Now that we know the best trait, lets find out the worst one...

Eventhough I like using Creative, I would have to say I think its the worst trait. +2 culture per city is nice when you need to expand to the fat cross quickly, but I find that any civ can become partially creative when they build Stonehenge (which I find easy to finish). Half price production on theartre's is OK, but I do enjoy half price on collesuems. I will put off building collesuems, unless I am a creative civ.

creative can be really powerfull.

My vote goes to expansive. On the higher difficulty levels, the happiness cap is much more important, and unless you're blessed with an abundance of pre-Calender resources or cursed with a lot of unhealthy terrain, you'll hit it long before you hit your health limit. Cheap granaries are nice, but I'd rather have cheap courthouses or forges. Generally speaking, Expansive is not a very good trait.

wow, what noob voted for spiritual/philo ? :lol:

For me, it's a close call between expansive and creative. I voted for expansive, because at least creative is useful for a short period of time, while expansive is often useless for the whole game. Health is rarely a problem for me, happiness is.

Philosophical would be the third most useless, but it has its uses. Spiritual comes in too late to make a real difference, but it's the best trait in the end game, which compensates a little. Industrious won't help you build wonders at Deity, but it will still give you cheaper national wonders and forges.

wow, what noob voted for spiritual/philo ? :lol:
AT least nobody's said Financial. (yet :rolleyes:)

I did! (and now 10 chars)

I find expansive just a little too benign. It really doesn't stand out much. I can see Creative being panned for the same reason...

so people really do think expansive isn't that great. i'd wondered...

i voted creative. i've been convinced by others on these forums that creative kinda sux and now i have to agree. i've been 1-pop pop-rushing obelisks instead. since i only really build 2 cities before i go war-mongering 2 obelisks isn't a big deal. creative is viable if you're gonna go for cultural victory, but there are some other good cultural traits too (phil, spir, fin).

I voted Expansive. Even with the recent boost it is still too weak. Cheap Granaries / Harbours are very nice since you probably want to build them everywhere you can, but that does not make up for the poorness in its main bonus: the +3 health bonus.

Having unhealthiness is usually not a huge problem and if you do run into it, it simply means that a citizen eats 3 food instead of 2 food, which is not much of a problem.

As has been said above, managing happiness is a much bigger problem than managing healthiness.

I find expansive fairly useful, especially on the higher levels where you need it more-that +3 health can be a real godsend as many times health is whats causing my cities not to grow.

Inspired by this thread, I'm going to try a Genghis (Agg/Exp) Emperor, relying on numerous cities and massive Granary/Barracks/Axeman/Keshik whipping. Health won't do alot, obviously.

I voted expansive, although I'm not a fan of creative or organised either.

Expansive and organised just seem so boring. I know organised is powerful and it saves you a lot of money throughout history, but you don't really notice the difference, like you do with other traits.

Expansive should just be the food equvilent for creative, with extra food on tiles that produce 2 or more.

I actually like Exp/Cre, I'm currently in a game with Cyrus right now anyway. Creative helps in an early land grab situtation, while expansivea allows you to trade away health resorces for happiness. Not to mention that Cyrus has a very nice UU for early game on Marathon speed.

Hm I think it depends what kind of game you play.

If you know how to use the various traits all are very useful but creative might be neglectable there are enough other ways to handle cultural growth.

Expander is very strong esp. in multiplay. You are always able to improve happiness with help of monarchy and many troops or by increasing the spendings on culture. Its harder to do that with health at a certain point health won't improve further.

I think expander is well underrated here.

Its between organized and spiritual for me cause the civics i use arnt that expensive and you rarely change civics or religon.
Im fairly surprized at all the anti creative people out there. Even if your going for a Military victory creative comes in handy cause now that city you just captured can get its border(and resources) back quicker than if you dident have it.

If spiritual i switch religion/civics 50 times in a game
its one of the most powerfull traits actually.

If spiritual i switch religion/civics 50 times in a game
its one of the most powerfull traits actually.


I agree, you don't realize how great 5 turn civic switches can be until you use them frequently.

If spiritual i switch religion/civics 50 times in a game
its one of the most powerfull traits actually.

I agree. Spiritual is extremely powerful on Emperor. I have not started playing Immortal or Diety yet and imagine they are even more powerful on those levels. Just imagine playing a non-spiritual civ and you have a large empire. Just 2 or 3 civic switches can cost you 3+ turns of anarchy per switch which equates to several turns of lost research, building etc... although you can still war during anarchy.

Organized. It can be useful, but not as useful as the other traits.

Each trait has their own ups and down. Anyways:

Best = Financial
Worst = Spiritual/Expansive if played on smaller/easier maps/difficulties.

Are Granaries, Harbors not that useful at higher levels? Is that why Expansive is up there as one of the worst traits? After settler production, I think I find it best to start your city off with growth, ie - Granaries, Harbors? Personally, I believe that Granaries may be built in more abundance than any other building, for City Growth. Because of Hereditary Rule! I find Spirtual and Creative to be the least useful traits!! I voted for Spirtual as the worst trait because of that and Culture is more of an advantage than having "No Anarchy"

spiritual is not about no anarchy, and no expansive is not bad because of fast granaries but because +3 health is peanuts in most cases

Being asked to vote for worst trait I'd say expansive not because its useless but because its less useful than the alternatives.

I did some extensive Trait Moding and I would be interested in seeing what you guys think of them. The Mod can be found in my Sig and I will place a summary of the major changes here...


New Traits Mod v2.0 by Impaler
!!! REQUIRES CCP v1.0 !!!!

