jma22tb
Prince
Recently, I modded CEP with the intention to try out some new priorities and have had positive results. I wanted to share the idea with you guys.
In CEP, there were four personality types that broke all 44 civs into groups. I changed these to personalities that I felt were more historically accurate and more competitive in gameplay.
The revised personalities are:
Nationalist
Imperialist
Hegemony
Liberalism
All four personalities prioritize the following the most of all the flavors: Great People, Happiness, Golden Age, Infrastructure, Trade Routes, Connections, Tile Improvement. This, in combination with an equal focus on Growth, Naval Growth, and Expansion, has the maintenance of the cities booming by comparison to the way CEP was before.
The equal Growth/Expansion is very important. If the values are different, then the AI will not adjust to their situation for founding more cities vs. growing them. A "boxed in" civ will just go Tall and build their economy that way, while having open space puts the green light on expansion.
I placed Wonders at 4 for everyone, which is the lowest tier. I did this because I wanted the AI to be more concerned about building their economy and developing, and for newer players to be able to crank out those Wonders against them to get that advantage. Wonders are a double-edged sword, if you have them all then you have an advantage, but your economy isn't going to be as strong, nor your military. I'd rather let the player decide if they want to emphasize them and have the AI be more economically-focused, taking advantage of a Wonder opportunity once they have time.
Okay now for the personalities.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nationalist aspires to Domination, Cultural, and Scientific Victory, putting much less emphasis on Diplomatic. They value Military Training, Infantry, Siege, Naval, and Air for their armed forces. They value Science, Spaceship, Culture, Archaeology, Tourism, Nuke, and Production for domestic development. They're most likely to have Engineers, WAM (Writer, Artist, Musicians), and Scientists. They will have less Gold, Diplomacy priorities, so their GNP is more dependent on Trade Routes than the others.
Historically, Nationalist is the approach that most of the nations in the world have taken. It's an evolved version of the tribe mentality that humanity has always had. They do not "go international," but rather emphasis on developing themselves and challenging others who they feel are weaker, unjust, or some other undesirable quality. They are dangerous if left alone - culture, tourism can quickly accelerate with consistent WAM deployment, and science can have them bring guns to knife fights. The Nationalist personality also has an innate distrust of internationally driven institutions like religion and a strong merchant class - they want to keep things in the family. Examples of strongly Nationalist cultures are Germany, China, Japan, India, the Vikings, and all of the Fascist movements leading up to and following WW2.
Their relations with others is generally friendly, but with the ace in the hole ready to use if they know they can conquer someone. They do not look for wars, though, since war can devastate their economy that isn't as strong as others. They do not care about city states at all - they would rather ignore them and not get involved. They have a slight desire to conquer them, but usually they keep their distance.
My picks for Nationalists are:
Germany - ethnic peoples took thousands of years to unite, and when they did the whole world had to "put them down" out of sheer terror.
Russia - this is the personality Russia had for a very long time before the Bolsheviks invaded and conquered them.
Poland - Poland is a distinctive culture in Europe, and for a period they had a strong military, so this fits best for them.
Denmark - The Vikings were so fundamentally different and strong that even to this day, people still don't entirely understand them.
Japan - The Far East in general had this type of philosophy about their governments. In this sense, Japan and China are very similar, except in recent years where Japan has become a lot more materialistic.
The Zulu - For an African tribal people who were faced with weapons and enemies that were a thousand years ahead of them, they fought like Spartans to protect their way of life.
China - The Far East in general had this type of philosophy about their governments. In this sense, Japan and China are very similar, but with China largely keeping their priorities intact, even after Communism's raping of their country.
Brazil - Brazil isn't all that involved with international politics, but is very unique, has developed into an economic power, and boasts a strong military now.
Austria - The Austria-Hungary empire was not Imperialist, but a strong nation that had developed very well before the World Wars.
Inca - They had expanded to cover a sizable fraction of South America, but did not use wealth to dominate people. They were an ethnic group that was simply the strongest in that region.
Maya - They were rivals of the Inca with a similar way of life, but with different gods and cultures.
