Ranking the PTW civs for MP

[Fried-Psitalon]

A few caveats before I begin:

1) I am unaware if this thread has been started elsewhere; I have not seen it and apologize if I am duplicating.

2) I am not a Civ "math cruncher" and rely on my experiences and intuition/judgement when I play. This has resulted in quite a fairly good record for me, so I feel safe making some claims.

3) I am not trying to place the "final word" on this issue, merely to stoke the flames of what could be a very useful debate.


I would propose to rank the new civs - and ONLY the new Civs - in order of their usefulness IN THE MULTIPLAYER FORMAT. Please feel free to tear into my rankings, but be gentle- I'm doing this more to teach AND to learn.


Greatest of the New Civs
Mighty Carthage.
I honestly think Carthage borders on too powerful. I've stopped playing them online because it makes most games too easy. Ignoring the ugly beard, Hannibal has a very powerful combination in his hands. His UU is surprisingly strong- archer and pikeman in one, for the cost of a Swordsman. Except you don't need warrior code or feudalism (or iron) to build them – just the bronze working that everyone grabs heading for Iron working anyhow. Wow. Whether or not you like Commercial as a civ trait (and I do, particularly because I can get some use of cities at longer distances than I could without Commercial) the power of Industrial for the early "road-rush" is not to be denied. When you march ten archers (or maybe Num Mercs? whee!) down your Industrialist road to meet your neighbor, you will understand why Carthage is king.

Bridesmaid of the New Civs -2nd place
The Celts.
I've always been leery in MP of a UU that requires a resource - I don't like getting resource screwed- but the Celts cure me of it. (If you haven't guessed yet, I consider the UU to be quite important in the MP arena, particularly with the trend of tiny/small/standard map play.) A swordsman that can retreat is handy, and you have to love those pants. I'm not overly impressed with Militaristic as a Civ trait (please debate THAT in another thread) but it doesn't hurt when your Gallics are elite. Religious allows a fast conversion to Monarchy (in MP, I feel Monarchy is the way to go over Republic, please debate THAT elsewhere too,hehe) and if you've started well, the combination can catapult you to a strong enough early advantage to win overall.

Groomsman of the New Civs -3rd place
The Arabs.
Honestly, I don't think any of the other 6 stand out in MP mode as much, but Arabia has a lot going for it. The cultural unit is a factor once you get that far, but many MP games are decided -or on their way- by the time Chivalry comes around. Sure, you might overthrow the top civ with your speedy unit, but don't count on it. Expansionist, long the underdog of 'normal' Civ 3, is *much* more powerful here. A long-held piece of military wisdom has been to find the enemy before he finds you, and in MP, that's twice as true. If you're smart, you circle around your target and hit him in a different direction with your army. That way, if you lose, he sends his retaliation the wrong way... the downside is that your scouts often meet feisty players with warriors. Oops. Religious is, once again, handy to keep things rolling in the MP environment.

At the halfway mark of the New Civs -4th place
The Ottoman Empire
All other factors being equal, Industriousness is a killer civ trait. The Ottoman UU is probably a non-factor; if the game isn't decided by the time cavalry are being fielded in a MP game...something odd is going on. On the flip side, scientific cultures can build that library a bit quicker, and if you can be sure of your safety, the Ottomans can rush the tech tree rather nicely. (That's a big IF.) This might be the pick for a “Builder” type player if they want to enter the MP realm (honestly, I think warmongers are going to hold sway until some excellent strategies are advanced) who uses their Industrious bonus to get lots of terrain to begin with.

Enraged at being in the second tier of the New Civs -5th place
The Mongolian Horde
Fifth and sixth place came down to the UU of the two civs in question- the Keshik and the Berserker. While I still believe that games are getting closer to completion by the time Chivalry is researched, the Keshik isn’t too fabulous even so. Having the defense of a spearman means they’ll get to use their retreating ability a decent amount, and being able to cruise over mountains isn’t that great, unless you have a mountain-rich map. If you’re in mountainous terrain, it’s a different story, but unless Keshiks can ignore mountain defensive bonuses when attacking (and they can’t) it’s still a convenience rather than a dealmaker. Militaristic isn’t bad, but there are two (three?) traits I’d rather have instead; the Expansionist is nice for maybe sneaking a few extra goody huts to get you closer to your Keshiks, though. All in all, a very average Civ in MP (and out of MP too, for that matter.)

