Are you a warmonger, a realist, a pacifist or a cooperative/defensive player?

[marioflag]

Just wonder what type of player are you?
Are you a warmonger, which plays only to wipe out all your neighbours and to be the final ruler of the planet?So u always play for conquest or domination victory.
Are you a realist, which take in consideration only the interest of his own civ so you are in peace or in war only if they are in your own interest?So u don't have any preference between victories.
Are you a pacifist, which build always small armies and tend always to create the best cities with as much wonders as you can build and with all improvements inside?
Are you a cooperative player, which doesn't repel wars and build always an army addapted to defend your territory with no aim of conquests.You always try to have a lot of friendly relations with other civs with the final aim to reach a diplomatic or space victory

 

[marioflag]

I forgot to say i'm a realist

 

[`DG`]

Somewhere pacifist/conservative.

I'm way too stuck on being a religion-pumping culture-whoring tech obsessive who only has enough army to withhold an attacker for the duration it'd take me to build a sufficient stack to make him accept peace.

 

[diablodelmar]

Depends entirely on the circumstances.

 

[·Imhotep·]

Most of the times I'm the loser

And I prefer doing this with the peacenik builder type of style...

 

[Watiggi]

All the above at the same time.

*Warmonger: I play to take over the world, so I end up with all the cities (well, 64% of them anyway). I play to dominate through expansion/war and I can't stand to raze cities (something I have to work on, I guess).

*Realist: I keep good relations with everyone. I keep open boarders and trade where possible. Whilst doing this, I will target a neighbour for expansion when I'm ready. They don't have a choice in the matter.

*Pacifist: I keep all my cities and build them up properly, so I also end up with well developed cities as well.

Hmm, after re-reading the original post, I don't play the co-operative player. Whenever there is a war and I'm in it, I either aim to conquer (best solution to someone who doesn't like you) or I don't bother with it at all (if it suits me best, ie, they are on another continent and I'm not ready yet).

 

[jimbob27]

I'm a total war monger. I always play huge maps, so regardless of the number of civs, theres tons of enemy cities all over the place. I have several early wars, and if everything goes to plan, by the time I get to riflemen my civ is the largest and most productive by a long way. I then go production crazy...... I spend the next 400 years quietly building an army big enough to conquer the world.I generally start of building grenadiers and riflemen, but they all get upgraded to infantry before the armies ready for global domination. When I feel the time is right, I go on a huge reckless rampage across the world, razing nuking and pillaging everything in sight. Any civ that's declared war on me in the past gets destroyed with extreme prejudice, and I get kicks from razing holy cities

 

[Bongo-Bongo]

I'm normally a realist, but some times my style of play is co-operative.

 

[Giaur]

I am a warrior, who beats all the rivals out. However it takes some time to achieve this, so sometimes I have to focus on increasing commerce instead of exterminating rivals. Greatest pleasure gives me war, but peaceful simming is fine too. I play only large maps. It has many advantages but also some disadvantages. When you have 80 cities game becomes pretty anoying and you just wish it ends soon.