Korea - Korea has always been insular, but has been strong enough throughout their history to stand up to China.
Celts - The Romans almost got driven out of the British Isles by the Celts. The Irish and Scottish people have always been groups that the British Empire and even the UK are scared of if they united or became their own nations.
France - The French have always been unique and less amenable to the kind of other strategies that are listed. Napoleon was the strongest leader the French had and he changed the world with his military genius and a heavily nationalist vision.
The Shoshone - They stood up to American Imperialism and held out for a long time.
Songhai - They built a strong and stable African empire, at least in those relative terms. It's hard to do that when you have European empires meddling and funding so many controlled wars.
-----------------------------------------------------
Imperialist aspires to Domination, Scientific, and Diplomatic victories, with a much lower emphasis on Cultural. They value Military Training, Infantry, Siege, Naval, and Air for their armed forces. They value Science, Spaceship, Gold, Diplomacy, Nuke, and Production for domestic development the most. They're most likely to have Engineers, Merchants, and Scientists in their cities. Their culture is lower, but the flavors are not set so low for Culture that they have no policy growth or any semblance of Tourism.
Historically, Imperialism has been the dominant power throughout history. Every major historical period is highlighted by a very influential, technologically driven, and a great industrial power, with their "culture" built on their forebears and assimilated rivals. The three victories they go for are the least colorful, so this approach is very logical and cold vs. the cultural personalities. It's all about wealth, industry, and having better weapons to kill enemies with. Examples include Assyria, Rome, the British Empire, the Soviet Union, and one could argue the US today. War is a way of life for Imperialists, but because they emphasize such a strong foundation, it doesn't destroy them as easily as others.
They are the most aggressive of all the different personalities. They place a high value on Deception and War. This is due to their confidence that their military, alliances, wealth, and industry will overwhelm their opponents. They have a strange relationship with city-states, but is more nuanced. They are just as likely to form alliances with them as conquer them, because, above all else, Imperialists are opportunists. If a CS is near Rome, for example, then you can bet that they'll conquer them, but they'll form an alliance with a CS thousands of miles away out of convenience.
My picks:
Venice - This is more about gameplay than history, since they're basically a OCC that deals primarily with city-states as their expansion/alliance strategy.
America - Say what you want about the Constitution, America conquered a native population of millions, expanded into the Caribbean and Pacific, joined up with the Soviets in WW2, and have been involved in so many wars since WW2 that it's hard to keep count.
England - The British Empire. Home of the Industrial Revolution, the first Global corporation, and easily one of the most sadistic ruling classes of all time.
Rome - They defined Western civilization, and Roman maritime law is still the rule of the seas. Most advanced military and industry in the world at the time.
Portugal - They're irrelevant now, but when the Colonial period was at its most relevant, Portugal ruled over a substantial amount of land and did so with one of the most technologically advanced navies.
Aztec - The Aztecs dominated Central America in their heyday, and probably would have expanded south into northern South America if the Spanish didn't come along.
Babylon - Rome built their empire on the culture of Greece and through their version of Babylonian law. Their international influence and emphasis on technology earned this spot.
Mongolia - The only Far Eastern people to get involved with international politics in a significant and aggressive way. They conquered more land than any Empire in history. They were the masters of the horse and surprisingly ruled competently for a so-called barbaric people.
Assyria - They were the main rivals to Babylon and were the OG Imperialists. They ruled over the Near East at the peak of their power.
The Huns - The predecessors to the Mongolian Empire, the Huns were the first people from the Far East to move to the West. They didn't rule long, unlike the Mongols, but one could argue that they set the foundation.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Hegemony aspires to Domination, Cultural, and Diplomatic victories, with a much lower emphasis on Scientific. They value Military Training, Infantry, Siege, Naval, and Air for their armed forces. They value Gold, Diplomacy, Nuke, Culture, Tourism, Archaeology, and Production for domestic development. They're most likely to have Engineers, Merchants, and WAM in their cities. They depend on the growth of their population and a basic scientific infrastructure to keep it going, they don't just throw out "heretics." They value Religion very highly as well.
