|
I'm also fairly sure if you upgrade catapults to Koreas UU instead of building them directly, they keep the vs cities bonus and become ridiculously strong.
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2014 13:51
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 10:30 |
|
|
Palleon posted:I'm also fairly sure if you upgrade catapults to Koreas UU instead of building them directly, they keep the vs cities bonus and become ridiculously strong. Think they fixed that.
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2014 14:49
|
|
|
Sanctum posted:Korea is a pretty awful civ all things considered. Both the special units are direct downgrades, but that 2 extra science per specialist seemed so good. But I can't work many specialists early on and by the time I do get rationalism and liberty for those sweet 1 hammer 7 science super-specialists at half food cost I'm still getting more research done just by lightbulbing great scientists I get from the GPP. Korea also gets 2 extra science from great person improvements. Basically as Korea you want to be running specialists as hard as you can for a. extra science from the specialists and b. more great people to plant. Ideally these will be science specialists and great scientists, but it works for all of them. Including the culture stuff (which, unlike popping a great engineer or great merchant, doesn't delay your next great scientist), and that in turn includes landmarks from archaeologists. In turn this means you want to prioritize food even more than you (presumably) usually do. Farm the poo poo out of everything of course. If you go for religion and/or wonders (the viability of either option will vary depending on difficulty level and what other civs are in the game), go for the food-related ones like: - Pantheon: Fertility Rites/Goddess of the Hunt/Sun God (depending on nearby resources) - Follower: Swords into Plowshares, maybe Feed the World (though that involves investing in shrines/temples) - Wonders: Temple of Artemis, Hanging Gardens Policy-wise: full Tradition, most of Rationalism, and the Freedom policies involving specialists and great people (your choice of tier 3 policy depending on what victory condition you're going for). The units are relatively uninteresting, I'll give you that, but the science bonus is loving amazing. And yes, you'll eventually want to save your great scientists to bulb (once your labs are up and running) rather than plant, but I'm too lazy to do the math to find out when the tipping point is.
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2014 16:36
|
|
|
lmao if you ever choose a pantheon that isn't Fertility Rites I guess some of the situational ones are okay? Dance of the Aurora is nice if you're someone like Russia who will definitely start near tundra.
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2014 16:48
|
|
|
Dance of the Aurora is never good. There are some good situational ones, though. Sun God can beat out Fertility Rites in some cases. Desert Folklore is good when it applies (and someone doesn't beat you to it.) Religious Idols can do great things since gold/silver tend to cluster heavily and you get +2 yield from it. Stone Circles can be good once in a great while. One With Nature turns Spain into a religious juggernaut, and can be ok even for other civs if you've got easy access to natural wonders. God of the Sea is kind of iffy--it seems great on paper but sea resources are expensive to develop early on and taking advantage of it may set back crucial early development.
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2014 16:55
|
|
|
I'm partial to the "+15% production of Ancient/Classical wonders" pantheon bonus when I'm playing multiplayer and trying to clinch GL, Stonehenge, Colossus, etc., but Fertility Rites is great as well. Desert Folklore + Petra with Austria was probably my favorite pantheon instance, but I hardly if ever get good desert starts. Maybe I should play Arabia or Morocco more often.
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2014 17:10
|
|
|
Sanctum posted:Korea is a pretty awful civ all things considered. Both the special units are direct downgrades, but that 2 extra science per specialist seemed so good. But I can't work many specialists early on and by the time I do get rationalism and liberty for those sweet 1 hammer 7 science super-specialists at half food cost I'm still getting more research done just by lightbulbing great scientists I get from the GPP. America's clearly the best because you're not playing some godless bonga-bonga-land people.  In terms of mechanics I think Poland, Korea, Babylon, Maya, Greece and England are the best in a vacuum. Most other civs have the potential to be good depending on the map type and your preferred strategy.
