which civ should i be?

[jaishaw]

i have practically no patience when it comes to going through all the civs and their probable advantages.

could someone make it really basic for me?

i generally like to: expand quick, stay friends with everyone, then start picking my opponents off (weakest first) after a i am well ahead on points

(if this is just a poor strategy then please help)

[Guynemer]

Picking off a neighbor EARLY can give you a huge step up in points.

To that end, you can't beat the Romans and their uber-UU.

[jaishaw]

thanks for that. the japanese take for ever to upgrade and research. found that out in my current marathon game. might give the romans a go next

[Quillan]

If you're playing Warlords, you get a choice of leaders. Augustus Caesar is Creative/Organized, which in Warlords is a HELL of a good combination. You get 2 free culture a turn in all cities which makes for quick border expansion, half maintenance cost civics to make it easier to maintain a large empire, and half cost libraries/theater/coliseums/lighthouses/factories/courthouses.
Both leaders get the same UU (Praetorians, a swordsman with a strength of 8!) and the same unique building (Forum, replaces marketplace, gives +25% to great person points in addition to market benefits).

[Dis]

I like Augustus over Julius. It seems to fit my playstyle.

I still like Elizabeth of the English.

So much depends on starting position, your neighbors etc. I just recently had my second highest spaceship victory with Kublai Khan. He turned into a research powerhouse. go figure.

[baboon]

If you want to expand quick, a Creative leader helps a lot. You could take Augustus for that, but the problem with him is that he might spoil your play style, his Praetorians are so overwhelming, you aren't learning decent city attacking.

[Guynemer]

Yes... once you go Roman, it is difficult to play as someone else.

I try to always play random, and to change my playstyle to suit the leader I get... so I'm a militaristic GPP whore right now as Alexander.

[couerdelion]

Brennus is fun too. So is Huayna Capac. In fact, almost all of them have something going for them as long as you play to their strengths.

For a solid basic leader, you can also try Mansa

[Ming]

Originally posted by couerdelion
Brennus is fun too. So is Huayna Capac.

HC is good for a builder. You get financial/industrious, making early gold easier, and a good shot at a few wonders. The UU is great early in the game, giving you a shot against barb archers, and they can beat barb warriors easy enough. You can even try a rush with them if you want, or just annoy people by sitting on key resources, since it usually takes two warriors to kill one.

Their UB of a granery that gives culture is a true bonus. You are going to build them anyway, so it's almost like being creative.

[MrWhereItsAt]

Re: which civ should i be?

Originally posted by jaishaw
i have practically no patience when it comes to going through all the civs and their probable advantages.

could someone make it really basic for me?

i generally like to: expand quick, stay friends with everyone, then start picking my opponents off (weakest first) after a i am well ahead on points

(if this is just a poor strategy then please help)

I gotta put in a recommendation for random civ. That way you start really exploring all the different styles of play. Or rather you see what works for which traits/units/starting techs etc. Otherwise it could be easy to find one civ you kick ass with and get stuck on that one forevermore, never exploring the other possibilities.

[jaishaw]

thanks to everyone for the advice, looks like romans are edging it!

the thing i am finding with the japenese now is becoming the pattern in all my games once i get to the modern era... well ahead on points, lots of cities, but every body is annoyed (bar the egyptians). is there a good way of getting people onside or do i just build a massive army and go on a rampage?

i am starting to think that my civic choices aswell as my original civ choice are working against me

[zeace]

The easiest way to have friends at the end of the game is to make some friends at at the start of the game and stick with them. That means you have to hate their enemies, you can't go to war with them, you have to share their religion, and they might want the occasional gift from you.

Friends are a lot of work, but they can be invaluable when your enemies start ganging up on you. If your friend is a lot smaller than you he might even become a free vassal for you. These friends are also useful for trading techs on branches you're ignoring.

The friendship you start early will grow stronger and stronger as it lasts. Near the end of the game you start getting "You're too powerful" modifiers and everyone's opinion of you drops. The only way to offset that is with lots of positive modifiers from a strong and long friendship.

[joncnunn]

For peaceful expansion, I really like the Ottomans.
Expansive = 50% faster worker production, 2X Granery & Harbor production
Organized = lower city maint, 2X Lighthouse, Court House, and Factory production
Their Unique Building is the equivalent of an Aquaduct that also makes 2 citizens happy

Their Unique Unit is ideal for being first to gunpowder and then making everybody with pre-gunpowder units pay.

[jaishaw]

i feel like a complete novice!! lots of advice much appreciated. the problem i have now is the two civs i want to go to war with are friends with my only friend. can i get around this or am i gonna just have to go it alone?

confuuuuuuuuuused

[Quillan]

If you want to get around that, you'll need to do some creative diplomacy. Seed your target with a different religion to the one your friends have. If need be, switch to this religion yourself then convince the target to join, and switch back a few turns later. Religion is probably the biggest single swing factor in relationship status.