[SPOILERS] Margarita and the Lurkers

[Krill]

Yeah, Agri/Wheel is considered to be the best widely available pairing, but Agri/Mining the best pair (1 tech away from any food and from slavery/chopping. Copper is just a bonus. Only available on China).

That basically means Egypt, Sumeria, France, Babylon, Ottomans plus China. Those are some of the most widely played civs when snake picks are used. Babylon usually is the least played because the UB is almost as close to junk status without potentially being junk, and the UU has a very short time frame of usefulness in PBEMs. Egypt is used a lot because the UU doesn't really become useless until cuirs and grenadiers are around (still cost effective way to deal with knights with some promotions, good throw away units when dealing with 2-4 unit stacks and don't want to waste cats, and can take sentry so a multi-purpose unit) and the UB is one of only 2 UB that give you a guaranteed Prophet (and is significantly easier to use than the Madrassa). So in isolation, those are the best civs to take.

There are a fair few times where other civs are good, due to synergy with traits (EXP Inca/India are basically the best examples of something that can break a game at any skill levels, though really India and Inca are still solid regardless of synergy). Stuff like CRE Maya for 40 hammer Ball Courts that give +3 happiness are niche picks but because they make can use of decent trait pairings like CRE/EXP or CRE/FIN they can be played into a good position, but lack the flexibility of Agri/Wheel, and there are plenty of times where it just doesn't work (pasture food resource, plenty of happiness around).

[Maga_R]

Yeah, Agri/Wheel is considered to be the best widely available pairing, but Agri/Mining the best pair (1 tech away from any food and from slavery/chopping. Copper is just a bonus. Only available on China).

That basically means Egypt, Sumeria, France, Babylon, Ottomans plus China. Those are some of the most widely played civs when snake picks are used. Babylon usually is the least played because the UB is almost as close to junk status without potentially being junk, and the UU has a very short time frame of usefulness in PBEMs. Egypt is used a lot because the UU doesn't really become useless until cuirs and grenadiers are around (still cost effective way to deal with knights with some promotions, good throw away units when dealing with 2-4 unit stacks and don't want to waste cats, and can take sentry so a multi-purpose unit) and the UB is one of only 2 UB that give you a guaranteed Prophet (and is significantly easier to use than the Madrassa). So in isolation, those are the best civs to take.

There are a fair few times where other civs are good, due to synergy with traits (EXP Inca/India are basically the best examples of something that can break a game at any skill levels, though really India and Inca are still solid regardless of synergy). Stuff like CRE Maya for 40 hammer Ball Courts that give +3 happiness are niche picks but because they make can use of decent trait pairings like CRE/EXP or CRE/FIN they can be played into a good position, but lack the flexibility of Agri/Wheel, and there are plenty of times where it just doesn't work (pasture food resource, plenty of happiness around).

Thx for detailed explanations, Krill. That is one of the reasons I voted to see the starting location, to see a bit longer list of civ to pick from . Although it is not so bad now - you mentioned 6 good agri civs + India + Inca = 8, which is exactly the number of the teams we have, so one good civ for each .

Wrt to synergy of treats and UBs - I have noticed that most people do it rather automatically, I mean if the China's UB is theatre, they would just pair China with a CRE leader, to get a discount on its UB. I am not sure if it is best policy - for example, theatre is a cheap building anyway, and China's theater - pavillon - is not much better than the original. So why not to choose a treat that would give an entirely independent benefits?

I think synergy makes most sense if the unique building is very expensive, but very useful, too - like Korea's +35% University. If I would play Korea, I would definitely want a PHI leader. But as I said, I am not that sure on CRE for China or AGG for Zulu, for example. I am actually not even so sure on EXP for India or Inca. Especially for India - workers are great anyway, they will be build anyway, do we really need that bonus? With Inca, it is the same, anyway we will get granary in every city - I understand the idea is to unlock culture bonus earlier?

I have also read somewhere that inca is actually a "bad" civ since you should not pair it with any CRE leader and that push people towards strange leader choice when they pick Inca first during snake pick. I am also not convinced pairing a CRE leader with Inca is such a bad thing - sure, you are missing on an independent benefits, but there are two points: a) CRE is not only about early border pops, it gives also cheap libraries (and theaters and colosseums); b) having multiple culture bonuses can be really powerful, dominant culture early should be great for land grabbing, early warning of the impending attack and defense.