Adds 10 new traits and modifies existing Traits, adds 9 new Buildings and modifies existing buildings

The goal of this Mod is to make each Trait both stronger and more focused on a
particular aspect of the game. These traits will also hugly incresse the number of
unique combinations (306 vs 56), Mods that create new leaders and Civs need not
replicate existing combinations and can create leaders that more accuratly match
history. A new Promotion inspired by Zuuls clever implementation of an Attack Promotionhas has
been added. Extensive balance testing will likly be needed on the first (and second) version

NEW TRAITS

AMBITIOUS: +50% Wonder Production
MERCHANTIAL: +1 Commerce on plots with 2, double production speed AirPort and new building RailYard
SCIENTIFIC: +20% Science, double production speed Library, Observatory, Lab
PROLIFIC: +1 Food on plots with 4, double production Granary, Supermarket
DEFENSIVE: Free Defender I promotion most Units, Double production wall, castle, bunker, bombshelter
CHARISMATIC: +2 Happiness per City, doulbe production Colosseum, Monument, Fun Land
SEAFARING: Free Navigation I, Combat I, Sentry I promotions all Navel Units, doulbe production Harbor, Lighthouse, DryDock
+50% production speed all Navel Units (Caravel improved)
ENLIGHTENED: +3 Health per City, double production speed Aquaduct, Park, Hospital, Recycling Center
PROGRESSIVE: +1 FreeSpecialist in all Cities
DIPLOMATIC: +4 to Diplomatic Relations, Double Votes in U.N.

OLD TRAITS

PHILISOPHICAL: only indirect change to University see below
AGGRESIVE: Expanded promotion to all Unit types except Archer and Naval, double production speed on Barraks, new building AirForce Base, Stable
SPIRITUAL: Droped no Anarchy, double production speed Temple, Cathedral, Monastary, +50% prdocution speed on Missionaries
EXPANSIVE: +50% production speed Workers (includes Indian fastworker), Settlers and Recon units
CREATIVE: Droped +2 Culture per City, +20% Culture, double production Theater, Broadcast Tower, new Sympony Hall
ORGANIZED: No Anarchy (Anarchy length increesed), -50% Civic upkeep, double production Jail, Courthouse
FINANCIAL: +20% Gold, double production speed Market, Bank, Grocer
INDUSTRIOUS: +1 Production on plots with 3, double production speed, Forge, Factory, new building SteelMill

NEW BUILDINGS

BREWERY: borrowed from Mylon Mod, +1 Happyness, +1 Health, Cost 80, No Prerequisite
PARK: borrow form Mylon Mod, +2 Happyness, +2 Health, Cost 150, Prerequisite Ecology
FUN LAND: borrowed from Mylon Mod, +3 Happyness, +8 Culture, 1 Free Merchant, 1 Free Artist, Cost 225, Prerequisite Mass Media
MONUMENT: borrow from Mylon Mod, +1 Happyness, +4 Culture, Cost ??, Prerequisite Nationalism
SYMPHONY HALL: original Building, +2 Happyness, +25% Culture, Cost 120, Prerequisite Music
RAILYARD: original Building, +1 Trade Routes, +50% Trade Yield, +2 Merchants, -2 Health, Cost 175, Prerequisite Railroad
AIRFORCE BASE: original Building, 3 Airlifts, +4 Exp Air Units, +50% Production Speed Air Units, -2 Health, Cost 350, Prerequisite Flight
STABLE: original Building, +3 Exp Mounted Units, Cost 80, Prerequisite HorseBackRiding
STEELMILL: borrowed from Lost Wonders, +25% production, +25% Production with Power, -2 Health, Cost 250, Prerequisite Steel

OLD BUILDINGS

RECYCLING CENTER: Added -25% Production, Cost 300
COLESEUM: Droped Commerce Happyness, +3 Happyness, +4 Culture, Cost 150
THEATER: Droped Commerce Happyness, +1 Happyness, +3 Culture, +1 Happyness from Dye
BROADCAST TOWER: Droped Commerce Happyness, +50% Culture, +1 Happyness Musicals, Singles, Movies
LABRATORY: Droped -1 Health
UNIVERSITY: Droped Science Bonus, +25% Great People, +3 Culture, +1 Each Specialist slot
SUPERMARKET: borrowed from Lost Wonders, +25% Food, Cost 200
GROCER: Droped 1 Merchant, Cost 125
Other Buildings: Production Traits changed for many other buildings to link them to new Traits

NEW PROMOTION

Defender I: +15% Defence, No Prerequisite, Uses City GarrisionI Icon
Defender II: +15% Defence, Prerewuisite Defender I, Uses City GarrisionI Icon
Defender III: +20% Defence, Prerequsite Defender II, Uses City GarrisionI Icon

LEADER:

The games Original Leaders have had the new Traits randomly inserted just to show them off, Leader Traits
can easily be changed back to the original ones by removing the LeaderInfo file from the Mod. If your creating
new Leaders and want to use these New Traits just combine your LeaderInfo file with references to the
new traits along with any art files you have added. I will be looking for advice on reassigning traits for
all the original leaders based on historical data.

MISILANIOUS:

Caravel now carries any land unit

I agree with those who say that creative and expansive are the worst. I would put it this way, myself: creative is the worst trait for builder games, and expansive is the worst trait for aggressive games.

Contrary to popular belief, the creative trait stinks when going for cultural victories. Culture games are about buildings and great artists. A single temple is better than the cultural trait.

Creative is quite strong in my opinion. I am surprised to see it have so many votes. There are a lot of benefits to being creative. It certainly makes your early game easier not having to worry about having to rely on religion/obelisks/Stonehenge to generate your culture. The most powerful benefit of creative though is the flexibility it gives you in your city placement and allowing you to obtain the resources that your civ needs to thrive. With creative, you don't have to worry about placing a city in a dodgy spot just to obtain that copper or that ivory. These optimally placed cities with copious luxory/health resources can reap huge benefits over the course of the game, and the culture bonus can actually prove very key in pursuing the cultural victory in the late game, especially with all the modifiers that cathedrals and such buildings provide. All of these factors make creative one of the top four or five traits.

