New Civ Traits

I looked over the 'currently discussed topics' thread and didn't see any discussions about the civ traits we have in Civ 3. Am I missing something? Are these being discarded for good or changed or what? Anyone?

Anyway, I had a thought today that if they are going to be keeping them, maybe it wouldn't hurt to add one or two.

The ones we have now:

Militaristic (cheaper military buildings, promotion chance, great leader chance)
Religious (cheaper religious buildings, instant government change)
Scientific (cheaper research buildings, free tech with each age, science leader chance)
Industrial (bonus shields in metro, faster worker terraform speed)
Commercial (bonus gold, lower corruption)
Expansionistic (scout, friendlier barbarians, better chance of good goody huts)

new with Conquests

Agricultural (cheaper aqueduct/recycling/solar plant, bonus food -city/desert)
Seafaring (start by ocean, bonus gold, safer and faster sea travel, cheap water buildings)


So my ideas:

New Traits:

Diplomatic (Diplomat specialist - Diplomatic civs only with discovery of espionage - 1 food and 1 gold and slightly lowers war weariness, Free embassy with every known tribe upon research of Writing, better trade results in diplomacy, cheaper espionage costs, add ability to bribe another civ to declare war or peace against a third party without having to do so yourself.)

Imperialistic (Bureaucrat specialist - Imperial civs only with discovery of nationalism - 1 shield and lower corruption as police officer, lower corruption (taken from Commercial), extra unit support = 1 per city in any government, cheaper government buildings (courthouse, forbidden palace, police station)

Philosophical (Philosopher specialist - Philosophical civs only with discovery of Philosophy - 2 lightbulbs and 1 happy face, instant government change (taken from Religious), cheaper library and university)

Break 'Scientific' into two new traits:

Creative (Scientist specialist - Creative civs only with discovery of scientific method - produces 3 lightbulbs, free tech at start of each age, cheaper library and research laboratory)

Engineering/Craftsmanlike (Engineer specialist - Engineering civs only with discovery of Engineering tech - produces 1 lightbulb and 2 shields, faster worker terraform actions (build airbase, build fortification, build colony, build railroad), Bridge Building effect from the start: all units cross rivers (with road) free.)

Change current traits:

Industrious (changes) (Union Rep specialist - Industrious civs only with discovery of Communism and Industrialization - produces 2 shields and 1 happy face, extra shields in metro square, cheaper factories/power plants, faster worker terraform actions (mine, build road)

Commercial (changes) (Banker specialist - Commercial civs only with discovery of banking - produces 3 gold, bonus gold in city square, add ability to link trade networks THROUGH enemy and non right of passage territory representing black market, cheaper trade buildings (marketplace, bank, stock market)

Religious (changes) (Cleric specialist - Religious civs only with discovery of monothesim - produces 2 happy faces and 1 gold, no war weariness, cheaper religous buildings, religious buildings add +1 extra culture per turn each)

Militaristic (changes) (General specialist - Militaristic civs only with discovery of military tradition - produces 1 happy face and 1 shield and lowers corruption slightly, cheaper military buildings, improved promotion and leader chance)

Expansionistic (changes) (Archaeologist specialist - Expansionistic civs only with discovery of theory of evolution - 1 lightbulb and 1 gold and 1 happy face, (remove scout, should be buildable by any civ), friendlier barbarians, increased good result from goody huts, cheaper colonist production)

Agricultural (changes) (Agriculturalist specialist - Agricultural civs only with discovery of Education - 0 food support - produces 1 food and 1 shield and 1 gold, cheaper aqueduct/recycle/solar plant, faster worker action: clear jungle and cut/plant forest and irrigate, bonus food in city square and desert)

Seafaring (changes) (Admiral specialist - Seafaring civs only with discovery of magnetism - 1 happy face and 1 gold and lowers corruption slightly, cheaper sea buildings, start by ocean, faster/safer sea travel)


That's it, doubtful any will be incorporated but maybe they'll spark a discussion.

-Elgalad

Too busy to comment on the thread in General... but how about giving a diplomatic penalty to imperialist or militaristic civs?

