What type of Civ4 leader trait do you possess?

pandamancer

Prince
Joined
Aug 18, 2013
Messages
335
Just for fun

If you are allowed to choose two, which traits do you possess in real life?

To make things clear, this is how I interpret the traits:

Aggressive - you always want to deliver your thoughts and actions across someone directly. Wants to always win in an argument. Possibly good at sports.

the good: You tend to be assertive in some way and if the situation favors you, you always get what you want.
the bad: You might hurt someone unconsciously. Might result in heated arguments even with trivial things.

Protective - you do not lead openly but look for situations that it might favor you (opportunist in some way). You are keen in observing other people's ideas and actions before you make your move (not necessarily you can do the correct response though). You seem calm most of the time.

the good: You always analyse the situation so you tend to make less fatal mistakes
the bad: Over thinking things can possibly cause you to miss an opportunity or lose the chance to be something great

Spiritual - you have a good foundation on your belief. Might have the passion in charity work. You believe the goodness in people.

the good: You tend to be happier than most people. You are not worried about the unknown for you feel everything is under control.
the bad: There will always come a time that you might suffer a "setback" letting you question your belief. But if you can surpass it, you will be a different person.

Expansive - you are fully aware of your abilities and capabilities. you seek to continuously question your weakness and improve on it (self actualization).

the good: You are resourceful and has the capability to resolve all problems using the best of your abilities. Additionally, your continuous improvement on oneself gives you a head start in your success.
the bad: One's abilities are not enough to succeed in life. If you only focus on self improvement, you might fail to realize that asking the help of other people can greatly accelerate your success as well.

Imperialistic - you have the talent to build connections (your empire). You know the right person to befriend (your great generals!) and to utilize them to reach your goals.

the good: Two heads are better than one. If you know someone of great ability to help you in situations. You can accomplish things faster and easier.
the bad: It also depends on luck to know the right person to befriend. Other people can make or break your life if you are not careful. Also you might neglect self improvement.

Charismatic - you are popular among the crowd. The people are willing to help you in times of need.

the good: You get a lot of free help from other people. Lucky you!
the bad: They say that when you want to be successful, you need to influence other people to be successful as well. A lot of energy must be invested to keep the relationship going.

Industrious - you tend to see things in long term rather than short one. You like to build plans that might flourish in years to come

the good: Good things in life come from those who leave their comfort zone. By taking long term and risk, you will get higher rewards in due time.
the bad: Sometimes risk can cause you to fall really hard if things are not going well. Other people might steal/break your dreams (can be parents, friends, spouse or some jerk).

Organized - you are good in decision making process. A candidate for being a good leader material

the good: You make less mistakes. You develop the habit of making priorities
the bad: A lifetime of experience is needed for the trait to be developed. But it is a rewarding path

Financial - you know how to properly spend and invest your money.

the good: You have the material resources to achieve your goal.
the bad: Money can't buy happiness. Also other people might feel jealous from your wealth.

Creative - you are naturally talented (especially in science, arts, sports)

the good: These talents can contribute in the success of your career
the bad: You might get too full of yourself if you find things easy and stay stagnant. As a consequence, your talents will be wasted. Additionally, over depending on your talents might put you in a position not to see the "big picture" in life.

Philosophical - you are not as talented as "creative" people but you got the eureka moment (self realization) if the right time comes.

the good: When the moment comes, it could greatly accelerate your success in life. Of course, hard work is still needed.
the bad: Luck plays a big part in your success.

-------------

Follow up question:

What kind of victory condition do you want to pursue in life? (realistic or unrealistic)

Domination - you are known to be an expert in your field OR you got a monopoly in your business

Conquest - you win people's heart (i presume you are running the office)

Time - you got everything you want in life and grow old peacefully. This also means you are financially stable, good relationship with people around you and happily single/married.

Culture - you got to be the new rising star known to the world. (can be an outstanding singer, musician, actor/actress, athlete or soldier)

Space - you accomplished a great piece of work or discovered a ground breaking stuff to be talked by people and ages to come.

Diplomatic - you lead a team of dedicated people to accomplish a project/task that "will change your community" OR "people thought is impossible."

Now, let's keep the ball rolling!
 
Ok, let me be first. I think expansive and philosophical fits me well.

My victory condition should be "time"; although I am striving for "space" (Peter-ish style of gameplay huh?)
 
Creative and Spiritual

Going for a Time victory overall though Domination victory is desired.