The worst trait in my opinion is industrious. Before Civ IV was released, when we first heard of the trait that gives a 50% wonder production bonus, we thought it was overpowered beyond belief. Of course, like the old saying goes, generals always try to refight the last war. In Civ III, this trait would have been broken, but in Civ IV it is actually fairly weak. Why? Because wonders themselves have been greatly weakened. The benefits they offer are modest, and typically not game-breaking. There are a couple that might offer advantages strong enough to turn the tide of a game (Pyramids, CS slingshot Oracle, Kremlin) and others that are very helpful (Great Library, Three Gorges Dam, etc), but the truth is that wonders just aren't as powerful as they were in past games. I have seen some players who consider this to be one of the most powerful traits. It is easy to be deceived since building wonders is just so gosh darn fun, but fun does not always equal to sheer power.

1pop pop rush obelisks and you will find creative to be weak (i've become convinced of this). you can do this when city grows to size 2. if you have 1 surplus food resource in your starting ring of 9 squares you can grow to size 2quickly and then again quickly after you pop rush the obelisk. if that's not fast enough to grab copper (if you need it really quickly) you might as well just build on top of it.

industrious weak? on higher skill levels it is harder to get wonders, for sure. but you have to examine industrious a little bit. for me industrious is a great cultural victory trait since wonders produce very good culture.

so take gandhi. spiritual + industrious + starts with mysticism (many religions, can start stonehenge asap) and mining (bronze after found hind and jud).

with gandhi, even on monarch-emperor, i regularly get stonehenge (even though i don't care whether i get it or not) and oracle and then consider pyramids too if i get stone and/or marble. with the fast worker you can chop more efficiently as well. with gandhi i don't consider industrious weak at all.

but, sure, if you're going aggressive industrious isn't great but that's cuz you wanna be warmongering not building.

as for wonders not being game-breaking, sure, any one individually isn't game-breaking, but the point of industrious is to get LOTS of them. and if you do get LOTS of them, THAT is game-breaking.

The biggest advantage of industrious is the half price forge, an otherwise expensive early game improvement. With forges up quickly you can get those +2 culture monasteries or +1 obelisks up and running for your culture. The benefit of industrious helps you to quickly gain the benefit of creative.

Industrious also gives you a good shot at the Oracle, which you can then use to get Metal Casting for forges. Like forges, Metal Casting is otherwise a pretty expensive undertaking for the early game.

if you're industrious, and not financial, then i would say courthouses are important, unless you're going cultural and not planning on building an empire through warmongering (another reason why industrious goes well with cultural). if you're industrious and financial (qin i believe?) then going forges makes sense. going forges also works for bismark due to his health bonus, but i worry about his economy without fin/org/courthouses.

Phi or Exp come close. I voted Phi because GPP strategies are to avoid, it only gives about 40% more Leaders IIRC at the end of the game.
I can't put Creative in the list because I now think it's very usefull is MP games. Expension is so wild and games are often shorter.
I played a GREAT Multi players Terra game last night (5 players no quitters !!!) with 5 civs all very close in score, waging a lot of wars in the old continent. I had Cathy, and I can assure you beeing creative when it comes to rush colonization of the new continent is completly overpowered.
Funny : I only had one city in the main continent (I was stuck on a peninsula with a weak fat cross) while others had 5 or 6 cities. I could found 2 commerce cities on a small Island next to the continent and 5 cities in the new world (occupying 50% of it's land mass very quickly), I was by far last in score until the colonization began.

The biggest advantage of industrious is the half price forge, an otherwise expensive early game improvement. With forges up quickly you can get those +2 culture monasteries or +1 obelisks up and running for your culture. The benefit of industrious helps you to quickly gain the benefit of creative.

Industrious also gives you a good shot at the Oracle, which you can then use to get Metal Casting for forges. Like forges, Metal Casting is otherwise a pretty expensive undertaking for the early game.

That's a good point. Cheap forges are the best part of the industrious trait. I don't think it's a bad trait. It's certainly a fun trait. But I would consider it to be weaker than the other traits.

Creative is not bad at all. Early in the game instead of rushing Obelisks (for only 1 culture) I'd be rushing workers and settlers.

Later in the game, after Calendar, it is real good for absorbing recently captured cities. Without Creative, you'd rush a Theatre for border-expansion as the first thing. With Creative, you can rush a garrison unit or a Courthouse, then build a Theatre without rushing, since it's cheap.

The worst trait to my game styyle and from my personal view is Financial. It's nearly always the least useful.

The worst trait to my game styyle and from my personal view is Financial. It's nearly always the least useful.
What?!?!?!?!?!?

Voted for industrious, it's just too weak at immortal/deity level because the computer builds the ancient wonders too quickly.

I voted for Organized. Lighthouses are not high on my "to build" list when I found a coastal city, as the land squares are generally more productive. I only build Lighthouses when all the useful land tiles are already being worked, and then the Lighthouse only takes a few turns to construct anyway. Double Courthouse production is alright, I suppose, but I don't build them unless maintenance gets very high (double digits). Also, I have newly conquered cities crank out cultural buildings before Courthouses.

I don't think the Creative trait is all that bad, but that might be because I abhor whipping. I don't like stiffling my city growth.

Phi or Exp come close. I voted Phi because GPP strategies are to avoid, it only gives about 40% more Leaders IIRC at the end of the game.

About 40% more GPP, but only about 10 to 15% actual GP.

What?!?!?!?!?!?
What do you mean <What?!?!?>?!?!?!?!?

