Picking the right Civ!

[Harovan]

I brought the idea about the regained possibility to research early in the 1.21-changes thread; but my game was at Monarch. I had to research, because I just blew the Americans and Aztecs from my continent and was alone till Navigation. I outresearched the whole rest of the AI's, although they beat me with all wonders except Bachs.

Early research is viable up to Monarch, if not playing expansionist. On Emperor, it's better to buy tech and meanwhile explore and build up a good commerce. While it may be possible for a while to broke tech, at the end of the ancient age the AI will instantly have Construction and Currency and you won't have the money to buy it.

[DogCiv]

I find Egyptians to be quite playable on Regent (v1.21f) 16 players, huge world. Things I like include:

Religious = early Cultural advantage from fast temples. Cheap Medieval Cathedrals give another boost. Mid-game advantage from 1-period of Anarchy. Late game advantage to switch to Communism to fight big mechanized wars.

Industious = huge early game advantage to fast improvements, fewer workers needed.

War Chariot UU = much disparaged, but I like it for its cheap cost and early availability. Allows you to build a quick and cheap deterrent force if you want to play Builder.

I tend to play Builder type style and focus on research, culture, and save wars for the Middle Ages and later. I have very little problem in becoming the strongest civ (military, culture, production, population, land size) by Middle Ages in my Regent games without fighting any major wars.

[Tim_Hobbit]

Very interesting thread. I am an old Civer & SMACer, but only recently started Civ3. Several of you have said that you like the Egyptians and also that you like to time your G-Ages. Now every time I have built the Pyramids as the Egyptians, I have triggered a GA. Is there a way to avoid this? I am a builder by inclination and would like to wait until the late MA or IA for the GA.

[Arrian]

Tim,

No way to avoid that, except not building the Pyramids (which is what I'd suggest, frankly).

I prefer the middle ages for a GA. I used to be a builder, and have become what I like to refer to as a "warmongering builder." Basically, this involves full-on raging warmongering bastardness in ancient times, and then a golden-age boosted building phase in medieval times.

If you're gonna build, play Egypt, avoid the Pyramids (if you're gonna invest that many shields in something early on, go with the Great Library), and hang on to a couple of war chariots. Then use one in a medieval war (the AI will probably pick a fight, if not, you may have to).

If you are curious about the power of the dark side, try out the Japanese. Their UU is perfectly timed, as are most of the wonder combos which will trigger a GA (Sun Tzu/Sistine, for instance).

-Arrian

[Tim_Hobbit]

Arrian -

Thanks for the reply! But, &^%, as a builder I really like the Great Pyramid!

Well, maybe the new expansion will have another Ind/Rel civ that it won't effect.

[Trevman]

For building up cities, nothing beats the Babylonians.
So many great early building are dirt cheap - giving you a huge advantage in the early game and ultimately throughout the rest of the game. I think that Babs are the way to go for the peaceful builder who likes smaller but better developed empires.

[Lawrence of Arabia]

I always REX at the beginning of all my huge map games. Gets my more resources, I can deny some to my enemys, and inbetween settlers, build chea p archers to go conquer a civ with a weak early UU (aka not greeks, or Aztecs, or Zulus) I heard that on any map, a civ starts with about 4 of the same luxery/resource nearby. If I can conquer that civ, or just cripple it, I will have a two big piles of resources.
All expansionist civs are good. Send out your scouts to get lots of free huts
Also Aztecs are good, because their JW doubles as a scout, although you will never get as much good stuff as if you were expansionst.

[Karl]

1. Expansionist is the way to go . England kicks as and has the coolest leader!
why is exp so good??
1.Taking control of as much terrain as possible is of vital importance,and the early stage of the game decides mostly everything. U see where to place your cities and how to limit other civs expansion.
2.Swapping maps u say! I wouldnt do it for 2 free techs and the other civs map! -Ull end up having other civs taking control of (your) territory end will have to build soldiers to take them out, ull make enemies at a stage when u should build settlers.
3.those huts even contain settlers sometimes....

U say that exp doesnt allow you to buld new cities faster... well where would u build them without seeing the map?? U would build fast ..but would u build with a plan??

[Karl]

My trait list .
1 Exp
2.Militaristic
3.Religious
4.Industrious
5.Commerce

I think we all know in heart that this is the true ranking. The start is so crucial that exp and military wins.

