Who are you when no one is looking?

[uberloz]

Does your personal code of morality, ethics and honor carry over into how you play this game?

If we could shine a flashlight on your gameplay would we find a closet despot? Or benevolent ruler?

That's part of what's so fun about civs games:the immersability and the escapism they provide.

Do you cringe at the thought of beating your population to death or working slaves mercilessly just to support the empire?

Or are they just playthings on the road of conquest?

Without answering my own questions I will say this: I find myself making interesting choices every time I play!

[GeoModder]

Some hidden depths surface now and then... Beware!!

[Ninot]

I'm a petty, jealous angry man when I play civ.

If any neighboring civ does that anything I don't like, I make plans for war.

Its actually quite the contrast to how I wanted to play the first Civ 3 demo game.

[TheDarkside]

I have probably a very odd way of playing most of my civ games... I like to build up my cities as commercial industrial mega cities and stay neutral for as long as I can. Then later when I have a tech edge and can build the more advanced units than everyone else I start acting as a police state, coming to the aid of any civ that is being bullied around by a more powerful one. I will try and help that civ get any lost cities back and keep pounding the bully civ until there is peace, then I leave. I never actually do any land grabbing for myself- my mega cities are all I need

[Roman]

I pretty much never begin a war. If another civilization attacks me I generally accept peace if the terms are favourable to me - if not I fight on. If such a civilization, though, during the course of the war successfully conquers one or more of my cities I wipe it out completely - not accepting any peace offers no matter how favourable.

[Niptium]

I'm usually a peacefull guy. I will start a war now and then if I feel

a) That I'm being bullied by a computer wich I have the means to defeat

b) He has colonized a part of the continent I felt was mine of divine right

c) He is bullying a smaller civilization I care for

But most of the time - I don't wage war - I'm no warmonger. I'd say though that I will get into a war for sure (at least one) every game I play - may I be the one to start it or the victim.

[Volstag]

I tend to vary it up depending on the victory condition I'm shooting for and/or unexpected changes in the status quo. In short, in one game I'll be the beneficent ruler... happily trading and building. In the next game, I may drive my enemies before me like cattle.

[Mace]

Originally posted by Volstag
In the next game, I may drive my enemies before me like cattle.

...and listen to the lamentations of the women

[Verenti]

I've a vicious bastard who, if I can get away with it, will break every taboo to speed along victory. Like in SMAC, I have a tendancy to make my "shock" troops (It's a pun.) have Nerve Gas pods as a standard method of making wars. I'm also fond of Planet Busters. In Civ2 this nasty streak involved sending a spy in as my vanguard and detonating a nuke so my army could march in all cosy.

Ethics < Tactical Advantage < Strategic Advantage

[Egbert]

Re: Who are you when no one is looking?

Originally posted by uberloz
Does your personal code of morality, ethics and honor carry over into how you play this game?

If we could shine a flashlight on your gameplay would we find a closet despot? Or benevolent ruler?

That's part of what's so fun about civs games:the immersability and the escapism they provide.

Do you cringe at the thought of beating your population to death or working slaves mercilessly just to support the empire?

Or are they just playthings on the road of conquest?

Without answering my own questions I will say this: I find myself making interesting choices every time I play!

No. Ethics are irrelevant in a game. (If I play chess and take a bishop I don't weep t the thought of murdering a pillar of the community. Wiping out a Civ city is the same as taking a bishop, just part of the game).

Sometimes I am utterly murderous and despotic and sometimes I am an "enlightened" ruler.

[sabrewolf]

in RL i'm a classic "nice guy", that's why chicks see me as friend and not more

in civ i am a true MFing, son of a bïtch. oportunistic, treaturous, exploitative, cold... warcriminal, etc.

i thing that in civ2 i played countless games where after essentially having won the game, i nuked with world down to a place of deserts and jungles *muahahaha*

i'm pretty sure that most GTA players thrive on shooting whores and running over cops...

[TimeTraveler]

At first I was to merely answer that I'd always choose democracy and peace and whatever. However, I came to realize that my reasons don't have to do with any code of ethics.

My primary focus in every game has always been an accelerated research rate, until I run out of things to research. Democracy is generally a good way of promoting that, so I take that direction.

As far as keeping the peace with the other factions, I have a tendency to want to place myself as far from those other factions as possible. In fact, I rarely ever contact other civilizations or factions unless by pure accident, and I generally worry every time that someone else contacts me, for fear that they're going to make threats of war. In the early game, if an AI attacks, even with one unit, then game over I lose. If I wait until my power has risen to levels considerably superior to everyone else, I may have a chance, and decide to ignore an enemy's threat of war once I think that I can take them on better if I start the fight then and there as opposed to after they got whatever they're trying to coerce me into giving up.

In the late game, I tend to see the conquest of other civilizations as somewhat wasteful, as I'm generally closer to another form of victory. ...but I wouldn't use that as a reason to ask for the end of a war I'm already fighting (and if that late, winning).

[FrostyBoy]

This is the thing I think Civ lacks in the most.

Every game I play, I generally end up doing the exact same thing.

My personality should not shape the game, the game should shape my personality, (towards the game).

[Pave]

In Civ, I could be called a shrewd twofaced bastard. I burn lots of money in others and try to be friends with all the others, but at the same time I'm already planning my wars against everybody, what cities should I pillage and what cities are worthy annexions to my nation. But then again, if the other wants peace, and I'm not pwning them with style, I usually agree, with a slight wish to suprise them pants down, again... My population is just minimum-paid pawns in my game of wars, even if I sometimes give them a nice temple or two.

[Kc7mxo]

as far as enemy civs go. . . .

burn baby burn!