The primary argument against Creative seems to be "well, you can get your culture from other sources." This is a load of crap and you can make similar statements about most of the other traits. Nothing in the game is nearly as effective at expanding your borders as the Creative trait. Whenever you have a tight border with someone, YOU have the advantage on pushing that cultural border back and forth for resources. Any time you build a new city, it expands much faster than having to wait for an obelisk, theater or library, and in the case of obelisks at least you're wasting valuable resources rushing it that you could be using on something else. Any game where you share a peaceful border with a civ for a prolonged period of time, Creative keeps their cultural borders from pushing yours back and taking all your resources. Any game where you're warmongering a lot, there's no more effective way to expand the borders of your new cities as quickly, hindering enemy troop movement. Creative certainly isn't the best trait, but it's not the worst either.

FWIW, I chose Organized. Given a choice between a trait that might get me 30g a turn at a point in the game where I'm generating 3000g a turn vs a trait that gives 2 culture in all my cities? Not even close.

Has anyone considered that there are no less/more useful traits, only trait combinations? And that even then, that can only be measured by your personal play style?

i don't believe in trait combinations.

i can't believe so many people are picking organized <_<

cheaper courthouses people! arguably, one of the most important buildings in the game!!! plus, if you're not financial, it's a great source of income, especially as the game goes on!

I think they want something more flashy than that...

i can't believe so many people are picking organized <_<

cheaper courthouses people! arguably, one of the most important buildings in the game!!! plus, if you're not financial, it's a great source of income, especially as the game goes on!

Most people also play on noble/prince. Organized is just about the only trait that actually gets stronger as you move up in difficulty. On emperor and higher, I think it's in the top 3 most useful traits. On noble, I can settle 15-20 cities in the BC's and barely even notice the maintenence costs. It's not exactly the same on emperor. Also, since they changed the early game civic cost model (removing the automatic -2 GPT from emperor+), Organized has become noticably weaker in the early game than it was previously.

Most people also play on noble/prince. Organized is just about the only trait that actually gets stronger as you move up in difficulty. On emperor and higher, I think it's in the top 3 most useful traits. On noble, I can settle 15-20 cities in the BC's and barely even notice the maintenence costs. It's not exactly the same on emperor. Also, since they changed the early game civic cost model (removing the automatic -2 GPT from emperor+), Organized has become noticably weaker in the early game than it was previously.

Organized has nothing to do with city maintenance costs. If it did, it would be useful.

Organized has nothing to do with city maintenance costs. If it did, it would be useful.

Two words. Cheaper Courthouses.

Also, Civic costs are directly related to the numbers of cities and people in your empire. It's tantamount to city maintenance and typically accounts for around 1/2 of an empire's total non-military expenditures (with courthouses and forbidden palace in place).

Most people also play on noble/prince. Organized is just about the only trait that actually gets stronger as you move up in difficulty. On emperor and higher, I think it's in the top 3 most useful traits. On noble, I can settle 15-20 cities in the BC's and barely even notice the maintenence costs. It's not exactly the same on emperor. Also, since they changed the early game civic cost model (removing the automatic -2 GPT from emperor+), Organized has become noticably weaker in the early game than it was previously.


Yeah, I've come to appreciate the organized trait as I've moved up in difficulty, especially with leaders like the Caesar, Washington, and Tokugawa. When your empire gets to the point where it can't fit on your screen and you have like more than 10 cities (I've had some 25+ city games before), that half civics thing helps along with the courthouses.

Two words. Cheaper Courthouses.

So? Granary is the best of all the buildings that get discounted, but it isn't a reason to go Expansive.

Also, Civic costs are directly related to the numbers of cities and people in your empire. It's tantamount to city maintenance and typically accounts for around 1/2 of an empire's total non-military expenditures (with courthouses and forbidden palace in place).

And the gold it saves you is what, maybe 30g a turn in a huge empire late game? It pales in comparison to the benefits of Financial to a point that it's rendered irrelevant and you're better off getting a trait with a more unique effect.

Most people also play on noble/prince. Organized is just about the only trait that actually gets stronger as you move up in difficulty. On emperor and higher, I think it's in the top 3 most useful traits. On noble, I can settle 15-20 cities in the BC's and barely even notice the maintenence costs. It's not exactly the same on emperor. Also, since they changed the early game civic cost model (removing the automatic -2 GPT from emperor+), Organized has become noticably weaker in the early game than it was previously.

sure, on lower difficulties i guess i can see that...

And the gold it saves you is what, maybe 30g a turn in a huge empire late game? It pales in comparison to the benefits of Financial to a point that it's rendered irrelevant and you're better off getting a trait with a more unique effect.

do you *play* on higher difficulties?

cheaper courthouses + forbidden palace + -50% civic cost is the *only* thing that allows you to expand quickly through conquest. financial certainly won't let you as it takes time for cottages to mature. combine this with a specialist economy, which incidentally is *also* activated via CoL and i fail to see how organized isn't easily one of the premiere traits for the warmonger, which is huge considering how important aggression can be in the higher levels.

do you *play* on higher difficulties?

Currently playing Immortal mostly.

cheaper courthouses + forbidden palace + -50% civic cost is the *only* thing that allows you to expand quickly through conquest. financial certainly won't let you as it takes time for cottages to mature. combine this with a specialist economy, which incidentally is *also* activated via CoL and i fail to see how organized isn't easily one of the premiere traits for the warmonger, which is huge considering how important aggression can be in the higher levels.

Once I see it saving me more than a pittance of gold, I'll become more interested. Even courthouses, although good, are vastly overrated by most.

Once I see it saving me more than a pittance of gold, I'll become more interested. Even courthouses, although good, are vastly overrated by most.

i notice it making a significant impact. i wouldn't call it a pittance at all. courthouses make or break whether i can keep cities while keeping my research from bottoming out. of course you can let your research bottom out and then play catch up, but with organized, you don't have to...

Organized is good at high levels - but it's by far the most boring of all the traits since all it does is save you some upkeep.

