Most hated leader

1 SB beats everyone + impossible to rush (super archers + dog soldiers) + settling everywhere, even far away from the core of his land
2 Expansive leaders tending to settle w/o fresh water
3 any other protectives, especially Wang becoming worst enemy of everyone with perfect ease, going first to Confu
 
1 SB beats everyone + impossible to rush (super archers + dog soldiers) + settling everywhere, even far away from the core of his land

And he likes to poison wells.
 
I don't like warmongers; outside of that, Joao and Gandhi annoy me because they're always begging for techs. Mansa Musa at least likes to trade instead of wanting something for free.
 
I don't really like warmongers either. You might say they are easy to handle, because you either get to friendly relations with them and use them as a meatshield, or build up a strong force yourself early on and take them out, but the problem is that they are dangerous and I'd rather sit next to a missionary pump than a unit pump.

Have a strong dislike for Protective leaders too, and perhaps in particular Sitting Bull. He's a tit to rush early due to the dog soldier (even Praets have problems with them) and being PRO, and you need to beat him down to almost nothingness before he surrenders.
 
If I had to choose one- it would be the Cualli leader from the rise from erebus modmod.

They are annoying to play against-it is difficult to get them to pleased, and as they are agnostic, they can't even adopt a religion, improving your relationship that way. What makes them worse is that their terraforming ability turns their land into useless swamp, uselesss for anybody but them, so conquering is unprofitable. Oh, and I haven't forgotten about their great defensive capabilities.

If we're talking about base BtS, then Sitting Bull. I thin everybody else have already mentioned the factors that make him a pain.
 
Ran into a particularly nasty "Stalin of Persia" with UL's last night. Dude hit me with a SoD bigger then I've ever seen. It was like 115 Cav, 40+ Riffles, Plus a decent number assorted lowbie units. The only thing that saved me was his cannons were separated so when he finally hit me he had nothing to soften me up with. I had about 100 mixed Infantry/Tanks to defend my city with. His first attack lasted 14 minutes. I made a sandwich and ate it whilst waiting for his turn to end!

Anyway he was pretty nasty to everyone all game. UL's are fun but dangerous ;)
 
I can't say I have a specific hated leader, but I do have issues with Sury of the Khmer. Sury tends to play like a human, spamming cities and deliberately founding cities in the direction of my borders. I believe a few other players have commented on this in this thread. Add his creative trait to the mix and it only gets worse. I have only seen Sury in one game where he didn't spam cities. He was isolated on a small landmass with room for maybe 5-6 cities, but he only founded 3.
 
I hate Zara. He was the only leader that out-researched me and that outexpanded me so hard, that Zara even became Rome as a Peace Vassal. No way to finish the game, so I retired.
 
I don't mind Zara so much, at least he's rather easy to bribe to war early on, assuming you have the tech of course, which isn't always easy given his daft fast tech speed.

Still Alex/Joao in my book. Maybe Giggles too depending on the proximity.

/curses SB and Pacal
 
Zara was actually nice to me a couple of games before. He actually gifted me a couple of technologies such as meditation or polytheism.
 
I've not had any issues with Zara a d he's a decent trade partner. In one game though he peace vassaled an AI I was trying to wipe out which got annoying.

My most hated is Shaka. Too much unit spam.
 
1 SB beats everyone + impossible to rush (super archers + dog soldiers) + settling everywhere, even far away from the core of his land
2 Expansive leaders tending to settle w/o fresh water
3 any other protectives, especially Wang becoming worst enemy of everyone with perfect ease, going first to Confu

Horse Archers and elepult work fine against sitting bull. As does Xbows & Trebs.
 
Kinda have a love and hate relationship with Mansa Musa. On one hand Mansa techs well and then trades well, he acts as a magnet for warmongers to fight him, and Mansa isn't usually that hard to conquer. On another hand though, Mansa is one of the only ones where he seems to get like every tech, he even gets "my" techs before I do somehow?!? Wayyy ahead of other AI sometimes, and can get really advanced in military later. Kinda want to kick Mansa's butt but also kinda want his help hmmmm.
 
Stalin.

I just can't stand who he was and the terrible crimes he committed. There's no room for him in any of my games, no matter what penalties I incur. He has to die as soon as it's feasible - even if he's on the other side of the world...

KH
 
I wish I knew AI mansa's secret. Him and Pacal are usually the speediest techers.
 
Stalin.

I just can't stand who he was and the terrible crimes he committed. There's no room for him in any of my games, no matter what penalties I incur. He has to die as soon as it's feasible - even if he's on the other side of the world...

KH

And you ok with others like Genghis Khan?
I know history may get blurrier the earlier we try to look, but theres a high probability some of the playable leaders in civ4 would make Hitler and Stalin look like boy-scouts
 
If the AI get all the same teching bonus why is Mansa almost always (unless very poor land) faster than e.g. AI Elizabeth who is also FIN?
It seems that the AI uses Great Persons often poorly, so Lizzie's PHI might not help her so much. Still, she is often also quite fast in tech.

BTW does the AI suffer turns of anarchy when Civic/religions are changed?
 
Maybe the AI switches civics a lot? Otherwise it makes no sense why Mansa would tech faster than Elizabeth.
 
Top Bottom