Official Poll: First Choice Civilization

[Tassadar500]

Vote for the Civilization that you want the most. Each vote made in this poll is worth 3 votes.

[BigFree]

Greeks

Because we don't have to gamble on having Iron and they only cost 20 shields. If we are going to be playing a defensive role why do we need Legionaries that cost more (30 shields) and are dependent on Iron?

If we are guaranteed to have Iron, the Rome is a better choice. But, there are no guarantees since the UN voted for "minimal modification." So, it depends if we want to gamble a bit.

[Rhothaerill]

The Romans are still my first choice. One of the perfect civs both trait-wise and UU-wise for what we want to accomplish in the first game. The only downside is if we don't find iron.

[Octavian X]

Romans for me too. We're screwed with or without iron, so it doesn't matter much anyway.

[Beta]

Originally posted by Octavian X
Romans for me too. We're screwed with or without iron, so it doesn't matter much anyway.

With Hoplites you can hang tough without iron.

Greeks.

[Tassadar500]

The thing that is good about Greeks is if we ever need to have an archer rush sticking a few Hoplites would make it an ultimate stack.

[asleepathewheel]

Greeks

[Togas]

I know we're concerned about resource scarcity, and if that's our primary fear, we should pick Greece, Carthage, or Sumaria, all of which are excellent early game defensive civs.

However, if we care at all about civ traits and UUs, then we definately need to get back to our original choice of the Iriquois. They're Agr + Com and they have a fantastic Ancient Age UU.

--Togas

[E_T]

I agree, a good mobile UU can be a bonus when in a big fight.

E_T

[conmcb25]

Originally posted by Togas
I know we're concerned about resource scarcity, and if that's our primary fear, we should pick Greece, Carthage, or Sumaria, all of which are excellent early game defensive civs.

However, if we care at all about civ traits and UUs, then we definately need to get back to our original choice of the Iriquois. They're Agr + Com and they have a fantastic Ancient Age UU.

--Togas

Togas what if we dont get horses? It could happen. And minimal modifications means just that, there wont be any moving or adding of resources.

I love the Iroquois and that would have been my first choice. But I dunno with the scarcity and clumping of resources in conquests.

And think about it. Its continents and 5 civs. That probably means 3 on one cont and 2 on another.

Either way if you have a resource monopoly you are probably gonna hoard it especially in the 2 civ island.

On the 3 civ island you may share with an ally if the goal is to get the thrird guy but then watch your back after guy three is gone. Although you could cut off the resource.

This randomness has me worried. I may go with a resource not needed UU. I just dont think we are going to get a resource if we dont have it.

[GhengisFarb™]

Maybe I just have weird luck but I tend to be able to get access to Iron more often than Horses. I have twice started on an island and had no Horse resource on it anywhere but I've always had an Iron resource. Are Horses scarcer than Iron or have I just had weird luck?

[conmcb25]

I think I have seen more horses than iron in my SP games.

It could just be luck of the draw. Anyone else seen anything different?

[Zero]

I have gotten LOT more horses than iron when i played.

I think it has to do with your starting loc/and what type of land you like to whore. I tend to sieze as much open land as I can while not paying attention to seizing mountainous area as i should in early games...

besides horses dont disappear...

I would either choose mayans/iroquois/sumerians.

[joncnunn]

Mayas for the traights and enslaving barbs into workers.

[notyoueither]

Iroquois call to me... so I answer.

First off, they are agri, so they REX better than any but other agri civs. Add to that they are commercial so that more of their cities are useful, and the useful ones are just a little more useful than anyone elses. That is a killer combo, right there.

Now, yes, the MW needs horses, however horses are the easiest to get AND the MW is the most kick ass UU of the Ancient Age aside from the Gallic Sword (which needs Iron so can be easier to deny).

I'm adding it up... better chance of a bigger early empire and a more productive empire at any size. A killer UU with the easiest resource to get... the sum is Iroquois.

[Donegeal]

Yes NYE the MW is a great UU, however, having it almost forces us to an agressive position. Would we go with the The Iroquois and play a defensive game? NO. We would be an the offensive and people will notice. And, like Togas said, our rep from game one will carry over to game two. If we go at game one with an agressive attitude, that a wild guess how we will be percieved in game two.

In my SP games, I have noticed an almost even distrubution between Horse and Iron (and IIRC, I do believe that the "number appearing" is greater, albiet not by much, for Iron than Horse). I also feel that whoever make the map, will not doom a team becasue of resource distribution. If we are going to go with a resource dependant UU, I think we should go with the one that lends itself to more options, the Roman Legion.

