+Aggressive

Free Combat 1 promotion for all Melee Units
½ cost Training Yard and Drydocks

+Agnostic

Can’t adopt State Religions
Cities resist religious spread
(Negative trait)

+Arcane

Arcane units earn XP faster
½ cost Mage Guid

+Barbarian

At peace with the barbarians
-10% research

+Creative

+2 Culture per turn per city
½ cost Obelisk and Theatre

+Defender

+15% Combat and +15% Withdrawal rate when the unit is in its own land
½ cost Archery Range

+Expansive

+2 Health per city
No Upkeep on Health Care Civics
½ cost Granary and Harbor

+Financial

+1 commerce on spaces generating 2 or more commerce
½ cost Market and Moneychanger

Hidden

Lands are always covered by the fog of war to other civs.

+Industrious

+50% Wonder production
½ cost Forge

+Ingenuity (woodelf)

Halves the cost of all upgrades

+Organized

-50% Civic upkeep cost
Can build the Command Post
½ cost Courthouse and Lighthouse

+Magic Resistant

All units gain the magic resistant promotion
Ring of Warding is twice as likely to desttory summoned attackers

+Philosophical

+50% Great People birth rate
No Upkeep on Education Civics
½ cost Elder Council and Library

+Raiders (Loki)

3 times as much gold from pillaging
+1 xp from each combat win
Archer, Melee, Mounted and Recon units start with the Commando promotion

+Scorched Earth (Loki)

Must Raze all Cities
(Negative trait)

+Spiritual

Free Mobility 1 promotion for all Disciple Units
½ cost Temples
No Anarchy

+Sprawling

Cities are able to work the 3rd plot ring instead of just the first 2
Cultural borders increased

+Summoners

Summoned creatures last for 3 turns instead of 1.

Reserved for ideas under consideration.

I was thinking that perhaps dwarven civs should be able to work peak tiles with their cities. Make it act like a mine on a desert tile.

Heck- make them able to build their cities on peak tiles-under the mountain.

Maybe throw in Dark Elves with that.

Nah. Dark elves should be able to plant forests on Mountains, and in Hell.

If you complete genesis, you will get forested peaks already. But they're no good unless the city can work the tile.

If possible I love the dwarven cities in peaks ideas, but would other civs be able to invade that tile since it's impassable?

Way back in November I added an Agricultural trait into my games. It worked like Financial, but added +1 food on tiles of 3 or more.

Also I've always preferred Industrial to work this way as well instead of the 50% bonus on Wonders.

Hey I'm just wondering if all of the new traits are included in the phase 2 alpha.
It said they were but I wasn't sure because things like hidden are very difficult to implement so quickly.

Hey I'm just wondering if all of the new traits are included in the phase 2 alpha.
It said they were but I wasn't sure because things like hidden are very difficult to implement so quickly.

Hidden will probably wait for Shadow (which is when the 2 civs that use it are implemented). The rest I would like to get into Light. That said Im not sure how the traits will end up. Granting non-researchable civ specific techs is so much more functional. For example the Seafaring trait actually doesn't do anything in 1.1. All of the effects we want from seafaring are granted by the Seafaring tech. So I will probably cut the seafaring trait.

The elven, dwarven, dark elven and orcish traits are the same, they will probably become techs.

Cut cut cut. Removed all of the racial traits, seafaring and bascially any trait that is better done as a civ specific tech. So the Lanun won't have the seafaring trait anymore, instead they will start with the Seafaring tech.

Changed the arcane trait so that it now allows casters to xp faster and typically gain more xp than other civs.

I also changed the summoner trait to allow summoned units to stick around for 3 turns instead of 1. This doesn't apply to spells like fireballs, but does to fire elementals.

What do you guys think, do they sound like reasonable traits?

Changed the arcane trait so that it now allows casters to xp faster and typically gain more xp than other civs.

I also changed the summoner trait to allow summoned units to stick around for 3 turns instead of 1. This doesn't apply to spells like fireballs, but does to fire elementals.

What do you guys think, do they sound like reasonable traits?

I like these. Will the sheaim still get the mages/conjurer combo unit?

I like these. Will the sheaim still get the mages/conjurer combo unit?

I dont know. After i post the next version I would like to hear your feedback on how spells are handed out and such. I had to juggle some stuff around to get it to work correctly.

But yeah, Im still up for it if it isnt unbalancing.

Another comment is that I think the barbarian trait should not give reverse war weariness, but a constant happiness bonus while you are at war.

Another comment is that I think the barbarian trait should not give reverse war weariness, but a constant happiness bonus while you are at war.

You're probably right. I love the idea of being punished for staying at peace but it is probably unreasonable (and difficult to get the AI to deal well with).

I snuck another trait in under the wire, Defender. It gives +15% combat and withdrawal rate to units while they are in their own lands. I gave the trait to the 2 Elohim leaders and Amelanchier.

How about giving +20% cultural defense also (maybe for later)

In my opnion

+Aggressive+Arcane+Creative+Defender+Expansive+Fin ancial+Industrious+Organized+Magic Resistant+Philosophical+Raiders+Spiritual
Those are ok, and some seems very fun to use:

+Agnostic+Barbarian+Scorched Earth (Loki)
For negative, i think those are fine. If some leaders are so strong they need a negative trait, then those are ok.

+Hidden
Most original!

+Scorched Earth (Loki)
Seems overpowered! I use alot of summoners and mages, man three demon summoners leading 9 of those great demons is scary! Add a bunch of other summoners in there and some crap units to garrison cities and you can take over the world without receiving any xp..

Damn i cant wait to play this..

In my opnion

+Aggressive+Arcane+Creative+Defender+Expansive+Fin ancial+Industrious+Organized+Magic Resistant+Philosophical+Raiders+Spiritual
Those are ok, and some seems very fun to use:

+Agnostic+Barbarian+Scorched Earth (Loki)
For negative, i think those are fine. If some leaders are so strong they need a negative trait, then those are ok.

+Hidden
Most original!

+Scorched Earth (Loki)
Seems overpowered! I use alot of summoners and mages, man three demon summoners leading 9 of those great demons is scary! Add a bunch of other summoners in there and some crap units to garrison cities and you can take over the world without receiving any xp..

Damn i cant wait to play this..

Keep in mind that we dont balance specific aspects, only the civ as a whole. The Summoner trait will probably stay on the Sheaim (though if it is to powerful they will be handicaped in other ways). And if its to powerful it may be removed from Thessa.

So we have no desire to make sure that Summoner is equal in power to Aggresive, only that the civs as a whole are relativly equal in power in power to each other.

Just now i noticed you changed the Arcane Trait.. It was my favourite, now its pretty useless... Mages usually dont fight, their spells do, since they have strengh 3 or 4! The 1.0 Arcane gave them a very usefull spell extention, now, when are mages supposed to get that extra xp? From the weakened enemies their spells dont manage to kill? Not fun.. Arcane wasnt overpowered, but i really like mages, and being able to hit enemies one square further away was very usefull.. I played a quick game and couldnt use the Arcane trait bonus more than two or three times.. in the end game, units move in mass, its hard to pick one weak enemy alone to level up your mage.

I propose you change arcane back to the way it was! Or teach me to do it, at least..

Also, "Raiders" is sweet!

"Philosofical" seems very good, but when i used it in 1.0 it didnt changed the upkeep of education civics, does it now?

"Industrious" dosent seem atractive, dont you think it would be better to use that popular industrial trait seen in several mods? (+1 hammer on squares with at least 3 hammers).