Organized is good at high levels - but it's by far the most boring of all the traits since all it does is save you some upkeep.

Hmm, by this logic, Geico is one of the most boring car insurance agencies.

Who would have guessed.

expansive seems so useless to me. if you have problems with your health in a city, it's fairly easy to fix, with all of the food resources and health improvements. Besides, its not like it actually hurts your city to be unhealthy, it just slows down your growth. that's it. that's all it does, is slow down your growth. Unlike unhappiness, when you are unhealthy in a city you can still use all of your population in the city to work tiles.

Many times I avoid playing with civs that are expansive. I guess being expansive is not much of a boost, and therefore it is a boring trait to have. No one will play as an expansive civ just because they are so in love with the bonus you get from being expansive. I know there are some small benefits, but overall it doesn't compare to the other available traits.

Organized may seem boring to some people, but its one of my favorites. Sometimes i think its overpowered. The gold you save from civics costs is enough to let you afford the upkeep of an extra city or two. Then when your expansion really needs it, you get courthouses dirt cheap. To me, Organized should be re named expansive and Expansive should be called healthy.

So? Granary is the best of all the buildings that get discounted, but it isn't a reason to go Expansive.



And the gold it saves you is what, maybe 30g a turn in a huge empire late game? It pales in comparison to the benefits of Financial to a point that it's rendered irrelevant and you're better off getting a trait with a more unique effect.


That's really the point isn't it? The late game favors the financial civ with cottages that has been lucky enough or skilled enough to avoid an early rush from a pillaging ai, while being organized favors the early game when expansion is critical. Yeah, 30 g per turn is nothing in the late game of a huge empire, but through the first half of the game or so, 30 gpt is really nice. half price courthouses are a must if your going to research at a high level and maintain a large empire through the first part of the game. That's why I think that Washington as a leader can be so powerful, he has both financial and organized. Good economy early and late in the game. You could compare being organized with founding a religion and spreading it, it helps a lot early on, but later is not as noticeable.

With the new Charismatic trait, expansive get a good match. let's see who is the Charming Healthy building guy/gal. :)

Hmm, by this logic, Geico is one of the most boring car insurance agencies.

Who would have guessed.

Car insurance has what exactly to do with strategy games... ?

Organized. Usually civic upkeep is around what, 100 gold at the very maximum? Paying only half of that is not going to really change the game.

Car insurance has what exactly to do with strategy games... ?

Geico:Car Insurance::Organized:Civ Traits

never heard of them

You guys need to wake up whats wrong with expansive in my experience the extra three health towards the ind era when your citys are rated at 15/16 but still have land to yeild on the limit of health :p .!!! still got three health is priceless , going to out produce you all the way??? not to mention the scouts at the start of the game especially on large maps exploting villages and picking strategic positions to settle and of course on hills to stop pescy barbarians poping up too close to your yet undefended borders. expansive/industrial too best traits no dought...........

I'm surprised Creative came second worst. I like it. I think it's pretty powerful for domination wins, fast expansion and grabbing land.

I voted for Organized, because I don't notice it. I think I should've voted expansive though. It's pretty lame.

You guys need to wake up whats wrong with expansive in my experience the extra three health towards the ind era when your citys are rated at 15/16 but still have land to yeild on the limit of health .!!! still got three health is priceless , going to out produce you all the way???

Fact is the vast majority of civ games are decided by the industrial age. The earlier a bonus kicks in the better, and the expansive health bonus rarely does anything until too late in the game to affect the outcome.

not to mention the scouts at the start of the game especially on large maps exploting villages and picking strategic positions to settle and of course on hills to stop pescy barbarians poping up too close to your yet undefended borders. expansive/industrial too best traits no dought...........

However scouts have the major disadvantage that they can't steal workers. I don't regard starting with them as beneficial (and anyway that's more to do with techs than traits and they don't always match up).

Organized. Usually civic upkeep is around what, 100 gold at the very maximum? Paying only half of that is not going to really change the game.
I am playing marathon/huge/fractal/emperor game as Napoleon, civic upkeep for me in industrial era is 400 gpt.. with organized I could save 200 gpt and combining that with my shrines I could keep my research at 100%.. but I am not organized and I cant keep my research at 100%..that means it takes extra few turns to get tanks..but when at war with Monty, Genghis and Alexander, every turn counts.. In most cases Financial can be pretty dam good, but still, there are situations for every trait where they prove to be better then the rest of the traits..

If games are decided by the Industrial era, and early game advantages are most important, then Creative certainly isn't the worst.

The bottom line with Creative is that all your borders are always expanding for the entire game, no matter what. That can hardly be considered the worst. Isn't the early game land grab one of the most important factors deciding victory?

Yeah, you can build obelisks to get a similar effect. But it's just plain silly to equate obelisks with a free +2 culture. Obelisks require you to have Mysticism, and to wait many turns (usually about 10, unless you are lucky with food) before you can rush them (which requires BW, meaning the whole process requires 2 techs.) And then, once you finally have it up, you only get +1 which means 10 more turns before an expansion.

All those hammers and population that you are using to get your obelisks up can be used for something else if you're Creative. The trait allows you to immediately start gobbling up land, and land is power. It gives you a strong foothold in the early game, and that is its strength, not to mention also allowing you to gobble up land through conquest much more quickly.

Any time you start with a cultural building you are just delaying something more useful. If you're Creative you can skip those buildings and get right to the good stuff.

The trait allows you to immediately start gobbling up land, and land is power. It gives you a strong foothold in the early game, and that is its strength, not to mention also allowing you to gobble up land through conquest much more quickly.


Land is only power when you have the population to make use of that land. Land without populaton is useless.

Any time you start with a cultural building you are just delaying something more useful. If you're Creative you can skip those buildings and get right to the good stuff.

