We know the worst, who's the best?

[Theben]

So who's the best leader IYO?

I'm torn between Washington and Sitting Bull. Washington is good for empire building, and being CHA can get good units. But my games tend to get pretty boring with him 'cuz after the land has been settled it's mostly a tech/build race.

Sitting Bull, OTOH, has good units for early wars and Phil gets you extra Great Persons which liven up the peaceful phase a bit.

[Unimatrix11]

I like the (blue ) khmer, hatti and wilhelm of orange.

[DirtyMartini]

My favorite leader (right now -- changes frequently) is Ragnar. I kinda like Agg/Fin, both are brain dead easy to use -- they don't require the forethought/leveraging some traits require. I like the UU and UB too -- I've been playing a lot of "medium and small" maps so there are a lot of islands to conquer. Berzerkers keep their amphibious when upgraded, which is nice. I strive to circumnavigate and end up with massive superiority in naval movement.

If you'd asked me a couple months ago, I'd probably have said Orange Bill. I really like creative. I also like coastal cities/financial. Hatshepsut is always good too.

[Modo44]

Zara Yaquob is my favourite right now. The traits are nice for fast culture and a sweet REX. They are also the builders wet dream: Six cheap, useful buildings for every city. And a good UU to boot: Two free (!) promotions, replacing the near-useless arquebuser.

[Indalecio]

Originally posted by Modo44
Zara Yaquob is my favourite right now. The traits are nice for fast culture and a sweet REX. They are also the builders wet dream: Six cheap, useful buildings for every city. And a good UU to boot: Two free (!) promotions, replacing the near-useless arquebuser.

Sorry, I've been running across REX a bit lately, but I don't know what it means. Regional Expansion?

[wodan11]

There are no "best" leaders.

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

...something to think about....

Wodan

[Jaybe]

You can also play with a leader because he does NOT match your playstyle, and use it as a minor upgrade in difficulty ... provide a bit more challenge.

Don't know that I'll ever do that, though. While I have occasionally neglected to choose Rome as my civ, I usually abandon those games within minutes (or less). Just doesn't feel right, to me.
I really have fun when it is a challenge getting iron connected ... and then have an aggressive Ghengis (with artificially strengthened keshiks) just beyond my iron supply.

[Garth Vader]

I think REX is rapid expansion.

[Modo44]

Originally posted by Indalecio
Sorry, I've been running across REX a bit lately, but I don't know what it means. Regional Expansion?

Rapid Early eXpansion. Getting as much land as possible, as quickly as possible.

[Theben]

Originally posted by Modo44
Zara Yaquob is my favourite right now. The traits are nice for fast culture and a sweet REX. They are also the builders wet dream: Six cheap, useful buildings for every city. And a good UU to boot: Two free (!) promotions, replacing the near-useless arquebuser.

That probably explains why he does so well under the AI.

[Fleme]

I like Willem for obvious reasons. Just the other day I finished a game of Big and Small where I managed to get half the world (those small 1-5 tile islands) under my control and you can just imagine how much the MFG goods skyrockets at that point. Topping that with Sid's Sushi and Mining Inc, all cities were well beyond any of the cities the AI had, ranging from sizes 30 to 35 (actually the small island cities grew larger than my continental starting area, it's the fish!). So, in a way Willem is the best. I'm no REXer, or atleast an aggressive one so I won't go there. I did, however, start a game with Washington recently and I'm going to revisit it any day now. Seems like a strong candidate too. Zara is good, Pacal is good... I also like Shaka (I finished a game today in which I got a diply win at 1460 through my Vassals which I had gotten through war but they still had +25 attitude towards me so now I'm thinking that Shaka is in fact a cunning diplomat in disguise and also since his UU and UB (not to mention traits) are both very potent you can make quite a nice empire very fast, through peaceful means or through war. As for other war-like leaders I like Ragnar. Berserkers are good fun.

Basically for me it depends on the day and how I feel that particular day. I never have a protective day and hardly ever a Philosophical, nor a Spiritual day so any combination of the other traits (with the occasional SPI or PHI thrown in) works for me. When I first started CIV my favorite was Gandhi, but not any more.

I'm quite surprised that you'd pick Sitting Bull as your favorite, Theban, since I absolutely hate him! Hate playing with him and against him.

[ZEE]

Re: We know the worst, who's the best?

Originally posted by Theban
Sitting Bull, OTOH, has good units for early wars and Phil gets you extra Great Persons which liven up the peaceful phase a bit.

QTF

[Theben]

Originally posted by Fleme
I'm quite surprised that you'd pick Sitting Bull as your favorite, Theban, since I absolutely hate him! Hate playing with him and against him.

He's not a micromanager's leader. He's a leader for someone who likes to have fun playing the game.

Not that you can't win with him, of course. Just check out AAHZ's current game. But you can have Drill 2, Cover archers from almost the start and get "axemen" (dog soldiers) w/o iron or copper, who have an excellent chance against melee units. An ideal early rusher.

[Fleme]

To each his own. Just doesn't fit my playing style. And since he's a pain in the butt to take out because of the reasons mentioned (Doggies make him increasingly hard to take out early, as do those PRO archers.)

Just not for me.

[Jvstin]

Originally posted by Fleme
I like Willem for obvious reasons. Just the other day I finished a game of Big and Small where I managed to get half the world (those small 1-5 tile islands) under my control and you can just imagine how much the MFG goods skyrockets at that point.

Indeed.

Playing with Willem, if you aren't putting every city you can on the coast (or worst, a river), you are intentionally disadvantaging yourself.

I can't imagine trying to play him on, say, Pangaea or Highlands, with consistent success.