Just my two cents :)

Just now i noticed you changed the Arcane Trait.. It was my favourite, now its pretty useless... Mages usually dont fight, their spells do, since they have strengh 3 or 4! The 1.0 Arcane gave them a very usefull spell extention, now, when are mages supposed to get that extra xp? From the weakened enemies their spells dont manage to kill? Not fun.. Arcane wasnt overpowered, but i really like mages, and being able to hit enemies one square further away was very usefull.. I played a quick game and couldnt use the Arcane trait bonus more than two or three times.. in the end game, units move in mass, its hard to pick one weak enemy alone to level up your mage.

I propose you change arcane back to the way it was! Or teach me to do it, at least..

Arcane allows mages to gain xp faster and level higher before there xp gain starts to slow. With those levels they can now buy spell extension (giving the addtional range) or spheres as you prefer.

"Arcane allows mages to gain xp faster and level higher before there xp gain starts to slow."

I dont get what you mean.. I never used my mages to attack, they always cast a spell or buff another unit, and they dont get xp by killing someone with a fireball, or do they? Am i using them wrong? How Arcane help you? I know now mages actually get something by leveling up, but how will i level up if its their spell who kills the unit, and not them? They have such low strenght!

And do you think if i search on the 1.0 files for the Arcane description, and Effects, and paste them on the apropriate 2.011 files, will i have some trouble? Man this mod rocks, but my favourite trait is just.. yknow... not the same.

magic units gain xp automatically now, like heros, but with different rates and limits.

ooooooh :)

Actually thei gain XP dependen on three factors.
Namely:
1. The Amount of XP they already have.
2. The Arcane Train/or Not
3. The Tier of the caster (Mages gain XP faster than Adpets. , Archmages faster than Mages)

There is no Maximum for the XP but the more you have the slower you get them. Therfor an Arcan Archmage will get a much higher amount of XP in the same time as an NonArcan Adept.

Please keep in mind that an Adept has to be level 3 to be upgraded to a Mage and a Mage has to be level 6 to be upgraded to an Archmage.

Every civ should have at least one negitive trait.

Another negitive trait idea- Revolutionary. Gives 1 unhappy for the first 25 turns without a revolution then 1 unhappy for every 15 after that.

Every civ should have at least one negitive trait.

Why should they?

I don't think that "Barbarian" is a negative trait...

Could spiritual also give temple upgrades allowed with 5 instead of 7?

I don't think that "Barbarian" is a negative trait...

Could spiritual also give temple upgrades allowed with 5 instead of 7?

Thats actually hard to do. Let me think about it.

To be quite honest (I know this is the wrong thread, but bear with me), requiring seven cities for upgraded temples is an invitation for city spamming. I rarely have more than five before I go on a killing spree late-game.

Barbarian is the most positive trait I know! I love the Doveillo now. :)

Not sure if this is the right place for this or not.
I was thinking about the Agnostic trait & thought that maybe they could have a unique upgrade path to replace the religious one.
Something more along the line of philosophy/ethics divorced from religious aspects, there would be schools instead of temples, & monasteries instead of cathedrals, etc. Monks (which are kinda worthless/redundent) could be a whole different path (iniatate/monk/????) or somesuch.
Just a thought.

Fader

Not sure if this is the right place for this or not.
I was thinking about the Agnostic trait & thought that maybe they could have a unique upgrade path to replace the religious one.
Something more along the line of philosophy/ethics divorced from religious aspects, there would be schools instead of temples, & monasteries instead of cathedrals, etc. Monks (which are kinda worthless/redundent) could be a whole different path (iniatate/monk/????) or somesuch.
Just a thought.

Fader

I dont like designing the same thing and giving it different names. It is the easiest way to balance things but I would rather have civs that are very different from each other, and the fact that the Grigori are missing a section of their upgrade tree makes them very different.

Instead if they are underpowered because of the lack of these units I would rather address that in other ways and force the players to adopt new strategies to deal with the different civ (but as designers we have to make sure those strategies exist and are effective).

. . . the fact that the Grigori are missing a section of their upgrade tree makes them very different.

Instead if they are underpowered because of the lack of these units I would rather address that in other ways and force the players to adopt new strategies to deal with the different civ (but as designers we have to make sure those strategies exist and are effective).

My take on this:

I think the Grigori are pretty underpowered. At the very early stage they are awesome, but as your GPP increases the great adventurers (GA) just stop coming. The only way to deal with this is to give up on all other great persons, which means no wonders. . . .this is ok, and kind of balanced, but with no religous buildings and no wonders it is hard to come up with the cash for those upgrades to keep your GA current. Plus for an industrious leader it is pretty much a slap in the face.

I have a few suggestions to make them more viable, probably implementing them all would make them broken. . . give Agnostic a + %research bonus (maybe scalable with pop/per city?). This would overcome the financial hardships imposed by having no really money makers and having to spend more to upgrade their GAs. Instead of hero give the GAs hero2 which would give them +1exp pt/turn to 200. I'd say make some sort of specific building that could increase your GA points, but maybe you could just make all +commander points GA points for the Grigori. Let the Grigori build command posts (meh, I don't like that one, not really in line with agnosticism). Give all GAs the divine promotion free (I kind of like that the power of god is in their hands).

Also, (this is all asthetics) please, please name some of the GAs after our founding fathers, it doesn't have to be overt, but a late game Tomijay would give me no end of pleasure. Also, give them an aura, a grey aura would be cool. And, instead of calling them Great adventurers call them the illuminati, or great agnostics or something.

I think the Grigori are pretty underpowered. At the very early stage they are awesome, but as your GPP increases the great adventurers (GA) just stop coming. The only way to deal with this is to give up on all other great persons, which means no wonders. . . .this is ok, and kind of balanced, but with no religous buildings and no wonders it is hard to come up with the cash for those upgrades to keep your GA current. Plus for an industrious leader it is pretty much a slap in the face.

Nothing forces you to focus on GA's. You can choose to get other kinds of GP if you think you need them. I usually end with about 4 adventurers, rest other GPs. 4 is still a pretty great deal, considering most others will probably have only 2 heroes, a civ-specific and a religion-specific.

I have a few suggestions to make them more viable, probably implementing them all would make them broken. . . give Agnostic a + %research bonus (maybe scalable with pop/per city?). This would overcome the financial hardships imposed by having no really money makers and having to spend more to upgrade their GAs. Instead of hero give the GAs hero2 which would give them +1exp pt/turn to 200. I'd say make some sort of specific building that could increase your GA points, but maybe you could just make all +commander points GA points for the Grigori. Let the Grigori build command posts (meh, I don't like that one, not really in line with agnosticism). Give all GAs the divine promotion free (I kind of like that the power of god is in their hands).

There are special buildings that increase GA points, the Adventurer's Guild and the Grigori Tavern.
A small research bonus might be a good idea.
Why should adventurers be divine? They don't have godlike powers just because they defy the gods.

Also, (this is all asthetics) please, please name some of the GAs after our founding fathers, it doesn't have to be overt, but a late game Tomijay would give me no end of pleasure. Also, give them an aura, a grey aura would be cool. And, instead of calling them Great adventurers call them the illuminati, or great agnostics or something.

You can name them yourself if you feel like it, but I personally don't see why they need to change.

There are special buildings that increase GA points, the Adventurer's Guild and the Grigori Tavern.

Oh good, I must have missed the tavern/ guild effects.

A small research bonus might be a good idea.

Yay, I liked that the most.

Why should adventurers be divine? They don't have godlike powers just because they defy the gods.