Waving a big axe at me for putting them behind the Mongols -6th place
Scandinavia’s Vikings
When I first brought home the PTW expansion, I was in love with these guys. C’mon- big, burly guys waving huge axes with no regard to their own personal safety! 6 attack early in the feudal! MARINE LANDINGS in the feudal! What’s not to love? The realities of the MP environment – namely, the massive predomination of pangea or continent+60 percent water games – however, have relegated my visions of hordes of galleys disgorging mobs of Berserkers to the background. Without the use of their marine landing ability, berserkers suddenly don’t look so great. You either follow them around with pikemen to ensure their safety while they rest, or risk a charging knight (not at all unlikely given that you need invention researched to field Berserkers) mowing over your axe-waving friends. As for being militaristic expansionists, well, so are the Mongols. Unfortunately, the Viking UU doesn’t allow for taking advantage of finding opposing cultures and hitting them with speedy attacks like the Keshik….unless you find them on other continents…which would require having galleys to carry your scouts around anyhow…. Sorry, Hairy Breeches, but your Civ isn’t that impressive in MP.

You’d be a sad Civ too if Firaxis made your leader look like a man -7th place
Spain
Spain is probably the culture with the largest difference in usefulness between SP and MP games. In SP, I love their UU- dump four of these off in a mad dash through mountains and jungles to cut the roads sitting over the oil/iron/horses/whatever and you’re sitting pretty. In MP, however, I’ve only seen one game of the dozens I’ve played ever make it to the Industrial age- Conquistadores, for all their speed, come too late to make a difference in the MP environment. Commercial and Religious traits don’t really alter the equation much. Spain gets the second-to-last slot, but at least they’re solidly protected from being handed the bottom position.

At least no one should disagree with THIS civ ranking -8th place
Korea
Honestly, if I see someone pick the Koreans in a MP game, I’m tempted to ask them to concede on the spot. A painfully bad Civ in the MP environment, Korea simply has nothing to recommend it – though SP may be a different story, that’s not what we’re discussing here. With a cultural unit that rivals America’s and England’s for “Ugh, why bother,” Korea won’t make any early gains for you that way. As a commercial/scientific culture, they also don’t have much to leverage in that direction. I suppose a “Builder” player might enjoy Korea (but a builder would enjoy Carthage, too) however, in the rough-and-tumble world of MP, Korea is just too soft. Maybe some brilliant strategies can be devised to raise Korea up, but for now they’re on the bottom. True, you could put their UU in a city and defend it well (once you research that far), and use their civ traits to utilize all your cities… but how do you claim enough terrain to survive that long? Korea unquestionably sits dead last.

I hope someone finds this helpful, sparks a few ideas of their own, or in some way contributes to the knowledge pool of the PTW community. If the feedback to this is fairly positive, I’ll do this again ranking all the Civs in a MP format later today.

[FNBrown]

Sounds like a fair evaluation to me... although I've never played any online MP games... just LAN-based.

[CrONoS]

EDIT: Sorry... deleted the msg

[Fried-Psitalon]

::Cough::

:: points to the thread title::

::cough::

I think I'll be doing a full-out ranking of the all civs in the MP environment a little later in the week to come. I'm on a bit of a writing rampage right now, and I'm going to be pushing forth a lot of "early theory" on the MP environment as it stands now in Civ3 PTW.

Edit: I noticed your edit right after I posted, but I'll leave this up for the general info anyhow.

[Swissy]

I agree that Carthage is the top of the pack, due to their UU. In most games I play, they are usually chosen quickly. I consider them the civ of choice for tiny map elimination games. Probably the the only civ that can stand up to the Persians.

[Adagio]

I'd say the best Civs are (in no particular order):

Random
Random
Random

Those civs are the greatest, since they're more fun than other Civs

[Fried-Psitalon]

While it's certainly fun to "let the chips fall where they may" and so on ( and in some games I do set everything to random just for fun) I was hoping to pinpoint the strengths and weaknesses of the new Civs in particular - and so whatever the computer selects for your random Civ, you, as the poor bastard stuck playing Korea, will at least have some information/background/theory to go on.

[Madcaptn]

Even overall I think that the best Civ is Carthage, I used to play China because of the 4-3-3 UU & the fast promotions in battles, but my aggressive play makes me pay when it takes like 50 turns to make a unit after that I've captured a few cities far from my capital, so since Carthage is Commercial & Industrious, less corruption helps me and I can get my forgotten palace faster. I think that Carthage is the #1 Civ in the entire game... do you guys agree or is there a Civ that I miss

[Abdul Alhazred]

More ! Carthage has an upgradable UU ! Not the Frenchs ... This two civs are industrious and commercial but Numidian Mercenary --> Pikemen and Musketeer --> None !

[Fried-Psitalon]

Carthage is great, but I've learned that there are a few cicrumstances when I'd use other Civs in the MP environment. The larger the map, the less useful the Carthaginian rush, for example.

If you've got a decent sized Pangea map and the host picks Sedentary barbs, I'm heading for America - industrious and goody huts with no risk, yum. If I find myself against, say, Germany, Ottomans, and France, I'll generally pick the Aztecs and begin "Jaguar Rush."

