Dancing Hoskuld
Deity
So are you suggesting that the developing traits is a better way to go? It would fit better with the idea of C2C being about playing your way to make the nation you want given the nature of your map location.
Extra Traits for C2C
- Thread starter strategyonly
- Start date
So are you suggesting that the developing traits is a better way to go? It would fit better with the idea of C2C being about playing your way to make the nation you want given the nature of your map location.
Faustmouse
Deity
- Joined
- Jan 31, 2012
- Messages
- 3,524
But this would mean that all leaders pick the strong traits and ignore the weak ones, so it gets pretty monotonous after a while. Rebalancing them would be definetly a better approach. But yeah, I think developing leaders is more suitable for C2C.
They should be balanced nothing else, i did not talk about the developing leaders or any other option. I don't really want to get involved in balancing them because it's to complicated for me, i just play without traits. I want to make everybody aware of this problem because it explains some 'isses with the AI' people are reporting. In reality things like 'the AI sucks because some civs just don't expand' can be caused by such balance problems.
Some traits or combinations of different traits allow much faster expansion but may have some disadvantages later. But those disadvantages don't really matter because the civ is already to big to really notice them.
Some traits or combinations of different traits allow much faster expansion but may have some disadvantages later. But those disadvantages don't really matter because the civ is already to big to really notice them.
JosEPh_II
TBS WarLord
strategyonly
C2C Supreme Commander
So get rid of the "Bad" traits then, or what??
Thunderbrd
C2C War Dog
Options can already do that. He's just pointing at the fact that some traits better prepare a leader to expand than others and in some cases this can make a very big difference for those civilizations. I do think that it's valid to mention Developing Leaders (with Start with No Positive Traits) as that will tend to get the leaders to start at least on a level playing field.
Dancing Hoskuld
Deity
I do think we should aim for the developing leaders. The UI needs a lot of work. IMO it should almost look like the tech tree in that it should show the branches and requirements for later traits and show what they provide. When I last played I could not tell if I was getting a second level trait or not.
Thunderbrd
C2C War Dog
There are currently no second or third level traits. I've designed an outline for that approach but left SGT Slick to go about setting that up and he gave up mid-process.
Once I've got more work done in that dept we can work on some better UI as you mentioned (though it's not much more to it than it would be for promotions.)
I was developing a lot of new tags and effects and just stepped away from the project to work on units more.
Once I've got more work done in that dept we can work on some better UI as you mentioned (though it's not much more to it than it would be for promotions.)
I was developing a lot of new tags and effects and just stepped away from the project to work on units more.
Faustmouse
Deity
- Joined
- Jan 31, 2012
- Messages
- 3,524
Before you add more levels, we should first rebalance the existing ones.
Probably it's not really the cause of unbalanced traits, but more the steamroll effect.
Probably it's not really the cause of unbalanced traits, but more the steamroll effect.
Thunderbrd
C2C War Dog
Of course. The way I had begun was to balance the baseline traits - for the structure with additional levels the 'base' would be a bit weaker as it would allow for growth but generally operating on the same principles.
Thunderbrd
C2C War Dog
I'll now look through here to find where a link to my last updated proposal spreadsheet was.
It's a basis for discussion but I no longer feel it to be complete or what I would do now with some further wisdom earned over the last few yrs. (Still an improved approach to begin with though.)
Thunderbrd
C2C War Dog
Ok... I just set this up so we can numerically suggest what we each feel the trait tag values would be worth and under what Flavor types said values would be established.
I have a feeling it would be fairly self explanatory but as SGTSlick points out, there may be some re-evaluation necessary of the base balancing factors here. So if you think anything's out of whack, simply explain how YOU would do it differently in a collumn of your own. Even if I haven't put you in there, simply right click and insert a collumn for yourself to add your own suggested restructuring of the value system.
A heck... just take a look and see what you can do
Traits Tag Evaluation Master Document
BTW, here would be a good place to add new tag suggestions under the current 'still to be developed' tags already listed there.
Ah... here it is. The master document is a link to my proposal. I don't think it yet includes all the new tags into the consideration and there's a lot to edit about it imo.
JosEPh_II
TBS WarLord
So I have to have a gmail account to view your doc? 
JosEPh
JosEPh
Thunderbrd
C2C War Dog
Apparently yes. It uses googledocs. A hotmail account can sign in and I believe a yahoo account can as well. The same as all the other document links in my sig.
EDIT: I figured I'd take a look at the doc. Apparently it is really only expressing my attempt at generating a method by which we could establish a balanced set of traits by a valuation system for each tag. Pretty sure somewhere I have a more complete proposal that utilized this method. I'll see if it's tied to the forum or not but I THINK it was posted as an excell spreadsheet.
This doc did include a proposal for Aggressive based on this method.
EDIT: I figured I'd take a look at the doc. Apparently it is really only expressing my attempt at generating a method by which we could establish a balanced set of traits by a valuation system for each tag. Pretty sure somewhere I have a more complete proposal that utilized this method. I'll see if it's tied to the forum or not but I THINK it was posted as an excell spreadsheet.
This doc did include a proposal for Aggressive based on this method.
Thunderbrd
C2C War Dog
Just changed the access level. Try again.
Thunderbrd
C2C War Dog
Sorry... posting in the new thread. let's put the rest of this past behind us eh?
JosEPh_II
TBS WarLord
Would appear this is the timeframe that Slick's Traits "may" have had a change. By svn 6612 Dec 2013 the iUpkeepModifiers had all been drastically reduced from Slick's original set. This svn v6612 tweaked some Crime values in Crime properties.
JosEPh