Agnostics really just ignore the gods. I was just saying that real agnostics went out and figured things out, while others turn to churches. It's just that in the absense of the clergy they'd figure out how to heal/ cure disease. It was more of a balance issue (allowing the GAs to heal).

Mainly I was comparing the GAs to the Hippus leader with raiding, I was playing a monarch game and had several 100 exp raiders before any any others had much of anything, I pretty much decimated three civs before I even encoutered an axeman. It just seems that compared with the rate of advancement that raiding civs get just as many protoheroes (although using GAs as archmages would be pretty cool) that the GAs don't make up nearly enough for losing ~40% of your final tier units.

I'll give grigori another shot soon.

maybe (just an idea) agnostic should:
1. allow no state religion

...maybe even have it so that it enables the "free religion" civic wouldnt be a bad idea...

2. allow no spead of religion

...i like this cause if i found a majority of the religions as the grigori, then other civs have no basis to get better units...

3. +2 science and/or culture per Great Adventurer

...this would be interesting becasue it would FORCE the ai to build GA and adds a reason to make them in the first place (aside from their diverity) and so that cheaters (people who use the world-builder in single-player) wont get the bonuses of the GAs' they gave themselves...

4. cannot accuire Great Prophets

...this is because they're agnostic. they wouldnt get a religious person if they have no religion...
that's it...

...i also think the grigori should beable to found the cult of dragons because its a religion that you cannot have as a state religion...

EDIT: its a cult... not a religion... thats why they should beable to found it as well...

Also, (this is all asthetics) please, please name some of the GAs after our founding fathers, it doesn't have to be overt, but a late game Tomijay would give me no end of pleasure.

I like this, but can't you rename then ingame anyways?

This would only really be neccesary if we were getting lots of "Great Adventurer was born in a far away land".

I'm not a big fan of the scorched earth trait. I mean, auto razing a town that has 4 wonders with a holy city included doesn't make sense. I'm sure Orcs would have enough sense to save that city and use it to boraden their war efforts.

What if instead of autoraze, 100% of the tiles that city was using becomes 'scorched and unworkable', sort of like a different version of a fallout. The titles could be fixed, but it would take a LONG time to do, making the city somewhat unproductive for years after the war.

I'm sure Orcs would have enough sense to save that city and use it to boraden their war efforts.

Orcs inflamed with bloodlust are not known for their capacity for rational thinking:)

But there's talk of allowing them to retake their own cities.

Orcs inflamed with bloodlust are not known for their capacity for rational thinking:)



I thought Jonus was smart though? I assume Orcs are fairly religious as well since Jonus is getting the spirtual trait. Why would they raze a Holy City of their adopted relligion?

Why would they raze a Holy City of their adopted relligion?

Good point. Perhaps an exception could be made for this as well. But in general I think the trait is a nice way to balance the orcs and their military might.

Good point. Perhaps an exception could be made for this as well. But in general I think the trait is a nice way to balance the orcs and their military might.

What makes the Orc's military so mighty though? They have undercosted cities and units, right?

Thats nice early game, since you can expand without Barbarians bugging you. But it can also be a bad thing since their units won't be as experienced as the other civs. Once Mid and late game roll around, they are stuck with -10% research and Barbs are all but a distant memory anyway.

Yeah we'll make exceptions with their holy city and in a city that they founded, only all of the non-orc's will die.

Any exceptions to neighboring cities that may have 25-50% Orc culture in their lands? Why would they raze them? I know Orc Culture may be oxymoronish. :D

Any exceptions to neighboring cities that may have 25-50% Orc culture in their lands? Why would they raze them? I know Orc Culture may be oxymoronish. :D

Good point. What if scorched earth was changed to instead kill all pop that are non-orc. Holy cities of your religion are saved but with only one pop left.

Ha i had exactly the same idea Loki. Must be a good one. ;)

Ha i had exactly the same idea Loki. Must be a good one. ;)

It must be great if I was involved, right? Guys? Hello....

:D

Loki i think i heard something. Did you it two?

Just sisonpyh.

I think this sounds good. Thanks Loki, Chalid and... umm.... Sisonpyh. ;)

Start the day with abuse, end it with abuse. :hmm:

This being married (twice) has prepared me well for the world... ;)

Hmm, thought of this last night, maybe agnostic could get a +%GP birthrate, based on pop. Since they will never be able to benefit from pacifism, the most awesome civic a phil/ind leader could get, and, until you get free religion and or monarchy it will be pretty hard to get your population up.

a +5% bonus in each city for each pop would be cool. Early game this would be like 25%, pretty modest, but when you get to late game it would be huge +100% at pop 20. That may be too high, but considering how many GP the grigori would normally produce in a game it may not be out of line. Maybe you could cap it at 50 or 100%.

Or, you could just give them a flat +GP% at the outset.

Also, once you introduce the crusades, the grigori should have some sort of weird diplomatic reaction to the crusading civ.

wait is this the wrong thread? (moved)

maybe (just an idea) agnostic should:
1. allow no state religion

...maybe even have it so that it enables the "free religion" civic wouldnt be a bad idea...

2. allow no spead of religion

...i like this cause if i found a majority of the religions as the grigori, then other civs have no basis to get better units...

3. +2 science and/or culture per Great Adventurer

...this would be interesting becasue it would FORCE the ai to build GA and adds a reason to make them in the first place (aside from their diverity) and so that cheaters (people who use the world-builder in single-player) wont get the bonuses of the GAs' they gave themselves...

4. cannot accuire Great Prophets

...this is because they're agnostic. they wouldnt get a religious person if they have no religion...
that's it...

...i also think the grigori should beable to found the cult of dragons because its a religion that you cannot have as a state religion...

EDIT: its a cult... not a religion... thats why they should beable to found it as well...

everyones read this and agrees? cause i got no responce to this...

Originally Posted by darkonion
maybe (just an idea) agnostic should:
1. allow no state religion

...maybe even have it so that it enables the "free religion" civic wouldnt be a bad idea...


It already is that way. And free religion is essentially a way to say that religion shall not be a dominating force in people's lives.
2. allow no spead of religion

...i like this cause if i found a majority of the religions as the grigori, then other civs have no basis to get better units...

I think that would be VERY out of character for the Grigori. The whole point is that they strive NOT to found any religions."Hoarding" religions would not make sense for them.

3. +2 science and/or culture per Great Adventurer

...this would be interesting becasue it would FORCE the ai to build GA and adds a reason to make them in the first place (aside from their diverity) and so that cheaters (people who use the world-builder in single-player) wont get the bonuses of the GAs' they gave themselves...


Why is that needed? GA's are good to have as it is, and I've seen the AI use them as well. I'm not sure I understand your point about cheaters.
4. cannot accuire Great Prophets

...this is because they're agnostic. they wouldnt get a religious person if they have no religion...
that's it...

That makes sense. But they rarely get them anyway, they rarely if ever get to use priest specialists, and they do not have much incentive to build the religious wonders.

...i also think the grigori should beable to found the cult of dragons because its a religion that you cannot have as a state religion...

EDIT: its a cult... not a religion... thats why they should beable to found it as well...

That doesn't really make sense. Just because it isn't a religion, they should be able to found it? The Cult is unique to the Kuriotates and the Sheaim, do you think the Grigori should have some special affinity with dragons too? Otherwise I can't see why it should be allowed, the Cult worships a higher being, just like the religions, and Cassiel would be opposed to that as well.

...

It already is that way. And free religion is essentially a way to say that religion shall not be a dominating force in people's lives.

...

I think that would be VERY out of character for the Grigori. The whole point is that they strive NOT to found any religions."Hoarding" religions would not make sense for them.