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2014 18:16
|
|
|
It is entirely possible for an AI who hasn't been liberated by you to vote for you for the diplo victory without prompting. I've had it happen before. They must REALLY love you, though. You can also sometimes bribe civs who like you but not love you into voting for you. I think it also might be possible for a liberated civ to not vote for you if you piss them off enough, but I'm not entirely sure about that. Dr. Video Games 0031 fucked around with this message at 18:27 on Jul 23, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2014 18:20
|
|
|
Tao Jones posted:In terms of mechanics I think Poland, Korea, Babylon, Maya, Greece and England are the best in a vacuum. Most other civs have the potential to be good depending on the map type and your preferred strategy. There are quite a few others which are also very nice provided you get a particular sort of terrain (which the civ in question is often predisposed to). For example, Aztec with rivers or lakes, or Inca with hills (especially mountain-adjacent hills), for floating gardens and terrace farms respectively. The civs I find least interesting are the ones whose benefits are completely tied up in military domination. Sure, they're great for that (sometimes it also has to be in the correct era), but they're nothing special in any other way. Civs with infrastructure UAs/UBs/UIs are a lot more appealing to me for the versatility. Though this is of course a matter of taste.
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2014 18:40
|
|
|
Morocco in a coastal desert with Petra is pretty good.
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2014 18:43
|
|
|
Vil posted:The civs I find least interesting are the ones whose benefits are completely tied up in military domination. Sure, they're great for that (sometimes it also has to be in the correct era), but they're nothing special in any other way. Civs with infrastructure UAs/UBs/UIs are a lot more appealing to me for the versatility. Though this is of course a matter of taste. How many "pure" warmonger civs are there left, though? Arguably it's down to Mongolia and Denmark. Japan and Germany both got infrastructure bonuses patched in. The Zulus and Ottomans don't have any direct infrastructure benefits but the resources they save on building and maintaining military forces are immense and they both make for fun builder's games. I agree that Mongolia and Denmark are not terribly interesting to me but Genghis and Harald are the most entertaining AI players so I don't really mind.
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2014 18:57
|
|
|
The way Harald speaks, he almost makes Danish sound like a real language. 
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2014 18:59
|
|
|
Gabriel Pope posted:How many "pure" warmonger civs are there left, though? Arguably it's down to Mongolia and Denmark. Japan and Germany both got infrastructure bonuses patched in. The Zulus and Ottomans don't have any direct infrastructure benefits but the resources they save on building and maintaining military forces are immense and they both make for fun builder's games. I agree that Mongolia and Denmark are not terribly interesting to me but Genghis and Harald are the most entertaining AI players so I don't really mind. What about the Huns? Also I'd probably add the Iroquois to the list of Best Civs, mostly due to the fact that they have literally no problem throwing units halfway across the map in a couple of terms. Once they get going they're pretty excellent.
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2014 19:03
|
|
|
majormonotone posted:What about the Huns? Free starting technology and bonus production for already common and valuable resource tiles. There are civs with a dedicated builder slant that don't play the builder game as well as the Huns do. EDIT: I mean, obviously the Huns don't hold a candle to civs with food/science bonuses, but nobody else does either.
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2014 19:06
|
|
|
Guessing Assyria doesn't count as "pure" since they get science boosts from capturing cities instead of bonuses to military production?
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2014 19:12
|
|
|
Venice, because they're the most fun to weasel around with and buy whatever you want.
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2014 19:12
|
|
|
Gabriel Pope posted:How many "pure" warmonger civs are there left, though? Arguably it's down to Mongolia and Denmark. Japan and Germany both got infrastructure bonuses patched in. The Zulus and Ottomans don't have any direct infrastructure benefits but the resources they save on building and maintaining military forces are immense and they both make for fun builder's games. I agree that Mongolia and Denmark are not terribly interesting to me but Genghis and Harald are the most entertaining AI players so I don't really mind. England, pretty much. Extra sea movement has minor exploration benefits but is mostly military, extra spy might let you do some crazy beelining but is basically about keeping up with the Joneses, and both ship-of-the-line and longbowman are pure military juggernauts.
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2014 19:15
|
|
|
Extra spy isn't bad for diplomacy.
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2014 19:17
|
|
|
Assyria gets free GW slots at least I guess? I hate having to build amphitheatres early on so there's that. But yeah, I guess I'd almost call them more militarily focused than the Zulu--the Zulu abilities are fantastic even if you're playing a purely defensive game, but Assyria is all about taking cities.
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2014 19:18
|
|
|
China is the best all around Civ hands down. Most Civs in the game will find their bonuses limited on certain map types while China's UA/UU/UB can be good on any map type.
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2014 21:37
|
|
|
Confirmed, China is my go-to faceroll civ.
