Raphifail Posted March 28 Share Posted March 28 What do you think is the best civilization in the game currently? You can say several criteria, personal choice, the most powerful,... And what is the functionality or unit that you preferred and which has disappeared. I have been playing 0AD for over 9 years now. Thank you for your work! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 28 Share Posted March 28 My personal choice would be the Romans. Reason being that they have strong melee unit base, and solid cavalry. Their ranged units are lacking, for the lack of a better word. Marian Reforms unique tech can be powerful when timed correctly. I prefer their playstyle the most, and their units are very detailed. If I were more objective, the choice would be either Seleucids or Athenians. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DesertRose Posted March 29 Share Posted March 29 Romans if you play with my bugfix mod. Being able to produce Civilians from Houses from the start of a match is crazy strong. Ptolemies also feels very strong due to cheaper buildings. I have read that most top-rated players judge Macedonians to be among the strongest Civs, but I don't fully understand why. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlexHerbert Posted March 29 Share Posted March 29 (edited) Not an easy decision for me. Romans, Chineses, Gauls, Persians I find are very good civs. But if I have to choose just one, I would choose Carthaginians. Just because of their style (Also I find very good). Edited March 29 by AlexHerbert Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sh4d0w Posted March 30 Share Posted March 30 i like to play rome, but i never seem to get it to work. i see the potential and so i keep trying. i can proudly say i beat the very easy bot in a 1v1 match, currently hopping to defeat the easy bot but currently at 17 losses , no wins seeming to appear in the near future. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sh4d0w Posted March 30 Share Posted March 30 never mind beat the easy bot just now, now aiming for the medium bot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sh4d0w Posted March 30 Share Posted March 30 Posted 3 hours ago never mind beat the medium bot just now, now aiming for the hard bot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perzival12 Posted March 30 Share Posted March 30 My favorite civ to actually play as is Athens, though I love the Britains as well (such cute little war puppies). Mauryan trained war kittens (tigers) when? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Helpinghand Posted Saturday at 22:54 Share Posted Saturday at 22:54 On 28/03/2026 at 3:48 PM, Raphifail said: What do you think is the best civilization in the game currently? You can say several criteria, personal choice, the most powerful,... And what is the functionality or unit that you preferred and which has disappeared. I have been playing 0AD for over 9 years now. Thank you for your work! I think some nations should be made significantly better than others; this would be based on the accomplishments each civ made in history like Rome might get a rating of 10, and Kush would get a rating of let's say 3 ( this is not exact ), and the rating would impact the performance of the civ during the game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grautvornix Posted Sunday at 12:37 Share Posted Sunday at 12:37 Frankly, I don't think that we should do that. Not argueing from history but from the gameplay perspective: For a game that offers different civs, these need to be balanced so they all remain a valid option to be chosen by the player. Any "less capable/less valueable" civ would simply never be chosen and we can remove it from the game. But all this while having different characteristics so that specific strategy might be beeded to win a game, e.g. Kush against Rome. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thalatta Posted Sunday at 13:43 Share Posted Sunday at 13:43 1 hour ago, Grautvornix said: Not argueing from history but from the gameplay perspective Indeed, the community is too MP oriented (many times at its own peril) for something like this to fly, and in this case, it's actually understandable. The only way I see this working is for people not to care about wining but ranking, and getting more points when wining with weaker civs, but I just don't see it happening. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frederick_1 Posted 23 minutes ago Share Posted 23 minutes ago In older 0ad Versions Civilisations had more differentiations. Then some releases ago there was done a lot of work to make them more balanced. I think there were reasons for that. Altough I am happy that in the two latest realeases there were new differentiations to make the game more interesting. At the moment I rate Athenians highest especially in no Champ-Cav-Games. Although in early game phase I think gauls is strongest. If you manage to boom in late game I think Mauaries are underrated. But if you have to fight an army of 50 elephants mele and ranged..... I think there should be limitations for that heavy units. When you face 20 rams or catapults its also gg, at least if there is a minimum companion army on their side. Maybe you are able to smash the first fiew of them but then everything gets wiped out. Persians and Han can are also very strong if you manage to built a large cavallery. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now