...

Why is that needed? GA's are good to have as it is, and I've seen the AI use them as well. I'm not sure I understand your point about cheaters.

...

That makes sense. But they rarely get them anyway, they rarely if ever get to use priest specialists, and they do not have much incentive to build the religious wonders.

...

That doesn't really make sense. Just because it isn't a religion, they should be able to found it? The Cult is unique to the Kuriotates and the Sheaim, do you think the Grigori should have some special affinity with dragons too? Otherwise I can't see why it should be allowed, the Cult worships a higher being, just like the religions, and Cassiel would be opposed to that as well.

im just trying to throw ideas out there because the grigori are at a major fault... FfH is a game CENTERED around RELIGION and PROMOTIONS... they have ONE OF THE TWO... we need to balance them out with those who CAN have a state religion...

maybe you can have it so that agnostic also does the EXACT SAME STATS as free religion, except, they can still DOUBLE THOSE STAT UPS by enabling free religion when they get... what is it??? liberty i think... i believe that will balance them out enough... just keep what i said before EXCEPT the part about being able to found the cult of dragons...

The way I see the Grigori are like the Polynesians in a game of Civ III - DYP Mod - on the Real World map, they start off at a distinct disadvantage and it's up to you the player to make them into a Civ to be remembered. It's not easy but with perseverance and some very careful planning it can be done. I'll have to try them out some time soon as I don't have the hands on experience with them yet.

I've played a few games with the Grigori, and have not found them particularly underpowered. Adventurers are very powerful in the early game, and they make great mages later, because you don't have to wait long for their xp. And I think it's very nice to have early freedom in regards to research, rather than thinking about going towards a certain religion all the time.

They do have certain issues, mainly with keeping their people happy. But the freedom of being able to select any religion-specific civic with Free Religion is a nice help(assuming it is in now, I haven't played Grigori recently).

I've never tried to turn my adventurers into adepts thinkings that adepts gain xp anyway... Maybe that's my main fault, but I still find Grigori underpowered. And it's not the matter of happiness but rather of culture - while other civ's city can build normally up to three temples (from which often at least one offers quicker making of new soldiers) the Grigori have nothing to make up for it. And it takes some time to make it to Liberalism, as you can rush it since you need lots of other techs to stay alive. Grigori just need a building that gives them extra culture and happiness - and it would be best if it was somwhere between the first three religiones and the two later ones, ex. Education, that it was made availible.

Maybe they could be allowed to research hiddden paths and dwarven mining? not early on, and they wouldn't get any benefit except for the boosts, but after they get free religion?

It seems silly that they wouldn't learn from other cultures.

One problem with scorched earth--I know this isn't an advantage, but the fact that you can't take dragon's hoarde, or any other wonder is a bit of a bummer--how about allowing city conquest if there is a wonder in the city?

One problem with scorched earth--I know this isn't an advantage, but the fact that you can't take dragon's hoarde, or any other wonder is a bit of a bummer--how about allowing city conquest if there is a wonder in the city?

Unfortunatly that means they destory all the cities except the really good ones, which counters the negative effect of the trait.

Speaking of which does anyone else miss the little popup that would tell you what wonders were in a city you just captured?

IMO industrious is a tiny bit weak. What if you gave it "Allows one extra engineer per city"

Unfortunatly that means they destory all the cities except the really good ones, which counters the negative effect of the trait.

Speaking of which does anyone else miss the little popup that would tell you what wonders were in a city you just captured?

I really do, I was expecting it to be in Civ4... And I thought you'd bring it back with scorched earth. I don't like capturing other cities, they can be too far away or sorounded with barabarians.

So... who has Sprawling, and what's it do?

Its in testing at the moment... Its a trait for builders.

Evil tease. :( I'm a builder, so I'm twice as curious...

I have a point about the calabim expansionist leader--They get free upkeep on their compassion civics, so it actually encourages the calabim to use the most caring civic. huh?

They get free upkeep on their compassion civics, so it actually encourages the calabim to use the most caring civic. huh?

I think it makes sense that they prefer their food fresh and healthy.

With the scorched earth and the dragon's horde, maybe if the city is raized then the game should check for the wonders and if it finds a wonder that provides free stuff such as the horde it should be placed on the ruined city square as a resource.

This would still weaken the player who is forced to destroy the city but still give a bonus for killing the dragon.

Or, as a second thought, maybe if the city is destroyed you should get lots of extra cash for looting the dragon's gold :D

With the scorched earth and the dragon's horde, maybe if the city is raized then the game should check for the wonders and if it finds a wonder that provides free stuff such as the horde it should be placed on the ruined city square as a resource.

This would still weaken the player who is forced to destroy the city but still give a bonus for killing the dragon.

Or, as a second thought, maybe if the city is destroyed you should get lots of extra cash for looting the dragon's gold :D

Thats an interesting idea, How much are we talking, 200? 300?

I'm not sure how much 3 permenant gems resources are worth :) but I was thinking on the lines of a great merchant's amount of wealth (Maybe because I am just greedy)

I'm not sure how much 3 permenant gems resources are worth :) but I was thinking on the lines of a great merchant's amount of wealth (Maybe because I am just greedy)

How about if you raze the city you get 200 gold and the tile becomes a permanent gem resource?

That sounds good :)
Will make all the people playing the scorched earth leaders much happier I expect.

How about if you raze the city you get 200 gold and the tile becomes a permanent gem resource?

Yes, I like this idea.

Today I finally killed that dragon and didn't realize I had to keep the city to get anything. I killed him with a ranger maxed out on XP, so I didn't even get the XP. I was shocked to not see the Gems appear in my resources...then, I remembered something about having to keep and not raze the city.

As mentioned, the barb city with the dragon is often too far away to consider keeping, so I like your idea better!

Yes, I like this idea.

Today I finally killed that dragon and didn't realize I had to keep the city to get anything. I killed him with a ranger maxed out on XP, so I didn't even get the XP. I was shocked to not see the Gems appear in my resources...then, I remembered something about having to keep and not raze the city.

As mentioned, the barb city with the dragon is often too far away to consider keeping, so I like your idea better!

K, I'll add it for 0.13 unless any team member objects.

about the raxed earth is their anyway that a razed wonder can then be built again? so if a 1 time wonder is razed people can then rush to build it again?

about the raxed earth is their anyway that a razed wonder can then be built again? so if a 1 time wonder is razed people can then rush to build it again?

It could definitly be done, but I tend to like the fact that once a wonder is gone it is gone. Unlike vanilla civ we never obsolete wonders so razing is the only way to get them out of the game.

I noticed that some of the traits here halve the production speed on some buildings, while others have no such effect. It'd seem to me that this is a bit of a problem, since it's effectively making some traits more powerful than others. To remedy this, some suggestions (though I couldn't come up with good suggestions for all of them).

+Arcane

Arcane units earn XP faster.
½ cost Mage's Guild.

+Barbarian

At peace with the barbarians
-10% research
½ cost Colosseum?

+Defender

+15% Combat and +15% Withdrawal rate when the unit is in its own land.
½ cost Palisade, City Walls, Castle.

+Raiders (Loki)

3 times as much gold from pillaging
+1 xp from each combat win
Archer, Melee, Mounted and Recon units start with the Commando promotion
½ cost Stable, Archery Range.


EDIT: Also, not related to the halved costs, Industrious probably needs a boost...

Mage Guild for Arcane seems good. Maybe halve the cost for the Minotr Towers of Mastery too.

