No messin' around, Who's the BEST leader?

[arthurdent2k]

For me Gandhi rules, as I'm kind of a builder and like to build up my empire before taking any military action (well,yeah, the obligatoric ultra-early warfare to get a little room)...his fast workers are a real gift and later on when I decide to actually do some warfare it's nice to switch civics to my needs for a short war without any hassle

[MikeH]

It's good that there's no 'right' answer to this question. Well done Firaxis.

[padillah]

I like this. Unlike previous Civ's where you didn't even need a poll to tell who the best leader was, this is comming out pretty even.

Bodes well.
Tom P.

[Dis]

except the for the leaders with 0 votes. sucks to be them.

but who really wants to be Kublai Khan anyways.

[padillah]

Originally posted by Dis
except the for the leaders with 0 votes. sucks to be them.

but who really wants to be Kublai Khan anyways.

I will say I am surprised to Hatshepsut, Issabella, and especially Fredrick with no votes at all.

Tom P.

[Thedrin]

Kublai Khan is my favourite leader. I just haven't voted.

I'm surprised Mao and Frederick haven't got any votes yet as well.

[Azuarc]

Everyone has their favorite leader traits. A lot of people champion Spiritual, or Financial, or Organized for the various benefits they provide. And I have my favorite, which I will no doubt be stoned for, when I also add the stipulation that I hate Philosophical...maybe I haven't taken my gaming to a high enough level, but I just never make extensive use of GPs.

The trait I cannot live without, however, is Creative.

Games I play with a non-creative leader always become an exercise in frustration whenever I start a new city. You start the game, you grind out a settler and place your second city. You eventually get a third. And depending on your style and your start, you might well sit at three for a while. When you're sitting at three, and two of your cities are quite possibly not using their best potential tiles because they're still at 0/10 culture, it's pure agony. The game grinds to a total halt. Sure, you *might* be able to pop a religion that happens to be founded in one. Or you might be able to chop your way to a library. But either one of those requires specific work that tailors your game plan in ways that may very well otherwise have nothing to do with your game plan. Much easier to pick up a creative civ, so that's what I do unless I'm going random or have something in mind to try with the game.

OK, so there's 5 different creative leaders. Which one to pick? I used Hapshetsut when I first started, and I've used the others at one time or another. I do well with any of them, besides Frederick. But overall, it seems I get the best bang (no pun intended) with Catherine. Financial helps significantly, and so do the Russian starting techs. You get a scout off the bat rather than a warrior for exploration, and you get mining to lead into Bronze Working early. Plus you get a great UU for later into the game. It's hard to beat that.

edit: grammar

[DaShi]

I usually play Tokugawa for the military options. But I've found with Roosevelt I can do most anything fairly efficiently.

[Bobby Chicken]

I voted for Qin Shi Huang, but pretty much anybody financial should do the job. It seems like most of you guys like the trait as well.

[Indon]

I'm a culture-monger, so my favorite is Hatshepsut.

In the early game, there's the benefit of the Creative trait, giving that little boost for those few vital extra squares early-game.

In the late game, there are cheap religious buildings for a Free-religion polyglot after I try to gather and spread every religion to include the ones I never discovered.

It's hard to get a city with all 7 religions, but if you _do_, it can become a cultural monster.

[Corvi #6]

Hatshepsut FTW!!!111

[sparkyal]

I'm playing my first game with a Philosophical leader, Moa Zedong, and since * use GP's all the time it is working out great. I also decided to the a pacifist (despite the fact that I love war) because of the GP bonus. I'm don't like the penalization for the military nowr the lack of experience, but it's working right now. We'll see (ìû ïîñìîòðåì).

[iapetus556]

Originally posted by Guardian



...and why exactly would that be a downside?

Gandhi not "cool" enough?

Would you rather be someone like Hitler or Stalin???

Mao was just as bad...


But anyway, as far as the game goes, Ghandi teaches Commisioner Lal the meaning of the term "Pusilanimous Wimp".

In my current game (playing as Washington), Isabella declared war on Ghandi, capturing and razing his capital. Izzy had been irritating me for the past few thousand years (I had only known her for one turn before she cancelled all deals with me for using the "wrong" state religion), but I wasn't in a position to help Ghandi directly, so I gifted him about 10 grenadiers. Whereupon he immediately capitulated.

Some time later, Izzy declared war on me as well. So I enlisted the help of Napoleon and Ghengis Khan, and went to kick some fundamentalist butt. I think that pretty well sums up the difference in attitude between me and Ghandi

[samspock]

I have played a lot of games as Hyuna Capac and did rather well. I Like starting out with a uu that counters what the ai starts with directly at monarch. I also love financial.

I did just play an awsome game as Hatshepsut. I don't think her UU gets much respect but if you get horses in your first city you can do some serious conquest fast. At the end of the game I had several units with 37 expt.

[Guardian]

Originally posted by iapetus556


Mao was just as bad...


But anyway, as far as the game goes, Ghandi teaches Commisioner Lal the meaning of the term "Pusilanimous Wimp".

In my current game (playing as Washington), Isabella declared war on Ghandi, capturing and razing his capital. Izzy had been irritating me for the past few thousand years (I had only known her for one turn before she cancelled all deals with me for using the "wrong" state religion), but I wasn't in a position to help Ghandi directly, so I gifted him about 10 grenadiers. Whereupon he immediately capitulated.

Some time later, Izzy declared war on me as well. So I enlisted the help of Napoleon and Ghengis Khan, and went to kick some fundamentalist butt. I think that pretty well sums up the difference in attitude between me and Ghandi

OK, with that kind of in-game experience, I can see why you'd feel that

Ghandi teaches Commisioner Lal the meaning of the term "Pusilanimous Wimp".

My personal experience is that Gandhi, while often reluctant to go to war, will usually be one of the "top dogs" and capable of holding his own if and when he needs to. He also tends to become a friend of mine and has occasionally signed alliances with me and entered wars against various third parties, usually when the enemy was the aggressor and already on bad terms with both Gandhi and myself and our friends.

My experience with Isabella is pretty much like yours though.

Oh, and by the way, I loved Commissioner Lal too, but I suppose that may have been because I was playing him myself and I've always thought the UN should "get tough" a lot more often than has been the case so far...