Additional resons to go with the Roman Legion over the Iroquois Mounted Warrior:
Warrior + Iron + 60 gold = Legion
Chariot + 30 gold = Mounted Warrior
However, once Horseback Riding is developed, the Chariot becomes obsolete and cannot be built. With the Roman Legion, we can pilliage our sorce of Iron and build up lots of cheap Warriors to upgrade once we reconnect. Gold is MUCH easier to come buy than Shields.

Rome also has the Military trait as opposed to the Agri trait. In this game where the REX period is not going to fill the land, being able to do so should not be a priority. OTOH, being able to build cheap barracks and get quicker promotions means a greater chance of a MGL. If we get just one MGL, we will be garunteed survival in the first game.

ROME ALL THE WAY BABY!!!!!

[notyoueither]

Why do we have to attack?

REX, find horses, then sit behind the threat of the MW while we out pace our neighbours in economy to the Medieval Age.

Do you want to attack a larger civ who has a 3-1-2 unit in the Ancient Age? I wouldn't, and the same goes for a larger civ with a 3-3-1 unit, but the chances of an agri civ getting to be larger are greater.

I am very familiar with the power of Rome, however I think faster growth will favour us on a larger number of possible maps.

btw, you are correct, horses and iron both have an appearance ratio of 160 in C3C (1.13) but horses are much easier to hook up (not sure how much of a factor that should be).

[Donegeal]

Yes I understand the concept of "a good offense is a good defense", but with the Legion we get a good offense AND defense.

And the Agri trait is a powerful trait. But it is also map dependent. What if we are nowhere next to a river? The agri trait is as map dependent as Expansion and Sea.

With Rome, we get two useful traits. Military, as I stated earlier, means better chances of a MGL. A single MGL will garuntee us of survival. We also get the same Commercial benefits as with Iroquis (a trait that is improved upon with the 1.15 patch I might add).

[notyoueither]

Having deserts produce 2 food is not so bad either. Agri has benefits. Many of them. I am reminded of how often dg teams I have been in have convinced themselves that Expantionist was too big a risk and settled for 'the safe bet' only to watch the Germans or some others pick Expantionist and get the free settler in every single game.

I say it is time to bet the odds. Odds are there will be water there. Water and agri is more than one 'free' settler. Odds of water are more than likely better than of having iron handy, although I will admit that can be debated.

[Donegeal]

This is going to get bloody. The odds of being able to fully use the Agri trait like NYE says is going to be slim. As it is a survival game, I see no more than the capitol and a partial ring of cities surrounding it (about 5-7 cities max). No more before it is over. If this were the second game, then yes, I would go for the Agri trait.

In this first game, I really think that it boilds down to the UU:
Legion- 3/3/1 30 Shield, upgrades from Warrior (unlimited supply), requires Iron
Mounted Warrior- 3/1/3 30 Shield upgrades from Chariot (only once), requires Horse

PS- NYE, I am really enjoying debating you about this. Thanks.

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by donegeal
PS- NYE, I am really enjoying debating you about this. Thanks.

Cheers. Too bad I had to sign off.

I have been thinking about another factor. Small map... 5 civs... Lots of room... Better chance of securing all resources, Iron and Horses included.

Both Rome and Iroquois are Commercial, so they both benefit from better empires at size.

So, I think it comes down to the uber foot unit (3-3-1; I rate as more valuable than the Immortal when they trade blows) and Militaristic vs the cheap, fast attacker (3-1-2 and let the Earth be the drums beneath the hooves) with Agricultural.

Take the UUs off the table, because both are very good and resourses SHOULD be available.

Grow faster into the larger spaces available, or get faster promotions vs barbs and the probably farther away civs is what it comes down to.

I have to favour growth, because I have seen first hand and too often how big a crap shoot warfare is in these games. Humans are not the AI, and they will not oblige our leader generation desires if they can help it. The best defense, in my book, is to be a bigger bad ass than the next guy when he comes calling. Be 150% his size, and he will most likely leave you alone, or fail in trying to pull you down.

[Donegeal]

Be 150% his size, and he will most likely leave you alone, or fail in trying to pull you down.

Or get the rest of the teams to say "Hey, look how big and powerful that guy is. Lets go get him!"

OTOH, its not like we don't have that already!!!!

Hmmm... small map you say? I thought it was going to be standard. Silly me.

One thing you have done, friend, is convinced me that we could be just as well off with either Civ (but I still want to be the Romans Dammit! )

When voting guys, just remember that the Roman Legion will give us the defense of the Greek Hopilite AND the attack of the Iroquis Mounted Warrior (minus the movement). We would be combining the might of the two other front runners in one unit.

[MrWhereItsAt]

Dammit!

Manual +1 for Iroquois, if it counted.

[conmcb25]

Hey I didn't get to vote either.

Manual +1 for Iroquois.