There are a number of times when this argument isn't true. Libraries are useful culture buildings. If you take care to spread a religion to new cities, being Creative doesn't make much difference. If you've built stonehenge, Creative doesn't make much difference. If you're running Caste system, Creative doesn't make much difference.

Creative is good because it allows you to place your first 3-5 cities without having to distinguish between adjacent tiles and those in the second ring. You have slightly more freedom in your placement. The bottom line is, when I'm creative, I can place cities a bit easier; getting more resources in a city's fat cross, without sacrificing short-term growth. Creative allows for optimal city placement. Often, though, sub-optimal isn't much worse, especially when you can just build another city to work those tiles you missed.

Once every couple of games, the ability to expand a city's borders very quickly has some sort of strategic or military value. That's a fairly rare occurence, and more luck-driven than anything else.

not to mention the scouts at the start of the game especially on large maps exploting villages and picking strategic positions to settle
that's civ III, in civ IV expansive has nothing to do with scouts, hunting as a starting tech determines if you start with a scout.

I'd like to use my stupid question of the week: why do people say that spirituality is particularly useful at the end of a game?

because it is. Being able to switch between u. suffrage, police state, rpresentation, nationhood, theocracy when you want instantlly is very powerfull tool at the end of the game. Its useless before CS however.

A trait is never used alone. It must be considered in conjunction with the other trait with which it is paired. For example in this poll expansive has come out as the most despised yet in conjunction with industrious as with Bismarck you have a very synergistic combination. Cheap granaries and forges in every city combined with a wonder building bonus and a +3 health bonus mitigating productive buildings demerits (forges, factories, airports) yeilds cheap buildings that enhance everything...... Libraries for science .. temples/temples for happiness etc.

Another synergistic combination is philosophical + spiritual as in saladin. Given a gold (research) gold rich start the majority of the 7 religions can be founded + with philosphical you can get the GPs necessary to either build a shrine and rush found a religion.

No doubt there are others.

My point is only that traits do not exist in isolation but are paired with another...

Therefore you can not consider the merits or demerits of a trait without considering the trait with which it is paired.

Land is only power when you have the population to make use of that land. Land without populaton is useless.

Hardly. Empty land is valuable in shaping your borders, denying other civs resources/land, saving resources for yourself (grabbing an oil before combustion), setting up choke points, and iirc more land is more points.

Hardly. Empty land is valuable in shaping your borders, denying other civs resources/land, saving resources for yourself (grabbing an oil before combustion), setting up choke points, and iirc more land is more points.

The original argument I was refuting was that land has economic value in and of itself. That is simply not true. Absent population to work it, or an enemy whose population could be working it, land is of no economic value. Resources without population are valuable in an economic sense; empty land is not. I'll make no argument regarding the strategic value of land, though.

Of course, this argument assumes you're not trying to meet some victory condition that attributes an arbitrary value to empty space.

<i>Its useless before CS however.</i>

Nonsense.

Spiritual saves you a turn when you switch to Slavery, saves you a turn when you adopt a religion, then saves you a third turn when you adopt either Organized Religion or Hereditary Rule.

Usually those three things will happen in the first 50-100 turns. So, Spiritual is giving you between 3% and 6% more hammers and beakers than you'd get otherwise.

Then there's switching civics because of the Pyramids; switching civics or religions to stay friends with someone; going to Theocracy for war... all things that can easily happen long before you get CS.

Spiritual rocks. It's good at the beginning of the game, it's good late in the game, it's just good.


Waldo

<i>Its useless before CS however.</i>

Nonsense.

Spiritual saves you a turn when you switch to Slavery, saves you a turn when you adopt a religion, then saves you a third turn when you adopt either Organized Religion or Hereditary Rule.

Usually those three things will happen in the first 50-100 turns. So, Spiritual is giving you between 3% and 6% more hammers and beakers than you'd get otherwise.

Then there's switching civics because of the Pyramids; switching civics or religions to stay friends with someone; going to Theocracy for war... all things that can easily happen long before you get CS.

Spiritual rocks. It's good at the beginning of the game, it's good late in the game, it's just good.


Waldo


nonsense.

saving 1-3 turns in that time period is negligible advantage when compared to advantage of any other trait at that stage.

I would say that expansive can be very powerful if you start in the middle of a bunch of floodplains. A capital with 12 floodplain squares can easily turn your civ into a monster.

1) Expansive

Once I started alone on a Nordic continent. Few food (so health) resources, few rivers, so most of my cities had growth problems - no farms AND no health from resources. And being alone meant no trade so it took me a lot to get off the continent and find other civs with which to trade for health.

Oh, and in another game Kyoto was in the middle of floodplains. As PeteJ put it, it would have been a real monster city with Expansive.

2) Creative

You CAN "become" creative with the Stonehenge, but... only for a while. It saves you time from building it or the Obelisks that will become obsolete quite fast anyway. What if you're in a territory full of Calendar enabled resources? Do you bother to go for the Stonehenge or not?
Others have posted other good reasons before.

3) Organized

Oh, where do I start? I know, my last game! Cyrus's Immortals are like a blessing to the warring heart. :) Since the computer mostly has archers, your Immortals can crush them like bugs. That meant a fast early expansion. What I would have loved was to have those cheap Courthouses in every city faster so that my economy would be back on track. (2 dead civs and 1 with 2 cities leave a lot of juicy empty space)

I'm not going to list reasons for the other traits since it seems more of us seem they are good/better anyway. So you see, any trait can have it's benefits. Likewise, I can think that it's possible for every trait to be less useful than another in a given situation. Oh well. Just play with what you have. :)


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


Oh, and I vote for Expansive. Really, really weak one.

creative is the worst, some ppl need to start voting creative so we can get it to pass expansive!

