The end overview is such a clear example of how well the mod designers, supported by the community, have made the mod. Of the dozens and dozens of civ, a measly five are rated low enough to not be worthwhile. That's amazing!
The balance is even better in Teamers (4v4) than it is for Free-For-All. The worst civs in this list are all civs which are better in teamers than FFA. Take Qin-Unifier, for instance. He's been reworked by BBG into a civ based around cheaper encampment buildings and earning great writer points from encampments. The civ's pretty bad in free-for-all games because the best way to play FFA is to avoid early warfare, and the civ's bonuses towards encampments aren't enough to justify building them during peacetime. However, in Teamers, it's an excellent civ because building encampments and spamming units at your neighbors in the early game is a viable way to play in that gamemode. Furthermore, the free great works of writing that Qin-Unifier generates from encampments can be traded to his teammates in order to accelerate their game. Lastly, whenever any teammate researches a technology or a civic, every other teammate instantly triggers the eureka/inspiration for it - this means that it's easy for Qin-Unifier gets massive value out of his Chinese bonus, which grants 10% extra progress from eurekas and inspirations, in teamers. Many of the biggest outliers in terms of FFA balance are that way because the BBG team prioritizes balancing civs for 4v4.
Me before: "Ah this should be interesting. I've really only played single player so far, but I'm curious about learning multiplayer. I wonder where they rank my favorite civ." later: "THEY PUT SUNDIATA DEAD LAST!?!?!?!??" :( Anyway though it was pretty interesting hearing you guys analyze each civ. Definitely learned a lot. I've really been enjoying the content on your channel a lot.
I'm a single player diety switch player. Watching your videos has recalibrated the way I think about the game. I'm going to try online speed basil, sounds like fun.
I‘d put Frederick much higher. He can f.e. capture a city state with just a warrior and 2 scouts. So, you get like a free settler. Teddy BM is broken due to his ability to plant woods earlier. In the midgame, you‘ll have all tiles covered in lumber mills with 2 culture, lots of production and often 2 culture (even more with preserves)
Hi Herson! Thanks for the comprehensive guide! wondering if you can do some tier list or more guides in terms of 3v3 or 2v2… most of time playing this with friends lol and most games ended between 60t and 80t 😅
Really like the tierlist but since im not that experienced in ffa I have a question. For leaders like Bazyl, Chandra e.t.c you mentioned that they are strong cause of their pushes, but for me both civs have not much aside of that. So how do you WIN ffa as pretty early warmonger civ? Trying to kill nearest neighbours asap to snowball or waiting for some timing pushes? Wont you fall back stat wise with such a playstile compared to a freesim players?
I think you might be misunderstanding Basil and Chandragupta if you view their warmonger bonuses as being exclusively early-game. Their war bonuses scale incredibly well into the late-game, even if you completely ignore their unique units. Chandra is a bit of a weird civ because his sim bonuses are really easy to overlook. The way I like to play him is to place down just 2-3 holy sites early, found a religion with the belief "Zen Meditation" (In BBG it just gives +1 amenity to every city following it), and then play a relatively normal commercial hub opener. Because India already gains +1 amenity for every religion with a follower in its empire, you just have 2 extra amenities per city for the rest of the game like this. +2 amenities almost always pushes you to the next amenity breakpoint, which will result in an 8% gain to all yields (culture, science, prod, faith, and gold). That, on its own, is enough to let you set a good pace to the industrial era, where you can try to snag a kill with Chandra's war bonuses. +3 combat strength, +1 movement, +1 sight on all units alongside a 25% discount on making corps and armies (which stacks additively with the 25% discount from military academies for a 50% discount) makes it really easy to kill someone even if you're just technologically on par with them. I prefer to push with Chandra with an army of cuirassiers and bombards in the industrial era, upgrading them to tanks and artillery as the war goes along. At this point, your target will have built plenty of things for you to pillage, so this war should accelerate your game as long as you can kill them relatively quickly. Basil II, on the other hand, is a much weirder case. He basically has no sim bonuses and compensates for it just by having some of the most reliably insane war bonuses in the game. I don't personally play this civ at all and I rarely see it due to it being one of the most banned civs in FFA, so I was mostly deferring to the opinions of my co-hosts when ranking it. We even had another strong player join the voice call to tell us we rated it too high, sparking a second discussion about the civ - it's just really hard to rate a civ like this. Personally, I think it's definitely one of the best civs in the entire game for strong players to use to stomp mixed-skill FFA lobbies, but it's probably not a great civ for the average player to pick up.
On Vietnam, it's generally best to cluster your Thanhs together. You want to get their adjacency as high as possible as quickly as possible, and clustering them together is the fastest way to do this.
Acsess is one of the highest rated players in CPL. He doesn't actually stream his games - we just know about him because we've all played games with him before. He has a reputation for playing Chandragupta at every possible opportunity.
Just the Better Balanced Game and Better Balanced Starts mod. The first is a large-scale rebalance of the game designed to make it more balanced for competitive multiplayer, and the latter tweaks map generation and civ placements to make spawns more reliable.
I have a question about Gorgo that might be stupid but I just don't see it yet. I'm a new player, I played 3-4 FFA games on cpl so far, 2 of which was Gorgo, and I fell behind both times (massively in science, with not high enough culture to compensate for it, even tho being top 2 highest in the lobby). When you say she has insane culture, do you only mean the acropolises or do you include the free culture on kills too? Because I have been building pretty good acropolises both my games, got all the writers, but I literally never killed a single unit in either game - legit didn't even seen one barbarian unit, and I was afraid to go to war with neighbours. So basically my question is, am I supposed to harass a neighbour to get some kills to not literally have -1 civ bonus, or is that bonus not even significant and I should just have better timing on acropolises? Speaking of that, I noticed myself and saw in your free inq video how important science is, but is it enough to put them down at 7 pop (10 in capital because of plaza) or should I delay the acropolises instead? (so commercial - campus - acropolis)
Acropolis into commercials with magnus internals is good. Don't attack your neighbour unless you have a clear advantage and can definitely break through. The culture on kills isn't worth the early war
@@melovepeas oh i know what went wrong, i didnt set up my commercials well enough. my question was regarding the culture on kills bonus, as in whether me not achieving anything with that is a problem or not
@@motyovszkimiklos7538You only take an early war if it's good. Going to war for the culture bonus alone will set you behind too much. As long as you have barbarians and city states to kill, you will make it to corps, armies, and fascism faster than other people in the lobby.
The culture you get from killing units is not really needed to reach fascism on a good pace - you're mostly just relying on all of the extra culture granted by your unique theater squares. In the early game, though, it can be very impactful to kill some barbarians. In BBG, Greece unlocks a free wildcard policy slot upon reaching the Early Empire civic, and killing a barbarian spearman can get you to that civic several turns sooner. Also, killing some barbarians early makes it very easy to hit Political Philosophy before the end of the ancient era, securing some extra era score for adopting your first government and making hitting a golden age much easier.
I think that this can be remade into more clear format. Sometimes there is too much voices and opinions, and it's hard to understand if you're don't know much meta like me.
This is absolutely not true, by the way. The strongest civs in the unmodded game absolutely smoke anything in BBG, while the weakest civs are worse than everything in BBG aside from Mali (which was just over-nerfed like ~2 patches ago and will be buffed next patch)
i think Chandragupter is not that strong i also think Kymeher is way better than Yongle becouse his Pop is way faster wiht his river goddes & if played well you can get 300/400 on turn 70 i never see that on Yongle like ever wehn he goes wide or hig so 4 me a civ like Kymeher is at the top whit civs like Rome or kongo mzigba mbande .
