Most agressive civs/leaders?

[Kierkegaard]

Ive played about 10 games so far and they all have been thousands of years of peace and happiness, other than myself. I want to make custom games where the AI will be aggressive towards each other. I need a good world war from time to time.

Other than Monty and Shaka who likes to mix it up?

tip: Turn on the option agressive AI or always war if you want

 

[Lemon Merchant]

I agree with Shaka, Ragnar, and Monty, but I'm going to go way out on a limb and mention Cathy's buddy Peter.

I'm not sure about the specifics in his code or anything, but I can't seem to ever keep him from DoWing me at some point in a game. When I see him show up, I always spam extra units and park them at the border, because sooner or later, I'm going to need them. He seems to grab a lot of territory early on, techs well enough to keep up or pass me, and so far, I haven't been able to successfully rush him in the early game.

I'm not sure about the aggression factor, but he's a devious maniac, second only to Louis on my "Most Hated AI" list. Cathy can be handled with some skill, but Peter seems to be very unpredictable to me.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

I agree with Shaka, Ragnar, and Monty, but I'm going to go way out on a limb and mention Cathy's buddy Peter.

I'm not sure about the specifics in his code or anything, but I can't seem to ever keep him from DoWing me at some point in a game. When I see him show up, I always spam extra units and park them at the border, because sooner or later, I'm going to need them. He seems to grab a lot of territory early on, techs well enough to keep up or pass me, and so far, I haven't been able to successfully rush him in the early game.

I'm not sure about the aggression factor, but he's a devious maniac, second only to Louis on my "Most Hated AI" list. Cathy can be handled with some skill, but Peter seems to be very unpredictable to me.

Peter is a strange mixed bag.

He has a unitprob of 30, like Stalin, Zara, Toku, Hannibal, etc.

While the AI uses philosophical about as well as it wages tactical wars, he *does* like wonders. One of his flavors, "growth", is among the more effective AI flavors.

Cheap granaries come up pretty fast in AI build queues, and they're the best building in the game, so EXP helps the AI quite a bit if it doesn't hamstring itself elsewhere.

What really makes him better than usual is that he is close to mansa-musa class in tech whoring. His notradethreshold is 15 (only mansa is higher @ 20, though several others have 15). He is willing to tech trade at ANNOYED and will do it with the player and the AI.

He also declares at pleased.

Basically in games where he gets some decent land and enough wonders in his cap to kick out early GPP, he takes off, and he's aggressive enough (his disposition warprobs are identical to tokugawa) that he will actually do very well then.

I still don't mind him as much as asp-hats like gilgamesh though, because he can be manipulated easily via war-bribes, has an easy favorite civic, and if he actually spawns close to you, unlike the AGG/PRO annoyance AIs he can be mowed down fairly easily...especially if he attempts a wonder (which is likely, he's in the top half of AIs to do that).

Left alone he is one of the late game threats @ culture or space though.

 

[Isikien]

I still don't mind him as much as asp-hats like gilgamesh though, because he can be manipulated easily via war-bribes, has an easy favorite civic, and if he actually spawns close to you, unlike the AGG/PRO annoyance AIs he can be mowed down fairly easily...especially if he attempts a wonder (which is likely, he's in the top half of AIs to do that).

Left alone he is one of the late game threats @ culture or space though.

I agree with this. Peter can be a loaded pistol and like all loaded pistols it's a simple idea to constantly bribe him into wars to slow him down.

Mind you I had this with Zara a while back in a couple of games. How susceptable is Zara to war bribes? In one game I had him constantly declare on his neighbours for a handful of techs each time

 

[Atranox]

From the XML files:

Aggression level of 6 (the highest):
- Alexander
- Boudica
- Genghis Khan
- Montezuma
- Ragnar
- Shaka

Aggression level of 5:
- Brennus
- Catherine
- Charlemagne
- Cyrus
- De Gaulle
- Gilgamesh
- Hannibal
- Huayna Capac
- Julius Caesar
- Justinian I
- Kublai Khan
- Mehmed II
- Napoleon
- Oeter
- Stalin
- Suleiman
- Suryavarman II
- Tokugawa
- Wang Kon
- Willem van Oranje

It should also be noted that leaders have a personality rating ranging from 0 to 10. Leaders that have a similiar number tend to get along, while leaders with distant numbers tend to dislike each other.

Personality rating of 0:
- Alexander
- Brennus
- De Gaulle
- Genghis han
- Montezuma
- Napoleon
- Ragnar

Personality rating of 1:
- Kublai Khan
- Louis XIV
- Mao Zedong
- Peter
- Suryavarman II
- Tokugawa

And from the other end of the spectrum...