3) Organized

Oh, where do I start? I know, my last game! Cyrus's Immortals are like a blessing to the warring heart. :) Since the computer mostly has archers, your Immortals can crush them like bugs. That meant a fast early expansion. What I would have loved was to have those cheap Courthouses in every city faster so that my economy would be back on track. (2 dead civs and 1 with 2 cities leave a lot of juicy empty space)
Oh, where do I start? Possibly with the fact that this has exactly and precisely nothing whatsoever to do with the trait.

What about the new warlords traits?

Imperialistic, Charismatic and Protective.

Oh, where do I start? Possibly with the fact that this has exactly and precisely nothing whatsoever to do with the trait.

I just conquered civs that were in their early stages of developpement, Monty isn't a great pacifist so he mostly had units but his cities were quite small, China was (mostly) in a jungle. I'm beelining for Astronomy, ignoring grocers and banks, to get to trade with the other continent, where 5 AIs full of resources and money wait just for the right person.

So, what would have been the effects of the Organized trait? Cheaper courthouses, so more research money. More research money, faster Astronomy. Faster Astronomy, faster intercontinental trade which means a huge boost in money, health and happiness. Also, faster courthouses means faster Forbidden Palace, which in turn means... you guessed, more research money!

Let's see if the Financial trait would have been better: I have only a few cottages - since my capital is mostly a GP farm, and my other initial cities are all poorly irrigated. The new ones I'm building won't mature for a while. I don't have banks to add to my income, and banks are hard to build anyway.

I did manage to get Astronomy earlier than any AI on my continent, so I did beat them to the trade race. But it still would have been an advantage to have done it sooner, don't you think?

If you have arguments against this, please post them. I see no use in getting into a "yes!/no!" contest with you.


creative is the worst, some ppl need to start voting creative so we can get it to pass expansive!

Have you even bothered to read the thread? People have given good reasons for why Creative is an interesting trait. You think otherwise? Well, give us the reasons!

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

People, a discussion about this is only possible if we give examples to support what we say. I can say that Financial is the worst trait ever and give no reason. Would you believe me? (If yes, that you have a problem... ;) )

Have you even bothered to read the thread? People have given good reasons for why Creative is an interesting trait. You think otherwise? Well, give us the reasons!

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

People, a discussion about this is only possible if we give examples to support what we say. I can say that Financial is the worst trait ever and give no reason. Would you believe me? (If yes, that you have a problem... ;) )

so I say creative is the worst trait and u say creative is an interesting trait, and ur asking me if I disagree w/ this new completely tangential statement made up by u in, I guess, disagreement to me?

hrrrm.

I did give reasons for this in an earlier post. What I said is right there before your previous post, where I also gave reasons for Expansive and Organized being interesting. InFlux5 also talked about this earlier in the thread and IIRC others have given their thoughts on the matter too. That's why I said read the thread. Your irony doesn't really work if you're ignoring anything that doesn't suit you.

I did give reasons for this in an earlier post. What I said is right there before your previous post, where I also gave reasons for Expansive and Organized being interesting. InFlux5 also talked about this earlier in the thread and IIRC others have given their thoughts on the matter too. That's why I said read the thread. Your irony doesn't really work if you're ignoring anything that doesn't suit you.

u dont understand, we simply aren't in disagreement. atleast u haven't said anything in reply to me I disagree w/.

it was never my contention that creative was an uninteresting trait.

I see where you're getting at. But my saying that it's interesting means there are situations in which it is better than other traits. Take one in which you have different food resources scattered around. Would you need Expansive that much? Most probably not, since those resources, once hooked up, would let you manage the health just as well. What you'd really want would be to get the most of them in your cities' borders as fast as you can. Which means... creative! For an example to the contrary see what I posted about Expansive: how useful is it to expand your borders if you have nothing interesting in them anyway? So yeah, Expansive > Creative in those conditions. All I'm saying is that it's really hard to give a "worst trait" without a context. I'd much rather focus on what would be more useful in a given situation, or how would you make use of the traits you have, and how will you counter those you don't have.

>> Carl Corey : Your fight is fun...

If I correctly understood yavoon, I agree with him:
if you think every trait is interesting in a way or another, choosing one as worst doesn't means it isn't usefull, it only means it is your last choice, or the less best trait.

for exemple, I think expansive is the worst, but when I have it (random civ) I make use of it and it becomes very usefull in early game and late game (I'm almost never bothered by health in mid-game). In my current game my wonderfully Food/hammer capital (prince) is blocked to lvl 4 due to 5 floodplains.. no health ressource.

But when I can choose, this trait is the one I'd rather not have instead of another more fitted to my strategies.
(the most usefullness of expansive is in desertic high plain maps.. almost no seafood, very few health ressources, some floodplains .. +3 health comes a handy :)

basically no traits are craps, but some are more usefull for people than others.

Champion of lost causes! That's me. ;) I was mostly annoyed about him giving no reasons for it - and even more so since someone else dismissed something I said without giving any reasons before him. If it weren't for that person I might not have said anything about his post. :D

I know,
I won't have posted if not for your "fight"
and franckly,even if he seems to be true (if I understood his meaning, I think he is right, but maybe it was not his meaning :mischief: ). Just giving his opinion so roughly, without explanation was undelicate, and answering in a so twisted way more so, but ... maybe just a little too speed to take the time to explain thing plainly to us no-brainers .. ? :rolleyes:

or maybe we really are on a bad day with a low frequency brain.. it is really a possibility for me today. :D

If creative/expansive are so bad then why does Cyrus seem to do so well in my games?

Once I get to Monarchy and HR for unlimited happiness due to the military presence, I wish I was Expansive sometimes.

