Civilization 6 R&F singleplayer tier list

[Assault Squirt]

Based on my over 2,000 hours of experience.

GOD TIER (Tier 1: Civs that have game-breaking bonuses)
Nubia
Germany
Australia
Korea

TOP TIER (Tier 2: Civs that either always have strong bonuses, or situationally game-breaking bonuses)
Arabia
Rome
Russia
Scythia
Sumeria
Macedon

HIGH TIER (Tier 3: Civs that are either really strong but too specialized, or civs that are generally strong)
Mapuche
Scotland
Aztec
Greece (Athens)
Mongolia
Indonesia
Persia

MID TIER (Tier 4: Civs that are stronger than average, and/or have situationally strong bonuses)
Zulu
Brazil
France
Japan
America
Poland
India (Chandragupta)

LOW TIER (Tier 5: Civs that are middling. Either they're too situational, or their bonuses are too weak over all to make a significant impact on the game)
China
Cree
Dutch
Greece (Sparta)
India (Gandhi)
Khmer
Kongo

BOTTOM TIER (Tier 6: Civs that just suck. They're hardly better than a completely blank Civ, with bonuses too minuscule for how situational they are)
Norway
Georgia
Spain (as of R&F, especially due to loyalty)
Egypt
England

[Drunk Demoman]

I would put scotland at T1. The entire early to mid game your cities are usually going to be happy, so you're always going to get that extra production and science, doubled if they're estatic. This lets you stall on building campus districts in the early game if you want to and focus on something else. Also, being able to declare liberation wars means you get an extra 100% production for ten entire turns. Seeing how the entire game sees civs taking out CS's or other players, liberation wars are usually never in short supply, so you effectively can always have double hammers. This means you can sort of exploit it (Especially in multiplayer) to get a gigantic prod boost for clicking a few buttons.
Their UU is pretty trash though, so there's that.

Also, I would put Mapuche at either T1 or 2, leaning towards 1. Their UA makes them undeniably the best war civ in the game hands down. Kill an enemy unit? City loses 20 loyalty, this means all you need to do is kill 5 to 6 units and that city goes into open revolt, spawning two rebel units and that may attack your enemy, and that city may barrage them as well. Pillaging also reduces loyalty by 5, so an even higher loss in loyalty. Their UB also grants a very nice (25%) boost to XP earned and +10 combat strength to civs in a GA (situational). Their UU can also see through forests and jungle/rainforests, so given the right situation, you can attack the enemy without them even knowing where they're being hit from. Their ren era unit is much weaker though, only giving 5 str if within a measly 4 tiles, but their other ability contradicts that bonus by only it costing 1 move point to pillage. I guess this means it's a balanced unit-but it hurts it more than helps, it seems like a defensive unit, but the other ability makes it seem like an attacking unit. Their Unique Improvement is pretty trash though.

[GhostDragon]

Zulu Tier 3?

[GhostDragon]

Could you also please explain why Indonesia is Tier 2?

[mONONOke_____]

isnt it always a question of the game type u want to play?
like:
if u want to play a map with a lot of isles (englang would be higher in tier)?
if u want to play a military game on some kind of map (this or that nation would be
higher or lower in tier)?
if u want to play a cultural game - u can choose to be a nation with cultural bonusses,
or to have a nation with cultural bonusses against u.
and so on.

[Exemplar]

"I" think Sumeria and Aztec should be in tier 1, because they're the only 2 with which I can consistently win on deity (maybe 30-50% of attempts).

Germany, Korea and Australia are pretty solid. Not sure about Nubia. Definitely not Arabia. It's possible I ALWAYS play them wrong somehow, but I struggle with them a lot, even on emperor.

[Assault Squirt]

Originally posted by GhostDragon:

Could you also please explain why Indonesia is Tier 2?

The ability to buy naval units with faith, guaranteed faith on city foundation, and extreme naval dominance. She's situationally the best civ in the entire game, depending on what map type you choose, but every map has at least a little water.

Considering singleplayer lets you rig the game in your favor by editting map generation, you can choose archipelago and dominate the AI.

[Assault Squirt]

Originally posted by Exemplar:

"I" think Sumeria and Aztec should be in tier 1, because they're the only 2 with which I can consistently win on deity (maybe 30-50% of attempts).

Germany, Korea and Australia are pretty solid. Not sure about Nubia. Definitely not Arabia. It's possible I ALWAYS play them wrong somehow, but I struggle with them a lot, even on emperor.

Nubia is basically Scythia in terms of their early game warmongering potential, but they also have other really good benefits from their UU and UI. Pitati archers are downright broken, and a top contender for the best unit in the game. I've beaten Gilgamesh on Immortal with Pitati Archers. They're just too strong.

As for Arabia, they're best played as a science civ. They can compete with Korea in science without sacrificing faith or warmongering potential. The Madrasa is really strong, and so is the Mamluk. Not only that, but they're really good at amassing faith, which is probably the strongest strategy in the game at the moment, thanks to the golden age bonus that lets you purchase units with faith. Put Magnus in a city and just have it constantly pump out workers and settlers. It lets you damn near keep up with Deity level unit production.

[Exemplar]

well, I think Nubia is good, it was made to be good, I just don't think it's a 1 in a 1 of 4 or 1 of 5 ratio, but a 2.

arabia isn't competing with korea in science. just off the top, korea's seowon is half the production to construct, and the adjacency bonus, unless you try hard to not make it so, will be 4, adding 1 science to each adjacent mine. if korea does everything the same as arabia from that point (as long as korea prioritizes education as it should), 1 extra science from university level building is not going to ever catch them up. the faith is nice, but again not something "other civs can't do".

