Early Age Civs
 

Who do you think is among the best civs for early age?

I found abysia to be quite strong but i havn't played the game enough to really know. I only stick to the early age as the game is complex enough to learn.

Re: Early Age Civs
 

Hinnom, Lanka, Niefelheim

Re: Early Age Civs
 

I think it's bit too early to say Hinnom's power level is over 9000.

Re: Early Age Civs
 

Mictlan uber alles.
oO

Re: Early Age Civs
 

I'll say Niefelheim. My vote is biased because I don't play blood nations.

Re: Early Age Civs
 

Tien, Lanka, Niefle, Hinnom, Mictlan, Vanheim.. more or less in that order.

Re: Early Age Civs
 

Best for SP or MP? In SP (I don't play MP) Niefelheim is probably the strongest, but I avoid them because I hate water magic. Marverni is strong too (although the mages are ruinously expensive). Helheim is quite strong with very thuggable commanders. Atlantis is also strong.

-Max

P.S. Edratman has a point. Some nations are very strong if you micromanage them properly. I guess what I meant is that Niefelheim is the most straightforwardly-strong. Just take a good bless, build a few Jarls, and go kill your closest neighbor. Marverni has excellent (gemless) battlemagic--again, that's about hassle-free magic at least as much as powerful magic. Blood magic is potentially great on the battlefield, I just hate carrying around blood slaves. And I'm uncomfortable with sacrificing virgins--I usually take growth over death because I want to feel benevolent towards my subjects. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif Anyway, Lanka has great troops and strong blood magic.

Re: Early Age Civs
 

You know what might be interesting? If some of the more experienced players around here contributed to a chart, based on their own perceptions of the different nations. Basically rating on 1-10 scale the strength of each nation in early, mid, and late game. Then again on a 1-10 scale for ease of playability, with LA Ermor being the only 10, and EA/LA Mictlan somewhere around a 2.

If anyone thinks that such a table would be abused to pick easy win races, I'm not so sure. Players who have been here very long already have a pretty good feel for the game. However, used properly, this chart would help struggling or beginning players pinpoint nations that cater to their competence or weakness. I know that I would have loved such a thing when I first started. Initially, I labelled some nations as nearly unplayable, such as Caelum, because I just didn't realize they require a solid understanding of the combat system to use effectively.

If that idea isn't shot down too handily by the old men of the forums, I may start another thread, and would even be willing to collate the data. Might even be arsed to learn enough about forum coding to make it look all purty. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...ies/tongue.gif

Re: Early Age Civs
 

i must just think of abysia as strong cause they keep owning me in sp games, i have no idea why. i keep beating all the other civs until they come along.

they seem to have very high armour and low defence, any tips on how to counter this? in my current game i am formoria(sp?) and i killed both agartha and ulm without losing a battle but now abysia is attacking me and i'm losing battles.

And to MaxWilson: i mean MP.

Re: Early Age Civs
 

I am surprised that no one has mentioned Sauromatia as strong?
the best archers in the game period strong death mages blood access and low level magic in spades. Sure they might not be giants but they have damn near everything else.