Most annoying civs to play against... - Page 3

Kuciwalker · April 6, 2003, 20:10

Wow... bumped after almost six months. That's impressive.

Mizaq · April 6, 2003, 23:41

lol, if it had anything to do with my feelings outside of the game, I would have been a smart ass and put "Freedom" as the descriptor for France. The fact is, I'm just tired of getting backstabbed by her.

Oh and about the bump, I saw the thread in another thread that linked a bunch of threads, and I replied to the thread thus bumping it to the top of other, less stale threads.

Master Zen · April 7, 2003, 01:40

Funny, France and India are the two civs with the lowest aggression level in the game. You must be very unlucky

cumi · April 7, 2003, 03:16

Oh, the persians. I hate them. I have no, but really no good experiece with that blood-thirsty civ. Whenever they are in my game, I know, I will have to fight those immortals. And there is no chance to prevent this....

Cort Haus · April 7, 2003, 16:51

Quote:

Originally posted by Arrian
It's the Germans and English for me.

The Zulu are somewhat annoying as well, but because I'm often in their cultural grouping (Babylonians), they're not all that hard to keep happy ....
-Arrian

Bismo for constant aggression, and Liz and Cathy as equal backstabbers. I've only just got PTW, but the new lot all seem equally annoying so far.

I've been away from 'poly too long, Arrian. Last time I read your posts you were Japanese experimenting with Chinese - and addicted to Militaristic. What happened?

TheArsenal · April 7, 2003, 17:41

Quote:

Originally posted by Master Zen
And now, the BEST civ to play against is France.

They have always been faithfull allies and never backstabbed me. Anyone who has edited them out must probably hate them for RL issues, not Civ issues.

Funny. In my (not as extensive) experience France is always unpredictable. It is one of the few nations that will attack me while still being "polite". Especially if I make the mistake of over expanding near it with insufficient units in the border cities. On the other hand, there are games when France will be my strongest ally.

Persia, while guaranteed to make demands and attack in the early game if I don't cave in, is at least predictable. If I see them, or the Arabs as another example, on my borders, I know that I'm not going to have a peaceful game and have to gear towards building strong units and taking them out.

MotownDennis · April 8, 2003, 00:10

The thing I hate about the Persians is that they seem to hold a grudge forever. Once you piss them off, they stay pissed. We can be at war for 50 turns, I can conquer or raze 90% of their cities, and still they refuse to sign a treaty.

In my experience, they are the most stubborn civ in the game.

TheArsenal · April 8, 2003, 11:53

Yep. Persia's a great Civ to play, frustrating to play against. And in PtW the Mongols are the same. Another Civ that you can war against forever but doesn't seem to quite understand when its been whipped.

Ubergeek · April 8, 2003, 14:24

I'm glad to see that others have problems with those thrice-accursed Persians. I hate those guys! I almost always wind up next to them because of the civs I prefer to play (Babylon, Egypt, Greece and Rome) and in all the games I've played, there has only been one game where they DIDN'T do a sneak attack for no reason whatsoever when they were Polite (in that game they were my game-long allies against the oddly aggressive Iroquois). It's gotten so that I know that the Persians will send wave after wave of Immortals to harass me, and later will sneak attack me with either cavalry or knights, depending on how long I allow them to live. And once they attack, they stay Furious at me for the rest of the game no matter what I do to try to improve their disposition. I guess the old saying is true: "It is natural to hate those whom we have wronged."

The only civ that even comes close to being as aggravating as Persia is Japan. They always get to Annoyed within five turns of meeting me, even if I trade with them at terms favorable to them and/or give them techs outright without them asking, and they can be counted upon to Ally with any of my enemies and remain At War with me long after the original belligerent has made peace with me. Jerks.

In my games the Zulus always wind up so far behind the tech curve by the Middle Ages that, as long as you can weather the early-game storm by them, they become a non-factor. It's just embarrassing watching them splatter their Impis against my Infantry defending size 15 cities!

I was surprised to read of everyone having problems with the Americans, though. I changed them to Industrious and Commercial way back when, and I haven't had any problems with them since. They seem inclined to be a big, placid blue whale of an empire that gets dismembered by the early Industrial Age by more aggressive neighbors.

On the other hand, I enjoy winding up next to Carthage and France because they seem much more interested in getting along that going to war (although I always seem to have to attack Carthage for some reason or another, but at even so they have never declared War on me).

