Worst Leader

[Julian Delphiki]

Originally posted by wodan11
There are no worst leaders.

There are only players who use a playstyle unsuited to a leader's characteristics, the map, and/or other game idiosyncrasies.

...something to think about....

Wodan

I play all traits and try utilize traits as well as i know in a game. I tend to think these best/ worst "ratings" as something that will / will not work for someone who just gets to the game. Of course everyone has personal preferences for those who suit best the way they play.

[wodan11]

Originally posted by JulianD


I play all traits and try utilize traits as well as i know in a game. I tend to think these best/ worst "ratings" as something that will / will not work for someone who just gets to the game. Of course everyone has personal preferences for those who suit best the way they play.

That's cool. But, it should be presented in that fashion. i.e., "What's the worst leader for a new player"

I do know I play this game as much as about anyone, and I'm still learning how to get the most out of the different leader/civ traits, UBs, and UUs. So, to me, it's important to point out that by its very nature, any poll such as this one is biased from the get-go. Plus, to point out to people that maybe what they should be doing is asking, "what strategies will get the most out of this leader that hasn't worked well for me so far?"

Just me.

Wodan

[Krill]

Roosevelt is arguably the weakest due to having no traits to help speed expansion (via warfare or economically). AGG civs are generally nice chokers due to it being easier to get the anti class promos and IMP does speed expansion, while PRO atleast makes it easier to hold cities (yah, I agree it sucks, but if you got screwed on resources and someone is rushing you you have a better chance to hold a new resource city with 2 CD1/Drill1 archers than with unpromoted archers.)

[snoopy369]

Originally posted by JulianD


How do you play then? MP? Just interested..

SP and MP both; either way, buildings are only useful in specific circumstances. A courthouse is not useful in a city with a 2.5gp maintenance, as it costs 120h and will take 100 turns to break even at a 1:1 h:g ratio; given that my average hammer turns out far more than 1g in value, this is not a good trade. You'd be better off building wealth - you get that 120gp faster.

[Blaupanzer]

When the AI plays certain leaders, they almost always do poorly. Both Montezuma and Tokugawa do poorly because they are generally unfriendly as AI. The German leaders all suffer from their late special unit (Panzer). Napoleon doesn't seem to do all that well either. Are there others who commonly don't do well as AI leaders?

[Spec]

Montezuma is the worst of the worst.

Spec.

[Theben]

I've seen games in which Monty has done well. I've yet to see a game since BtS that Tokugawa hasn't been vassalized.

[wodan11]

I tend to play with no tech trading, so Toku and Monty do just fine.

Wodan

[joncnunn]

I'd say instead that is the leader the AI is worst at playing.

Not that I would be particularly good at Montezuma either; he's designed to do the polar opposite of what I want to do.

Originally posted by Spec
Montezuma is the worst of the worst.

Spec.

[DaShi]

I liked Toku when he was Agg/Org. You could still do well without having to go to war constantly.

[DaShi]

Originally posted by Theben
I've seen games in which Monty has done well. I've yet to see a game since BtS that Tokugawa hasn't been vassalized.

I agree. I made friends with Toku in one game because he was one of the few people sharing my religion. I wouldn't have minded him going to war so much, if he didn't lose so many cities. Eventually he capitulated to Mansa. Yet, somehow he got out of it and immediately asked to be my vassal.

[Yosho]

Eh, Monty's not bad. Agg is a good trait, and his UB is pretty nifty; no unhappiness from whipping is really nice.

I think the worst traits are probably pro and creative. All the other traits are decent.

[Krill]

The thing with Cre is that if you really (ab)use it you can screw over any civs near you.

Monty: "I'm an aggressive bastard so I'm taking that city site"
Hatty: "Screw you *****, I'm settling there and good luck stopping me from one moving that city in 5 turns."

[Unimatrix11]

I usually dont care too much about religions and for that kind of playing-style creative is just great. It enables me to forgoe the whole religion part of the tech tree. It´s only problematic, if all (or most) of the religions get founded by one single other civ (as often the case when playing with a buddy of mine - but in SP usually not).

When playing this way, the +2 culture per turn is priceless and the half-price libs almost seem like a waste, for when i am not creative and still conduct things this way (no religion - probably not a good idea, when not creative), i wish so badly they were cheaper, so i could build them just for their culture, which is not needed under creative.

[LzPrst]

I like all the traits. gee, aint I the "everybody gets their fair share"-hippie...

but seriously, every trait has its use. one of my first wins on monarch was with Tokugawa. I had a big island all to myself, did alright, but was falling behind the romans who had a bigger island to my south. I churned out some Infantry and Marines and had a field day beating his wimp armies to pulp. it is true that tokugawa doesn't have anything overly useful in peacetime, but you just have to counter it with some serious kickage.

another game Toku was AI, quite backwards, and my main competitor was the Maya. they were quite advanced hitting modern age the same time I did. then Tokugawa happened. he steamrolled the Mayans fancy "thunderstick" armies with his vast medieval army and crushed him out of the lead and down to a vassal state. I was shocked! and impressed. and grateful.


a lot of you people seem to underestimate Protective. dont. it is arguably the better of the two direct combat traits. for not only does it give your archer (and later gunpowder) units 2 free upgrades (a third with barracks, fourth with vass or theo) = Drill 3. in addition you get cheap walls, can be nice if your neighbour is aggressive. and castles, which then make sense building for the combined economy+culture+defence bonus. do you have any idea how long it takes 2 catapults to hammer down a castle's defence bonus? and here's another little bit of news, those cheap drill promotions not only give you first strikes, they also give you less collateral damage taken. let the enemy break themselves against your impenetrable city walls. you're practically invincible! collateral damage doesnt hurt you, all your archers have city def 1 or more, your cities stay yours. period.


creative is obscene if used correctly. I did a culture win as Louis XIV the other day. on a standard map I had 4 cities most of the game. Justinian, my BIG neighbour eventually started handing over cities because of the power of french poetry, music and erotica. i later colonized half of the new world continent as I was playing Terra, but that didnt help until I was already sure of a cultural win.

imperialist is great! you'll get every resource you want, no real contest from normal civs. with Genghiz that means you get those horses, and the copper, and the iron, now start conquering! with charlemagne you get the spots you want and stick with them. and you can get a lot of spots. and if someone DOES mess with you, that wellplaced production powerhouse gets a few Great Generals and your expert troops will fight like gods.



I'm playing a game now as Boudicea, and boy is it great! Early start, Dutch to my north. can't have those potsmoking hippies out-teching me. I have copper in my capital's fat cross so I whip and chop some axemen. with a barracks they start with Combat I, 25% vs Archery and 1 XP away from another upgrade. Willy ain't got no minerals, and my axemen are making sure he ain't gettin any. eventually I conquer him and expand a wee bit peacefully. to my west is Charlemagne. my veteran axemen decide to give him a hard time and I have a hell of a fight outside his capital, barely losing (a non-prot would be dead by now) costing me my momentum. I go south and conquer a barb city instead (on a hill) and make peace. later Justinian who lives faaaaaar faaaaar away beyond HRE and China DoW's me and hits my barb city with huge armies. again and again his vast forces get crushed by my increasingly experienced defenders, who most of which have a few hills defence bonuses as well. that Dun isn't so dumb when defending. my army grows his keeps fertilizing my farms. I get Charlemagne to DoW him so I don't have to worry about those vast armies walking through his kingdom and now that he has war on his west and I don't have to deal with 10-15 troop armies coming by every few turns, I'm gonna beat his west. evil? yes. deceitful? yes. effective? oh yes! laughing all the way to the bank when I take his holy citiy capital?