Is anyone else disappointed that there is a lack of new traits in the game? I mean they added a few war related traits in Warlords and even a trait designed around Great General use (Imperial). Yet, there is no new traits to make use of a Great Spy or anything that is "Beyond the Sword" (such as a Scientific trait or anything else).

Does anyone else feel cheated that there are no new traits?

Also, I'm surprised they haven't rebalanced some of the other traits. I mean Creative is pretty useless past early border expansion and is even worse than going for a Cultural victory than Philosophical or Industrial.

Is anyone else disappointed that there is a lack of new traits in the game? I mean they added a few war related traits in Warlords and even a trait designed around Great General use (Imperial). Yet, there is no new traits to make use of a Great Spy or anything that is "Beyond the Sword" (such as a Scientific trait or anything else).

Does anyone else feel cheated that there is not another trait?

Also, I'm surprised they haven't rebalanced some of the other traits. I mean Creative is pretty useless past early border expansion and is even worse than going for a Cultural victory than Philosophical or Industrial.

I'm fine. I like how they've aimed at filling out the trait combinations instead of adding even more traits.

Furthermore, Creative is one of the best war traits in the game (and in multiplayer). If you're going to complain about a trait with little use, Imperialistic has the least use because most players don't play on large maps where the settler production bonus would be useful; and Protective will be bad until BtS is released and gunpowder units can take the drill line of promotions.

No, I don't feel cheated at all. It looks like the best expansion pack ever, and you kids are never happy whatever they throw at you. You should play the sims, there are more goodies in it.

No, creative doesn't suck, it gives cheap libraries too in case you didn't know.

I'm fine. I like how they've aimed at filling out the trait combinations instead of adding even more traits.

Furthermore, Creative is one of the best war traits in the game (and in multiplayer). If you're going to complain about a trait with little use, Imperialistic has the least use because most players don't play on large maps where the settler production bonus would be useful; and Protective will be bad until BtS is released and gunpowder units can take the drill line of promotions.

Even still, why is CREATIVE a WAR trait? I know it is designed to give early border expansion, but it doesn't mesh well with its flavor.

Also, "MOST" players do play on "Standard" size maps which generally is enough to make 6 to 8 of your own cities, at least.

It would have been nice to have at least one new trait and maybe a new set of civics, not just expanding the ones already there.

I have no problems with new traits, glad to see most of the combo used. All existing traits are fine with imperialistic which should have "one" more benefit.

No, I don't feel cheated at all. It looks like the best expansion pack ever, and you kids are never happy whatever they throw at you. You should play the sims, there are more goodies in it.

No, creative doesn't suck, it gives cheap libraries too in case you didn't know.

I'm not talking about all the other things it gives, which is great (this should have been what Warlords was), but there is still a giant thing missing -- new traits.

Also, if you do a statistical analysis on Creative compared to any other trait you'll find it lacking in power.

I had an old thread explaining the break down of how Creative is worse than Expansive and Organized on a Standard sized map (or larger). It basically breaks down to the number of hammers saved and turns profited, which Creative is the worst in.

I don't reall feel cheated by the lack of new traits, but:

- Some traits really do needs to be unnerfed badly (imperialistic and expansive).

- And some new traits like agricultural or seafaring would have been quite nice to have.

I am not disappointed by the lack of new traits, to feel the lack is worthy of a new topic. ;) There's enough new content in BTS to prevent me from being disappointed about what is lacking.

I don't reall feel cheated by the lack of new traits, but:

- Some traits really do needs to be unnerfed badly (imperialistic and expansive).

- And some new traits like agricultural or seafaring would have been quite nice to have.

Creative is less powerful than Expansive (Expansive you save more hammers and get a bonus to Worker production... even if it is getting nerfed) and sometimes less powerful than Imperialistic (depends on how you play for that, but generally Imperialistic is still better in the long run).

Seafaring would have been nice with the addition of the Dutch and Portuguese to the English, Carthaginians, Vikings and Spanish, but that's largely taken care of by the Viking and Carthaginian UBs and the Dutch and Portuguese UUs. I'm a little surprised the Byzantines didn't get a naval UB rather than the Hippodrome. At least now they have a place for hippopotamuses to take off and land.

Seafaring would have been nice with the addition of the Dutch and Portuguese to the English, Carthaginians, Vikings and Spanish, but that's largely taken care of by the Viking and Carthaginian UBs and the Dutch and Portuguese UUs. I'm a little surprised the Byzantines didn't get a naval UB rather than the Hippodrome. At least now they have a place for hippopotamuses to take off and land.

I agree that the UUs and UBs give a "pseudo-trait," which could have been better if they added more interesting UUs that were not war related (besides the naval ones). I mean in Warlords India was the only Civilization to have a non-war related UU (Fast Worker) and it would be awesome if they added some cool UUs like the Ninja (better Spy for Japanese) or something. The game is too war-based, I want more units that deal with attrition and specialized things, not just combat, that is why I think new traits would be good too.

