Poll:Which trait is best?

[jdd2007]

religious

a religious will give plenty of roleplaying, and it isnt too bad in the game either

[Hot_Enamel]

Militaristic - But thats just because of my play style.

I depend on Great Leaders to build my wonders. And I depend on expanding my empire by taking AI cities.

Good lord I have tried being a builder. My current game is the americans @ emporer level. But its just too easy to go for a military win, and I have been at war with every Civ (5 of them) that I share my continent with.

[Epistax]

Industrious and religous are both very powerful

[Kuciwalker]

I just noticed - religious isn't an option

[Panag]

hi ,

industrious has to be the best , followed by expansionist , combined its the best ya can get

have a nice day

[Zero]

Originally posted by panag
hi ,

industrious has to be the best , followed by expansionist , combined its the best ya can get

have a nice day

Insane startup... I agree. Only reason why Industrious is better than exp IMO is that Ind is useful later in game as well as early in game.


Anyways typical civs considered "useless" ::

Americans - I'd disagree on the traits (strongly), but their UU sucks. So its worth considering

English - Trait isnt too bad IMO... a weird combination... but UU makes it worthy of being one of "useless" civ.

Russians - Im playing them right now, and I'm realizing Sci/Exp isnt too bad. It was really easy for me to secure Iron early on and it helped me alot. Nevertheless, its another civ ususally called "useless".

Koreans - not too bad trait, cause Commercial is lot better now, but They still got sci. Only reason they arent as playable as greeks is because of GA problem. UU isnt too bad.. but once again, the GA problem is huge. and the fact Greeks werent that good to start out with and then you add another downside to it by changing a UU to not trigger GA makes it "useless"

Indians - Rel Com is pretty good. But most people think their UU is terrible. I disagree, but its debateable, since it depends largely on circumstances.

Germans - normally not in the "useless" list for most people... but I really dont see how they are good(except for the fact that they start out with both spearmen and archers and can research IW right away for ultra early war).

[Panag]

Originally posted by Calc II


Insane startup... I agree. Only reason why Industrious is better than exp IMO is that Ind is useful later in game as well as early in game.


Anyways typical civs considered "useless" ::

Americans - I'd disagree on the traits (strongly), but their UU sucks. So its worth considering

English - Trait isnt too bad IMO... a weird combination... but UU makes it worthy of being one of "useless" civ.

Russians - Im playing them right now, and I'm realizing Sci/Exp isnt too bad. It was really easy for me to secure Iron early on and it helped me alot. Nevertheless, its another civ ususally called "useless".

Koreans - not too bad trait, cause Commercial is lot better now, but They still got sci. Only reason they arent as playable as greeks is because of GA problem. UU isnt too bad.. but once again, the GA problem is huge. and the fact Greeks werent that good to start out with and then you add another downside to it by changing a UU to not trigger GA makes it "useless"

Indians - Rel Com is pretty good. But most people think their UU is terrible. I disagree, but its debateable, since it depends largely on circumstances.

Germans - normally not in the "useless" list for most people... but I really dont see how they are good(except for the fact that they start out with both spearmen and archers and can research IW right away for ultra early war).

hi ,

well the americans are the only one who combine those two special traits , and when combined together , it rocks , .....

UU , okay the F - 15 comes a later on , but a good player does not need a UU from the start , and the F 15 comes in handy for later parts of the game , then its a good thing you have it when you need it

have a nice day