magicalsushi
Prince
I'm fairly new to Civ IV - I've been playing for about a month now. I've started about six games (and only finished two of them, but that's another story...). Apart from my first two games (the ones I finished), I've been using the maximum number of civs - it makes life more interesting.
Now that I've started a few games (at Chieftan or Warlord) with the full range of (vanilla) civs, I've noticed a pattern in their attitudes to each other. The same groups of civs always seem to like or dislike each other, from day one. Later in the game, things like religions or wars sometimes change the pattern in a limited way, but on the whole I see the same set of friends and enemies each time. Which are...
(England, Rome, Persia, Mali, Germany, Spain) - the nicer of the two 'major' groups.
(America, Egypt) - the ones I'd love to be friends with but whom everyone else hates - sometimes India is part of this group too.
(China, Mongolia, Japan, Aztec, Inca, Greece, France) - the bad guys! I'd usually like to be friends with Huanya Cupac or Qin Shi Hunag, but they pal up with Montezuma and Alexander and I run away crying.
Russia tends to pal with almost everyone; India is almost always a pariah; Arabia seems not to attract either positive or negative attitudes.
Amongst each group, countries always seem to be pleased with each other, and cautious or annoyed with everyone else, even in the absence of any + or - modifiers. Is it always like this? I quite like the leaders having distinctive personalities (Montezuma = warmonger, Isabella = religious nutcase, Mansa Musa = tech trader, etc.), but I don't like the way the same sets of countries always like or dislike each other, even before they have proper reasons to. Is the latter phenomenon an inevitable consequence of me not selecting "random personalities"? Or perhaps I'm imagining the whole thing?
Now that I've started a few games (at Chieftan or Warlord) with the full range of (vanilla) civs, I've noticed a pattern in their attitudes to each other. The same groups of civs always seem to like or dislike each other, from day one. Later in the game, things like religions or wars sometimes change the pattern in a limited way, but on the whole I see the same set of friends and enemies each time. Which are...
(England, Rome, Persia, Mali, Germany, Spain) - the nicer of the two 'major' groups.
(America, Egypt) - the ones I'd love to be friends with but whom everyone else hates - sometimes India is part of this group too.
(China, Mongolia, Japan, Aztec, Inca, Greece, France) - the bad guys! I'd usually like to be friends with Huanya Cupac or Qin Shi Hunag, but they pal up with Montezuma and Alexander and I run away crying.
Russia tends to pal with almost everyone; India is almost always a pariah; Arabia seems not to attract either positive or negative attitudes.
Amongst each group, countries always seem to be pleased with each other, and cautious or annoyed with everyone else, even in the absence of any + or - modifiers. Is it always like this? I quite like the leaders having distinctive personalities (Montezuma = warmonger, Isabella = religious nutcase, Mansa Musa = tech trader, etc.), but I don't like the way the same sets of countries always like or dislike each other, even before they have proper reasons to. Is the latter phenomenon an inevitable consequence of me not selecting "random personalities"? Or perhaps I'm imagining the whole thing?