[alexman]

Say that again after playing an archipelago map with max water.

In that case your rankings would be basically turned upside-down.

[Arrian]

Alexman, I love the sig. "NO SHIELDS FOR YOU! You come back, 3 weeks, bring a courthouse!"

-Arrian

[alexman]

Arrian,
Gotta stop those corruption whiners!

[V.O.C.'02]

plain and simple: persians

industrious: speaks almost for itself (BIG fan of railroads (defence and offence can switch in one turn)

scientific is good too, On large/ huge maps with reasonable growth, I pop-rush a spear, then a library and the land is yours, and the free tech off cours (better then nothing)

[Dis]

hey this thread is still around. I found my post on page 3, and my answer is nearly the same. I haven't played the game in 10 months until last week. I'm really getting into it again.

So far both of my games have been Aztecs. I don't know what it is about the, I love them. Some say military isn't all that great though, but don't think I can go without religious. I love religious.

I really should try the other civs though. The only other ones I have tried were the romans and I think babylonians. I never finished those games though.

[Chemical Ollie]

I think all CIVs are "right" if you just learn to use their special abilites and units to your advantage. I've had great games with most of them. Some I have yet not played much are India, France, England and Aztecs, but that's mostly because the random generator has not given them to me.

Currently I'm playing a game as Egypt and have finally discovered the power of war chariots. Just avoid to attack the Greeks or Romans, and you will do well. Those hoplites are just impossible to beat in the early game. I used 25 KNIGHTS to attack a Greek size 12 city, and lost half of them, while the rest retreated. The defenders just got some bruises, brushed the dust off their shields and awaited the next attack.

[Arrian]

Ouch, Olaf, that's painful. I will typically only attack Greece with Knights if most of their cities are size 6 and below, or if they only have a couple of cities. It's not the 3 defense alone... any old pikeman has that anyway. It's the 3d and the GA combined. If they have a large empire with large cities... I wait for Cavalry. Rome, on the other hand, should be hit with warriors or archers... or if you know they can't hook up iron for a while, you can wait for swords and horses. But allowing them to survive long enough to build legionaries is ASKING for pain. I like playing Egypt with cultural linking off.

My favorites have remained pretty consistent:

Any combo of religious, industrious and militaristic is solid (Japan, Aztecs, China, Egypt). I have a soft spot for Babylon too. I've had fun games as the French and Romans, and the Americans in AU102 (or was it 103... Give Peace a Chance).

-Arrian

[Dis]

I've been lucky not to be near the greeks in my games (although the one time I played the Romans I was, but I lost).

I suppose if that happens, I may wait till the middle ages to attack.

[Athitis]

Originally posted by Olaf Hårfagre

[...]
Currently I'm playing a game as Egypt and have finally discovered the power of war chariots. Just avoid to attack the Greeks or Romans, and you will do well. Those hoplites are just impossible to beat in the early game. I used 25 KNIGHTS to attack a Greek size 12 city, and lost half of them, while the rest retreated. The defenders just got some bruises, brushed the dust off their shields and awaited the next attack.

MUHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Welcome to Greece! The Hoplites acted exactly like they did in real life u know!

Now seriously you shouldn't be surprised. The Hoplites have 1.3.1 ADM. When fortified they gain 50% better defense and being in a city gives them an additional 50% for a total of 1.6.1 (!)-without taking into consideration any terrain bonuses or even experience. Your knights were facing a superior force.

That's exactly why I love Greeks. They are by far my best civ.

1) They are commercial. More money, less corruption. Marketplaces and such easier to build. Thus more gold and earlier economical development.

2) They are scientific. God, I can't believe you underestimate the scientific trade so much. It's by far the best trait (IMO always) since you get three techs for free; that's an averange 20 turns. And 20 turns are equilevant to 5 modern techs! Not to mention the ability to build faster libraries and such that further helps u to take the lead of the tech race.

It is all in all my perfect combo. Fast research, more money, powerful defense. The only true defensive civ in the game. The only unit that can efficiently defend itself from the early Immortals. The warmonger's nightmare. Stick with them and they want let you down.