I see where you're getting at. But my saying that it's interesting means there are situations in which it is better than other traits. Take one in which you have different food resources scattered around. Would you need Expansive that much? Most probably not, since those resources, once hooked up, would let you manage the health just as well. What you'd really want would be to get the most of them in your cities' borders as fast as you can. Which means... creative! For an example to the contrary see what I posted about Expansive: how useful is it to expand your borders if you have nothing interesting in them anyway? So yeah, Expansive > Creative in those conditions. All I'm saying is that it's really hard to give a "worst trait" without a context. I'd much rather focus on what would be more useful in a given situation, or how would you make use of the traits you have, and how will you counter those you don't have.

just because the relative values of traits jitters up and down a little bit given different circumstances hardly negates the idea of having best and worst traits. u just have to use ur judgment.

If creative/expansive are so bad then why does Cyrus seem to do so well in my games?
I usually see him do very well early on, then fade as the game goes on. I think it's the creative trait that lets him grow his borders, plus starting with a scout.
I like to pick him off after his UU has expired, since he usually has some good cities by then. :mischief:

Creative is pretty awesome for early game. Your borders expand like nobody's business without any real effort on your part. I've never played a Creative leader all the way to late game, but it looks like the Creative trait fizzles out then. +2 culture seems pretty worthless when your cities are developing culture in the double or triple digits per turn. It looks like Expansive gets stronger in late game, while Creative gets weaker.

I think that expansive is the worst trait, because health is not a big issue in the later game, and not even in the earlier stages.

So, what would have been the effects of the Organized trait? Cheaper courthouses, so more research money. More research money, faster Astronomy. Faster Astronomy, faster intercontinental trade which means a huge boost in money, health and happiness. Also, faster courthouses means faster Forbidden Palace, which in turn means... you guessed, more research money!
And that is a meaningful argument for Organized. "Immortals are good" is not.

Hehe, I see what you mean. I was trying to say that any early growing empire would benefit from courthouses - be it conquered with axes, immortals, war chariots, praetorians, jags, etc. Sorry if it came out as "Immortals are good". :) And yeah, my second post is more meaningful. I had all that in mind, guess I just got lazy. ;)

If creative/expansive are so bad then why does Cyrus seem to do so well in my games?

because immortals are good, when a human plays him,
and because he has some good personnality matrix (not agressive enough to stop the trades, agressive enough to grab land, ...) when the AI plays him

I'd say Expansive, but maybe I'm not looking into well enough.

because immortals are good, when a human plays him,
and because he has some good personnality matrix (not agressive enough to stop the trades, agressive enough to grab land, ...) when the AI plays him
Exactly. The relative strength of the AI is usually the result of their programmed personality as much if not more so than their UU and traits.

Persia is the eaisest for me .
Immortal + Creative+ Expansive.
I basically own my neigbour (atleast 1 ) before i found feulism or something.
So i really dont think theres any uesless traits.
Your game Your Call.
Subjective. and case by case basis. my Poison your meat. kinda

I see creative still hasn't caught expansive for worst. not sure what difficulty level this is representative of but if ur at emperor try trading away ur health resources(ur guarenteed) for the computers excess happiness early. do that a few times and my guess is u wont be saying creative beats expansive no more.

Uhm, isn't the solution to that NOT trading off all your health resources?

Uhm, isn't the solution to that NOT trading off all your health resources?

but then u wont get the happiness

On Immortal I typically get plenty of happiness with HR long before any resources, but what I really lack at this point is health.

Being a Louis man, I'm going to throw in my two cents for creative. Think Pyramids for a minute people (or Oracle, or temple of Artemis, or any of the other very good but "long haul" wonders in the early game). In order to get these *EXTREMLY* useful wonders, you need more than just the techs required to build them - you need a very solid spot and the right resources to increase the shields you're bringing in on them over the long haul.

Now, ask yourself - what is the best possible way to get these things early game? Have solid early game city growth to give you population to work those resources, a road system to connect your stone and all that jazz early, and culture borders. Getting these things fast is what makes the difference between obtaining these wonders or not. With a 600+ shielder like the pyramids, a guy who isn't industrious, has less stone, and fewer forests in borders is not going to beat you by getting the techs a bit sooner if you have these things.

Enter Louis. The guy gets roads, farming, and free culture right off the bat... And he's industrious. This combo makes him, in my opinion, the best early wonder grabber in the game. I can place cities, work them up, their culture expands on its own to grab vital resourcse, and I have optimal pyramid/oracle cities sooner than anyone else in the game - and even on emperor level, I get them all the time because of this.

Sure this is situational... Sure not everyone needs these wonders... But Louis being creative is a cornerstone to getting what are, in reality, huge boons for a long time to come.

As for the worst civic... I will have to think on it. Personally, I think they're all pretty damned useful

Someone should pop this poll again for warlords. :)

Being a Louis man, I'm going to throw in my two cents for creative. Think Pyramids for a minute people (or Oracle, or temple of Artemis, or any of the other very good but "long haul" wonders in the early game). In order to get these *EXTREMLY* useful wonders, you need more than just the techs required to build them - you need a very solid spot and the right resources to increase the shields you're bringing in on them over the long haul.

Now, ask yourself - what is the best possible way to get these things early game? Have solid early game city growth to give you population to work those resources, a road system to connect your stone and all that jazz early, and culture borders. Getting these things fast is what makes the difference between obtaining these wonders or not. With a 600+ shielder like the pyramids, a guy who isn't industrious, has less stone, and fewer forests in borders is not going to beat you by getting the techs a bit sooner if you have these things.

Enter Louis. The guy gets roads, farming, and free culture right off the bat... And he's industrious. This combo makes him, in my opinion, the best early wonder grabber in the game. I can place cities, work them up, their culture expands on its own to grab vital resourcse, and I have optimal pyramid/oracle cities sooner than anyone else in the game - and even on emperor level, I get them all the time because of this.

Absolutely 100% true. Creative + Industrious has some mad synergy for building early wonders.

if organized surpasses creative I'm gna cry.