Historically, this personality reflects Byzantium, Spain, the Caliphates, and large religion-driven empires throughout history. The lower emphasis on science is a keynote of these types of civs, who usually built a long standing traditional way of doing things that didn't push the envelope too much. They want to be wealthy, influential, are vain, and work their people hard to sustain their military might. Religion is an identifying factor of these civs - they want to be the most widespread and most powerful faith in the world.
They have a similar taste for war as Nationalists, seeing it as an opportunity, but not as a modus operandi like Imperialists. They tend to be suspicious of rivals, and more insular in regard to international relations because they not only influence CS but the greater world with their culture. They are very protective of City-States and seek alliances with them, creating a conflict with the type of opportunism that Imperialists approach them with.
My picks:
Arabia - The Caliphates of Arabia were the inspiration for this personality type. Islamic Arabian Caliphates had been incredibly powerful and far superior to Europe for a thousand years.
Ottoman - The Ottomans were the successors to the Arabian Caliphate, ruling in a similar way for the period leading up to the World Wars, where Europe snapped Islam over its knee and has Balkanized the nations ever since.
Egypt - Egypt was a huge conglomeration of cultures and their international influence on Greece was what motivated me to put them here.
Morocco - At the height of their power, they were able to rule over a good section of Northern Africa, and resisted control by the Caliphate, Turks, Germans, and had even expanded into Spain at one point.
Byzantium - The East Roman empire eventually became the foundation from which the Turkish Ottomans would build on, with Constantinople as the center of the Near East for a very long time.
Siam - Southeast Asia has always been a strange place that did not have a huge impact on the rest of the world, but Siam was the strongest power of all of them, having been the premier Buddhist empire of the region.
Persia - The upper Near East was dominated by a succession of Persian Empires for thousands of years, and the terror of a unified Persian people still grips the West today. Like the Caliphates, the barbarism in Europe was laughed at by the Persians until Alexander came along.
Spain - The largest religious empire in world history, the dominance of Christianity and the Catholic religion is attributed to the Spanish. They utterly conquered Central and South America and changed that continent forever.
--------------------------------------------------------
Liberalism aspires to Diplomatic, Cultural, and Scientific victory, placing much less emphasis on Domination. They focus on siege, defensive, ranged, and infantry for their armed forces, able to defend themselves effectively enough. They prioritize Gold, Diplomacy, Culture, Tourism, Archaeology, Science, and Spaceship for domestic affairs. They are most likely to have Merchants, WAM, and Scientists in their cities. They value religion as much as Hegemony does, but for different reasons.
Historically, Liberalism is the most radical and shortest-lived of the personalities. Brief bursts of amazing progress are the inspiration for this, such as ancient Greece, the Founding Fathers of America, Venice during its heyday, Austria-Hungarian Empire, and the Iroquois. They do not want war, but want to spread their philosophy of prosperity, beauty, and curiosity about the world. They have been short-lived because of the inability they have had of defending themselves from more predatory enemies, and for politicos to eventually lean toward more aggressive policy. They view usually view Religion as inspiration to become greater people rather than Hegemony's use of it as an extended foreign policy and tool.
Their approach with other civs is looking to make friends and stand by them, no matter what. This approach, if things work out, can keep them in the good graces of a rival who might be willing to defend them if need be, but with the risk of making a wrong friend that stabs them in the back, like Rome. They want to make friends with city states, alliances, but do not go out of their way to protect them since they have no love for war.
My picks:
Iroquois - Their laws were called the "Great Law of Peace" and was one of the inspirations for the US Constitution. Amazingly, the Iroquois nations still exist today within the US political system.
Sweden - Sweden had brief periods of imperialism, like any other European nation, but have been unique in how they embrace science and ideas that are usually dismissed. They prosper today on socialism as a state policy, and were the first to embrace public education.
Carthage - Descended from the Phoenicians, who were more imperial, but who did not try to conquer North Africa, Carthage was the biggest prize of the early expansion by Rome. Carthage was not an aggressive nation, but their ingenuity and culture held up against Rome with dramatic effect.