Also I think that the Hoplites are better than the musketeers. I cannot realize y so many ppl like musketeers. They are worthless and become obsolate in no time. The extra attack is only useful for counter attack, but it's still a low attack rating.

Best traits:

1) Scientific
2) Industrial (it rocks! Damned Persians.....)
3) Religious (1 turn anarchy! Gotta love it!)
4)Expansionist (it's a special case-the commercial trait is better than this more often than not)
5) Commercial
6) Militaristic (not my style actually)

I also enjoy playing the Babylonians and Japan. I think I am going to like the Celts and the Spanish.

PS: The Cossack is good!...

[alexman]

Originally posted by Athitis
That's exactly why I love Greeks. They are by far my best civ.

Are you sure that's the real reason?
You're not biased because that's where you happen to be from, are you?

[vmxa1]

I think the real test is not what a human does with a civ as any civ can beat the AI, it is what does the AI do with a given civ. As far as I see, not much with Greeks. Anyone can tell you that you kill the Greeks before they can make hoplites, if they are close, if they are far, kill them later when hoplites are not a factor.

[alexman]

Actually, the Greek AI does pretty well in my games. I think it's just because they build cultural improvements, and they have just about the right amount of aggression (3) though.

[vmxa1]

I can only speak for my games, and that may not be the norm, but they do not make the last 3 civs very often. That does not mean anything to others experiences. But the point I was making is that it does not matter that a human player does well with a given civ, they will do fine with any civ. It is not a valid test of the civ itself.

[Athitis]

Originally posted by alexman


Are you sure that's the real reason?
You're not biased because that's where you happen to be from, are you?

No don't say that. In CIV 1 i never played the Greeks. In Civ 3 they are excactly as they should be, meaning they match my gaming style

I am wondering how u can kill the Greek early when u are near them....they get theit UU right away from the start. Even the Persian have a hard time fighting them.

[Arrian]

I've had the same experience as Alexman - the AI tends to do well with the Greeks in my games.

I'm not sure why that is, because I consider the Greeks to be a pretty weak civ. Sorry, Athitis, it's all about personal preferences. I've played as Greece, but not since I was playing Warlord level.

Actually, I do have some ideas as to why the AI does well with Greece: They are really hard to kill, so they don't get whipped early. They are commercial, which means they have more money - and the AI is almost always strapped for cash. They get that free tech per age to help them keep up or even get ahead in the tech race. And finally, like Alexman said, they have a moderate aggression rating - making them opportunistic. Back when I used to play "builder" style, the Greeks could be counted on to attack me with Knights.

-Arrian

[punkbass2000]

I would imagine that some civ traits suit people better and others suit the AI better. Especially when playing at higher levels, religious or scientific benefits would be less meaningful to the AI. Sure, 50% is 50%, but 30 shields isn't 18.

[Athitis]

No need to be sorry Arrian as everyone has his own gaming style indeed. I suppose you are a warmonger? Can't play like that; takes time to develop a good army, and I am always losing my units before I deal any serious damage.......Perhaps cause I am playing the wrong civ! (just kidding!)

Heck, I can't wait to play PtW!!!!!!!! There Greece will show its true superpower!!!! MUHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHA....................oups, got obsessed again.

[Chemical Ollie]

As I said, I think any civilisation will do a great job in the hands of the right player. I just want to add some thoughts here: This thread has mostly been about the special abilities of the civs, but there is so much more to it. You also have to consider the power and timing of the UU, the timing of the golden age (but if you play it right you can control that, in ways that some people have already suggested).

Is there a civ where both special abilities, UU and golden age timing is perfect?

[Theseus]

Probably Japan or China.

[Prince]

China's UU isn't too shabby, and they can have a very well timed GA, if you're into early medieval warfare that is. Militaristic isn't the best of traits, but it holds his own, and industrial is simply great. So China comes close to me.

Other civs I favor are the Americans, Egyptians, Persians, and French. Although each has a weakness I can think of right now.

[Theseus]

As a warmonger:

* I want a kick-butt UU... Samurai fit just fine.

* I want a GA that matches my warmonger production needs... that means post-Despotism, and when I can max out production of my preferred offensive unit, or its pre-build. Oh! There's Japan!

* I want the flexibility to change government as appropriate to the situation... which is probably going to mean war versus peace. Japan again!

My pick.