India is another good neighbor, except for one memorable game where we both had huge empires by the Middle Ages, and they declared War against me for no reason. I had a city on a chokepoint on a hill with walls, barracks and eight pikemen, and over the course of the next forty or so turns they lost over 120 War Elephants trying to take that city. They lost so many I thought the city should have gotten an Ivory resource to represent the tusks that would be scavenged from the battle site for the next thousand years.

Arrian · April 8, 2003, 15:04

Any of the civs has the potential to be a royal pain, but in my experience, I have had more trouble with the Greeks than any other. They are really tough to kill in the ancient age (and to an extent in the medieval, unless you can just roll right over them before their GA production boost can hurt you) and they know it.

The Americans are ornery. They are industrious, which is a strong trait that requires little to no skill to use (hence, the AI benifits), and they might just grab an early settler from a hut. I remember, back when I was more of a peaceful builder type, being overrun by a horde of American horsemen while my poor, outnumbered Mounted Warriors just couldn't stem the tide.

The Persians can also be a PitA. They too are kinda aggressive, are industrious, and worse, they've got themselves a nasty attack UU. When near Persia, I would advise you to hit them before they hit you.* Immortals are just spearmen on defense.

-Arrian

* - Of course, I would advise that with almost any neighboring civ. Hell, even against the hardcore defender civs (Greece, Carthage) I'd argue for an early harrassment war to hamper them.

Fatalis2 · April 9, 2003, 04:50

- Germany. During my first games, they ALWAYS declared war on me, sooner or later. Now, I prefer to have them on my continent, with an allied decent neighbour between us

! They will declare war on me... my frind will do the job. Or I will first give Bismarck some gold or tech, if he comes too close to my borders... Later, when my empire will be built, I'll have my revenge... If I have a frontier with them, they will be my first target. I don't want that psychotic Bismarck reach the late industrial age, if possible...

- Zulus... If I don't have enough troops in my border cities, I'm quite sure they automotically will declare war on me, even if my empire is twice theirs... Fisrt target too, as soon as my army is ready.

- I find Babylon annoying too... just because it's very hard for me to make their cities flip...

- I don't understand why, but I often have problems to discuss with Lincoln.

- I often use Aztecs as my personal "NATO", during the early game ! I simply buy their alliance as I build my empire. The war with them will often take place at late MA - early IndA.

- Yes, the English put cities anywhere they can, but they're almost time not very strong.

- Best relationships : France, India, Egypt, China and Greece. The "dark side" of these good relationships is that two or three of these civs (Egypt, France and sometimes China) are often well developped...

Matthijs · April 10, 2003, 06:58

For me it are defenitly Germany, Rome and Zulu's who are most annoying. for some reason they always backstab me whenever they can.

Yahweh Sabaoth · April 10, 2003, 13:04

Carthage.

And it's not just the NM... it's that they 75% of the time seem to be on top, seem to have good luck conquering their neighbors, and always send a huge army my way at some point.

Those bastards. I swear that their agression level is 5.

Their well-developed infrastructure, militant ways, and potential for tech supremacy drive me insane.

The Greeks can be a hassle too, but compared to Carthage, they're nothing.

Compared to Carthage, none of the civs compare.

They weren't like this in real life!

Agathon · April 10, 2003, 17:11

I hate the Aztecs. I hate the Aztecs. I hate the Aztecs.

The worst civs to play against IMHO are the ones who are weakened but still feel compelled to declare war on you even though they don't have a hope of winning. This is a major annoyance. I can understand why a major power would want to fight me but not someone who's been whupped fairly badly early on in the game.

In my last game (Monarch) I shared a continent with the Aztecs who had attacked me in the early game and been beaten back badly. They left me alone for nearly 1800 years and then sprang a surprise nuclear attack on one of my good border cities, which they then razed.

In response to this impertinence I used the huge stockpile of nukes I had intended for the Babylonians and flattened all but 2 of their cities in one turn (must have been about 15 nuclear strikes). Heh heh...

TheArsenal · April 10, 2003, 17:16

I've changed my mind. My nemesis is now the Mongols.

It's 2034. A hard fought game where I have managed to conquer most of the (large map) continent I occupy so that I have now surpassed the Super Power Ottomans who are alone on the continental mass they completely conquered some hundreds of years back. All is well. I am ready to build up the last bits of culture, science and pollution reducers to cruise easily to my 2050 victory.

Enter the Mongols. War after war I have squeezed the once massive empire of the dangerous Mongols into the center choke point of the twisted figure eight like continent, but on this size map they still had too many cities to comfortably take out all the way without massive general ill will among my people. So I let them live.

