LordBalkoth
Prince
- Joined
- Dec 7, 2014
- Messages
- 525
Refusing an offer to go to war has no diplomatic impact, don't spread misinformation.
Worst Civ in the Game??
- Thread starter Fluphen Azine
- Start date
fallout3dc
Warlord
- Joined
- Jun 29, 2014
- Messages
- 289
I'm talking about after the longhouse is built though. At that point, it is only 1 food.
If you have a Lumber Mill Forest Tile (guess what, Lumber Mills can exist in Longhouses Forest Tiles), it is only 1-food-3-production. If you're the Iroquois, you have 1-food-4-production tiles which are more useful than a mine unless you're using Five Year Plan.
With that change of yours, it's a 2-food-4-production tile. Basically, a self-sustainable Mine, with a tech-path that doesn't force you out of what is expected for a peaceful science victory - or a cultural victory.
Essentially, yeah, it's pretty darn powerful.
reddishrecue
Some dude on civfans
- Joined
- Nov 16, 2009
- Messages
- 6,213
It does. You get a negative, 'you refused to help us during war time,' which is small and insignificant at first, but eventually these negatives add up in time for ai to use against you.
That triggers if you say for them to wait 10 turns and then refuse. If you just plain out refuse, you won't get a negative modifier.
reddishrecue
Some dude on civfans
- Joined
- Nov 16, 2009
- Messages
- 6,213
You dont? Well you used to in civilization 4 at least. That mustve changed from civilization 4 to civilization 5.
IkM
King
- Joined
- Mar 30, 2013
- Messages
- 862
Japan is low tier? Oh c'mon guys! I haven't play as Japan but AI uses them perfectly. Their Samurai spam is irresistible, if you are not a war-favored faction defeating them is pain in the ask*
*Ask, a nicer word, no? Thank you Kassie for this nicer word
killmeplease
Mk Z on Steam
when they come with some request (war, gpt, lux etc) you dont lose diplo points when refuse to help. but its an opportunity for you to get some if you accept the request.
you lose points when you lie or change your mind
NerfPoland
Chieftain
I can't stand turtle civs(Korea,Ethiopia etc..)They are just too boring to play,and they are also too boring to play against.
reddishrecue
Some dude on civfans
- Joined
- Nov 16, 2009
- Messages
- 6,213
Yes, thats true.. i used to believe that refusing war invitations from ais in civilization 5 annoyed ais like they used to in civilization 4.
PreLynMax
Your Lord and Master
India and Venice.
India's UA simply limits expansion and because land is power in this game, limits your ability to win. So if land is power, India is a potato. So, if I need a certain luxury and I can settle there, I eat double unhappiness... so I have to kill my economy in order to win the game? How is that fair? I can't win for losing with India's useless UA.
Then we get the uselessness of Venice. Why can't I make settlers? Why do I have to spread my power all over the map by buying city states? Seems like a dumb concept to me, a concept I want nothing to do with. What was Fraxis thinking when they though of this? You can kiss defending individual cities goodbye when your forces spread all over the world.
So in short, these two civilizations always result in a reroll if I'm playing random. They are useless and not civs that I want to begin to strategize around.
India's UA simply limits expansion and because land is power in this game, limits your ability to win. So if land is power, India is a potato. So, if I need a certain luxury and I can settle there, I eat double unhappiness... so I have to kill my economy in order to win the game? How is that fair? I can't win for losing with India's useless UA.
Then we get the uselessness of Venice. Why can't I make settlers? Why do I have to spread my power all over the map by buying city states? Seems like a dumb concept to me, a concept I want nothing to do with. What was Fraxis thinking when they though of this? You can kiss defending individual cities goodbye when your forces spread all over the world.
So in short, these two civilizations always result in a reroll if I'm playing random. They are useless and not civs that I want to begin to strategize around.
reddishrecue
Some dude on civfans
- Joined
- Nov 16, 2009
- Messages
- 6,213
India's ua is kind of ironic because its ua experiences less happiness. For example, i was able to get a domination victory with Russia and India in the emperor difficulty and you know what the main difference was? Unhappiness. With Russia i was taking a longer time making my citizens happy than with India. I even had the fountain of youth with Russia, too. I couldnt believe it.
SeedenGreedens
Chieftain
- Joined
- Feb 21, 2014
- Messages
- 77
The mughal forts are kind of great too. +2 tourism after flight, why not?
reddishrecue
Some dude on civfans
- Joined
- Nov 16, 2009
- Messages
- 6,213
Yeah, why not..?
killmeplease
Mk Z on Steam
its maybe better for india not to build cities but to capture them?
you start with one city, build NC, build an army elephants, go conquer a couple of cities
did anybody try this?
captured cities already have improved luxes and some population so you dont suffer excess unhapiness phase
also, you can keep them as puppets for some time making it easier to build NWs and take policies
you start with one city, build NC, build an army elephants, go conquer a couple of cities
did anybody try this?
captured cities already have improved luxes and some population so you dont suffer excess unhapiness phase
also, you can keep them as puppets for some time making it easier to build NWs and take policies
Its better for every civ not to build cities but to capture them!
killmeplease
Mk Z on Steam
not every civ has an early uu
Similar threads