Honestly, *for most games* Carthage is the strongest pick - but there are lots of situations and variables that can drop them into mediocre pretty quickly. Strongest of the PTW civs? I think so. Strongest overall- I'm not as convinced. But I'll be writing THAT thread in a day or so....

[Rusty Nail]

If you include the old civs, and especially on a tiny map, my experience is that the zulus outrank the powerful Carthaginians for one reason. Before the Carthage UU gets going, the faster, hard to catch impis can, with a little luck, devastate them (and anyone else) with pillaging, while they build up their strength far away. Granted, if that ploy fails, I like Carthage as well.

[CiverDan]

I remember one MP game where I was carthage and my only other human opponent on the continent was Greece. Needless to say..we quickly made an agreement not to attack each other..as it would have been pointless. Anyways, I agree Carthage is the most powerful overall.

[Madcaptn]

I don't like the Zulu Impi cuz it only has 1 attack.. I can't see how you can takeover a whole civilization just with Impis heh. I guess that their main strenght would be pillaging and killing the worker if possible or to just scare him away not doing any terrain improvement, but as for attacking a base, I don't think it's hot enought. Normally a Civ would already have a spearman or something

[Fried-Psitalon]

I apologize if I'm doing anything seriously inappropo- bumping this thread (and the two others like it) back up because I'm very interested in advancing MP theory, and the recent spat of "Oh god, Civ3PTW is so evil!" that took over the front page seems to be over. I'll only do it this once if it dives right back down to the bottom of the list.

[Brizey]

AA:

Musketeers upgrade to Riflemen.

All:

MP must be way different than SP if Carhtage is the best of the new civs. I guess its the small maps. I'd much rather have the French. The problem with Carthage is the terrible timing of its UU. The French have the best timed UU in the game, even if its combat features are mediocre.

[Fried-Psitalon]

Brizey- MP is vastly different than single player. Games almost *never* see the Industrial online, nevermind any later- many games are mostly resolved (mop-up) by the end of the ancient, and few get past Chivalry's explosion of knights.

If you play a Civ that is meant to achieve greatness in an era past the Ancient, you're either betting on being isolated, or holding off rampaging ancient Civs in the meantime.... a gamble indeed.

[Swissy]

The timing of the Carthage UU can be problematic. I usually find most MP players will not even try to attack Carthage before they get a 4 attack factor. While the Persian Immortal fits the bill, they usually have easier prey. So I rarely get attacked before feudalism. Some games I am forced to build the Great Lighthouse and Hanging Gardens to trigger a GA.

The real weakness of both Carthage and France is their dependence on non-jungle rivers. My worse games with Carthage have been ones where I could not place atleast half of my first 8 cities on a non-jungle river. The big benefit of lower corruption is all the gold and the things you can do with it; rush builds, push science, support larger army.

[Fried-Psitalon]

Originally posted by Swissy
The timing of the Carthage UU can be problematic..... I usually find most MP players will not even try to attack Carthage before they get a 4 attack factor....... So I rarely get attacked before feudalism..... The big benefit of lower corruption is all the gold and the things you can do with it; rush builds, push science, support larger army.

(Edited by Friedrich for points I wanted to talk about.)

Swiss- you actually wait to be attacked? Maybe I have a different style. I usually go in and play "I wish I was a Zulu Impi" on my opponent's land pretty early. Sooner or later he desperately tosses a few warriors or archers at me, and voila, I have my golden age. If he doesn't, I'll clear everything out and call in a few more Num Mercs to raise real heck.

I totally agree with the lowered corruption, but I firmly believe the biggest benefit is the Industrial- it allows you to move your Num Mercs at high speeds, because building roads is a non-issue. 2 workers? One square a turn, wee! A common tactic I'll use is to build a road across unclaimed ground, gather my Num Mercs at the opponent's border en masse (just out of the national line of sight).... and then pay a visit. Elim games usually end about 8 turns later.

[Panag]

hi ,

the americans , they get the F - 15 , ...

have a nice day

[Swissy]

I prefer to have at least 4 cities before I get my GA. You just can't push the tech with fewer. I do not seek out early combat in elimination, I have my Mercs and the are near invincible in walled towns. This allows me to get to feudalism faster, with more cities, to support a larger army with both offensive and defensive capability. I have won many elims with my opponent marching his stacks of swords/Legions against my frontier cities, each with 8 mercs, while I sneak in a stack(6) of merc with catapults. I sit outside his city until the walls come down, then it is over as the bulk of his army is sittting outside my untakable cities, and my half dozen Mercs make short work of the two spearmen inside. They cannot support enough troops to both attack and defend, I can as I used the early game to build up.

You can have success with your strategy, I have used such on occassion (mainly against a nearby Persian), but if your opponents are able to hold out through your GA you will have budget problems when the GA ends. Allow an opponent to get to feudalism before you, you will be seeing the military advisor announcing your "humiliating defeat".