Colloseum has been removed, so something else might do for the barbarians.

Stable is halved for aggresive i think., but it would definetly fit for raiders, too. Problem will have Aggreseive-raiders.

Archery range would be mor fitting for Defensive as archers are the defensive untis. But the defensive buildings make perfectly sense as well.

I noticed that some of the traits here halve the production speed on some buildings, while others have no such effect. It'd seem to me that this is a bit of a problem, since it's effectively making some traits more powerful than others. To remedy this, some suggestions (though I couldn't come up with good suggestions for all of them).


½ cost Mage's Guild.


½ cost Colosseum?


½ cost Palisade, City Walls, Castle.


½ cost Stable, Archery Range.


EDIT: Also, not related to the halved costs, Industrious probably needs a boost...

I dont agree with the logic that all traits have to have the same bonus's. Just because the raider promotion doesn't a reduced cost building doesn't make it underpowered.

But I do think the reduced cost on mages guilds for the arcane trait and archery ranges for the defender trait makes good sense so I will add them in.

Seems that the traditional dwarves (Khazad, that is) are lacking a real "dwarven" flavor. Maybe a Stonescaping trait or somesuch could be added, one that would allow them to build hills, or chop them down like forests for a decent production boost, maybe allow working mountains as well. This could probably be handled like the seafaring trait, with a placeholder tech. How about it?

Seems that the traditional dwarves (Khazad, that is) are lacking a real "dwarven" flavor. Maybe a Stonescaping trait or somesuch could be added, one that would allow them to build hills, or chop them down like forests for a decent production boost, maybe allow working mountains as well. This could probably be handled like the seafaring trait, with a placeholder tech. How about it?

Yeah we are working on them right now. They are the last of the civs we need to fled out. We have talked about hill creation/destruction before and we havent been able to come up with a good way to do it (besides it seems to similar to the elves love of forests).

I agree, it'd be better if the dwarves weren't "elves, but in hills"

you guys already seem to have focused the elves on things outside the city, and the dwarves with things inside the city, like the dwarvish forge

the differences are already there, but the elves are more distinct than the dwarves at the moment

Maybe the creation/destruction of mountains, instead? If they could work these mountains, that might make things interesting, too. Of course, it would lead to some interesting issues with opposing armies trying to get to their cities, so maybe dwarven workers would have to build roads through the mountains for anything to get through them. Heck, maybe dwarves could even build cities inside mountains, for a production bonus like building on a hills/plains.

I like building inside mountains better than on top; Cities that only recon units can attack seems a bit cheap, but being able to build inside mountains wouldn't make them untouchable ideally, but would give a hefty defense bonus and unique locations where only they could locate cities.

Hmm-would it work if their mountian cities had, say, +150% defense + culture (but can't build wall/castles) but if the defense is bombarded to zero, then the city is destroyed and the mountian turned into a hill? (i.e., the enemy caused a cave in.)

I like building inside mountains better than on top; Cities that only recon units can attack seems a bit cheap, but being able to build inside mountains wouldn't make them untouchable ideally, but would give a hefty defense bonus and unique locations where only they could locate cities.

Hmm-would it work if their mountian cities had, say, +150% defense + culture (but can't build wall/castles) but if the defense is bombarded to zero, then the city is destroyed and the mountian turned into a hill? (i.e., the enemy caused a cave in.)

I really like the "build inside the mountain" idea, along with the defensive bonus. I don't think cities should be able to be destroyed solely by bombardment, though. In fact, I'd suggest something more toward the opposite end of the spectrum - making them more difficult to bombard. Perhaps one of the strengths of the dwarven civ could be highly defensible cities (if located in mountains, that is).

Maybe instead bombarding the city would damage the units inside by causing a cave in after a certain amount of damage was done by bombarding. The units would lose maybe 1/3 to 1/2 their health.

What if Khazad defensive city improvements and forts raised the land around them a step (by raised I mean elevation; i.e. flat to hill, hill to mountain) and the land lowered when the improvement was destroyed, or the city defense went below a certain threshhold. You could create new mountains that could not be improved, but would allow for some rock solid defense.

well, then if you built walls & castle, you'd have a city that would be impossible to get to, but could work no tiles!

Hahaha, would be fun. =P

industrious works just fine....
or you could lower it to 40% and add an extra engineer slot to each city
(allowing them to generate more GE's than other civs)

an underground stream
+1 food in hills
counts as a scource of fresh water
(dwarves only)

New trait idea, ideally for each Balseraph Leader--
Capricious
At the start of the game, the civ gains any one random trait (In addition to whatever other trait they have.)
Every 80-100 turns, they will lose this random trait and gain one new random trait.
If played by the AI, then at the same time they will randomly get from -5 to +5 diplomacy with each other civ.

This is to make the Balseraphs really unpredictable style wise and a bit crazy diplomaticaly.

New trait idea, ideally for each Balseraph Leader--
Capricious
At the start of the game, the civ gains any one random trait (In addition to whatever other trait they have.)
Every 80-100 turns, they will lose this random trait and gain one new random trait.
If played by the AI, then at the same time they will randomly get from -5 to +5 diplomacy with each other civ.

This is to make the Balseraphs really unpredictable style wise and a bit crazy diplomaticaly.

We have discussed a something like that about three month ago. We came to the conclusion that we did not want it but i can not name the reasons right now. Maybe I'll search for it later today in our Design: Features thread (internal Forum) whre it was discussed.

industrious works just fine....
or you could lower it to 40% and add an extra engineer slot to each city
(allowing them to generate more GE's than other civs)

an underground stream
+1 food in hills
counts as a scource of fresh water
(dwarves only)

I do agree that the Dwarven civs don't seem to have a better chance of getting a GE than any-other civ, and it also takes them a long time before they can produce anything that allows them to generate one.
I think they need a early building which will help them with this. You can genertate a GP, GS, GM and GB from almost your starting techs. The GE takes SOOOO much longer.
Maybe some type of workshop is needed, infact, why not be able to build it when you can a workshop, but for Dwarfs it has an extra ability. Build city Workshop: +2 basic production (+1unhealthiness) in the city, can turn one population into an Engineer.

Perhaps give the dwarves a unit that can lower mountains into hills, but not raise hills into mountains. The dwarven Druid would be a good choice for that ability think.

I think this would give them a nice flavor ability of being able to create a path or tunnel through mountains that any unit can cross and becoming a substantial threat to anyone who treats the mountains as a safe border.

They can make a mountain range passable, but will then have to worry about counter attacks along the same path later.

This would also allow the dwarves to make use of the mountains near their citys by upgrading them to hills.

Being able to raise mountains I think would be too overpowered if they are the only ones who can do it. Imagine the dwaves walling themselves in untill they want to fight, breaking the wall, and building it up again after moving through to prevent serious counter attacks.

For building mountains it could be balanced with proper restrictions and requirements I think.
Like:
-can only build mountains where there's already a hill
-can only do so within your own borders
-level 3 earth spell that sacrifices the unit (for archmages so everyone can do it, and so it can't be done often or quickly - takes a long time to train archmages)
-can't be done in any tile next to water (to prevent complete mountains walls)

I don't think I like the idea of dwarvens ever making the ground flatter and less rocky myself, seems better if they use magic or divine assistance to make it more hilly or mountainy. It doesn't seem overpowered for dwarven priests to get a Bloom like spell but for Hills as a level 2 earth spell (adding forests is actually more beneficial, as they add +1 shield (and +1 food if they become ancient) and +50% def, whereas hills only do -1 food and +1 shield and +25 def).