The Dutch - The Netherlands came to be through a democratically-driven revolution and were the brainchild of much of what we consider to be the modern financial system.
Polynesia - The Polynesian peoples of the Pacific were culturally unique, their peaceful lifestyle, and excellent seafaring skills, made them more Liberal than the others.
Greece - The OG Liberal nation, Greece was a mix of different cultures, but formed the foundations of Western philosophy, science, culture, and the intellectual foundation for warfare. One could argue that if you're European or American, Greeks made you who you are.
India - India has always been very peaceful, which put them in this area. They do not have a particularly long history of being imperial or international, but have shifted gears in recent years to be an emerging power that does not need to use force to exert influence.
Ethiopia - Ethiopia can be argued as the premier African nation and ethnic people of modern times and throughout history other than Egypt (hard to say if Egypt was actually African by ethnicity or something else.) They were highly religious, were not aggressive, always emphasized trade, and are uniquely cultured.
Indonesia - Indonesia has always been one of the most curious regions of the world. There are so many cultures and convergences there, along with startling scientific breakthroughs in agriculture. They've never been imperialist, and are an emerging power today.
-------------------------------------------------------
The way I made these personalities was through the organized Leaders folder that CEP has, making changes so that the Fundamentals I listed before each personality was at 9, the highlighted items in the descriptions at 8, and everything else at 4.
I wouldn't know how to carry that organization over, but if we could, then that would make this idea a lot easier to implement in CPP.
I do want to point out how "unfocused" these might appear to be. Civ 5 is a game where you want to have a solid foundation rather than just specialize in one thing, and I think the AI does better when they have options to emphasize rather than shoe-horning them.
This was my problem with the CEP Leaders priorities. Conquerors were just stupid - they'd pick a fight with everyone and not even emphasized Gold to pay for their wars, didn't make any friends through the personality system - it was either all or nothing. Expansionists were just as weird - they had a strange strategy of founding a bunch of cities, not emphasizing growth, but emphasizing science. Diplomats were too passive and spent more time building Wonders than anything else, which made them easy prey.
Do you agree with these ideas? What could improve them if you don't?
In CEP, there were four personality types that broke all 44 civs into groups. I changed these to personalities that I felt were more historically accurate and more competitive in gameplay.
The revised personalities are:
Nationalist
Imperialist
Hegemony
Liberalism
All four personalities prioritize the following the most of all the flavors: Great People, Happiness, Golden Age, Infrastructure, Trade Routes, Connections, Tile Improvement. This, in combination with an equal focus on Growth, Naval Growth, and Expansion, has the maintenance of the cities booming by comparison to the way CEP was before.
The equal Growth/Expansion is very important. If the values are different, then the AI will not adjust to their situation for founding more cities vs. growing them. A "boxed in" civ will just go Tall and build their economy that way, while having open space puts the green light on expansion.
I placed Wonders at 4 for everyone, which is the lowest tier. I did this because I wanted the AI to be more concerned about building their economy and developing, and for newer players to be able to crank out those Wonders against them to get that advantage. Wonders are a double-edged sword, if you have them all then you have an advantage, but your economy isn't going to be as strong, nor your military. I'd rather let the player decide if they want to emphasize them and have the AI be more economically-focused, taking advantage of a Wonder opportunity once they have time.
Okay now for the personalities.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nationalist aspires to Domination, Cultural, and Scientific Victory, putting much less emphasis on Diplomatic. They value Military Training, Infantry, Siege, Naval, and Air for their armed forces. They value Science, Spaceship, Culture, Archaeology, Tourism, Nuke, and Production for domestic development. They're most likely to have Engineers, WAM (Writer, Artist, Musicians), and Scientists. They will have less Gold, Diplomacy priorities, so their GNP is more dependent on Trade Routes than the others.