[Drunk Demoman]

Originally posted by Exemplar:

well, I think Nubia is good, it was made to be good, I just don't think it's a 1 in a 1 of 4 or 1 of 5 ratio, but a 2.

arabia isn't competing with korea in science. just off the top, korea's seowon is half the production to construct, and the adjacency bonus, unless you try hard to not make it so, will be 4, adding 1 science to each adjacent mine. if korea does everything the same as arabia from that point, 1 extra science from university level building is not going to ever catch them up. the faith is nice, but again not something "other civs can't do".

>Go Mapuche
>Spam ranged units with a few blockers
>Go into other AI/player lands
>Kill units
>Laugh as they abandon the city because it revolted in 3 turns

[ashvandam_uk]

After playing a lot of civ 6 recently i think this list is pretty accurate,

at first glance, i thought, erm no he has got it wrong, Aztecs and Brazil should be higher, but then, if you read through the whole list again, it does make sense (looking at all the teir 2 civs) they should be there. because the teir 2 ones are super strong.

the more times you read through the list, the more you realise, actually this is pretty spot on. i wanted to pick a civ that i disagree with... and the best i can do, is maybe Persia should be a little bit higher.

[Drunk Demoman]

Originally posted by ashvandam_uk:

After playing a lot of civ 6 recently i think this list is pretty accurate,

at first glance, i thought, erm no he has got it wrong, Aztecs and Brazil should be higher, but then, if you read through the whole list again, it does make sense (looking at all the teir 2 civs) they should be there. because the teir 2 ones are super strong.

the more times you read through the list, the more you realise, actually this is pretty spot on. i wanted to pick a civ that i disagree with... and the best i can do, is maybe Persia should be a little bit higher.

I still think Mapuche should be T2 or 1. His bonus to completely cause chaos in enemy cities is something that should not be underestimated.

[GhostDragon]

Originally posted by Assault Squirt:

Originally posted by GhostDragon:

Could you also please explain why Indonesia is Tier 2?

The ability to buy naval units with faith, guaranteed faith on city foundation, and extreme naval dominance. She's situationally the best civ in the entire game, depending on what map type you choose, but every map has at least a little water.

Considering singleplayer lets you rig the game in your favor by editting map generation, you can choose archipelago and dominate the AI.

But with that logic sumeria should be top tier. Just pick 1v1 on pangea and spam war carts.
I think a civ should be rated on the power of his abilitys and how often he can use them.

[Assault Squirt]

Originally posted by Exemplar:

well, I think Nubia is good, it was made to be good, I just don't think it's a 1 in a 1 of 4 or 1 of 5 ratio, but a 2.

arabia isn't competing with korea in science. just off the top, korea's seowon is half the production to construct, and the adjacency bonus, unless you try hard to not make it so, will be 4, adding 1 science to each adjacent mine. if korea does everything the same as arabia from that point (as long as korea prioritizes education as it should), 1 extra science from university level building is not going to ever catch them up. the faith is nice, but again not something "other civs can't do".

It's not just the science from the Madrasa that makes Arabia really strong. The +1 science from every city converted to Islam helps a lot. Him getting the Madrasa early seals the deal. If you're prioritizing science and faith, Arabia will be 2nd only to Korea. And with the ability to purchase units with faith, you can focus on just science and faith and still come out even.

Nubia, on the other hand, is flat out the best warmongering civ I've played. The Pitati Archers and Ta Seti are ungodly powerful together. You can steamroll even Deity AI in the early game, and even go toe to toe with Scythia. With early game aggression being one of the best strategies at the moment, Nubia can take down an enemy civilization and parley that into a strong mid game, especially with the +40% production to districts.

[Assault Squirt]

Originally posted by A Black Square:

Originally posted by ashvandam_uk:

After playing a lot of civ 6 recently i think this list is pretty accurate,

at first glance, i thought, erm no he has got it wrong, Aztecs and Brazil should be higher, but then, if you read through the whole list again, it does make sense (looking at all the teir 2 civs) they should be there. because the teir 2 ones are super strong.

the more times you read through the list, the more you realise, actually this is pretty spot on. i wanted to pick a civ that i disagree with... and the best i can do, is maybe Persia should be a little bit higher.

I still think Mapuche should be T2 or 1. His bonus to completely cause chaos in enemy cities is something that should not be underestimated.

The reason I rated the Mapuche as T3 is because they're situationally strong, but not always strong. Their ability is nice for capturing cities without accruing warmongering penalties, but beyond that, they don't do much else. The chemamull isn't great, the Malon Rider comes in too late and isn't effective enough, and the only thing they do is war, but they're not as overbearing as Macedon, Nubia, or Sumeria, for example.

I do think they're good, I just don't think they fit the level of quality of T2 civs, since they're situationally game-breaking or consistently really strong. Mapuche aren't consistent, and their abilities aren't game-breaking.

[Drunk Demoman]

Originally posted by Assault Squirt:

Originally posted by A Black Square:

I still think Mapuche should be T2 or 1. His bonus to completely cause chaos in enemy cities is something that should not be underestimated.

The reason I rated the Mapuche as T3 is because they're situationally strong, but not always strong. Their ability is nice for capturing cities without accruing warmongering penalties, but beyond that, they don't do much else. The chemamull isn't great, the Malon Rider comes in too late and isn't effective enough, and the only thing they do is war, but they're not as overbearing as Macedon, Nubia, or Sumeria, for example.

I do think they're good, I just don't think they fit the level of quality of T2 civs, since they're situationally game-breaking or consistently really strong. Mapuche aren't consistent, and their abilities aren't game-breaking.

I would argue that being able to cause a city to revolt only by killing 4-5 units and pillaging a few tiles is game breaking. If you were sneaky, you could go to the civs second most powerful city, DOW, and cause that city to revolt in a matter of seconds. Sure, it's situational, but extremely OP in many circumstances.