Open main menu

Talk:AI personalities

Assessment

Outliner top.png
B - This article is considered a B-class article on the wiki quality scale

I've added this page for the ease of referencing on AI personalities and behaviors. I didn't add ethos to the lists because I've seen AI with the same personalities but with varying ethos and governments.

Contents

Commented outEdit

Found these in the Game Files under To Do:

  • Peacekeeping Interventionists
  • Alluring Diplomats
  • Stupid Sexy Xenophobes


Interesting to note but probably doesn't belong in the article. Christopholes (talk) 00:31, 11 May 2016 (CEST)


Do we know what the deal is with the Despicable Neutrals? While it claims to be a fallback these definitely do spawn in games, complete with the note saying it shouldnt. Is it known to be a bug or is the flavor text just being....quirky? The direct Futurama quote compared with the sober descriptions on the others does seem odd, yet its possible this is meant to be an Easter Egg. Curiously lines up with the Stupid Sexy Xenophobe removed personality since that one is a Simpsons reference. Despicable Neutrals Personality encountered in multiple 1.0.0 games Celem (talk) 19:42, 15 May 2016 (CEST)

Requirements for AI PersonalitiesEdit

Hello, I am the guy that started this little effort to map wich AI types spawns based on wich Ethos traits.

I wanted to point out that the goal is to map the minimum traits needed for the AI type, not every single last combination the have been seen with. This includes mentioning only the basic Traits if that is enough to spawn this AI type. I find it generally implied that the Fanatic Version of those traits could spawn that AI personality too, but I still wrote it down for completeness They just might have the option to spawn another AI personality instead (Fanatic Xenophobes might be Purgers instead of Isolationists).

Some ethosses seem to shift the personaliy more towards a "agressive" stance. Collectivists and Militarists might be more prone to take the Zealot/Purger interpretations then the Individualist/Peacefull Soceities. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.77.219.20 (Talk) 10:40, 23 May 2016‎ (CEST)

SplitEdit

I feel like the page is a little too cluttered right now. A good way around this would be to split each personality into its own article, detailing how that personality acts and what ethos are required for it. - Mitchz95 (talk) 04:06, 25 May 2016 (CEST)

I can't agree with this, splitting into that many small pages would be a nightmare to keep updated. However I am open to suggestions of ways to make the page easier to read. Dauth (talk) 10:00, 25 May 2016 (CEST)
There really wouldn't be that many pages. I don't really think that keeping them all contained here would allow us to include too much information on them. At the bare minimum we need an accurate list of all the ethos' that spawn each personality, and it would be annoying to squeeze them all into a single cell in the table. - Mitchz95 (talk) 03:34, 29 May 2016 (CEST)
What would be said on each page? We'd have about 15 stubs each of which needing a navbox to link to the other personality types. A better looking table would be nice but cluttering the wiki with tiny pages is not part of the style guide. Dauth (talk) 10:23, 29 May 2016 (CEST)
No need to split; it's all down to good presentation. I'm currently working on another page so I'll look at this later. ~ SolSys (talk) 17:37, 29 May 2016 (CEST)
A split seems pointless, yeah. The only split I could see any sense to would be moving the AI personalities bit to a single page of its own, leaving this page focusing on things like AI difficulty, how the AI responds to diplomacy, general overview of how the AI actually works, how it does/doesn't cheat, and similar. But at its current length, that's not needed. ~ Meneth (talk) 13:21, 30 May 2016 (CEST)
I think anything we could write would just be a re-listing of the values given in the personality file. Wich anybody actually interested in this can just look up in the actuall files. I recently added mention that some Ethoses are distinctly less likely to seek alliances due to the AI Personalities they will produce. --The Founder (talk) 02:08, 25 June 2016 (CEST)

Xenophobic Isolationists work with SpiritualEdit

Unlike what it says here a combo of Xenophobe, Spiritual, Pacifist will give this result. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.179.109.164 (Talk) 21:02, 28 May 2016‎(CEST)

It's what listed in the files. May be a bug. ~ SolSys (talk) 17:37, 29 May 2016 (CEST)
It IS coherent with what is written, actually. The second point works with either Pacifist OR {NOT Spiritualist/Collectivist/Militarist} (or both). As long as one of the two conditions is verified, the full requirement is fulfilled; so once a (Xenophobe) empire is Pacifist, it can be a Xenophobe Isolationist regardless of the rest of the ethos.--83.153.3.198 23:35, 29 May 2016 (CEST)

Fanatical BefriendersEdit

Please can someone confirm that "Fanatical Befrienders" is actual thing. It does not look like to be real. Haven't see such AI personality. Also Despicable Neutrals and Metalhead, invented personalities? --Atlantas (talk) 16:28, 29 May 2016 (CEST)

It's what listed in the files. Do note, however, that you're not supposed to meet Despicable Neutrals in a normal game. ~ SolSys (talk) 17:37, 29 May 2016 (CEST)
Fanatical Befrienders was originally a mod-only personality for the Blorg, added to the base game files with patch 1.1. --108.35.192.104 04:42, 31 May 2016 (CEST)

Base weight not explainedEdit

The page could use an update explaining what the term 'base weight' means. I don't know if someone just ripped it from the files or assumed people would understand what it meant, but more info is needed. ~ Databug (talk) 18:28, 24 June 2016 (CDT)

Weighting as a term is very familiar to me, even both from Economics Classes in School and how the tech Draw system already works. But I might not be a good person to evaluate what is "common knowledge" for the average Wiki reader --The Founder (talk) 02:11, 25 June 2016 (CEST)
Let me see if I understand. A race is generated with traits and ethics. If it could fit in to more than one of these categories then the weighting determines the chances for that race to get that personality. Is that right? ~ Databug (talk) 22:40, 24 June 2016 (CDT)
It's left as it is since it's rather self explanatory; Base weight == base chance [out of X] before any applied modifier. Items with the same weight [in the same group] have equal chances to spawn.
You do have a point, however, in that the data is not presented in a clear matter. The requirements column needs to be split into 2: requirements [only] column and weight/modifiers column. ~ SolSys (talk) 21:01, 25 June 2016 (CEST)

Either as a logic connectionEdit

In the table the word either may be misleading as it usually (at least from my understanding) means XOR (exclusive OR). But in this context the proper logic connection is OR. I added a note above the table to explain this beacause I didn't want to change that much. If you have a more elaborate solution to this, feel free to implement or to suggest it here Flomotlomotflo (talk) 11:35, 29 November 2017 (CET)

"Either" in the English language stands for "OR". I'm not sure what would make one confuse it with XOR since as far as I am aware there is no "everyday" word used for XOR -- not every wiki user studied electronics so it wouldn't be of much help here. In any case, it is to be understood as its "everyday" linguistic usage. ~ SolSys (talk) 21:42, 29 November 2017 (CET)
Return to "AI personalities" page.