Historically, Nationalist is the approach that most of the nations in the world have taken. It's an evolved version of the tribe mentality that humanity has always had. They do not "go international," but rather emphasis on developing themselves and challenging others who they feel are weaker, unjust, or some other undesirable quality. They are dangerous if left alone - culture, tourism can quickly accelerate with consistent WAM deployment, and science can have them bring guns to knife fights. The Nationalist personality also has an innate distrust of internationally driven institutions like religion and a strong merchant class - they want to keep things in the family. Examples of strongly Nationalist cultures are Germany, China, Japan, India, the Vikings, and all of the Fascist movements leading up to and following WW2.
Their relations with others is generally friendly, but with the ace in the hole ready to use if they know they can conquer someone. They do not look for wars, though, since war can devastate their economy that isn't as strong as others. They do not care about city states at all - they would rather ignore them and not get involved. They have a slight desire to conquer them, but usually they keep their distance.
My picks for Nationalists are:
Germany - ethnic peoples took thousands of years to unite, and when they did the whole world had to "put them down" out of sheer terror.
Russia - this is the personality Russia had for a very long time before the Bolsheviks invaded and conquered them.
Poland - Poland is a distinctive culture in Europe, and for a period they had a strong military, so this fits best for them.
Denmark - The Vikings were so fundamentally different and strong that even to this day, people still don't entirely understand them.
Japan - The Far East in general had this type of philosophy about their governments. In this sense, Japan and China are very similar, except in recent years where Japan has become a lot more materialistic.
The Zulu - For an African tribal people who were faced with weapons and enemies that were a thousand years ahead of them, they fought like Spartans to protect their way of life.
China - The Far East in general had this type of philosophy about their governments. In this sense, Japan and China are very similar, but with China largely keeping their priorities intact, even after Communism's raping of their country.
Brazil - Brazil isn't all that involved with international politics, but is very unique, has developed into an economic power, and boasts a strong military now.
Austria - The Austria-Hungary empire was not Imperialist, but a strong nation that had developed very well before the World Wars.
Inca - They had expanded to cover a sizable fraction of South America, but did not use wealth to dominate people. They were an ethnic group that was simply the strongest in that region.
Maya - They were rivals of the Inca with a similar way of life, but with different gods and cultures.
Korea - Korea has always been insular, but has been strong enough throughout their history to stand up to China.
Celts - The Romans almost got driven out of the British Isles by the Celts. The Irish and Scottish people have always been groups that the British Empire and even the UK are scared of if they united or became their own nations.
France - The French have always been unique and less amenable to the kind of other strategies that are listed. Napoleon was the strongest leader the French had and he changed the world with his military genius and a heavily nationalist vision.
The Shoshone - They stood up to American Imperialism and held out for a long time.
Songhai - They built a strong and stable African empire, at least in those relative terms. It's hard to do that when you have European empires meddling and funding so many controlled wars.
-----------------------------------------------------
Imperialist aspires to Domination, Scientific, and Diplomatic victories, with a much lower emphasis on Cultural. They value Military Training, Infantry, Siege, Naval, and Air for their armed forces. They value Science, Spaceship, Gold, Diplomacy, Nuke, and Production for domestic development the most. They're most likely to have Engineers, Merchants, and Scientists in their cities. Their culture is lower, but the flavors are not set so low for Culture that they have no policy growth or any semblance of Tourism.
Historically, Imperialism has been the dominant power throughout history. Every major historical period is highlighted by a very influential, technologically driven, and a great industrial power, with their "culture" built on their forebears and assimilated rivals. The three victories they go for are the least colorful, so this approach is very logical and cold vs. the cultural personalities. It's all about wealth, industry, and having better weapons to kill enemies with. Examples include Assyria, Rome, the British Empire, the Soviet Union, and one could argue the US today. War is a way of life for Imperialists, but because they emphasize such a strong foundation, it doesn't destroy them as easily as others.
They are the most aggressive of all the different personalities. They place a high value on Deception and War. This is due to their confidence that their military, alliances, wealth, and industry will overwhelm their opponents. They have a strange relationship with city-states, but is more nuanced. They are just as likely to form alliances with them as conquer them, because, above all else, Imperialists are opportunists. If a CS is near Rome, for example, then you can bet that they'll conquer them, but they'll form an alliance with a CS thousands of miles away out of convenience.
