over producing..

Carthage.. ?? Another civ that could remember its leader, Dido ? (Elephants don't forget)

Huh? Keshiek move, shoot, then move again. This renders them invincible. They never get hit. Samurai are garbage in comparison.

There is no such thing as overproducing or too much production...

I can't tell if you are trolling or just really weird.

 

[Lexicus]

I can't tell if you are trolling or just really weird.

Almost certainly it's the fact that you're talking about multiplayer while he's talking about single player.

In single player it is certainly a possibility to build "too many" units, in that their marginal utility declines after you have a certain number to the point where it isn't worth the gold they cost to maintain.

In multiplayer tactics are more important than in SP so Keshiks rule. In single player ranged units do the bulk of your fighting to achieve high kill ratio against the AI and so Keshiks rule.

Keshiks are like easy mode.

 

[qemist]

Almost certainly it's the fact that you're talking about multiplayer while he's talking about single player.

In multiplayer tactics are more important than in SP so Keshiks rule. In single player ranged units do the bulk of your fighting to achieve high kill ratio against the AI and so Keshiks rule.

That doesn't make sense. If Keshiks "rule" in MP and also "rule" in SP, what does it matter whether RR was talking about SP or MP? Anyone who reads here at least semi-regularly knows that RR's posts are frequently strange and inaccurate.

 

[reddishrecue]

Almost certainly it's the fact that you're talking about multiplayer while he's talking about single player.

In single player it is certainly a possibility to build "too many" units, in that their marginal utility declines after you have a certain number to the point where it isn't worth the gold they cost to maintain.

In multiplayer tactics are more important than in SP so Keshiks rule. In single player ranged units do the bulk of your fighting to achieve high kill ratio against the AI and so Keshiks rule.

Keshiks are like easy mode.

Yea, exactly.. In SP, keshiks and the cs capture UU can often make new players fall victim to other civilizations that constantly take advantage of the diplomatic penalties. In MP, keshiks can pull off all kinds of things off their butts.

 

[khanasaurus]

Made the mistake of doing domination victory as Mongolia on continents. I had 2 civs left to kill and my rocket artillery had +1 range and logistics and then my largest city flips because of cultural influence and joins Persia ):

 

[khanasaurus]

In my opinion Spain is the worst(situational) because even if they do get a natural wonder often it's not game changing and in this case their UBs can't bring them back very well.

 

[Acken]

In my opinion Spain is the worst(situational) because even if they do get a natural wonder often it's not game changing and in this case their UBs can't bring them back very well.

You're wrong on this. A decent natural wonder in your borders makes Spain just OP. And if you find 2 first for quick 3 cities it gets crazy.

See deity challenge 20 for proof.

 

[JonnasN]

Natural Wonders can also be enhanced by the right Pantheon (like a free Stonehenge) or the World Congress.

Spain strikes me as a fun Civ to play (since they don't have a clear, set strategy to follow, and it depends on the map you have), but I've had games where Natural Wonders just... didn't appear, which soured my experience with them.

I don't like thinking of Civs as "bad", as I can usually find something good to do with them (Denmark is situational, but they're much more than just Berserkers. They can move and fire 2-3 Trebuchets on the same turn, that's crazy effective). So far, the only one I thought was "meh" was the Celts, as they didn't have much about them that was fundamentally different (being the first to pick a Pantheon&Beliefs is nice and all, but it's not enough to change a game, though I suppose they're good candidates for strategies based on a specific religion).

 

[Myth and Legend]

Natural Wonders can also be enhanced by the right Pantheon (like a free Stonehenge) or the World Congress.

Spain strikes me as a fun Civ to play (since they don't have a clear, set strategy to follow, and it depends on the map you have), but I've had games where Natural Wonders just... didn't appear, which soured my experience with them.

I don't like thinking of Civs as "bad", as I can usually find something good to do with them (Denmark is situational, but they're much more than just Berserkers. They can move and fire 2-3 Trebuchets on the same turn, that's crazy effective). So far, the only one I thought was "meh" was the Celts, as they didn't have much about them that was fundamentally different (being the first to pick a Pantheon&Beliefs is nice and all, but it's not enough to change a game, though I suppose they're good candidates for strategies based on a specific religion).

The celts don't need to invest early/mid game hammers into religion. They can still get their pick of the best pantheons and usually the first religion, unless Ethiopia goes super wide or someone gets Desert Folklore. Some barb farming with thir UU will guarantee a first religion though.

The religion can then be tailor made to help with whatever victory you think you can go for, based on your area and on the civs you've met so far. It can be growth, hapiness, culture/tourism, early warmongering, defensive, hammers - whatever you need.

 

[shaglio]

In single player it is certainly a possibility to build "too many" units, in that their marginal utility declines after you have a certain number to the point where it isn't worth the gold they cost to maintain.

Is this really an issue? If you build too many units and the maintenance cost becomes too burdensome, just gift the lesser experienced ones to CSs for free influence.

 

[Lexicus]

That doesn't make sense. If Keshiks "rule" in MP and also "rule" in SP, what does it matter whether RR was talking about SP or MP? Anyone who reads here at least semi-regularly knows that RR's posts are frequently strange and inaccurate.

How does it not make sense? It only doesn't make sense if Keshiks can't rule in both single player and multiplayer, which, obviously, they can, it's just for slightly different reasons.
And I guess I'm not "regular" enough to know that.

Is this really an issue? If you build too many units and the maintenance cost becomes too burdensome, just gift the lesser experienced ones to CSs for free influence.

Well, if you're building too many units in the first place it doesn't seem likely you'll think of this. Someone who might do this would probably know not to build so many units in the first place.
Speaking from my own experience, I certainly do build "too many" units by this measure but I usually am so rich and powerful by this point that it doesn't matter.

Yea, exactly.. In SP, keshiks and the cs capture UU can often make new players fall victim to other civilizations that constantly take advantage of the diplomatic penalties. In MP, keshiks can pull off all kinds of things off their butts.

The problem here is being a noob, not the Mongolian UU or UA. Mongols are obviously not among the worst civs in the game, in fact they are top-tier IMO despite having an essentially useless UA.

 

[reddishrecue]

Huh? Keshiek move, shoot, then move again. This renders them invincible. They never get hit. Samurai are garbage in comparison.

So you think Japan could be low tier instead?

There is no such thing as overproducing or too much production...

There is.. sometimes you overproduce so much that you run out of gold and eventually out of science.

I can't tell if you are trolling or just really weird.

I'm not trying to troll nor trying to be really weird.