Our factional choices

[Lacero]

I don't think the mercenary team is going to be much use. Depending on map size / settings they may not be able to hire any units out to us until they have galleon.

The Greeks aren't that bad, I agree the UU kinda sucks but their traits are quite good. The problem I have is the philosophical trait makes micromanagement more necessary and painful. For this reason I'd rather not play Greek. If one of you really enjoys it though go ahead

We'll have to fight hard from the beginning though, and continue to micro manage the cities for GL while we fight. Stock piling Great Artists and using them to culture bomb conquered cities is a nice tactic, especially near the end of a war as it stops the enemy taking them back.

Romans are better for winning with though, I also like Huang(Chinese) (for wonders and large empires and the UU is GREAT midgame) and catherine(Russians).

[Illuminatus]

Originally posted by Maniac
I guess it isn't possible to rename your civ in Civ4? That way which civ we pick wouldn't matter at all for roleplay purposes.

Oh, it is quite possible. Sister Miriam of Believers

[GeoModder]

Actually yes, hadn't thought of that. Playing with a civ the "experts" call viable, and renaming appropriately then. Only thing is it appears those same experts prefer a financial civ.

[Senethro]

So, what traits do we like? I like Financial, philosophical and organised.

Also suggesting we play as the United Chironian Re-Civilizing Expeditionary Force, a combine effort with delegates from each faction returned from Alpha Centauri to re-teach these barbarians the true meaning of Civilization!

[GeoModder]

UNCRCEF? Nah, isn't a nice acronym.

I definitely like Philosophical, altho spiritual and organised are quite nice as well.

[ForesterSOF]

I also like the multi faction representation with a military.

[binTravkin]

Wait, to properly decide which civ/leader to go for, we should take into account following factors:

- UU (or unique unit)
and
- the combination of traits with the initial techs*

* - it is very important that the first techs allow full exploitation of given traits and vice versa.
For example certain civs have a lot easier time doing the chop-rushing in early game just because they have perfect trait-tech combination (you can use acronym TTC further ).

Taking that into account I say Romans are very good for expansion and getting big and high because:
- their expansionist trait (halves granaries)
- early access to those same granaries
- early access to additional food sources (fishing was one of the start techs IIRC)
- their organisation trait

Makes for perfect ICSer..

[Senethro]

I see the Romans as being more a great momentum faction. Early slavery then whip together some granaries for early pop-boom, then praetorian rush. The organised trait makes it easier to manage a large empire by cheap courthouses, and also to sustain momentum for longer by having cheap, militaristic, high-maintainence civics.

I'm happy to go with Romans, but is this the style we want to play?

Edit: I hadn't thought of the acronym :P Anyone got one that makes better sense?

[binTravkin]

Well, Romans were from the very beginning our secondary choice, we could now make them primary instead with someone else being secondary and greeks tertiary (am I saying 'third' here? ).

But we should define rather the style we want to play, not which 'traits' we like - trait itself is nothing, only in combination with the second trait and the starting techs it creates a factor.

The styles I know:
- cottage/financial style
- heavy specialist/great people approach (requires philospphical for best effects)
- heavy religion approach
- momentum/popboom approach as described b Senethro

more? (Im not so good at naming them, sorry)

[GeoModder]

Personally, I like the Philosophical road for the wild cards it would give us. Can't take the Oracle for a free tech? No prob, use our first Great Prophet to grab Theology or Civil whatever (that tech that opens Confuciusm) to have that happymaking religion. We want a certain wonder now? Use the Great Engineer that was born some turns ago.

Hmm, wasn't one of the Russian leaders Philosophical as well?

[ForesterSOF]

Style:

Explore and grow with a strong military so we dont get squashed.

As time goes on and our inferstructure is on its way we can go more philosophical and research into other areas.

Hence start Roman and modify as time goes on.

[Maniac]

Originally posted by GeoModder
Hmm, wasn't one of the Russian leaders Philosophical as well?

Peter the Great?
Hmm, I could live with that...

[Maniac]

Btw, what does "doesn't receive defensive bonuses" mean again? Only that the unit can't fortify, or also that terrain doesn't give a defenes bonus?

[PJayTycy]

for chopping forests you need:
1 worker
2 techs : mining, bronze working

so it might be usefull to choose a civilization with mining as starting tech:

malinese (mining, the weel, UU= new archer [none, power: 2->3, first strike : 0->1])
Mansa Musa => spiritual, financial

chinese (mining, farming, UU = new crossbow [iron, power: 4->5, first strike: 1->2, collateral damage: 0->50])
Mao Zedong => philosophical, organised
Qin Shi Huang => industrious, financial

romans (mining, fishing, UU= new swordsman [iron, power: 3->4, city attack: 10->0, cost: 40->45])
Julius Caesar => expansive, creative

english (mining, fishing, UU= new rifleman [none, power: 10->12])
Elizabeth => philosophical, financial
Victoria => expansive, financial

german (mining, hunting, UU= new tank [oil, power: 25->30, +vs armor: 0->50])
Bismarck => expansive, industrious
Frederick => philosophical, creative

indian (mining, mysticism, UU= fast worker [none, moves: 2->3])
Asoka => spiritual, organized
Gandhi => spiritual, industrious

russians (mining, hunting, UU= new cavalry [horse, power: 12->15, +vs mounted: 0->50])
Katarina => creative, financial
Peter => philosophical, expansive

So, 12 out of 26 leaders have mining as starting tech. I would choose one of these. Building cottages is the other thing I often do with my workers, then we need the weel and fishing or farming (fishing is cheaper). So, my preferences based on techs alone would be : malinese, chinese, romans, english. Ofcourse, this way we'll almost certainly lose out on the early religions.

For the UU's : some of these require special resources in order to build them, so if we miss out on one of these resources, we might not even build one of our UU's. I've listed the pre-requisites next to them, together with the changes for the UU. I don't have any real preference for these UU's. If we have iron, they are all good, but the roman UU has 2 penalties . I don't know if it's better to have an early UU (bigger relative bonus, but less likely to be involved in war). I guess in this category the chinese win.

As for the traits: creative, organised, philosophical seem the best ones. Mao Zedong has both of them. Expansive becomes more attractive on higher difficulty levels.


So, I'd say : go for Mao Zedong (and rename him Yang)

[Chaunk]

Personnally, I'm a big fan of financial as a trait. I'd say Katarina or Qin Shi Huang myself, although to be completely honest, I'll go for who ever! The Chinese are strong (IMO) because of their ability to easily gain pop with farms early on. Industrious is awesome (Cheap forges FTW!) so hence I'd pick Qin. Philosophical is nice though, but it does require large pop to make full use of it.