Bad leader traits

[Dilger]

Just thinking of a new challenge for Civ V and beyond...bad leader traits....not all the great leaders of the globe have been good...some just luck out...possible examples.

New German leaders:

Kaiser Wilhelm: Charismatic/Dumb
Dumb would make him negative in relations with all other leaders.

Adolf Hitler: Charismatic/Paranoid
Only negative random events happen to your civ and keep getting more frequent when things are not going your way.

New American leaders:
George W. Bush (I know...not so great..but humor me) Spiritual/Dumb

US Grant Philosophical/Corrupt
Corrupt would be the reverse of organized

Change Stalin to Aggressive/Paranoid

Any thoughts on others?

[Lord Avalon]

Drunk & Stupid? - extra from wine, penalty to

Hedonistic - extra from luxury resources, extra from war.

Thieving - a portion of income goes directly to the leader's personal hoard (maybe can be used to buy/rush military units and wonders?); also EP discount for spies stealing from others.

Lazy - workers take longer to build improvements, cities take longer to build stuff, units have -1 move (min 1), -1 road move.

[Supr49er]

Egotistical -1

Selfish -1

Stubborn -1

[Golth]

What shocks me is the inclusion of Stalin at all. I understand Hitler got passed by because of the atrocities he was responsible for. Pohl Pott (?SP) was excluded for the same reasons. And yet Stalin--Who was responsible for three times as many deaths as Hitler gets a pass Whats with that?


[edit] Hiya, glad to be here, you people have kept me entertained for quite some time.

[Supr49er]

Welcome Golth.

[Will9]

Originally posted by Golth
What shocks me is the inclusion of Stalin at all. I understand Hitler got passed by because of the atrocities he was responsible for. Pohl Pott (?SP) was excluded for the same reasons. And yet Stalin--Who was responsible for three times as many deaths as Hitler gets a pass Whats with that?

Don't forget about Mao (the reason that Hitler isn't in the game is actually beacause it could potentially make the game illeagal in Germany due laws that ban anything that could seem pro-Nazi. Therefore adding Hitler and adding Stalin or Mao are two different things. Please do not respond what is in these parenthesis, the last thing we want is turn this perfectly good thread into a hitler thread. If you really want to respond, start your own thread, but forst use the search function and read other threads on the topic.)

Back on topic:

Nero- pyromaniac, seriously ****ed up

[wodan11]

Shouldn't Hitler get a bonus to build obscure religious wonders? He was obsessed with the paranormal, after all.

Wodan

[Yosho]

John Quincy Adams: Financial/unlikable
(Unlikable: -1 happy in all cities; increased chance of culture flip)

Other negitive traits:

Weak leader: small chance that any command given to a millitary unit will be ignored; you will not discover this until your next turn when it has already happened.

Narcisistic: Small chance that any great general is actually a "sycophantic, really bad general", with negitive effects instead of positive; will not discover this until it has been either attached to a city or to a unit.

Libertarian: You have no control over what techs are researched by your civ or what buildings will be built in your cities; it will all be determined by the invisable hand of the free market.

Iron-fisted:extra -3 happy in all cities that do not contain any millitary units; extra -1 in cities that only contain 1 millitary unit.

Saintly: +3 happy in all cities. Can not declare wars; will only fight if declared upon.

[Seedle]

Hmm, bad traits could be interesting. But I think a small subset of players would actually use leaders with bad traits. I think it would be interesting to have both positives and negatives to every trait. For instance, aggressive civs could have a "We fear your violent nature" diplomatic penalty. Financial Civs could have extra war-weariness. Expansive could have a "your civ isn't big enough" unhappiness or even maintainence penalty (you'd have expand quickly to keep costs down, but that would potentially leave you either undeveloped or lacking proper military for your size. Penalties would be made based on total land available and your size vs. opponents size.) Industrious could have a health penalty, or its mines could be exhausted at random. Imperialistic could pay more maintainence for cities with it's own nationality, but less on cities that have a majority of another nationality. Organized could have more expensive settlers and longer unrest periods to represent the time spent "organizing" those operations. Protective could have slower healing outside of its own borders. Charismatic....could have a penalty to great person growth, because everyone is too busy admiring the leader to be great themselves. Spiritual...uhh, additional unhappiness for lacking religion, or maybe a penalty if you have a religion in a city but not a temple or monastery for it? Creative...production penalty because your architects are adding flair to everything rather than just doing the minimum necessary for function?
Of course, I'm a fan of all traits just being good, but having an option for bad traits, or traits with both pros and cons, could be interesting for a play or two.

[Lord Avalon]

Originally posted by wodan11
Shouldn't Hitler get a bonus to build obscure religious wonders? He was obsessed with the paranormal, after all.

Wodan

Perhaps there should be a quest for a religious artifact? (The Box of the Agreement. ) You need to get a unit to a certain desert square, recover it (spend a turn digging), and escort it back to your borders.

[Yosho]

I would certanly like it if civs had both advantages and disadvantages. Other games have had that kind of thing (the master of orion games, for example), and it worked well in those games. I think it makes you try out different stratagies when playing different civs, more so then when there's just positives, and gives the different civs more flavor.

[Fleme]

While I'd like to see traits that are negative in some way, I think that no single trait should be entirely negative in CIV. For example, if there was a trait like "pacifistic", said leader could only go to war if provoked but he'd get some other benefits such as increased happiness in cities or increased GP rate like with the civic. Also for some other examples:

Paranoid: Vastly increased espionage output and chance to catch enemy spies but suffers a relations hit with other AI and cannot sign Open Borders unless at +5 relations to begin with.

Megalomaniacal; 25% faster unit production, reduced maintenance from number of cities. Cannot suggest peace, alliances, treaties, trades or take part in diplomatic votes. Things like this would balance the traits out. Megalomaniacal would be really good for a warmonger but would be horrible if you were getting the stick.