Mistake.

Several Mongols troops come sliding into my territory. I ask them to leave. They declared war. Apparently, all this nation has been doing for hundreds of years is building units. 57 showed up on my eastern border. Another 40 or queued up behind them. Mostly infantry. My easy victory is now going to be a massive slug fest that I was hoping to avoid.

Agathon · April 10, 2003, 19:16

When PTW is ever released for the Macintosh I might be able to test your claim.

Bah!

Wazell · April 10, 2003, 20:19

Heh, cannot say anything about France because I usually play as them.

For the most annoying, Persians really have won the medal. When other civs go to war, they bother to declare it and actually become belligerent in turns before, but not these guys. Oh well, it can be literally predicted in which stage they'll make a nice sneak attack. Of course you being vulnerable on ancient ages and them having Immortals has something to do with it.

Others are far milder to play with. But those Americans always seem to get annoying position on a good resource site, not to mention making stupid demands. So when they'll start running around annoyed, it's no wonder their destruction comes before middle ages end. Germany tries to play same part in industrial times, often a little too successfully.

Still, I remember Mongols from Civ2 as real pain sometimes. One more reason not to bother with PTW yet.

MysteryMan · August 15, 2003, 13:56

The following assumes that you are playing any strategy OTHER THAN the standard kill everything so I can get my GL etc etc.
The following also assumes you are still in the earlyish-game (knights cap the end of this period)
Lastly, the following mostly is how to defeat a civilization that has a MUCH stronger military than you and has a big hard-on for you.
1)Attack where they are weak.
The Indians can do you just as much ill as the Zulus, just in different ways. If Indians are your problem, a strong military is your solution. but what of the Zulus, or another militaristic civ? I can almost GUARANTEE you that the Zulus do not have temples in their cities. A bit of clever city placement and rush building, and you could flip their cities. However, this is not reliable enough to be your Plan A. So what to do?

Step 1:PUT YOURSELF IN A POSITION OF INVINCIBILITY.
ALL of your border/coastal towns MUST have walls. You must have 2 strong defensive units in each city with at least 1 offensive mobile unit (some catapults don't hurt either). Zulu forces rampage up to your front door, but can't get in. Then your mobile unit destroys any one of the wounded Zulus (usually) and can usually make it back to your city to heal up.

REMEMBER - You CAN make yourself invincible. Only your enemy can render himself vulnerable. Be undefeatable and wait for your enemy to give you the means to destroy him.

Step 2:THE GUERILLA WAR
If you have a mobile unit with a defense above 1, PERFECT. If not, pair up some spearmen (veteran please, they will need it). Send them into the territory of the Bad Guys. PILLAGE EVERYTHING. The AI must then either divert his forces (that WERE coming to kick your door down) to wipe out those 2 puny units, or you will eventually destroy his infrastructure, cut him off from his resources and luxuries, and THEN you will be able to build up the edge you need in military (or just force a peace on your own terms).

Step 3:CALL IN YOUR BROS
You should be joining hands with your allies. If you are a peaceful civ, ALWAYS have one militaristic ally if you can swing it. At the very least, that's one guy who's stronger than you who probably won't try to kill you.
Read about international opinion. If you know how to swing it, you can prevent people from ever declaring war on yo in the first place...

- NOTE ON TRADE EMBARGOS -
These are SO useful. The BEST reason to have embassies with everyone. Find the civ you want weakened the most. Get eveyone to sign a trade embargo against them. This will have the effect of getting ALL the other civs mad at your enemy (WILL ALSO MAKE YOUR ENEMY VERY MAD AT YOU, BE FOREWARNED). This could cut them off from a potentially deadly resource, the Persians without iron are just a cold glass 'o water...
PLUS, this gives everyone else someone BESIDES YOU to work their aggresion out against.

Anyways, hope this helps (or at the least doesn't hinder). Happy hunting!