Have anybody seen it in practice - e.g. CRE Inca?

[Oxyphenbutazone]

http://realmsbeyond.net/forums/showthread.php?tid=5488- It didn't really work out for them though

People tend too overvalue synergy as opposed to just picking the most powerful combinations, the only exception really is EXP Inca, as that shifts the whole dynamic of early border pops away from monuments and missionaries and towards a building you need in every city.

[Maga_R]

http://realmsbeyond.net/forums/showthread.php?tid=5488- It didn't really work out for them though

People tend too overvalue synergy as opposed to just picking the most powerful combinations, the only exception really is EXP Inca, as that shifts the whole dynamic of early border pops away from monuments and missionaries and towards a building you need in every city.

Thx, Ox, will read it.

Yeah, I was also beginning to wonder if obligatory synergy is such a good idea ...

[Krill]

Inca is one of the most game changing civs, simply because it has a UB that emulates one of the strongest parts of a third trait (CRE), and a UU that also emulates the early game strength of a fourth trait (AGG). No other civ really does that, even if India has it's own unique flavour.

It strictly speaking doesn't need to be with any trait pair to function effectively (though obviously Kublai of Inca is one the more retarded combinations out there), but it benefits from EXP because it gets the Terrace out earlier, which means the snowball can start earlier. IIRC, the advantage of getting a granary completed before the food box is half full at size 1 means you only need 47 food to grow to size 4, compared to 72 food without a granary (which is akin to saying that is the advantage to only having to chop with 1 worker compared to 2 workers, lower start up costs etc). That extra 25 food is basically another 2 pop with the granary, which is 60 hammers which is an additional worker, but as workers re cheaper you even save hammers on that. EXP just starts the snowball faster than another trait, and when Inca is added onto that, it means you can plant cities for the best long term effectiveness because there is no short term drawback to doing so.

tl;dr Inca is fucking easy mode. You don't want to pair it with CRE, sure, but that means you can go pick up any other trait you want. Bismark for Ind, Peter for PHI, even Washington for CHM for more happy to slave even harder or work more cottages.

[Commodore]

Krill's got it; Inca is easymode. I will say playing Imp/Ind Inca, it's not as smooth as with Exp, but the terrace is still an extremely nice UB; just need a little more effort than with Exp, but granary first is still what you want 99% of the time anyway. Actually, to a green, I'd recommend Inca first just for that, gets you in good habits.

You are very right about India; fast workers are absurdly great 25% hammer-boosted or not. One could even argue outside of the early snowball fast workers are mildly antisynergistic, as India can find herself needing fewer total workers with tight micro.

[Maga_R]

There is basically no reason to not pick FIN in an NTT game provided the second trait isn't totally junk.

So which traits are totally junk? . Other than PRO?

[Maga_R]

I have also asked our dedlurker, Jovan, for his advice. He is an exceptional civ player, although he typically plays in different settings:

I am used to restricted leaders. I played unrestricted leaders very rarely in multiplayer, so I have very rarely thought about picking unrestricted civ and leader.
My favourite leaders in restricted rules are:

1) If opponent is on same land mass:

Fin, exp, agg: Pacal, Ragnar, Shaka,...
If fin and agg are banned: Cyrus, Joao, Washington,...

2) If opponent is on the other land mass:

Fin: William, Pacal, Huayna Capac,...
If fin is banned: Mehmed, Bismarck, Suryavarman,...

Fin is generally the best. Agg is worth only if opponents are close, and if they prefer war more than civilized development.

Maya have Ball court. Good UU is Holkan, because you don't need metal to defend vs surprise chariot/horsearcher attacks.
Zulu have nice barracks, Ikhanda. Impi is also good, if you like to attack. Impi can move together with mounted units, making a fast and strong pillage stack.
Ottomans have the best starting techs, Agriculture and Wheel. Janissary is excellent UU. Hammam is a nice UB.

[Qgqqqqq]

Agg, Pro are the junk traits. Cha and Imp are also generally rated lowly but at least have SOME economic benefit.

[Maga_R]

Agg, Pro are the junk traits.

That would be my guess, too . Although Krill was making and interesting point that being the only one AGG civ can be powerful.