AI Personality

[karlkrlarsson]

I everyone. I have played civ for many years now, but it is not until recently I have started to take an interest in the finer points of the game. Lately I have found myself surfing these forums to find just the right tactic to bounce me up to prince.

In this wealth of information I have found that a good analysis of the AI leader personality is lacking. I think there could be great potential and fun in doing this. The already posted information on this subject is very good, but it lacks some accessibility. It needs to be more explicit, and not just relaying on numbers.

So. To at least do some work myself I have compiled all the information in the Leader personality file into this xls file. I have seen it done better before, but not with the BtS information added. I apologize for its shabby appearance, but i usually work in openoffice and a lot of the visual elements where lost in the conversion. If someone would like to shine it up and repost it, that would be nice.

Since I am not a programmer I have no idea of what the components in the AI file does exactly. Some information on this would be very welcome. I am dieing to know what the flavor stat does.

My first analysis is based on who is a good neighbour. I have used pseudo-scientific methods, witch involves a lot of number crunching. The leaders are evaluated on how they react to close borders, how friendly they are, how likely they are to go to war, and how protective they are of their lands and tech. All leaders have been rated from between 0 and 10. 0 indicates a bad neighbour, while ten is the perfect one.

0 – Montezuma (who knew?)

1 – Genghis Khan

2 – Alexander, Napoleon, Shaka, Tokugawa

3 – De Gaulle, Isabella, Julius Caesar, Mao, Ragnar, Stalin, Suryavarman,

4 – Brennus, Catherine, Huyana Capac, Kublai Khan, Louis XIV, Mehmed, Peter, Qin Shi Huang

5 – Bismarck, Charlemagne, Hannibal, Gilgamesh, Joao, Pacal, Saladin, Sitting Bull, Suleiman, Willem van Oranje.

6 – Augustus, Boudica, Churchill, Cyrus, Elizabeth, Hammurabi, Mansa Musa, Ramesses, Roosevelt, Victoria, Wangkon, Washington, Zara Yaqob

7 – Darius, Frederick, Justinian, Pericles.

8 – Asoka, Hatshepsut, Lincoln

9 – None

10- Gandhi

My second analysis is the assess who is the biggest fanatics and who is the biggest idealists. The fanatics hates you when you don't share their religion and they will push you the change to theirs. An idealist will love you if you share his favorit civic, he will ask you to change to it if you don't, he will also be mad at you if you decline his request.

Top six Fanatics are:

1. Isabella
2. Mansa Musa
2. Saladin
2. Zara Yaqob
6. Catherine
6. Louis XIV

Top seven idealists are:
1. Mao (state property)
2. Gandhi (Universal suffrage)
3. Stalin (state property)
4. Qin Shi Huang (bureaucracy)
5. Boudica (Universal suffrage)
5. Napoleon (representation)
5. Roosevelt (mercantilism)


KK



(In my work I used the spreadsheet developed by ori, NeverMind, PeteT as a reference tool)

 

[Barry Bonds]

Half these people aren't even in the game... Ragnar, Churchill....

 

[PimpyMicPimp]

Half these people aren't even in the game

BTS much?

Cool list

 

[Swedishguy]

In some other statistic it showed that Ragnar is the most aggressive leader in the game?

 

[PimpyMicPimp]

^ I know the thread you mean. I think he's number one in terms of chances of attacking you at pleased/friendly and dog piling. Not 100%, though.

 

[karlkrlarsson]

Sorry for the late reply. Thought this thread was dead.

The list I have made is calculated from a lot of different variables in the AI file. I have seen the one with Ragnar on top, but I felt it left out some interesting numbers. The making of such a list is always totally personal. The AI-file has so many different stats that any analyzes will be different.

The list you are thinking of Swedishguy is a list of aggressiveness. My list rates them as neighbours, which I clearly state. The other list included troop training rate as a factor, while mine includes tech trading and close border hostility (among others).

Since people actually are reading this I might post so more lists and analyzes later.

KK

Edit: Barry Bonds: Yes. This list includes leaders from BtS and Warlords

 

[karlkrlarsson]

OK. Her is some new information. The good/bad neighbor list has been changed. The numbers are now more sensitive in the middle. I have tried to have equal amounts off people on each step.