MysteryMan · August 15, 2003, 14:07

I have noticed that when I play as the Chinese, the Japanese always seem to have a hard on for me, and vice versa.
Is this coded into the game to reflect the historical animosity between the two nations? If so, it would also lead me to believe the following:
Germany hates France who return the feeling
America hates Russia and vice versa
France and England are unpleasant bedfellows AT BEST
India probably don't like China too much

I know there are more, but I don't have the time to continue. YOu know your history (don't you?) - you figure it out.
But if anyone could confirm or deny this (if certain civs are coded to hate certain other civs) I would be grateful.
Adios

zorbop · August 16, 2003, 23:01

Quote:

Originally posted by Thrawn05

I thought like you, but I relieze, if you can't beat 'em join them. The germans are the only civ that I suck up to. I give 'em free tech every so often and stuff. All that sucking pays off in the industrial age, with their panzers! I sign a MPP with them and goto war with someone I hate. In the end, their panzers help level a rival civ to nothing. I course being nice, after the war that I dragged them in, I give them a 1000 gold or so in the end. If I do this, they are usualy graicious towards me all the time.

heh. same here. i have found myself giving them stuff for free. the difficulty with them on higher levels is that they are militaristic/scientific. this means they start with, on diety, 4 archers AND 8 spearmen. the aztecs are anoying to, they start with 4 archers and 8 jaguar I believe.

GhengisFarb™ · August 20, 2003, 14:01

Most annoying civs to play against...

Gathering Storm and their UU, the War Chicken puts Elizabeth to shame..................

Yahweh Sabaoth · August 21, 2003, 11:36

I know I previously said Carthage - and I still hate the bastards - but I'm beginning to get damn sick of the Babylonians too.

Their build preferences do not include defensive units. So why do they always have twice as many as anyone else?

They're a bunch of back-stabbers, too: Back-stabbing babylonians.

I hate leaving these scuzzbuckets to survive.

Gufnork · August 21, 2003, 23:43

Indians. Mahatma Gandhi is the best diplomat of the AI:s and my usual plan to cut off their iron to bring them back to the stone age strategy I use when conquering strong opponents in the knight area doesn't work against them. Zulus always, always get stuck on a tiny island. I've never seen them past the middle ages, usually barely hit it. They're harmless. The rest I have no extreme aversions for.

Arrian · August 22, 2003, 09:30

Quote:

Originally posted by GhengisFarb
Most annoying civs to play against...

Gathering Storm and their UU, the War Chicken puts Elizabeth to shame..................

Why thank, you Ghengis. *bows*

We (don't) aim to please.

-Arrian

Odin · August 24, 2003, 20:15

Quote:

Originally posted by dunk
Looking at the editor, I do see that there is "Favorite Government" and "Shunned Government". I wonder if civs who's "Favorite Government" is someone else's "Shunned Government" incurs a penalty when dealing with that civ. For example, the Germans shun Communism, while the Russians favor Communism. Maybe that's why the two fight.

Same here, when I play as The US, Cathrine always hates me, just like US vs USSR in real life.

Odin · August 24, 2003, 20:19

Quote:

Originally posted by Gufnork
Indians. Mahatma Gandhi is the best diplomat of the AI:s and my usual plan to cut off their iron to bring them back to the stone age strategy I use when conquering strong opponents in the knight area doesn't work against them. Zulus always, always get stuck on a tiny island. I've never seen them past the middle ages, usually barely hit it. They're harmless. The rest I have no extreme aversions for.

Same here, Gandhi is annoying.

The Zulu are dangerous in the early game, but fall behind soon because all they do is KILL! KILL! KILL!

Bismark is always an annoying backstabber. Korea tends to backstab me a lot to.

Yahweh Sabaoth · August 25, 2003, 10:23

The worst backstabbers are those damn Babylonians.

AluminumKnight · November 8, 2003, 01:21

My experiences with the Germans have been pretty negative. The first even game I completely finished, I was Egypt, and the Germans were being their usual ******* selves and demanding crap from me in the early game (not a good thing to do when I have the UU

), so I completely wiped him out.

However, the Zulu make me really mad. First off, I lost a game very early because I refused one of their demands and they swarmed me with archers and impi. Second, I've been playing a world map as Carthage (started in Italy), and the Zulu (started in Tigris-Euphrates valley) somehow razed the capital of my strongest and oldest ally, the Egyptians (started in India), and every single other one of their cities was magically razed at the same time. By the way, is this a bug or what?

Solomwi · November 8, 2003, 02:06

My vote goes to the English, just for making me picture Lizzy in a milk bath

*shudder*

Kuciwalker · November 8, 2003, 12:23

Quote:

The Americans are ornery. They are industrious, which is a strong trait that requires little to no skill to use (hence, the AI benifits), and they might just grab an early settler from a hut. I remember, back when I was more of a peaceful builder type, being overrun by a horde of American horsemen while my poor, outnumbered Mounted Warriors just couldn't stem the tide.

Isn't that a bit historically accurate?