I still like the idea of dwarves being able to make roads through mountains, which anyone can pass through (though maybe dwarves can move more quickly through them). Then, maybe they could also work mountain tiles as if it was a hills/plains with a mine on it, which would mean that they'd want some mountains near each city, but not too many or they wouldn't have enough food. Making hills would be nice, too, but perhaps there could be a limit of a certain number of hills in an area before no more could be made.

Hmm, maybe dwarves need some way to get food from hills. Some sort of dwarf-unique improvement that gave +2 (+3 with some tech) food to hills could be added, but then dwarves wouldn't be able to build farms to make up for it. I'd almost say that it would be a good idea to do this for elves and forests, but we want to avoid the "dwarves, but in forests!" thing too. Dwarven civs being covered in workshops, hills, and mountains sounds perfectly flavorful to me!

this thread should prolly be updated with new traits! :p

lol, I was just looking at this and well, you updated it... That was creepy :P

i knew you would say that too

Lots of threads need updating.

why does Aggressive give double speed for stables and shipyards? Training Yard seems like the best candidate for double speeded production for aggressive.

why does Aggressive give double speed for stables and shipyards? Training Yard seems like the best candidate for double speeded production for aggressive.

Because I dont want to force the player down one path. Double speed of training yards would be bonus/bonus along the melee path. As is the aggresive trait helps out in a variety of builds.

Lots of threads need updating.

Yeah Im not as keen to keeping the design thread up to date as I am to keeping the Wiki up to date. Not that there isnt work that can be done there too, but there has been cool work done by the community there and its a better long term solution than these forum threads.

Because I dont want to force the player down one path. Double speed of training yards would be bonus/bonus along the melee path. As is the aggresive trait helps out in a variety of builds.

The Aggressive trait still does, it should be changed, maybe it could be done like adaptive, Aggressive (Melee) or Aggressive (Mounted) and so on.

thats an interesting idea, adaptive being applied to pick subtraits O_o

that would really make for some interesting choices that are not too mold breaking (going from aggressive to philosophical seems way too lax, but going from aggressive mounted to aggressive melee seems more mild and useful)

I think some should start with Aggressive (Adaptive) and others with class specific. Adaptive would lose the ability to chose Aggressive, of course.

Because I dont want to force the player down one path. Double speed of training yards would be bonus/bonus along the melee path. As is the aggresive trait helps out in a variety of builds.
that reasoning does make sense, but i dislike aggressive because all its bonuses dont line up.. where as creative for instance, you get bonus culture, and can build buildings to increase your culutre more quickly.. they stack and help each other. aggressive basically gives you 1 useful ability for three differing play styles

I think some should start with Aggressive (Adaptive) and others with class specific. Adaptive would lose the ability to chose Aggressive, of course.
if that system were in place you might as well do away with standard aggressive and replace it with Agg(Adaptive), Agg(Mounted),Agg(Melee), etc. where adaptive lets you change it or specialize it

though this almost sounds like a civic, but unless the military doctrines civics QES was talking about were to be introduced i dont think theres anything like this

I think Creative should give a % boost instead of a raw culture bonus. Right now, Creative is too weak, IMO.

the raw is better lol, since if you got a % your new cities would have 0 culture and wouldnt grow borderwise

if that system were in place you might as well do away with standard aggressive and replace it with Agg(Adaptive), Agg(Mounted),Agg(Melee), etc. where adaptive lets you change it or specialize it

though this almost sounds like a civic, but unless the military doctrines civics QES was talking about were to be introduced i dont think theres anything to accomodate this type of play.

Yeah, that's what I meant, the standard Aggressive would become Aggressive (Melee) and would halve production on training yard.

Ingenuity[/b] (woodelf)

Halves the cost of all upgrades

Does this apply to the Warrior to Drown upgrade?

Does this apply to the Warrior to Drown upgrade?

Nope .

Nope .
Well, regardless, something needs to be done about it, it's weak and the weak fall ;).

Well isn't it a Khazad only trait?

if that system were in place you might as well do away with standard aggressive and replace it with Agg(Adaptive), Agg(Mounted),Agg(Melee), etc. where adaptive lets you change it or specialize it

though this almost sounds like a civic, but unless the military doctrines civics QES was talking about were to be introduced i dont think theres anything like this

Eh. Qes' idea's don't get far, despite popular or unpopular support. This is perhaps for the better.
-Qes

I feel the same way sometimes.

Aggressive (Archery)

Can choose any of the traits below.

Aggressive (Archery)

Archery units receive Drill I and Combat I.
½ cost of Archery Range.

Aggressive (Melee)

Melee units receive City Raider I and Combat I.
½ cost of Training Yard.

Aggressive (Mounted)

Mounted units receive Flanking I and Combat I.
½ cost of Stables.

Aggressive (Naval)

Naval units receive Navigation I and Combat I.
½ cost of Shipyard.

Aggressive (Recon)

Recon units receive Mobility I and Sentry (or Combat I).
½ cost of Hunting Lodge.

Aggressive (Siege)

Siege units receive Barrage I and Combat I.
½ cost of Siege Workshop.

giving them 2 promos might be a bit much, personally just getting combat one with a unit type of my choice and cheap building of the the building required would be pretty good

Well isn't it a Khazad only trait?
it's also a trait of the mercuirians (minor civ)

Hello,

I have a new trait suggestion. At first, I think it's only for XML working convenient, but actually it create other possibilities. My trait suggestion is Elven trait, Dwarven trait and Orcish trait. These traits give free Elf/ Dwarf/ Orc promotion to civilization that has this trait. The promotion could apply to Melee, Archer, Recon, Mounted, Disciple and Adept. I have test this using barbarian trait by adding Orcish free promotion and it did well.

Using these trait we don't need to add Elf/ Dwarf/ Orc promotion to each unit anymore. Furthermore we could create a Dwarven Archer of Leaves, an Elven Drown or a Orcish Diseased Corpse. This trick is working with Luchuirp too, because Golem is not a Combat Melee unit. But there is problem with demon, is it okay if we have an Elven Eidolon (an elven demon) ?

We could add another effect in those traits. In most RPG, we usually found that if we choose Elven race for our character, we will have some additional effect, like reduce strength, magic resistant, more cultural etc. So we could add in the Eleven trait free promotion Weak, free promotion Magic resistant, Commerce change, etc.

Thanks for this great mods :goodjob:.

rief_s

There are slaying promotions to counter these units.

There are slaying promotions to counter these units.
And?

- Niilo

I suspect it's desirable to actually have the specific units for each specific team, primarily because of all the work the art team has put into the game thus far.

Personally I think traits should only be used for leader qualities, independent of their civilizations. Beginning techs and UUs (or UBs or UWs or UHs etc.) should be what gives the civ its differences.

I posted this suggestion in the Modpacks forum thread, but I figured it should go here too.

Why don't we have a popup which would notify an adaptive player the turn before a trait change that it is about to happen? That way the player would have time to look up the traits and make a better decision.

the raw is better lol, since if you got a % your new cities would have 0 culture and wouldnt grow borderwise

Or the trait could give both +2 culture and a percentual boost.

I posted this suggestion in the Modpacks forum thread, but I figured it should go here too.

Why don't we have a popup which would notify an adaptive player the turn before a trait change that it is about to happen? That way the player would have time to look up the traits and make a better decision.
Since the traits occur in pre-determined turns, I don't think it is necessary a pop-up. Maybe only say on the trait description how many turns between each change.

Or the trait could give both +2 culture and a percentual boost.

If it's going to give +x and +y%, the +x would need to be +1, because Creative is already one of the more powerful traits.

