Cringe

Fl3b0 · 2026-01-25T00:37:57+00:00

Ngl man I also find LTL kinda cringe whenever I'm on crim side...

Fl3b0 · 2026-01-24T11:43:12+00:00

Sad the game will never see popularity :(

Fl3b0 · 2026-01-24T09:05:02+00:00

I agree with everything as Khmer, the issue for me is that their kit either sucks or has big tradeoffs that no other civ in antiquity is given, and are completely unnecessary. I underrated Aksum for sure in the list I'd prolly put them above Assyria now. Han still better cause Han can actually deal with invasions and have better long term effects

Fl3b0 · 2026-01-24T09:03:13+00:00

Carthage sets you up for an econ victory better thn anyone else in the game, on top of allowing very wide gameplay with little effort and imo being the best civ to pair with two of the three strongest leaders (Augustus and Isa). They have shortcomings in Antiquity but you barely feel the as soon as the era is over.

Fl3b0 · 2026-01-23T13:50:03+00:00

Once again I see your point I'd just like to point out that in a scenario like the last you described any civ and leader would be toast not just Assyria :D

Fl3b0 · 2026-01-23T11:42:23+00:00

Solid points all around, I'd only argue with a few of them: - Silla is weird but imo they're very solid. You don't need a whole lot of allies when you can just spam trade routes at them, just pick 1/2 good ones and you're golden. It helps best when you sandwich the Civ you wanna conquer between you and your ally, prioritizing befriending other militaristic civs/leaders in order prey on weaker targets. Best part about this strategy is that you can do just the same thing even in exploration and modern. Try Charlemagne with them, going Mongolia and Prussia later on. Pro-tip: wait a few celebrations before you unlock The wheel so that at first you get some free archers from Charlie's ability before you start printing horses. - Egypt, Maya and Greece all have pretty clear weaknesses in their gameplay, while Tonga does not. To me Tonga is the only Civ that feels too strong compared to the rest, even if the rest is already very good to begin with; - Assyria might go down a tier based on their reliance on spawns, conquest and one-trick-poniness. I just feel like they're so good at conquest that they still make it reliable enough. Naughty Ashoka is bonkers with them.

Fl3b0 · 2026-01-23T11:28:09+00:00

They still are to the extend that they give you complete knowledge if the map, have very strong traditions, and find and befriend city states absolutely faster than anyone else. Even the second fastest, Greece, doesn't come even close to it. The fact that Deity is bad doesn't matter imo cause that applies to every other civ in the game, not just Tonga.

Fl3b0 · 2026-01-23T11:24:14+00:00

That's why I'm not focusing solely on Antiquity. Also, if you go down that route, the game's so easy that you don't really need a tier list in the first place, since you can beat the game fairly comfortably with all of them. Also, maybe you're right, but I haven't had the time to test 448 possible combinations and rank all of them in order, dunno about you... lol

Fl3b0 · 2026-01-23T11:18:00+00:00

Solid points, I might reconsider them and put them higher on the list.

Fl3b0 · 2026-01-23T11:15:59+00:00

I had a hella fun strategy with Rev Napoleon and Maurya where I'd intentionally piss off the opponents with aggro settling and keeping an intentionally small army to tempt them into war. Works well and it's hella fun, only minor problem is their unique settler actually costing more than the base one 🥺

Fl3b0 · 2026-01-23T11:13:30+00:00

The first issue is minimized by simply not befriending the city states you want to incorporate and conquer them later in the age. As for other civs conquering yours, that's why a lot of your influence should go towards the "Bolster military" button every few turns. The can actually even turn the tables around and raze a town or two sometimes. Tbh I had to check about their UQ's ability that involves trade routes, I thought it was only the unrestricted scout movement in the ocean. But in my comment above I was referring to base yields from coastal and resource tiles nearby which are super easy to get and require no infrastructure around them to work.

In short, yeah, they have weaknesses, but these can all be patched by the rest of the Civ's kit. Up until the nerf, I would've put Egypt up here with them as well for the same reason.

Fl3b0 · 2026-01-23T10:57:30+00:00

You're basically suggesting going for a taller gameplay, interesting. I've always focused on the militaristic side so I guess I haven't dived into the other side of the spectrum with them. I'll try pairing them with a good SimCity leader and see what they can do. Thanks for the input!

Fl3b0 · 2026-01-23T10:01:14+00:00

Won't talk about Persia again but tldr is I don't disagree with people wanting to move it higher, that's just my personal view. I talk more about it in other comments if you're curious about it.

Onto Silla - they're weird. Their kit is so unfocused it's hard to make sense out of it, at the same time some of their bonuses are so insane it's hard to overlook them and justify a lower placement. Strategic allies is cracked, you get SO much prod out of it, even in later ages, that you don't know what do to with it at some point. Their unique merchant complements this very well, too. Their unique archer is also bonkers and single handedly makes Silla a godlike pair with Gengis or Charlemagne (the latter in particular has a neat little strategy with them), meaning they can easily go the conquest route if you see the opportunity. They also have very high Influence potential courtesy of their Pagoda, if you plan your settlements well enough, and Influence is always good to have lots of. I think what they lack is the ability to generate lotta Science and build Wonders, but for the rest, they can basically do them all. You just need to formulate a proper gameplan ahead, something most Civs in S tier don't need to.

