Leaders oddities

Oddity is like a third trait but with both positive and negative effect. I think it would be funny, such a thing expanding personalities.

Here some possible oddities i thought out are listed:

Xenophobic (Junistinian)
bad: -25% less commerce from trade, -1 to rivals attitude;
good: lowered WW, enemy units get damaged in culture borders

Savage (Gengis, Boudica)
bad: conquered cities lose as many as half+1 population, -20% to culture;
good: enemies suffer increased WW

Extravagant (Montezuma, Catherine)
bad: no happines from single luxury resource;
good: 3 happines from more than one luxury resources

Paranoid (Stalin)
bad: -10% to GG and GP points;
good: +2 per city, 2x higher enemy spy exposure chance

Fanatical (Isabella)
bad: -10% to research;
good: faster state spread, automatically spread state in newly built or conquered cities

Gentle (Ghandi)
bad: +1 on whipping and drafting;
good: +2 per city if there is no war and no barbarians inside culture borders

Ignorant (Mao)
bad: -10% to research;
good: +1 and +1 per state building, lowered WW

Nihilist (Peter)
bad: -20% to culture;
good: +10% to research, 2x shorter anarchy period

Traditionalist
bad: 2x longer anarchy length;
good: +15% culture, +1 experience per battle inside culture borders

Arrogant (Pericles)
bad: -1 to rivals attitude;
good: plus 25% to culture in plot flipping test, +1 per vassal

Narcissistic (Ramesses II, Louis XIV)
bad: increased cities maintenance;
good: +2 per great wonder

Militarist (Frederick)
bad: -10% and output;
good: lowered army support costs, 2x shorter draft anger period

Cosmopolite (Alexander)
good/bad: when get/lost a city in the war, half of its culture becomes a culture of conquerer's nation, city revolting time halved;
bad: invaders heal faster

Justinian was classified as paranoid? think again at the time ALL leaders were super afraid of losing their kingship. espically to the military. and i think it even happened to Rome at least once.

so Justinian 'paranoia' was 100% justified. Justinian should get Xenophobic. the Byzantine Empire always treated the west as Barbarians (because they are.. ok their DESCENDED from barbarians) and treated Muslims with respect. to a degree.

Mathalamus said:

Justinian was classified as paranoid? think again at the time ALL leaders were super afraid of losing their kingship. espically to the military. and i think it even happened to Rome at least once.

so Justinian 'paranoia' was 100% justified. Justinian should get Xenophobic. the Byzantine Empire always treated the west as Barbarians (because they are.. ok their DESCENDED from barbarians) and treated Muslims with respect. to a degree.

Click to expand...

NP, let him be xenophobic
I've just associated those oddities with some leaders to illustrate an idea

It's a nice idea, not unlike the character traits that leaders get in the game Crusader Kings... e.g. Arbitrary, Generous, Cowardly, Chaste, Honest, Suspicious, Indulgent, Energetic,. Cruel, Selfish, Valorous, Lazy, etc. They can modify the personality of a leader over time, and also affect the character of his heirs (okay, in Civ our leaders don't die and have successors, or establish dynasties).

Nice fun idea, but, firstly, it's not necessary, and secondly, it would create another balance issue in a place where a balance issue would be particularly unbalancing (given that there are already numerous unique things for each leader/civ).

uus, ubs and leaders are not necessary too
and most unbalancing thing is a capital position

Well sure, but geographical differences are a much more important part of the game. True that those things aren't necessary, but I do prefer them to these 'oddities' (although still, I like the idea, if it wouldn't add to balance issues).

killmeplease said:

Ignorant (Mao)
bad: -10% to research;
good: +1 and +1 per state building, lowered WW

Click to expand...

But if you call Mao ignorant you can't sell it in china!