Altering a Civilization's Characteristics

[Six Thousand Year Old Man]

I guess the issue is - if you change the modifier to +1 or -1 you affect the priority a civ assigns to military techs. But that doesn't explain why 'perfectionist' Civs build only a half dozen cities while an 'expansionist' Civ builds 20 - unless those numbers affect other things besides the value assigned to certains techs.

Or do I have it wrong, now?

[Gatekeeper]

STYOM:

In one game I played with the 0-0-0 Sioux, the AI played them in an aggressive and expansionistic manner — they built dozens of cities and were hard to get along with.

In another game with the 0-0-0 Sioux, they built maybe eight cities and pretty much followed a peaceful path.

In both games they were allowed to flourish, as I generally don't destroy neighboring civs unless they're really close to my capital.

So what accounts for the differences? It has to be the fact that 0-0-0 causes a civ to "lean" in a direction w/o necessarily being tied to it, and this "leaning" is determined at the game's start. The same holds true for *any* civ with a "0" in its characteristic controls, IMHO.

Gatekeeper

[Campo]

Might the difference be accounted for by how much room they had to expand? Even expansionist civs only build a few cities if they're boxed in. In my last game (a few months ago because I'm taking the summer off from Civ'ing) the Mongols were on a small peninsula and built only two cities.

BTW, as to the premise in your first post -- that the Sioux were a rational culture -- I think Lewis & Clark would disagree with you. If I recall correctly, they found the Sioux to be the most agressive of the Indians they encountered. (Though not agressive enough to wipe out the expedition, which from their point of view would have been the best course of action.)

[Mercator]

0 is just another fixed level between -1 and +1... The difference between games simply depends on the randomness of the AI, the suitability of the map, neighbouring civilizations, not to mention how YOU are doing (at least regarding their attitude towards you) etc.

STYOM: Indeed, I'm pretty sure those modifiers affect much more than simply the tech preference, but that is really the only "hard" evidence. Other influences are probably in variable parameters in the AI algorithms (which probably makes it sound much more sophisticated than it really is).

[Gatekeeper]

Campo:

Hmm ... well, I played on the Northern Hemisphere map (which I've modified somewhat to create more habitable areas) on both occasions and with the same civilizations. The 0-0-0 Sioux did destroy the Aztecs when they were being aggressive and expansionistic, but left the Aztecs alone in the other game where they were perfectionistic.

As for the Sioux, what would be a good balance of characteristics for them? Aggressive perfectionist?

Gatekeeper

[Gatekeeper]

Originally posted by Mercator
0 is just another fixed level between -1 and +1... The difference between games simply depends on the randomness of the AI, the suitability of the map, neighbouring civilizations, not to mention how YOU are doing (at least regarding their attitude towards you) etc.

So the "0" modifier is one of the wildcard factors then, right? As for me, I generally try to keep a low profile ... usually no better than "strong," but sometimes "mighty" and even a few times "weak."

"Supreme" doesn't come about until I start building my military up towards the latter part of the game.

Gatekeeper