Whilst I would have liked a few more traits, namely Seafaring and Agricultural, there is no need to have new traits, and I certainly don't feel cheated by there being none. It's nice to most of the trait combos being used now.

it sounds like somebody never tried building stonehenge+temples in every city in early game with creative trait leader...

Stexe:
Is anyone else disappointed that there is a lack of new traits in the game? I mean they added a few war related traits in Warlords and even a trait designed around Great General use (Imperial). Yet, there is no new traits to make use of a Great Spy or anything that is "Beyond the Sword" (such as a Scientific trait or anything else).

There was a need to add new traits in Warlords. Without new traits there would only have been 2 free trait combinations for the 10 new leaders.

Also, why should new traits be added when people still can't agree on what is a balanced trait. For example:

Also, I'm surprised they haven't rebalanced some of the other traits. I mean Creative is pretty useless past early border expansion and is even worse than going for a Cultural victory than Philosophical or Industrial.

For the record it doesn't surprise me that creative gives less benefits over the course of the game than some other traits. I'm kind of surprised that it gives less benefits when turn delay is taken account of. But it's still my favourite trait. I like not building stonehenge or monuments in the very early game - it's for me the most frustrating aspect of the entire game. Organsied and expansive, the traits I believe you said you compared it against, also have their proponents.

Ikael:
And some new traits like agricultural or seafaring would have been quite nice to have.

Agricultural, or expansive, is already in the game. Only now it gives extra food at the end of a city's growth instead of at the beginning (which was it's affect in CivIII).

I would have liked some new traits like Agricultural and Seafaring but the fact that all traits combinations have been used makes leader's choice more interesting.
In any case there are more important features in BtS than traits.

I always thought a "Diplomatic" trait (+1 with standing with all civs) would be great. I figure it's not in, because it would be meaningless in multiplayer and less useful for the AI than for humans.

I can live without it or other new traits, though. The obvious areas are covered.

There really isn't a "Scientific" trait, although you could say it was divded up into other traits such as Financal and Philosophical.

I would have liked to see a Trait oriented towards Espionage, fortunatly its easy to mod.

I think Firaxis wants to make a war biased game.

I think an Espionage trait would be fun and interesting, but I don't know what leader would have it. I can think of some leaders who would have non-war based traits that are based on Science and other things, but not really on Espionage.
Yes it is easily modded, but I like to play with default settings over a LAN where everyone is familar with the rules.

I'd like to see both seafaring and agricultural back in, and different from "expansive", but I still prefer they use this expansion to rebalance the traits and add in some formerly "forbidden" combos.

They made some startling changes to protective, and I'm hoping to see alterations to other traits and civics based on the new espionage system. So I have no big complaint.

the idea of a new leader trait having to do with espionage is interesting... maybe for Roosevelt or Churchill? but I do think they shouldn't have to change everything about the game. they also could have added new civics, but they didn't. I think there comes a point when you can have too much of a good thing. game balance and the overwhelming choices can start you down the wrong path, and it's not always a clear answer. some of the great mods that people make suffer from this problem - they offer you too many new choices and it's hard to get a "feel" for the game unless you devote even more time that we don't have.

LOL@#1, some ppl just CANNOT be satisfied.

There was plenty of gaps to fill in this time, so there was no need for new traits. However, they'll need more traits for the next expansion. :please:

First, I don't understand why people have such a low opinion on creative, even lower than imperialistic. Creative makes the game much easier at the very beginning. In mid- to late game the cheap libraries, theatres and colosseums really help the empire expansion - you conquer a high pop city, then whip the theatre and library and the city is productive again. This is why Augustus can be so powerful. Just steamroll your opponents with praets, conquer new cities, whip the cheap courts, cheap libraries, cheap theatres and by the time you get nationalism these cities are all draft-ready.

And back to the topic, I don't think new traits are needed. IMHO traits like "sea-faring", "scientific" are really too specific. It's like instead of describing a person by his general personality, you label him by his job. If they want new traits, before BtS comes out I did propose traits like diplomatic (e.g. increase war weariness of opponents if war started by them, better outcomes with barbarians, bonus in trade revenue) or perserving (e.g. +1 food in "bad tiles" like desert, tundra, jungle and hill, less vulnerable to negative random events). At least they are more general.

Giving each leader 3 traits is also an option, although it will further put strain on game-balancing (so it won't happen).

Even still, why is CREATIVE a WAR trait? I know it is designed to give early border expansion, but it doesn't mesh well with its flavor.

Also, "MOST" players do play on "Standard" size maps which generally is enough to make 6 to 8 of your own cities, at least.

It would have been nice to have at least one new trait and maybe a new set of civics, not just expanding the ones already there.

Creative is a war trait because is can be used in border wars to effectively pin your opponent into an easy-to-kill position. That's really about it though. I'd say it can be used for war, but not so much that I'd call it a war trait.

If they were to give any leaders espionage-related traits, it should be Elizabeth (Francis Walsingham, anyone?), Louis (the Cabinet Noir), or Stalin (KGB/NKVD for the win)