It's just that, in all my BnW games, I've never - never - seen an AI suggest Science Funding, much less see it voted through almost unanimously. It should be added that Arts Funding was in place at this point, but still ... But arguably, this was an overall weird game, where Huns decided to go cultural and take Hanging Gardens, Parthenon, Sistine Chapel and Uffizi, and then alter on Portugal starting dominating everybody with their massive world congres dominance and an army twice the size of anybody elses (which she never put to any use, though).
No, I'm quite sure I didn't - I never use this option, so unless I somehow did it by mistake ... but I don't think so, most other civs played like they normally would - Pocatello was super expansive, Japan super agressive (and failing), Isabella super religious, etc.
Yeah, same here.
In my game today, the AI delayed proposing arts funding until turn 200+, I was shocked. (We were too busy embargoing and beating up on Gandhi).
I do wish the arts/science funding people would be more balanced. Right now, it seems like it's 3:1. If we can shift it to 3:2, that'd be good.
How are random personalities? I've never tried. Is it purely random? As in, they generate a number 1-9 for each trait? Or, do they have set templates for personalities that work, or at least not mess with the civ's ability to use its abilities? (e.g., would be a pity to see England put no focus on naval power on an islands map).
Well to me, it's not so much about determinism - in fact, what my example here shows is that even with locked personalities, there's sufficient room for variance to still see pretty big fluctuations like Huns going cultural. I like the different civ personalities, without those you lose the point with having actual leaders represented instead of just having each civ be a faceless identity.