Perhaps +1 culture, +25% culture per city?

Since the traits occur in pre-determined turns, I don't think it is necessary a pop-up. Maybe only say on the trait description how many turns between each change.
Well I'm trying to think in the interest of the casual player. I just played FfH for the first time yesterday and on one of my first turns I was told to choose my trait with no warning whatsoever. The traits may occur in pre-determined turns, but the player isn't notified of that anywhere.

why isnt Summoner an option for adaptive?

barbarian, sprawling, agnostic, and scorched earth aren't options, but those alll have some negatives, but im a little confused about the lack of summoner.

Well I'm trying to think in the interest of the casual player. I just played FfH for the first time yesterday and on one of my first turns I was told to choose my trait with no warning whatsoever. The traits may occur in pre-determined turns, but the player isn't notified of that anywhere.
That's way I said put it in the trait description, them you can know after hovering your fag.

Anyone want to jump in on Yohan's setup? I'm not touching that straight line with a ten-foot Hoover.

why isnt Summoner an option for adaptive?

barbarian, sprawling, agnostic, and scorched earth aren't options, but those alll have some negatives, but im a little confused about the lack of summoner.

Even though 2 leaders have it outside of the Sheaim it is a sheaim specific trait and I dont share any of those.

But it really could go either way. It would be a bit of a balance issue because the downside of Summoner is that its not useful for so long. With adaptive you would have the ability to use other stuff up until you get some conjurers out there then switch to it, which may be to much for an already very powerful trait.

on that note, isnt defender kind of a Elohim trait that a few others borrow?

and also, to help out the hippus, itd be nice if Hippus Warriors could Uupgrade to Raiders so they could take advantage of the combat one given to their warriors from the aggressive trait, would be a simple flavourful fix that solves the aggressive issue without any big changes.

on that note, isnt defender kind of a Elohim trait that a few others borrow?

and also, to help out the hippus, itd be nice if Hippus Warriors could Uupgrade to Raiders so they could take advantage of the combat one given to their warriors from the aggressive trait, would be a simple flavourful fix that solves the aggressive issue without any big changes.

I agree with the second point... completely.

I would agree if I thought the Hippus needed boosting, but in my opinion they are already very powerful and don't need additional perks.

Well, it's better than having Subdue Animal Raiders...

Well, it's better than having Subdue Animal Raiders...

;) Yeah, Subdue Animals raiders are definitly awesome. The Hippus are great animal trappers.

How about make the Hippus cavalry gain an advantage over animals? (something around +50%, Magnadine +75%)

EDIT: This would probably require a lot of animals to justify. You could of course make a ritual that spawns a lot of animals around the globe (which can enter borders).

ive never seen the hippus to be strong until they get into the late game (though by that time theyre always a minor power and cant do much) and can get the windknights and chariots.

rangers are uber atm, and theyre easy to get.

It's true, Hippus are nothing against an army of rangers "/.

Only if I happen to be controlling them. ;)

Nah, the Hippus have been a thorn in my side many times in SP. Nothing more, but that's the way they are.

Well, yes, you're the great leader of the rangers.

We should have a new trait shared by Mercurians and Infernals--Fanatic (or such name) wherein no religion that would change the leaders alignment is allowed to spread to their cities.
Like their other traits, this would vanish if their hero's are killed, not putting too much more difficulting into a religious victory for others, but it would prevent absurd outcomes like these two leaders allying or switching alignments.
Most every civ should have a choice of religion and thus alignment, but not these two, imo.

Yeah, Orderly Hyborem and Demonic Basium should probably be prevented. Currently it's really tough to get them to convert, but it should be impossible.

I think Aggresive should be boosted/changed now that the Raider trait has been added to the game.

What works ok now:

Free Combat I for Melee units - This is better then many people think, atleast in FfH since it opens up for so many specialized promotions.What should be changed/added:

It should make Training Yard cost ½ amount of hammers.
Maybe something more unique to Fall from Heaven aswell. (Like a bonus on attacking, like opposite to defender, maybe change the name of defender to Defensive as well)

I think Aggresive should be boosted/changed now that the Raider trait has been added to the game.

What works ok now:

Free Combat I for Melee units - This is better then many people think, atleast in FfH since it opens up for so many specialized promotions.What should be changed/added:

It should make Training Yard cost ½ amount of hammers.
Maybe something more unique to Fall from Heaven aswell. (Like a bonus on attacking, like opposite to defender, maybe change the name of defender to Defensive as well)

Maybe automatic diplomacy negatives? To push for conflicts? Like -3 diplomacy with all nations. (Including other aggressives).

In return they should, of course, get a slight boost, not production, but perhaps bonus XP on attacking only. (+1xp per attack?)

-Qes

Maybe automatic diplomacy negatives? To push for conflicts? Like -3 diplomacy with all nations. (Including other aggressives).

In return they should, of course, get a slight boost, not production, but perhaps bonus XP on attacking only. (+1xp per attack?)

-Qes

Well, thats not really negative in MP.

Well, thats not really negative in MP.
Hm. Hadnt thought of that. It makes sense, though, for a trait. Not sure how to flex that to MP. Maybe require players to have a net positive diplomacy with another player to be able to trade/discuss ANYTHING?

That might be too severe, but still, something?
-Qes

well, if you know someone is aggressive in multiplayer you tend to not trust them, and aggressive players would tend towards aggressive trait leaders.. :p

Hm. Hadnt thought of that. It makes sense, though, for a trait. Not sure how to flex that to MP. Maybe require players to have a net positive diplomacy with another player to be able to trade/discuss ANYTHING?

That might be too severe, but still, something?
-Qes

Well, many times we have tech trading turned off anyways. I like the effect of negative diplomacy for a reward. BUT, there could be another negative if the opponent is human. What, I dont know. But I dont really like having it hurt your diplomatic abilities in MP. The built-in relations should never be the factor in MP anyways.

EDIT: Sureshot, was that an aim towards me? :p -- although I have only been agressive in one of our games, and that by retaliating against an aggressor (with the aggressive trait in every game though :p).

well, if you know someone is aggressive in multiplayer you tend to not trust them, and aggressive players would tend towards aggressive trait leaders.. :p

So your saying its psychologically automatic anyway? Good, then the -3 fits to supplement the AI nicely, and everything else sort of "works."
-Qes

EDIT: From the way she talks, i would Expect Sureshot to be the aggressor/dominatrix/imperatrix in most MP games. But then i stay away from those with at least a 10-foot pole.

EDIT: From the way she talks, i would Expect Sureshot to be the aggressor/dominatrix/imperatrix in most MP games. But then i stay away from those with at least a 10-foot pole.

My style is sortof passive-aggressive in MP (I do play a Philisophical-Aggressive civ afterall, with Pacifism+Military Civics often on). The games I have played against sureshot she has always been an opponent I have feared to face. And the first game she won by being aggressive.

i never attack first unless someone has attacked me without warning in a previous game, in which case i just assume they will do so again and make short work of them heh

grey, which game are you talking about? i can't seem to remember a game where i was the aggressor heh, except one where i think someone got wiped out early so i decided to wipe someone else out quick so we could start a new game :p

i never attack first unless someone has attacked me without warning in a previous game, in which case i just assume they will do so again and make short work of them heh

grey, which game are you talking about? i can't seem to remember a game where i was the aggressor heh, except one where i think someone got wiped out early so i decided to wipe someone else out quick so we could start a new game :p

My first MP game. You got attacked by orthus in the beginning and suffering some I guess, but you still got OO. The game I crashed alot and had to reinstall Civ4 and FfH and then come back to a nation brutalized by AI care. When I came back eerr had been wiped out (I thought it was by you) and you were making BCalchets cities into green goo with your drown.