My picks:
Venice - This is more about gameplay than history, since they're basically a OCC that deals primarily with city-states as their expansion/alliance strategy.
America - Say what you want about the Constitution, America conquered a native population of millions, expanded into the Caribbean and Pacific, joined up with the Soviets in WW2, and have been involved in so many wars since WW2 that it's hard to keep count.
England - The British Empire. Home of the Industrial Revolution, the first Global corporation, and easily one of the most sadistic ruling classes of all time.
Rome - They defined Western civilization, and Roman maritime law is still the rule of the seas. Most advanced military and industry in the world at the time.
Portugal - They're irrelevant now, but when the Colonial period was at its most relevant, Portugal ruled over a substantial amount of land and did so with one of the most technologically advanced navies.
Aztec - The Aztecs dominated Central America in their heyday, and probably would have expanded south into northern South America if the Spanish didn't come along.
Babylon - Rome built their empire on the culture of Greece and through their version of Babylonian law. Their international influence and emphasis on technology earned this spot.
Mongolia - The only Far Eastern people to get involved with international politics in a significant and aggressive way. They conquered more land than any Empire in history. They were the masters of the horse and surprisingly ruled competently for a so-called barbaric people.
Assyria - They were the main rivals to Babylon and were the OG Imperialists. They ruled over the Near East at the peak of their power.
The Huns - The predecessors to the Mongolian Empire, the Huns were the first people from the Far East to move to the West. They didn't rule long, unlike the Mongols, but one could argue that they set the foundation.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Hegemony aspires to Domination, Cultural, and Diplomatic victories, with a much lower emphasis on Scientific. They value Military Training, Infantry, Siege, Naval, and Air for their armed forces. They value Gold, Diplomacy, Nuke, Culture, Tourism, Archaeology, and Production for domestic development. They're most likely to have Engineers, Merchants, and WAM in their cities. They depend on the growth of their population and a basic scientific infrastructure to keep it going, they don't just throw out "heretics." They value Religion very highly as well.
Historically, this personality reflects Byzantium, Spain, the Caliphates, and large religion-driven empires throughout history. The lower emphasis on science is a keynote of these types of civs, who usually built a long standing traditional way of doing things that didn't push the envelope too much. They want to be wealthy, influential, are vain, and work their people hard to sustain their military might. Religion is an identifying factor of these civs - they want to be the most widespread and most powerful faith in the world.
They have a similar taste for war as Nationalists, seeing it as an opportunity, but not as a modus operandi like Imperialists. They tend to be suspicious of rivals, and more insular in regard to international relations because they not only influence CS but the greater world with their culture. They are very protective of City-States and seek alliances with them, creating a conflict with the type of opportunism that Imperialists approach them with.
My picks:
Arabia - The Caliphates of Arabia were the inspiration for this personality type. Islamic Arabian Caliphates had been incredibly powerful and far superior to Europe for a thousand years.
Ottoman - The Ottomans were the successors to the Arabian Caliphate, ruling in a similar way for the period leading up to the World Wars, where Europe snapped Islam over its knee and has Balkanized the nations ever since.
Egypt - Egypt was a huge conglomeration of cultures and their international influence on Greece was what motivated me to put them here.
Morocco - At the height of their power, they were able to rule over a good section of Northern Africa, and resisted control by the Caliphate, Turks, Germans, and had even expanded into Spain at one point.
Byzantium - The East Roman empire eventually became the foundation from which the Turkish Ottomans would build on, with Constantinople as the center of the Near East for a very long time.
Siam - Southeast Asia has always been a strange place that did not have a huge impact on the rest of the world, but Siam was the strongest power of all of them, having been the premier Buddhist empire of the region.
Persia - The upper Near East was dominated by a succession of Persian Empires for thousands of years, and the terror of a unified Persian people still grips the West today. Like the Caliphates, the barbarism in Europe was laughed at by the Persians until Alexander came along.
Spain - The largest religious empire in world history, the dominance of Christianity and the Catholic religion is attributed to the Spanish. They utterly conquered Central and South America and changed that continent forever.