0 -MONTEZUMA, GENGHISKHAN, NAPOLEON and ALEXANDER
1 – TOKUGAWA, SHAKA, DE GAULLE, RAGNAR, ISABELLA.MAO and JULIUS CAESAR
2 – STALIN, SURYAVARMAN, KUBLAI KHAN, HUAYNA CAPAC,BRENNUS and CATHERINE
3 – QIN SHI HUANG, MEHMED, LOUISXIV, PETER
4 - GILGAMESH , BISMARCK, JOAO, SALADIN and PACAL
5 – HANNIBAL, CHARLEMAGNE, WILLEM ORANJE, SULEIMAN and SITTING BULL
6 – BOUDICA, RAMESSES, AUGUSTUS and HAMMURABI
7 – CHURCHILL, ROOSEVELT, MANSA MUSA, ZARA YAQOB, WANGKON, WASHINGTON, ELIZABETH, VICTORIA, CYRUS
8 – JUSTINIAN, FREDERICK, PERICLES, DARIUS
9 – HATSHEPSUT, ASOKA, LINCOLN
10 - GANDHI

They are also ranked internally. So the last one stated is the closest one to going up one step. So Lincoln is the closest one to Gandhi for instance.

I should have called this post Civ is racist. Look at how all the English and American leaders all have 7+. It also seems like De Gaulle was added because they needed a modern leader that could be aggressive. But as I will prove later, as typical with American portrayal of the French, he is a coward.

OK. Now some new stuff. Last time I showed you who is the most idealist and who is the most fanatic of the leaders. I am a bit unsure now about Gandhi as an idealist. He likes you if you have his civic, and he will ask you to change it. But the other day I found a number in the file that shows how much they mind if you refuse to change. Gandhi, alone among the leaders, has a zero rating, so it seems he doesn't mind being turned down at all. Good to know.

Anyways, todays first ranking is the games biggest atheists and pragmatists. The atheists don't care about your religion, while the pragmatists don't care about your civic. The opposite of Idealists and fanatics.

The pragmatists rating is pretty boring it turns out. The top ten is. Almost all of them has the same score.
1 – SALADIN
2 - MONTEZUMA
2 - SITTING_BULL
2- ALEXANDER
2 - BISMARCK
2 - PERICLES
2 - CYRUS
2 - DARIUS
2 - PETER
2 - HATSHEPSUT

They will rarely ask you to change civic, and you get little bonus if you have it.

Here are the top atheists. One out layer and a lot of equal scores here as well.


1 - MAO
2 – SITTING BULL
2 – BISMARCK
2 - GENGHIS KHAN
2 – VICTORIA
2 - ELIZABETH
2 - NAPOLEON
2 – DE GAULLE
2 – ROOSEVELT

Honorable mention goes to Gandhi. He asks you to change rarely, and he doesn't mind being turned down, but he likes you better if you share his religion.

Todays last analyzes is my favorite. Who are the games biggest extortionists. The AI-file seems to have three numbers on this. The odds of asking for tribute, the odds of attacking when refused, and the odds of sneak attacking when refused. I can only guess, but I am pretty sure you can refuse from a position of power without fear of retaliation. But if you are weak, there are some threats that are more real than others. The top five extortionists are: MONTEZUMA, SITTING BULL, GENGHIS KHAN, NAPOLEON and DE GAULLE. Followed by: JULIUS CAESAR, LOUIS XIV, CATHERINE. ISABELLA, JOAO.
Now I have put some of them in categories, to illustrate their behavior after the demand has been rejected. Those not put in a category has less predictable behavior. Remember that a refusal also lowers relations, witch again increases the chance of regular war.

Grudge bearer: These leaders are extra offended if you turn them down
LOUIS XIV
CATHERINE

Backstabber: These leaders will sneak attack you if refused
CATHERINE
ISABELLA
NAPOLEON
MONTEZUMA

Honorable: This leader will declare war and attack. No sneak attacks.
GENGHIS KHAN

Coward: Will rarely attack you if demands are not met.
SITTING BULL
DE GAULLE

So there you have it. The founder of the fifth republic and the hero of little big horn are cowards.


Thanks for reading

KK

 

[smallstep]

Well, I recently played a game as Zulu and Montezuma was my close neighbor. He was piled in north of me and had nowhere to go.
I ended up winning cultural at 1880 with him as my best buddy.
My defenders most of the game were warriors until I got Rifling.
I never took any religion and my other best buddies were Napoleon, Genghis Khan, Ragnar and Alexander. Diplo can get you very far.
This was played on Huge Pangea Prince level.

 

[karlkrlarsson]

Well. That is always true. I am sure there are hundreds of games were Monty was a nice guy, and Gandhi was a total jerk. But there are certain tendencies, and a good player should know them. I am not a programmer, so I don't know exactly how the AI decides his tactics, but by comparing the information given in the AI-leader file, one can see that Monty , Usually, is a lot less friendly than Gandhi.