Same traits as Hatty.

civ4-hatshepsut-high.jpg
 
PRO / SPI

Hmm, what about Diplomatic Victory?
 
aggresive /industrious without a doubt
my victory type would be domination/space
 
My first thought was Philosophical. Creative is most likely the other one. Which means what, +50% chance that I'll become a great person and larger cultural borders? Not too bad I suppose.

This thread is useless if all everyone does is list the traits, though. Without a "why" element, in other words.

As for why philosophical - I'm not a philosophy major or anything, but I do like to think things through, analyze them, and I don't necessarily take up mainstream or popular opinions on topics. If I realize a position doesn't make sense, I won't take it up, and I'm willing to have a mixed opinion on things if I think it's ambiguous/a gray area/depends on the situation. I'll agree with people based on the merit of their argument, not because of their status, and will occasionally change my view if I learn more about the subject that changes what I'd based my previous assessment on.

Why creative... over the years I've realized I actually am somewhat creative. Mostly in a thinking-about-things-in-different-ways type definition. Back when I was young and thought "creative" meant "good at artsy stuff" I considered myself entirely non-creative and considered creativity almost undesirable. But now that I realize creativity is more than that, including literary creativeness and inventiveness, I see that it is good and I do have some aptitude there.

There are a couple of the traits where I disagree with your definitions. For industriousness, I'd described it more as being able to make do with what you have, or being unusually efficient at what you do. Focusing on the long term is good if you want to build a long-term business, so I see the relation to industry, but I'd consider that more discipline or farsightedness (in a good way) than Industriousness. I'd actually consider that closer to Organized than Industrious.

For Expansive, I'd consider it more about expanding your abilities than necessarily being aware of the extent of them. More importantly, I disagree with the "improving your weaknesses" focus. I think it's more effective to acknowledge your weaknesses, not focus on them too much as long as they aren't causing excessive problems, and to instead develop new skills that you do have some natural proclivity for. Better to be good at a lot of things with a few weak spots than to be good at a few things and average at a lot of things. You can always hire people to do the things you're weak at for you, and you'll be in plenty of demand (or have plenty of friends who are willing to lend you a hand) if you're a Renaissance man in general.
 
I think I would probably be SPI/FIN, aiming for time victory (even though in civ4 that's just a terrible way to win...)

EDIT: So unfortunately that makes me Mansa Musa...
 
Fair point, Quintillus.

I am spiritual because I always have been since I was little. I have never doubted there is more to existence than the physical world. It only seems logical to me. I have explored my spirituality many times even going on a few "walkabouts" and/or "vision quests". I am more rooted now as that was in my late teens and early twenties I did that. Though I had something akin to a vision quest in my mid twenties.

Creative I chose because I have always been good with my hands. I am talented in drawing for sure. Many have said I am talented at writing, but I take that with a grain of salt. Sculpting is a talent that I dabble in but don't care much for. I can play music by ear if I am familiar with the instrument. (I used to be real familiar with piano and guitar - would like to be familiar with drums)
Even my current profession (Welding) came naturally in a way. Got a weld job with no prior experience and have always been able to keep up with guys who have went to school for welding or have been welding for 10+ years. My welds look good and I am fast at building.

You can even tie those two things together and I honestly feel my talent is a straight up blessing from "above". I considered Philosophical too, as Spiritual makes me really dig guys like Plato or Socrates and Aristotle. What is "piety" is one that still offers great inner debate. I am no major in philosophy but philosophy itself can argue "what constitutes the ability to "master" philosophy?" However, Philosophical seemed more like a byproduct of the other two traits so I dropped it.
 
There are some trait definitions that are debatable. I see an "Imperialistic" person as someone who can influence other people significantly in one way or another. I agree with Quintillus with his definition of Industrious. With "Organized", i see someone who has a firm control of his life (antagonistic to a happy-go-lucky type of person).

Either with your set of definitions or mine, I would be a PRO/IND leader (Qin Shi Huang)

As for the victory condition that I would pursue, it would be a Space Victory
 
At my current point in life (and age, lol), it'd be PHI/FIN. Hmnn, probably time vic. Wanna make sure my heirs rule in order to stand the test of time :)
 
If I'm honest, probably Protective and Industrious. It would be interesting to hear how other people, who know me well, would answer this since it's always so hard to accurately self-assess.
 
By those definitions, I'd be SPI/IND, going for time victory. That figures, since Gandhi was in my rotation of leaders in vanilla, and I've been meaning to get around to Ramses.
 
I would say Charismatic and Protective. I would say I am either going for a conquest or a time victory.
 
Back
Top Bottom