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2014 22:52
|
|
|
zgrowler2 posted:I'm partial to the "+15% production of Ancient/Classical wonders" pantheon bonus when I'm playing multiplayer and trying to clinch GL, Stonehenge, Colossus, etc., but Fertility Rites is great as well. Desert Folklore + Petra with Austria was probably my favorite pantheon instance, but I hardly if ever get good desert starts. Maybe I should play Arabia or Morocco more often. Fertility rites and wonder production are awful pantheons. The former takes too long to kick in (compared to +1 food on camps or wheat/citrus/bananas), and the latter gets obsolete too quickly. Not to mention that building all the early game wonders is not a good strategy. Early game, you want to get your core cities up and growing, and with some basic infrastructure so you can exploit the synergy of tradition capital + national college.
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2014 23:29
|
|
|
HappyHelmet posted:China is the best all around Civ hands down. Most Civs in the game will find their bonuses limited on certain map types while China's UA/UU/UB can be good on any map type. Yeah, there is nothing bad in the China lineup. Great Generals are a bit crap in multiplayer since they're so easily sniped though - there's no way to move a great general AND the unit guarding it at the same time, so a savvy human player can rush a mounted unit in while it's unguarded. But MP in this game is kinda poo poo so it's not a big deal. Phobophilia posted:Fertility rites... takes too long to kick in Huh? It works from the moment you take it. +10% growth is +10% growth.
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2014 23:53
|
|
|
I think he means pay off. Which he's right, it's a late game focused bonus, which is especially bad when you don't plan on spreading your religion. But is also generally just bad because early game growth is better than late game growth.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2014 00:00
|
|
|
I think I'll need to see some maths here.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2014 00:17
|
|
|
If you are running a +1 food surplus in a city from a camp and you get Goddess of the Hunt, you will end up with +2 food, which is a +100% increase. With Fertility Rites you end up with +1.1 food. Fertility Rites would also fail to help you from starving if you were to work a low-food tile like a mine, because growth is calculated after citizens eat. If you are running a +10 food surplus in a city with one of that coming from a camp, Goddess of the Hunt gives you +11. Fertility Rites would also give you +11. Thus FR scales better at high food surpluses which you are unlikely to have early in the game.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2014 00:39
|
|
|
+10% growth applies to the food surplus only. So if your size 4 capital is making 10 food, and eating 8 food, then your food surplus is +2, and through fertility rites is only +2.2. So until you have a +10 food surplus, a single hunt goddess or sun god resource will beat fertility rites. Add more of those hunt/sun resources, and the argument against fertility rites becomes even weaker.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2014 00:41
|
|
|
Cool, that makes perfect sense. Thanks for the clear explanation.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2014 00:57
|
|
|
I think someone here made the case of the Shoshone being a good beginner/generalist Civ and I tend to agree after playing around with them for a while. Shoshone benefits are geared more towards giving you a leg up in the startgame, where new players might struggle the most, but they establish a solid foundation that any player can appreciate. While the extra settled territory and defense bonus are nice to have for turtling when you're starting off, the big Shoshone draw are Pathfinders. Yes, ruin placement is luck dependent and there is an opportunity cost loss in the extra hammers it takes to produce a Pathfinder over a Scout, but the ability to choose your bonus can be huge. Especially considering the fact that Pathfinders essentially remove the crap bonuses like revealing part of the map or Barbarian locations if you cycle your selection right. The flexibility of having extra population, a side tech while you're beelining, enough culture that puts you on the way to a starting policy, enough faith to gain a pantheon if you so desire (and later, a good chunk of faith that'll jumpstart you towards a religion), or a composite bowman instead of an archer when you upgrade can help shore up the aspects of your civ that you aren't focusing on. Even if you crap out on getting these ruins in a particular game, I think playing as the Shoshone as a new player is still useful because it gets you in the habit of exploring the map, which you should be doing anyway for city-state relationships.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2014 01:05
|
|
|
Note, however, that some things are +% growth bonuses (which have the aforementioned drawbacks) and some things are +% food bonuses (which are vastly more attractive).
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2014 01:26
|
|
|
I've been away from the game for nearly a year. How's the CEP (by Thassalonicus) doing? And last time I played I was trying out some policies/religions patches by Machiavelli - have those held up well to the test of time? Has the vanilla game (core + G&K + BNW) really not gotten a patch since fall 2013?