KK

 

[LlamaCat]

you seem to contradict yourself about Sitting Bull and De Gaulle - are they extortionists or not?

The top five extortionists are: MONTEZUMA, SITTING BULL, GENGHIS KHAN, NAPOLEON and DE GAULLE.

Coward: Will rarely attack you if demands are not met.
SITTING BULL
DE GAULLE

 

[karlkrlarsson]

The extortionists are demanders. They frequently demand things of you if they don't like you. If you turn them down, they will react diffrently. Those I have jokingly called cowards are those that will do nothing if rejected.

See the difference?
So the frequency of demands, and the level of military aggressivness if demands are not met are two different things.

Take Roosevelt or Suleiman. They will rarely make demands, but if you turn them down, they have a high likelyhood of attacking.

Is this clear?

KK

 

[ori]

- good thing I didn't yet start updating my files
Mind if I add it to the other Files in the Personality Matrix thread? So it can be in one place with Nevermind's and PeteT's Vanilla file and the Warlords file...

 

[karlkrlarsson]

If you can make it work, be my guest. I think I have reversed the axis of my document. Do you want me to check if I have a previous iteration that has the leaders on the top of the sheet? Or can you make it work?

I also want to inform you of a mistake in your sheet. You have greyed out the variables where there is no change. You have missed the attitude change on Gandhi. The MemoryAttitudePercent of DECLARED_WAR_ON_FRIEND and NUKED_FRIEND is not constant.

Beside that I really think this is an undeveloped issue among civ fans. I have seen tons of guides on the best forty moves, but not a single write up on the individual leader behaviours.

KK

 

[ori]

If you can make it work, be my guest. I think I have reversed the axis of my document. Do you want me to check if I have a previous iteration that has the leaders on the top of the sheet? Or can you make it work?

I don't think that should be too difficult... I'll do that over the weekend.

I also want to inform you of a mistake in your sheet. You have greyed out the variables where there is no change. You have missed the attitude change on Gandhi. The MemoryAttitudePercent of DECLARED_WAR_ON_FRIEND and NUKED_FRIEND is not constant.

Thanks, there is at least another one (in the tag descriptions) which I meant to change for months now, so I might actually do that

Beside that I really think this is an undeveloped issue among civ fans. I have seen tons of guides on the best forty moves, but not a single write up on the individual leader behaviours.

KK

The problem is that to predict behaviors you have to know quite well what those different items do. Also for BtS I expect that Blake has changed quite a lot in general AI behavior so I will have to look through the code to understand it again
But a decent writeup of AI personalities (in terms of what to expect from them) is really missing

 

[karlkrlarsson]

Yes. But you really don't need that much information about the items. Since you are comparing you need just a general idea. Take the build wonder stat for instance. Monty has it at 0. We don't know exactly what that means, but it does mean he is one of the least likely to build wonders, along with Sitting Bull.

I have put the leader information into a statistics program called SPSS, which alows me to play around with the numbers. The results of which I have posted here.

Anyways. Glad I could help. And I look forward to hearing more about the AI-code if you decide to look into it.

KK

 

[Barry Bonds]

Hang on: Who gets added in WLRDS, who gets added in BtS?

 

[ori]

Look here for Warlords and here for BtS

 

[LlamaCat]

The extortionists are demanders. They frequently demand things of you if they don't like you.

Is this clear?

KK

crystal. thanks!

 

[MouseNightshirt]

I have played many many games that feature Mansa Musa, and regardless of how much more powerful than me he is, how different we are, he has never ever declared war on me or been anything short of a model neighbour. Maybe it's to do with my playstyle, but Mr Mali is my preferred neighbour.

Isabella is a cow though. Not a game I've ever been in when she hasn't declared war on me (and invariably everyone else at some point).

 

[karlkrlarsson]

Guess that it fits with my analyzes. The thing is that I made my list from a lot of different variables. So some of the baddies have redeeming qualities, while people like Mansa have some drawbacks. Here is a few examples:

Ragnar: Someone mentioned Ragnar in another post as being a top baddie. In my list he is lower down. This is because he rarely betrays those he like, he likes to trade and he doesn't make demands that often.

Isabella: Not a cow, but a lady. Not among the worst because she won't attack you if you can get along with her, and because she doesn't react violently to shared borders.

Mansa: Seems like a nice guy, why isn't he at the top? Well, mainly it is betrayals. He rarely goes to war, and he is easy to get along with. But if the decision to go to war is made his respect of friendship is average.

KK