Worst Civ
- Thread starter alcaras
- Start date
madscientist
RPC Supergenius
I really like all of the leaders and civc in the game but some I think are weekest or at least the most problematic for me.
Khmer: I do not like the UU/UB but the trait combo is pretty good.
Victoria: I never seam to get a good game with the warlords/BTS trait combo. Maybe just me.
Sitting Bull: Everything is built for a turtle game which is a recipe for avoiding losing. UU/UB both go outdated fairly early and I am not a fan of the best ancient/classical unit being 4 instead of 5 regardless of whether you need no resources.
Saladin: Weak starting techs, and unlike Isabella, do not make getting an early religion that much easier. One of the best UBs in my opinion but the UU is pretty much nerfed if you have iron and horses anyway.
Joao: designed to overexpand without any real help in running an economy to support it. The UB comes too late to help with it.
Again, I do enjoy playing these leaders, but they are the weakest to me (except Victoria who I just never get a good game with.)
Khmer: I do not like the UU/UB but the trait combo is pretty good.
Victoria: I never seam to get a good game with the warlords/BTS trait combo. Maybe just me.
Sitting Bull: Everything is built for a turtle game which is a recipe for avoiding losing. UU/UB both go outdated fairly early and I am not a fan of the best ancient/classical unit being 4 instead of 5 regardless of whether you need no resources.
Saladin: Weak starting techs, and unlike Isabella, do not make getting an early religion that much easier. One of the best UBs in my opinion but the UU is pretty much nerfed if you have iron and horses anyway.
Joao: designed to overexpand without any real help in running an economy to support it. The UB comes too late to help with it.
Again, I do enjoy playing these leaders, but they are the weakest to me (except Victoria who I just never get a good game with.)
Diamondeye
So Happy I Could Die
I do agree with Madscientist, mostly, except for Joao which is an awesome leader, only drawback being the UB.
AlessioCerci
Prince
- Joined
- Jul 17, 2007
- Messages
- 416
Joao's UB is awesome.
I agree about Khmer & the Arabs
Anyway my worst civ was America until Lincoln turned up with his phi/cha trait combo. <blank> UU/UB and Roosevelt/Washington dont have good traits combos.
Moderator Action: Language deleted.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889
I agree about Khmer & the Arabs
Anyway my worst civ was America until Lincoln turned up with his phi/cha trait combo. <blank> UU/UB and Roosevelt/Washington dont have good traits combos.
Moderator Action: Language deleted.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889
madscientist
RPC Supergenius
Actually I always felt Washington a dRoosevelt were pretty stronge. The UB is awesome (20% gold!!) is essentially a better market with all the additional late happiness. The navy seals are the only UU that does not go obsolete besides the Indian worker. The Americans are well fed early, starting with agriculture and fishing. American cities can expand faster than most other because of this, and they can start teching military right away.
Roosevelt: organized and industious, a real powerful combo. CHeap forges and courthouses, new cities can become affordable and production powerhouses faster than any other leader. Organized and Industrious are my 2 favotires traits so I may a little more biased here.
Washington: I consider one of the best. His traits allow him to have the largest cities from the get go, and the food to get there. Charasmatic can get 2 extra happiness with a monument, and 2 extra health helps alot early on especially if there are lots of floodplains. The cheap graneries allow the cities to grow faster. The city of Washington can be at 7 pop in no time and the charismatic trait allows turing that population into instant military.
No knocks on Lincoln either.
LightSpectra
me autem minui
Celts, unless you know how to use Boudica's trait combination.
Arabs were perfect in Vanilla, though now they're pretty awful. Their only saving grace is a good UU.
Arabs were perfect in Vanilla, though now they're pretty awful. Their only saving grace is a good UU.
madscientist
RPC Supergenius
I don't think the Celts are that bad, not the best, but not the worst either.
I found the best way to play either one is grab an early religion, and take out one or two other civs early utilizing the UU and UB. The idea is to get an shrine as early as possible to fuel the economy, and the early warfare builds some nicely promoted units that can be promoted during the course of the game. Both Celts are charismatic and generate alot of units with gurilla I promotions right off the bat.
I found their limitations are not getting that early religion and/or not having a close enough enemy to beat up on.
Gooblah
Heh...
- Joined
- Jun 5, 2007
- Messages
- 4,282
Worst is probably Mongolia.
Ignoring the probable gasps of "Heresy!" et al right now, i'll explain why I think so:
1) UU is the Keshik. You have to tech to HR for it, which is something I avoid until I can get it from Mansa or some other AI.
2) Traits suck. Aggressive and Expansive for Genghis and Aggressive and Creative for Kublai. Not very good synergy.
Ignoring the probable gasps of "Heresy!" et al right now, i'll explain why I think so:
1) UU is the Keshik. You have to tech to HR for it, which is something I avoid until I can get it from Mansa or some other AI.
2) Traits suck. Aggressive and Expansive for Genghis and Aggressive and Creative for Kublai. Not very good synergy.
madscientist
RPC Supergenius
OMG!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
First the Mongols. They are built for war man, plain and simple. Tech HBR before mathematics, it's worth it for them. If your a peaceful builder, then I agree they suck.
Ghengis: he gets military benefits all over the place. The UB directly effects his UU which I think is great (see previous threads for these arguments, I won't make them again). Double GG points. He's agressive, fast barracks and drydocks, and from combat I. Best war monger in the game.