No! No diplomatic penalties or bonuses! The AI should play just like a human would.

Sorry if I seemed a little rude there. Anyway, if you want the diplomacy to be more realistic, it should involve how the people react to your foreign policy. That way, both human and AI would be governed by the same rules. I made a topic on this earlier.

Back to the topic at hand,

Diplomatic - A little difficult to pin this on any particular civ. Also, giving unique diplomatic options is a BAD idea (way too unbalancing). Out of curiousity, why does the Diplomat give extra food? Having a "Diplomat" specialist doesn't make much sense, anyway. Would there really be a large enough group of people hired to account for a single population point?

Imperialistic - This has some potential.

Philosophical - Already covered by "Scientific," and the C3C Scientist produces 3 beakers.

Break 'Scientific' into two new traits - This isn't really a good idea. "Scientific" refers to research, which is not covered in either subcategory.

Creative - So this is the original Scientific, eh? "Creative" isn't really a good name for this as that brings to mind artistic talent.

Engineering/Craftsmanlike - Really not that different from Industrious.

Change current traits:

Industrious - The Union Rep is a bit overpowered. The entire point of the Entertainer is that you must sacrifice production for happiness.

Commercial - Black Marketing occurs in noncommercial Civs, too.

Religious - The new changes are far to overpowering. TWO happy faces?

Militaristic - The general doesn't make much sense. You wouldn't have several thousand generals based in a single town.

Expansionistic - Now this actually looks like some good changes. Namely, the cheaper Settlers. That might give this trait some value. Question, though: why Archeologists?

Agricultural - I don't see how it was changed, aside from the overpowered Agriculturalist Specialist (eek! THREE FOOD PER TURN?)

Seafaring - Again the Admiral doesn't make much sense. Aside from that, I don't see any changes.

Shouldn't the title of this topic be "Unique Specialists"?

Sorry if I seem overly critical. I think some of these could be good if tweaked a bit. I generally only post what I disagree with, since that's the only thing that really matters, isn't it?

In reference to the original post, I think that it's a good idea to add additional factors influencing the general behavior of civilizations. Something like this would do greatly to enrich the general atmosphere of the game by providing a far more succinct and elaborate environment of game play.

But in some of these cases, I think we can avoid the need to adhere to civ traits. For example, take the "imperialistic trait", which gives a civ an administration bonus. Undoubtedly, successful empires have historically been successful administrators. But would you say that this trait is inherent in every civilization on its way to becoming an empire? Are certain countries destined, more than others, due to some inherent administrative ability, to become great empires? In most cases, yes. But since civ IV is going to deal with the history of civilization from the Stone Age to the modern age, the answer is no. These traits don't develop until much later in the course of history. Instead, these traits are inherited due to the course of history, rather than contribute to the progress of history. I doubt, for example, that the Romans' stone-age ancestors could have conjured the very thought of empire, much less imagine its most detailed intricacies. Another contradiction emerges when a civ player decides to forgo the actual imperialist history of the Roman Empire in favor of a cultural or a spaceship victory.

But the idea of adding more traits is a good one, I agree with that. Perhaps if these traits were inherited over time and due to special circumstances. Then we'd get very peculiar games indeed. If the Babylonians, a "relatively" peaceful civilization can manage to hang on to an empire for a period of time, maybe it can get the imperialist trait. And we can elaborate furthermore, by considering the choices that players make in shaping their societies, certain societies would be favorable towards a certain trait, and eventually develop to encompass that particular trait.

Oh, and another thing, wouldn't this system of selective traits be treated a lot (though not completely) like government changes. And wouldn't that ultimately destroy the uniqueness of each civilization? If a trait can be forgotten or acquired, (historical as it may be) the game might become bland and flavorless. After all, if I didn't want to recreate the Roman Empire, I'd play as the Babylonians.