--------------------------------------------------------
Liberalism aspires to Diplomatic, Cultural, and Scientific victory, placing much less emphasis on Domination. They focus on siege, defensive, ranged, and infantry for their armed forces, able to defend themselves effectively enough. They prioritize Gold, Diplomacy, Culture, Tourism, Archaeology, Science, and Spaceship for domestic affairs. They are most likely to have Merchants, WAM, and Scientists in their cities. They value religion as much as Hegemony does, but for different reasons.
Historically, Liberalism is the most radical and shortest-lived of the personalities. Brief bursts of amazing progress are the inspiration for this, such as ancient Greece, the Founding Fathers of America, Venice during its heyday, Austria-Hungarian Empire, and the Iroquois. They do not want war, but want to spread their philosophy of prosperity, beauty, and curiosity about the world. They have been short-lived because of the inability they have had of defending themselves from more predatory enemies, and for politicos to eventually lean toward more aggressive policy. They view usually view Religion as inspiration to become greater people rather than Hegemony's use of it as an extended foreign policy and tool.
Their approach with other civs is looking to make friends and stand by them, no matter what. This approach, if things work out, can keep them in the good graces of a rival who might be willing to defend them if need be, but with the risk of making a wrong friend that stabs them in the back, like Rome. They want to make friends with city states, alliances, but do not go out of their way to protect them since they have no love for war.
My picks:
Iroquois - Their laws were called the "Great Law of Peace" and was one of the inspirations for the US Constitution. Amazingly, the Iroquois nations still exist today within the US political system.
Sweden - Sweden had brief periods of imperialism, like any other European nation, but have been unique in how they embrace science and ideas that are usually dismissed. They prosper today on socialism as a state policy, and were the first to embrace public education.
Carthage - Descended from the Phoenicians, who were more imperial, but who did not try to conquer North Africa, Carthage was the biggest prize of the early expansion by Rome. Carthage was not an aggressive nation, but their ingenuity and culture held up against Rome with dramatic effect.
The Dutch - The Netherlands came to be through a democratically-driven revolution and were the brainchild of much of what we consider to be the modern financial system.
Polynesia - The Polynesian peoples of the Pacific were culturally unique, their peaceful lifestyle, and excellent seafaring skills, made them more Liberal than the others.
Greece - The OG Liberal nation, Greece was a mix of different cultures, but formed the foundations of Western philosophy, science, culture, and the intellectual foundation for warfare. One could argue that if you're European or American, Greeks made you who you are.
India - India has always been very peaceful, which put them in this area. They do not have a particularly long history of being imperial or international, but have shifted gears in recent years to be an emerging power that does not need to use force to exert influence.
Ethiopia - Ethiopia can be argued as the premier African nation and ethnic people of modern times and throughout history other than Egypt (hard to say if Egypt was actually African by ethnicity or something else.) They were highly religious, were not aggressive, always emphasized trade, and are uniquely cultured.
Indonesia - Indonesia has always been one of the most curious regions of the world. There are so many cultures and convergences there, along with startling scientific breakthroughs in agriculture. They've never been imperialist, and are an emerging power today.
-------------------------------------------------------
The way I made these personalities was through the organized Leaders folder that CEP has, making changes so that the Fundamentals I listed before each personality was at 9, the highlighted items in the descriptions at 8, and everything else at 4.
I wouldn't know how to carry that organization over, but if we could, then that would make this idea a lot easier to implement in CPP.
I do want to point out how "unfocused" these might appear to be. Civ 5 is a game where you want to have a solid foundation rather than just specialize in one thing, and I think the AI does better when they have options to emphasize rather than shoe-horning them.
This was my problem with the CEP Leaders priorities. Conquerors were just stupid - they'd pick a fight with everyone and not even emphasized Gold to pay for their wars, didn't make any friends through the personality system - it was either all or nothing. Expansionists were just as weird - they had a strange strategy of founding a bunch of cities, not emphasizing growth, but emphasizing science. Diplomats were too passive and spent more time building Wonders than anything else, which made them easy prey.
Do you agree with these ideas? What could improve them if you don't?