Personality rating of 8:
- Asoka
- Augustus Caesar
- Cyrus
- Frederick
- Hammurabi
- Roosevelt
- Sitting Bull
- Victoria
- Wang Kon
- Washington

Personality rating of 9:
- Elizabeth
- Hatshepsut
- Lincoln
- Mansa Musa

Personality rating of 10:
- Gandhi

So if you're looking for a lot of wars, I would definitely put on some extremely aggressive leaders such as Napoleon, Genghis Khan, Montezuma, Boudica, Shaka, and Alexander. Also put some at the opposite end of the spectrum though, such as Gandhi, Augustus Caesar, Frederick, Mansa Musa, Elizabeth, and Cyrus. Hopefully with that mix, you should get quite a few wars between the AI.

 

[DigitalBoy]

Personality rating of 10:
- Gandhi

I know Gandhi has a tendency to get picked on, but having him in his own category seems like some sort of sick joke. Guess I shouldn't be surprised.

During one game I had with Peter as my next door neighbor, he declared war on me out of the blue and then sent hardly any units at all my way. The only units he actually entered my territory with were one swordsman and one chariot several turns after he declared war, which he squandered by having them attack a phalanx and swordsman in a jungle tile across from a river.

I didn't have much of a troop buildup at this time, but I figured that since we were already at war, I'd send my modest stack of 6 units his way. And promptly captured his second oldest city, which was defended by a garrison of two archers and an axeman. Pathetic. I negotiated peace and declared war again after 10 turns of troop buildup; he even got longbows by that point (to my swordsmen and catapaults) but didn't build enough to adequately defend his cities.

 

[CivIVMonger]

I never think of Alex as one of the most aggresive due to this fact.

Take Monty, Boudica, Shaka, Ragnar, And Ghengis Khan, three most agressive right? (Excluding alex.)
It might be funny to some to know that the above are all native/barbarians and they are uncivilized. The greeks, however, Civilized the western world and europe. He doesn't really fit the catogory.

 

[Ignorant Teacher]

I never think of Alex as one of the most aggresive due to this fact.

Take Monty, Boudica, Shaka, Ragnar, And Ghengis Khan, three most agressive right? (Excluding alex.)
It might be funny to some to know that the above are all native/barbarians and they are uncivilized. The greeks, however, Civilized the western world and europe. He doesn't really fit the catogory.

I guess you should really rethink a couple of things...

 

[CivIVMonger]

I guess you should really rethink a couple of things...

Sorry, didn't mean to write three... I edited it and forgot about that. Yes, alex conquerd like 200,000 Squre Miles of land. But it's a good joke.

 

[Ignorant Teacher]

Not the Alex part, the barbarians part.

 

[CivIVMonger]

I KNOW they aren't barbarians. I'm one of them, history buffs. But what I was trying to get out was that they were aggressive and *less* civilized. And as a matter of fact, barbarians were just people outside of ones culture or faith. They were actually named barbiarians because the Greeks (Alex.) Thought thier language consited of Bar-Bar-bar. Also, barbarians were usually herders and hunters. following thier flock around. Raiding when they are short on food/money. They actually lived fairly simple lives. And were not the blood-thirsty clubbed cavemen who speak with grunts or moans. Usually, the barbiarian civilizations did not have a written language. Thus, culture, and science were not spread as vastly through thier lands. Thus, making them backwards. Actually, I firmly believe that barbiarians were far more advanced than people take them for. Because they do not have a written record, they could not write down thier sciences, cultures, and advancements. And all the buetiful metal work and art archeologists have found explain this plainly! They less, advanced tribes, (Usually hunters that followed flocks.) tools and equipment were wooden and portable. Thus, they perished. Thier tents being made of cloth and wood could not sustain the elements that long and we lost much about these people. The encrochment of thier society should explain thier raids. Plus, just because they are aggresive and raid, doesn't mean that our friends Shaka, Monty, Ragnar, Gangis, and Boudica, aren't barbiarians. They all did the above. They all made thier mark on history, and thus, they are not insulted by being called a barbairian. You can look at this three ways. Barbairian, as in, every tribe who partakes in raids or uncivilized acts.
As in, A civilization outside of a faith or culture. As in, there is no such thing as a barbairian. Since All the listed Civilizatinos are not barbairians, and they listed all the descriptions off them. They simply don't exist. That should sum it up in a historical since. Sorry for the spelling errors, typing fast!

 

[Lone Wolf]

Why not use Monty, Ragnar, Shaka, Genghis Khan and Tokugawa on a Standard Pangaea Map with Aggressive AI on.

Then they will like each other due to WarMongerRespects and will more likely gang up on the player. To create often and significant AI-AI wars you need a warmonger-builder mix.