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2014 01:42
|
|
|
Gabriel Pope posted:There are civs with a dedicated builder slant that don't play the builder game as well as the Huns do. Yeah, like the Iroquois. I mean, unless the AI is playing them, for whatever reason. Vil posted:Note, however, that some things are +% growth bonuses (which have the aforementioned drawbacks) and some things are +% food bonuses (which are vastly more attractive). And the Temple of Artemis’ description says it’s the former, but in reality it’s the latter.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2014 02:49
|
|
|
Brannock posted:I've been away from the game for nearly a year. How's the CEP (by Thassalonicus) doing? And last time I played I was trying out some policies/religions patches by Machiavelli - have those held up well to the test of time? Between hypothetical Civ 6 and Civilization Beyond Earth I'm pretty sure the team has moved on.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2014 03:19
|
|
|
moot the hopple posted:I think someone here made the case of the Shoshone being a good beginner/generalist Civ and I tend to agree after playing around with them for a while. Shoshone benefits are geared more towards giving you a leg up in the startgame, where new players might struggle the most, but they establish a solid foundation that any player can appreciate. While the extra settled territory and defense bonus are nice to have for turtling when you're starting off, the big Shoshone draw are Pathfinders. Yes, ruin placement is luck dependent and there is an opportunity cost loss in the extra hammers it takes to produce a Pathfinder over a Scout, but the ability to choose your bonus can be huge. Especially considering the fact that Pathfinders essentially remove the crap bonuses like revealing part of the map or Barbarian locations if you cycle your selection right. The flexibility of having extra population, a side tech while you're beelining, enough culture that puts you on the way to a starting policy, enough faith to gain a pantheon if you so desire (and later, a good chunk of faith that'll jumpstart you towards a religion), or a composite bowman instead of an archer when you upgrade can help shore up the aspects of your civ that you aren't focusing on. Shoshone are one of the Civs on the precipice of being great, but not quite there because they are too reliant on luck. Their UA and horse based UU only add up to a fairly mediocre Civ. So if you don't pop enough goodie huts with your pathfinders you could find yourself in trouble.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2014 07:19
|
|
|
Shoshone big borders cities are great. It gets your best tiles online and improved quicker than anyone else.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2014 07:26
|
|
|
Yeah, that border boost is amazing for players of all skill levels and for all strategic plays. It also makes it a little tough to pinpoint where the city actually is for human players attacking into fog of war and they're my least-favorite civ to have to fight because of it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2014 08:15
|
|
|
Poland feels like playing on chieftan. I'm sitting on 2000 gold in the medieval era, don't need more military or anything so I'm just waiting on city-states. Maybe it's the start I got: plains river next to a mountain with 6 pastures, gems, incense, and iron all workable by my capital. Oh and I got Mt. Kilimanjaro on a world that's apparently all hills and mountains from what I can see. That mountain unit bonus has made life easy. Cleopatra built 4 nice wonders so I took her capital. I'm probably just gonna raze her other cities because my happiness will definitely go to poo poo and I don't want 8 cities so early on. Problem is on a map filled with mountains and not many good city locations, razing cleopatra's cities would make life much easier for her neighbors brazil and dido who are both fuckers. I don't want them benefiting from the early territory vacuum I'd create, but what else can I do? Leave an easily vanquished cleopatra so she can denounce me for the rest of the game?
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2014 10:56
|
|
|
Sanctum posted:Cleopatra built 4 nice wonders so I took her capital. I'm probably just gonna raze her other cities because my happiness will definitely go to poo poo and I don't want 8 cities so early on. Problem is on a map filled with mountains and not many good city locations, razing cleopatra's cities would make life much easier for her neighbors brazil and dido who are both fuckers. I don't want them benefiting from the early territory vacuum I'd create, but what else can I do? Leave an easily vanquished cleopatra so she can denounce me for the rest of the game? Cleopatra isn't in Civ 5.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2014 12:33
|
|
|
What do the circular arrows in the bottom left tile signify? Don't think I've noticed that in my playthroughs so far.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2014 12:46
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 10:30 |
|
|
Fwoderwick posted:What do the circular arrows in the bottom left tile signify? Don't think I've noticed that in my playthroughs so far. The tile is being worked by another city. If you click the circle it boots the other city's citizen out and frees it up for the selected city to put a citizen in.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2014 12:52
|
|