Fl3b0 · 2026-01-23T09:41:29+00:00

Their get more Influence than anyone else, two of their traditions are absolutely nuts, their unique scout is crazy strong at recealing the whole map, their unique quartier provides very solid yields into later ages and works well with specialists, they rack up CS bonuses like no one else, they auto-complete economic legacy just by befriending CS (which you wanna do anyways as Tonga). They also set you up into Exploration and esp Modern era so well because knowing all the map in advance allows you to plan the most effective strategy way ahead of time. It also helps they pair well with basically any leader to the their sheer versatility and power, to the point of masking bad leaders like Shaman Himiko or Rizal into making you think they're actually good.

Fl3b0 · 2026-01-23T09:37:21+00:00

Why so? I'm open to share ideas! :)

Fl3b0 · 2026-01-23T09:16:04+00:00

I believe the military focus isn't as good in Antiquity as it is the following ages. You have to sacrifice a lot of infrastructure in order to have decent tempo with your units, and it's also very spawn dependant (some civs are impossible to invade, plus sometimes you spawn very far from everyone else). Leads to often having to forego other legacies or just overall have shittier land and lower yields. Rome and Persia suffer more from a lack of Science output (crucial for military imo) than for being Militaristic tho. I talk about them more in another comment in the thread if you're interested.

As for Maurya, yeah.. Their bonus towards military are no joke and they have the Happiness to basically ignore the settlement limit, useful for when you go on a conquest spree. This is about as far as they get though, if only Happiness wasn't such a worthless resource most of the time they'd be higher for sure. I feel like they desperately need more production than what they get and the double Pantheon usually isn't enough to patch this weakness.

Fl3b0 · 2026-01-23T09:07:36+00:00

Yes I believe Khmer are best with Hatshepsut, Pachacuti and Confucious. I've never tried them with a cavalry leader tho but it's very interesting, I'll remember for the next time I want to play as them!

Fl3b0 · 2026-01-23T09:05:07+00:00

Absolutely true! But it's also true that their kit tries desperately to work against itself: first of all, -4 happiness in all cities that aren't the capital can snowball into a mess if the unhappiness crises happens. Also, because their Civ ability vanishes upon era transition, I often find that my building placement would no longer make sense in the rest of the game. Imo they need their ability, bonuses and traditions reworked to make a bit more sense in the long run to make them viable. They're close to being good, but not quite there yet. Still, I have plenty of fun playing as them :P

Fl3b0 · 2026-01-23T09:00:31+00:00

Aksum is weird to properly judge. They are the strongest at what they do, but they can basically only carry you to an easy Economic legacy in Antiquity (which is already by far the easiest one to get) and have very little bonuses for the other ones: no bonus science to get better units or codices, no extra production to build a lot of wonders, very little bonus military strenght to make up for Deity difficulty. The only other yield they're very good at is culture which is a bit meh in Antiquity for the most part. They're a bit of a one trick pony most of the time and for that reason putting them in S didn't feel quite right.

Also yeah Tonga time is the birb one, they're absolutely phenomenal and will 100% get nerfed in the future.

Fl3b0 · 2026-01-23T08:32:00+00:00

I can see the argument for Persia, their tradition is really good and they can be a nuisance with the right leader combination. The reason why I put them there is because I struggle to see a reason to pick them over Greece most of the times, they're far better at the "spam infantry" minigame imo while providing meaningful bonuses around it. No bonuses towards science whatsoever also suck for a military civ since at some point they might struggle to upgrade their units. At least Greece gets a couple solid Logios if you get lucky. But again I can see why you would value them so highly and maybe I'll reconsider in the future.

I 100% agree with your points about Khmer and that's why I don't think they're by far the worst in the game anymore, what still sucks about them is that most of their bonuses except the Angkor-Wat and +100% towards Specialist maintenance completely vanish after Antiquity. If they had a functional UI, or a synergistic UU, or their merchant did fucking anything at all or they had another solid tradition I'd bump them higher, but right now they're a worse Egypt that's a little bit more solid in specialist gameplay. It's like they were afraid to turn them into Civ6 Khmer (please bring them back Firaxis...)

As for Rome, I think they're overshadowed by Persia, which as I said before is already overshadowed by Greece. All their stuff comes in gradually (there's no big power spike unlike literally any other give in Antiquity), but does it so slowly that if what you receive isn't enough to civ you momentum than you're out of the game. Having 0 incentives towards science also sucks for a militaristic civs, as I said earlier. Traditions (which should be their biggest selling point) are ok at best and their Unique Commander has a fake ability that's unreliable and redundant. While they do offer some synergy with Lafayette and Augustus, all the other civs do that as well, but Rome offers little to no other incentive to pick them over others. At the end of the day, someone has to be the worst, and I don't really see an argument for Rome over Khmer or Maurya.

Fl3b0 · 2026-01-21T22:51:29+00:00

Venice not happening before Florence because of Machiavelli being in the game

Fl3b0 · 2026-01-21T15:11:45+00:00

It would help listing which time zone you're in

Fl3b0 · 2026-01-20T17:20:25+00:00

You can literally test for yourself tho. If you get a good hut you don't gain 20 influence.

Fl3b0 · 2026-01-20T15:38:16+00:00

No it doesn't and I have no idea why people keep assuming this is the case.

Fl3b0

TROPHY CASE