Kublai: Agressive trait and UU/UB same as his mongol grandfather. Creative allows fast culture border popping for captured cities, what's not good about that.
Incans. The BEST in teh game IMHO.
The UU is a double edged sword early on. They can be mass produced and kill every/anything that moves out there. On the other hand, they are cheap and free (non-tech) city protectors allowing Hyuan to tech everyreligious and economic thing under the sun. Lot's of hammers saved that can be turned into wonders. He's the AI most likely to get the oracle and free metal casting (very early and cheap forges). He's financial, enough said there. If that's not enough he's got a UB that essentially turns him into an instant creative leader.
First the Mongols. They are built for war man, plain and simple. Tech HBR before mathematics, it's worth it for them. If your a peaceful builder, then I agree they suck.
Ghengis: he gets military benefits all over the place. The UB directly effects his UU which I think is great (see previous threads for these arguments, I won't make them again). Double GG points. He's agressive, fast barracks and drydocks, and from combat I. Best war monger in the game.
Kublai: Agressive trait and UU/UB same as his mongol grandfather. Creative allows fast culture border popping for captured cities, what's not good about that.
Incans. The BEST in teh game IMHO.
The UU is a double edged sword early on. They can be mass produced and kill every/anything that moves out there. On the other hand, they are cheap and free (non-tech) city protectors allowing Hyuan to tech everyreligious and economic thing under the sun. Lot's of hammers saved that can be turned into wonders. He's the AI most likely to get the oracle and free metal casting (very early and cheap forges). He's financial, enough said there. If that's not enough he's got a UB that essentially turns him into an instant creative leader.
Indiansmoke
Deity
I agree Incas are one of the best civs.
The worst for me is any protective, except from Toguwaka. I think he is a military monster especially mid-late game.
The worst for me is any protective, except from Toguwaka. I think he is a military monster especially mid-late game.
madscientist
RPC Supergenius
I think some protective civc are pretty good with nice synergy.
Both chinese leaders are very good, good starting techs and a stronge UU made stronger with the protective trait.
Churchills redcoats are killers, especially if you went to war early and have a few GGs planted in your HE city and run vasalage or theocracy. That's a rifleman with CGI and drill I, +25% versus gunpowder, +50% versus cavalry before 3 free promotions.
Although I have not played them yet, Gilgamech and Charlemange looks pretty tough.
Wang is pretty tough but his UU got nerfed badly with the change to seige weapons.
I agree, Tokus gunpowder units are pretty nasty.
Already mentioned Sitting Bull and Saladin.
As far as traits go, I have more problems with Imperialistic.
Both chinese leaders are very good, good starting techs and a stronge UU made stronger with the protective trait.
Churchills redcoats are killers, especially if you went to war early and have a few GGs planted in your HE city and run vasalage or theocracy. That's a rifleman with CGI and drill I, +25% versus gunpowder, +50% versus cavalry before 3 free promotions.
Although I have not played them yet, Gilgamech and Charlemange looks pretty tough.
Wang is pretty tough but his UU got nerfed badly with the change to seige weapons.
I agree, Tokus gunpowder units are pretty nasty.
Already mentioned Sitting Bull and Saladin.
As far as traits go, I have more problems with Imperialistic.
Indiansmoke
Deity
Imperialistic I like, especially Cyrus is a monster for early wars.
You get more GG's and you get them faster, it can really make a difference early on. The settler bonus is nice as well, but GG's is what the trait is all about.
You get more GG's and you get them faster, it can really make a difference early on. The settler bonus is nice as well, but GG's is what the trait is all about.
madscientist
RPC Supergenius
I know and it works well with Cyrus and Ghengis. Others like Catherine and Victoria are so so. It fits with the Romans but I always thought Julius was stronger in Vanilla although I like Agustus being Industrious (great synergy with the UB). i have not played Charlemange, Suliman, or Justinian yet.
madscientist
RPC Supergenius
Hmmm. I did not think of that, good point. I forget and know it was discussed previously, does the great wall work within cultural borders? Meaning, can I use privateers on my own water tiles and get 3X GG production if I have the great wall?
KMadCandy
giggling permanoob
the great wall counts your water tiles for GG points. it doesn't count water for blocking out barbs, go figure.
Hawe Hawe
Warlord
I wouldn't say worst civ, but some weak leaders in my opinion are:
Bismarck: The Panzer is nothing special, how often do you face tank vs tank fights? The traits are not bad, but not my prefered ones. The UB is extremely good with Friedrich, who gets a discount from organized but much weaker with Bismarck.
Hammurabi: very weak UB and UU, mediocre traits
Mao:the weakest trait combination possible, but good UU and UB.
Dschinghis Khan and Boudica: already mentioned above and i agree, probably because i don't do well with those war only leaders.
China and Germany are not bad as civs, but both have a strong leader (Qin and Friedrich) while the other is much weaker in comparison.
Bismarck: The Panzer is nothing special, how often do you face tank vs tank fights? The traits are not bad, but not my prefered ones. The UB is extremely good with Friedrich, who gets a discount from organized but much weaker with Bismarck.
Hammurabi: very weak UB and UU, mediocre traits
Mao:the weakest trait combination possible, but good UU and UB.
Dschinghis Khan and Boudica: already mentioned above and i agree, probably because i don't do well with those war only leaders.
China and Germany are not bad as civs, but both have a strong leader (Qin and Friedrich) while the other is much weaker in comparison.
Similar threads
