What type of Civ4 leader trait do you possess?

[MantaRevan]

So I'm Philosophical and Protective/Aggressive by your definition.

Using the real-world meaning of these traits however, I'd say that I'm Philosophical and either Organized or Protective.



I'd rather be an expert in my field, so domination by your definition.

Hey guys

 

[MantaRevan]

So anyone know how I can size down the pic?

Anyway, as for explanations, I see myself as Philosophical because that's literally what I've been doing all my life. When I was in middle school I made my own manifesto and in high school I had already tried to create my own school of philosophy. I'm literally as philosophical as you can probably get.

As for Aggressive, I'm far from athletic, but I'm intellectually assertive in a lot of ways, always want to win an argument, and am generally pretty blunt. This trait would work pretty well but I'd still hesitate to call myself aggressive.

As for Organized, I'm a pretty rigid person that is ruled by the mechanistic rules of logic and does a LOT of over-analysis, so I feel like that applies well.

And finally Protective feels like arguably the best secondary fit because I'm an extremely reserved and solitary person, and I feel like protective does the best job of illustrating isolationism.

 

[Macksideshow]

I always downsize my images using paint. Ctrl-A to select the whole image then Ctrl-W to Stretch/Skew.

 

[Elite]

Imperialistic and Charismatic for traits.


Victory: Conquest.

 

[Tristan_C]

Interesting topic and posts.

Rule 63 on me:

Very financial, not attached so much to greed for myself as to the idea behind money, that part of any bond between people is the exchange of value for value. Like seeing people play to their strengths. Also Anglophile!

Time VC.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

I'm...Shaka!

Wow, it all makes sense now.

 

[Lemon Merchant]

Protective and Spiritual for me. I guess that makes me Saladin. Hmmmm...

 

[12tn2]

Well, with my own point of view (not your trait definitions) I've got 3 traits already
However, the victory type is really new & interesting. It is until you mentioned that I realized that I aim for all of those type!! Maybe both my ambition & my head have swollen so big ...

 

[pandamancer]

But..but isn't it Roosevelt??!!

Yeah, you are right. I seems I mixed up Theodore and Franklin Roosevelt

 

[pandamancer]

Well, with my own point of view (not your trait definitions) I've got 3 traits already
However, the victory type is really new & interesting. It is until you mentioned that I realized that I aim for all of those type!! Maybe both my ambition & my head have swollen so big ...

Well you can only choose two, don't be greedy

I think life allows you to win on different "victory conditions", but you need to be first aware of your "traits". Speaking of such, I remembered a quote from the author of the Last Lecture:

“We cannot change the cards we are dealt, just how we play the hand.”
― Randy Pausch

 

[CivNoobie]

according to this i can be either Bismarck or Sury

funny, I had never played those 2 before

 

[Major Tom]

FIN and PHI.

Makes me Elizabeth. Funny, I've never weared skirts.

 

[zuwzuz]

Spiritual and philosophical albeit in a more "spiritual" meanings of these words...

The victory? A win-win situation is a goal in real life (which I guess would be DIPLOMATIC by your description). I like to win diplomatically in the game too

Cheers

 

[Antilogic]

This is what I don't get--why do Spiritual people have a "good foundation" for their belief? Why are Imperialistic and Charismatic so close in practice? Why are Creative and Philosophical so indistinguishable?

 

[pandamancer]

This is what I don't get--why do Spiritual people have a "good foundation" for their belief? Why are Imperialistic and Charismatic so close in practice? Why are Creative and Philosophical so indistinguishable?

Spiritual - "good foundation" not "right foundation". Like everything has a meaning/answer

Imp VS Cha - it is different. See post 27. Being popular does help but not mandatory.

Philosophical - I don't know actually. It is hard to define philosophical... not really argumentative per se or within the context of Socratic methodology. It lies in being critical/logical/inquisitive. If you can better define it go ahead.

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

So go ahead, pick your poison traits

 

[elmurcis]

Financial and foolish
I like to get my economy running.. until I get in some war that i won't stop figthing until I win even if it will take 1000 yrs (or even more).. And after that I really need to use all my skills to recover.. but thats fun

 

[Pangaea]

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

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

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

Certainly Philosophical, though the stuff about luck was a bit odd. After that probably Spiritual, given this description, though I'm an atheist. Like to think about the common good and strive towards such goals though, so it's probably quite fitting.

Industrious fits a bit too, as I like to think and plan for the "long lines", but philosophical and spiritual is probably more fitting.

Financial and Organised...?

 

[LincolnOfRome]

Spiritual/Philosophical;Space.