My style is sortof passive-aggressive in MP (I do play a Philisophical-Aggressive civ afterall, with Pacifism+Military Civics often on). The games I have played against sureshot she has always been an opponent I have feared to face. And the first game she won by being aggressive.

We should continue to talk about her, as though shes not here, im sure she'll love that.

On real topic: What about a trait dedicated to diplomacy?
Like "Diplomatic"

All trades are consided to be worth 2x value to AIs.
+2 To all diplomatic relations.
Allows building of Diplomat & Embassy (most important aspect of MP play).

Diplomat - Invisable unit that is available with Trade
May enter foreign borders. May Bribe units spend money to dominate a unit - cost depends on total value of unit.
May Build embasy

Embasy: (Built in Foreign Cities), Units of Building nation may heal in city at the "Friendly territory" rate. Halves time for revolt after city is conquered if nation has embasy in city. +2 Trade routes with founding civ.

Or something like that.
-Qes

oh that one, heh, well eerr was one of the people i no longer trusted, since a few games earlier he tried to attack me with his first warrior on the 6th turn! we stayed at war for over 100 years and we both we're minor powers because of it (neither of us could maintain improvements heh)

so ya, that wasnt being aggressive so much as removing him before he could attack me :D
and the elves... well, its just plain foolish not to kill elves, they make such excellent slaves

We should continue to talk about her, as though shes not here, im sure she'll love that.

On real topic: What about a trait dedicated to diplomacy?
Like "Diplomatic"

All trades are consided to be worth 2x value to AIs.
+2 To all diplomatic relations.
Allows building of Diplomat & Embassy (most important aspect of MP play).

Diplomat - Invisable unit that is available with Trade
May enter foreign borders. May Bribe units spend money to dominate a unit - cost depends on total value of unit.
May Build embasy

Embasy: (Built in Foreign Cities), Units of Building nation may heal in city at the "Friendly territory" rate. Halves time for revolt after city is conquered if nation has embasy in city. +2 Trade routes with founding civ.

Or something like that.
-Qes

She is still here :p

But on-topic; Cool idea but +2 Trade routes are a bit too much I think for the Embasy.

She is still here :p

But on-topic; Cool idea but +2 Trade routes are a bit too much I think for the Embasy.

I supose your right, considering you could put them in EACH city, maybe +1 trade route? That way one of your cities would benefit from an embasy in their city. Their city ALSO would benefit. Win-Win.

A diplomatic trade-monger could be a force to be reconed with. Perhaps if the civs go to war, all embasies of the opposing sides are automatically destroyed?
-Qes

I remember that, Sureshot. You got the Overlords, and eerr founded Leaves even though he was Cassiel. Lord Vermillion set up a Runes empire on another continent, and I got the highest score with an immaculately efficent Order empire led by Varn Gosam. Too bad we had to end that one.

heh that was possibly going to be one of the most interesting MP games I have played. Chand and I were very close (score wise, I think you had me by like 100 pts.) and a war between us was inevitable. I had been funding sureshot for at least 50 yrs, and was assembling my landing forces for your shores.....man I wish we coulda finished that one. (heh, I think you were still guarding your cities with warriors at that point? :P)

Warriors and a very bored Valin Phanuel. I think the winner would have been whoever managed to convince the other two players, (Sureshot and eerr) to side with him. And if Sureshot had gone one way and eerr the other... yes, it could have been very interesting.

well i guarrantee i would not have joined eerr on any side, he had not succeeded in taking a single city of mine (i dont think he even kept a single xp from me, as the only time i lost a unit were times when i used up one first to soften an enemy and then finished it off with others) and i had taken one of his cities and was preparing to take the rest.

So... the ideal strategy would have been to get eerr to attack me? :lol:

naw, then you'd have taken his land, and it was to be mine, those godless heathens needed the firm guidance of the elohim

possible additions to traits:

Creative:
no upkeep cost on Cultural Values civics

Expansive:
mobility for settlers
half cost settlers

Defender:
half cost walls/castles

Financial:
half cost gambling houses

Industrious:
half cost workers

Ingenuity:
half cost siege workshops

Organized:
free Drill 1 promotion

Raiders:
half cost stables

Spiritual:
disciple spell casters gain xp faster

Summoner:
half cost Ring of warding

Hidden:
half cost hunting lodges

Good Ideas. Hidden will of course require more than that one bonus by the time it is implemented. I'm still not sure about the Creative or Financial additions either.

hidden -- would it be possible to have only the outline of the empire show up on the map and to not have the cities appear even if they have the religion you founded? Plus some sort of xp bonus or upgrade to recon units (mobility 1?).

would make hidden little advantage in single player, but a tough AI opponent and tough on MP (I have never played MP civ iv)

Wow, first post in over a year.


Of course, Kael decided to cut the Hidden trait completely in the BtS versions, and won't do any more work on the Vanilla versions.



There has been some talk about traits in other threads lately, so I'll rehash some of my ideas:

The Defensive trait's Homeland promotion should give its bonus based on the percent of the owner's culture on the tile, not a flat bonus whenever in owned territory. The current way makes these leaders better at holding on to recent conquests, when they should really be better at defending and recapturing their own lands.


I'm liking my Scavenger Trait for the Doviello leaders. This Trait gives the Scavenger promotion to meleee units. The promotion uses a xienwolf's modcomp to give yields/commerces when the unit wins a battle, and once I merge in other mods will also let the units steal weapons promotions from their victims.


I'm also liking my decision to cut the Summoner Trait and make the Dimensional sphere promotions boost the duration of a unit's summons. I now have Os-Gabella being Spiritual/Arcane and Tebyrn as Aggressive/Arcane. (I also made aggressive give combat 1 to all the unitcombats and gave summons unit combats, so this is pretty useful)


I'm thinking that Arcane could use a research boost of some sort. Right now I'm about to test letting units with the arcane promotion gain research points from combat (the same way as Scavenger works)


I'm thinking philosophical needs some boost now, since it no longer gives free education civics since Education civics don't exist. Hmm..how would letting Philosophical leaders build Academies the same way that Organized leaders can build Command Post work?

all very interesting == but I think the academy is too powerful. The combo of culture and science makes it a very significant add. I sometimes drop them in cities I need but am losing a culture war in (i.e. to retain a mithril tile).

possibility for a mod -- allow magic research -- create new spells but they can backfire -- would not recommend putting it into the main FFH build --


aggressive summons is very intersting -- I've never played perpentech but there's a miniscule chance that he'd acquire that ability too.

I think the aggressive and defender trait might give alittle to much of a combat advantage for free, maybe if it was a 10%/5% instead of 20%/15%

Trait: Lucky
10% more random events, +50% good events or lucky leader only events
First strike for melee/archery/recon/horse
+5 gold or +1 happy from gambling houses
2% higher chance of finding resources in mines

Arcane: give +3 research for mages guilds and discount on alchemy labs
Summoner: discount on alchemy labs

i think the lucky trait would be perfect for falamar

Both Elohim leaders ought to have Spiritual. Come on, they're monks.

thread necromancy much?

ive alwayse hated defender, tis boring...

Well, Ethne isn't a monk.

That Lucky trait, I also thought instantly would be great for Falamar. Should replace his expansive trait. Charismatic/Lucky just sounds like a flamboyant pirate.

Typo in OP under ARCANE: Lacking "l" in Mage Guild