Grand Conquest - Civs?

[~Vodka~]

OK, I am what you would call a pure "builder" for the most part. I enjoy having a super-economy and tons of citys and usually win a cultural, space, or UN victory type. I play as babs, chineese, ruskies, and sometimes egyptians and I play in mostly small/standard maps. Just for the sake of somthing diffirent I want to try somthing totally new: Huge map, Islands, 4000, 2 civs(including myself) on Regent. I may add 1 or 2 civs but I like the idea of one "Arch-Rival". The Idea is to allow me to have the luxury of building a massive empire and having a nice economy and in the late-game go off on a massive war with my rival civ and see who is left standing. (I'm thinking its goin to be a mass Nuclear/Naval war.)

My question is. what civ would you suggest playing as and what civ should be my rival. Im looking of an Industrial civ for me and just any expansionist civ as the enemy (want to make sure our empires are both large).

[Giovanni August]

I don't know why but in my games the Russian are always between the largest AI and build cities like no others, if they didn't get to war against somebody like say..... the ROMANS .

I like the Chinese as Industrial, but I'm an early warmonger, and you said you want to go to war later.... so i guess the best Civ for you would be the Americans (rapid expansion and late UU).

Saluti

[Playa del Carmen]

I'd say the Persians, if not just because of the Immortals. Though I've never tried to conquer the world with them, they've saved my behind more than once.

[Arrian]

Vodka,

You want a long period of building, followed by a "war to end all wars" right? Well, I would suggest a really good "builder" type civ, then. Such as Egypt.

Or, since you're aiming for a late-game showdown, you may want to go with Germany. Panzers are nice toys.

-Arrian

[Cort Haus]

Originally posted by Arrian
Well, I would suggest a really good "builder" type civ, then. Such as Egypt.

Cleo Rocks! - I can't put her down.

Fast workers, cheap temples & cathedrals, no anarchy, and Hoover Dam-triggered golden age for a tech lead into the Modern Age and two-turn tanks.

[Ironwood]

The "Arch-Rivarly" I've always envisioned is the Babylonians (ultimate culture producers) vs. the Zulus (ultimate military expansionist types). Actually, the Zulu's really aren't all that great; they've never survived past the early game in my games.

Another possibility is to pick two religeous civs and imagine they are diametrically opposed to one another, a climactic clash between Good and Evil (which is which depends upon which side you're on).

For late game warfare, though, you really can't beat Americans vs. Germans, since they both have a very late UU (if not perfectly conciding). I think the Germans' UU is more useful than the Americans', but I don't have enough experience in late game warfare to say this with certainty.

One thing to note (and this might balance the UU disparity in that last pairing) is that, with only two players, Expansionists will have an inherant advantage (with less civs, there are more huts to pop), and militarists will be at an inherant disadvantage (with fewer civs to fight, there are fewer opportunities for military experience and leader generating).

[spy14]

I'd go with Americans for your own civ, F-15's are more useful than they are often given credit for. For the opposition, I find the Persians and the French often end up with huge empires and its nice to give either one a kicking...

[Cort Haus]

Originally posted by spy14
F-15's are more useful than they are often given credit for

How do you use them?

[~Vodka~]

Yeah, I think Americans would work well, F-15s can now kill things!! (as of the new patch) So now they arent to useless.

Far as Enemy goes, I'm thinkin' either Russians (C0dld War gone Nuclear!) or the Indians (Just to WHOMP Ghandi's oh-so-annoying little rasin lookin' ass.)