So if you're looking for a lot of wars, I would definitely put on some extremely aggressive leaders such as Napoleon, Genghis Khan, Montezuma, Boudica, Shaka, and Alexander. Also put some at the opposite end of the spectrum though, such as Gandhi, Augustus Caesar, Frederick, Mansa Musa, Elizabeth, and Cyrus. Hopefully with that mix, you should get quite a few wars between the AI.

Cyrus and Augustus, while not exactly rabid warmongers, aren't that peaceful. Still, the advice is sound.

 

[CivIVMonger]

I KNOW they aren't barbarians. I'm one of them, history buffs. But what I was trying to get out was that they were aggressive and *less* civilized. And as a matter of fact, barbarians were just people outside of ones culture or faith. They were actually named barbiarians because the Greeks (Alex.) Thought thier language consited of Bar-Bar-bar. Also, barbarians were usually herders and hunters. following thier flock around. Raiding when they are short on food/money. They actually lived fairly simple lives. And were not the blood-thirsty clubbed cavemen who speak with grunts or moans. Usually, the barbiarian civilizations did not have a written language. Thus, culture, and science were not spread as vastly through thier lands. Thus, making them backwards. Actually, I firmly believe that barbiarians were far more advanced than people take them for. Because they do not have a written record, they could not write down thier sciences, cultures, and advancements. And all the buetiful metal work and art archeologists have found explain this plainly! They less, advanced tribes, (Usually hunters that followed flocks.) tools and equipment were wooden and portable. Thus, they perished. Thier tents being made of cloth and wood could not sustain the elements that long and we lost much about these people. The encrochment of thier society should explain thier raids. Plus, just because they are aggresive and raid, doesn't mean that our friends Shaka, Monty, Ragnar, Gangis, and Boudica, aren't barbiarians. They all did the above. They all made thier mark on history, and thus, they are not insulted by being called a barbairian. You can look at this three ways. Barbairian, as in, every tribe who partakes in raids or uncivilized acts.
As in, A civilization outside of a faith or culture. As in, there is no such thing as a barbairian. Since All the listed Civilizatinos are not barbairians, and they listed all the descriptions off them. They simply don't exist. That should sum it up in a historical since. Sorry for the spelling errors, typing fast!

I think I made my point!

 

[Huayna Capac357]

Asoka is rather aggressive. Spiritual means can change civics seamlessly, Organized gives you more money for soldiers.

EDIT: putting that out there because no one else has mentioned him.

 

[CivIVMonger]

Easily aggressive for YOUR part! The AI for him in the XML files puts him in the least aggressive catogory.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

Easily aggressive for YOUR part! The AI for him in the XML files puts him in the least aggressive catogory.

And only Gandhi builds fewer units...asoka is tied with a bunch for 2nd...and doesn't declare at pleased. Usually a total walkover unless you time an attack wrongly and walk into a lot of longbows or something (well...three longbows feels like a lot to axes ).

 

[CivIVMonger]

And only Gandhi builds fewer units...asoka is tied with a bunch for 2nd...and doesn't declare at pleased. Usually a total walkover unless you time an attack wrongly and walk into a lot of longbows or something (well...three longbows feels like a lot to axes ).

I know!!! I always still have leftover axemen in the middle ages from previos invasions!!! Glad to know SOMEONE's in my boat..

 

[DMOC]

Most aggressive civs/leaders? I'd put all the Aggressive leaders there except Hammurabi. And of course, I can't forget Sury (ick!), the 3 french guys, etc.

And of course the 4 highest unit-building AI's:

-Mehmed II
-Shaka
-Ragnar
-Napoleon

I think.......

 

[CivIVMonger]

One time Shaka (Friendly.) Sent in a stack through my lands it LITERALLY took 60 seconds for it to move!

 

[PaulisKhan]

A fun excercise!
Atranox bought up a very important point, AI hidden diplo modifiers.

For a good mix of AIs that would maximise in-game fireworks I'd go with something like

Shaka
Gilgamesh
Alex
Mehmed
Sitting Bull
Tokugawa
Augustus Ceaser

It's not going to take them long to pick a worst enemy but there's enough balance there that noone should get completely steamrolled early on (though Augustus is probably the most vulnerable leader on that list).
Some other leaders I wouldn't mind seeing in that sort of game would include

Charly: great protective rexer with traits/personality that allow him to survive to the late game to be a target for whichever aggressive AI ends up dominant after the early stages.
Catherine: backstabs like an Alex but is better at getting herself into a position to take advantage of that.

This definitely isn't a list of the most aggressive AI, but I think it's a list that should generate an obscene amount of warfare and GG's over an extended period of time.