The Most Playable Civ Has To Be...

[SlowwHand]

And Thrawn05, I'm only killing time until this game becomes MP capable.

[OPD]

Don't get me wrong I'm a builder myself i just feel the need to get a large number of cities as quickly as possible so I can stop expanding and build the cities up. In which case I can't wait around for Swordsmen and find that large numbers of bowmen can still be useful before the age of the swordmen really gets going.

I love getting a stack of about 10 bowmen and attacking a civ who can't do anything but watch as I take their cities.

Do you think that if we take about tactics enough they'll move this thread to the strategy bit.

[khyron]

OPD: I think I'm too conservative in my early game with regards to conflict. Unless I gotta, I don't. I prefer to let loose swarms of settlers at first. (Okay, I admit, I'm a wuss. I like big maps with islands. If you've ever read Douglas Adams's "Life, the Universe, and Everything", I would be the Krikket.) Maybe that's part of the reason why I like Babylon, I don't like the early GA, so playing it forces me not to go on conquest binges unless I'm in serious danger.

And putting anything I say in the strategy forum could be hazardous to the health of people's monitors...you know, like when people put their fists through them.

[OPD]

Originally posted by khyron
If you've ever read Douglas Adams's "Life, the Universe, and Everything", I would be the Krikket.)

Currently reading it.

but without an early war you must struggle to survive on the high levels.

[khyron]

Originally posted by OPD


but without an early war you must struggle to survive on the high levels.

High levels?

I've dipped my toe into the waters of Monarch once or twice, weaning myself off Regent. (Hey, I never said I was any good at this. ) Now don't get me wrong, when someone feels the need to put my back against the wall, I go for the jugular, but I figure that by expanding early and quickly, and throwing up enough defense to make the AI think twice, I have a sturdy enough base from which to jump off. And as I said, I generally play on larger maps with about 13 civs, which usually gives me a little elbow room. When there isn't said elbow room, well, I guess Xerxes, my eternal culturally linked first contact, gets a set of elbows in the ribs.

Now, I'll be sure not to come crying to you when this fails me at Emperor....

Listen, I don't see much discussion of this kind of thing in the Strat forum, maybe we should follow your suggestion and take this there, before someone yells at us.

[khyron]

Something I don't like about playing Babylon, with cultural linkage, is when Xerxes gets his Iron. For some reason, though, these last couple games I've run into him, he hasn't run a road to his iron yet. So I was able to off him before the Immortals popped up. Usually there's one iron between him and me, so in that case, I immediately go for war.

[Artifex]

"Besides, why NOT take the second most dominant power to ever occupy the earth? Only thing I miss - the great Roman anthem from Civ1. Caesar III also has outstanding music to listen to when playing (it kicks the HIGH HOLY HELL out of the Civ3 music). "

LOL I was just thinking about how much I missed that Civ1 Roman Anthem earlier today..we are like minded indeed. I wish I could find that on the net somewhere.

when I click on the download overture link..it sends me to the nascar page. I guess those files were taken down some time ago.

[OPD]

The Russian anthem used to scare the C*** out of me in civ1. As soon as you heard that music you knew you were in trouble.
After a while I just used to play as the Russians every time.

[The_Hawk]

First of all, i've got to say its a tie. I personally am attached to the Egyptians. Forget their UU. Cheap happiness improvements, industrious and no Anarchy on Government switches? OUCH!

The only reason why I say its a tie is because I tried the French. Once again, forget their UU. It is not that powerful in relation to others. My only problem with Egypt is once I start conquering, the whole corruption thing becomes a real pain. You basically manage to give up on having healthy production from many of your cities.

That's why I think the French are cool! Yes, it takes longer to build your culture stuff (science and happiness), but the commercial advantages clearly outweigh this tradeoff. Plus, as you begin your military campaigns, your conquered cities suffer less from the corruption drain. That means, even if they are not near the capital OR your FP city, you can still crank some serious production out of them. PRICELESS!

[The_Hawk]

How can anyone lobby for a Civ without the Industrious trait? I can MAYBE see Babylon with that be culture swoon (Rel/Sci), but outside of that I don't get it. Is the UUs that big a deal for you guys?

[Venger]

Originally posted by Artifex
when I click on the download overture link..it sends me to the nascar page. I guess those files were taken down some time ago.

Bastards!!! I can FTP or somesuch it if you'd like - it's that effing good.

Venger

[zorbop]

i like the japenese.they don't have industrious... and military isn't much to brag about... but the samuri are unstopable.

the indians are good to. commercial/religious works well. you go take a few cities, sign a peace treaty in exchange for a bunch of stuff, quickly switch to repub/demo(where religous helps). your conquered territory will have little corruption with a demo/repub govt and the commercial trait. with this you can build more units... switch to a war govt.... and go conquer more. it really can work well.
the UU can actually help here also. you might not be able to build roads over a large area to provide iron for all your cities in this conquer method.... so the big elephants work well.