Thanks for looking! I'd like to clarify a few things that were maybe misinterpreted. First, I didn't put too much thought into the Balancing of the various specialists and some were sort of jury-rigged in there just so that every civ trait would have one. The exact bonuses they offer could easily be adjusted during beta testing or whatever. Some of the questions about bonus specifics (particularly food) lie in the fact that every specialist Consumes 2 food just like any other citizen in a city. That means that a food bonus of 1 is just a way to make the specialist cheaper, a food bonus of 3 (the agriculturalist) is more of a way to jury rig adding a little extra food since it would take 2 agriculturalists to support a third nonproductive citizen. To be honest, I'd just as soon eliminate some of the spec's, they're only in there for symmetry. Agriculturalist = first to go

As for the specific traits, Mewtarthio;

Diplomatic - this is actually a misnomer. I wasn't thinking of any civ that was 'good' at getting along with other nations, but rather a few that were good at Manipulating other civs to do/get what they wanted. Historically I can name a few excellent choices 1) France - oh yes, Cardinal Richelieu, Charles De Gaulle. One might have to research the middle ages to see just How much impact French puppetmasters had in the evolution of Europe, but even to this day France has 'kept a hand in' even while it's own post-colonial economy has declined. The European Union may be the future of Europe, but it would never have come into being without France's approval and support. 2) America - Jefferson and Franklin both had significant impact on European politics furing the birth of the USA and may have saved it from an early death. At the dawn of the 20th century, Theodore Roosevelt presided over a gunboat diplomacy before either world war made the United States' role as a diplomatic heavyweight a reality. And what is 'international aid' really anyway? 3) Not being as familiar with Asian culture as I would like, I would still suggest China as another possiblie diplomatic candidate. China has only been an international military power worth reckoning with in the last few decades. In antiquity, China was more like an unguarded treasure chest waiting for the first warlord to come along and snatch it up. From my understanding, China had great success during various 'conquests' by playing the diplomatic route, pitting warmongers against each other, as well as assimilating a few over the ages. Something has to be said about a nation that has existed between 50 rocks and 50 hard places for thousands of years mostly intact. I still dont get why they made China militaristic

Philosophical - This refers to civs that spent a good deal of time trying to solve the basic dilemma of human existence. Maybe making it a trait isn't a great idea, but I was trying to find a home for the instant government change which to me never belonged with Religious in the first place. As for the philosopher specialist, think of it as a less effective scientist. Yes it produces research but not as much, and it makes folks happy all that postulating.. Greece, Korea, France again (Sartre, Descartes)

Creative - I agree that it's a bad name, maybe Visionary might be better. I see England here, Russia possibly. Greece fits too, this is the sort of the trait that makes folk say Eureka! Anyway, this is the Researcher (as opposed to the.. )

Engineer - blue sky ideas are great and all, but Someone has to make them work. The Engineering nation is one that has a talent for turning ideas into reality. America is a great example of this, as is Germany. Scotland (if it ever reaches CIV status) would fit too.

Industrious - These nations have traditions of industry. That is not the same as Engineering, not even close. Engineers make machines, Industrialists use them. A large source of discontent in America today is that all of the perceived manufacturing jobs have 'gone overseas'. China, Singapore, Mexico, Taiwan, etc.. cheap labor, lousy working conditions but hey! They keep your Kathy Lee line of activewear reasonably priced. Keep in mind though, the machines that make those products overseas were invented elsewhere.

Religious - I put the two happy face spec in there to help balance losing instant government change. If it's overpowered, it's easily alterable. How about 1 happy face and 2 gold?

Commercial - not sure what you meant about the black market. I was referring to a benefit the commercial civ would get. Earlier resource trades by 'illegally' linking trade networks through unfriendly territory.

Expansionist - Originally I wanted to call the specialist an 'Adventurer'. Maybe I should have stuck with that Think Marco Polo, Lewis and Clark, Pizarro, Columbus, Richard Burton, Indiana Jones

Agriculturalist - mentioned above

Militaristic and Seafaring - What we have here are nations that are traditionally comfortable with land and sea warfare. The Generals and Admirals represent sort of a cadre of Advisors or Military Governors that offer their support to a city. They both add a slight benefit of lowering corruption to some extent to represent the more 'disciplined' structure in that civ's government. I know, I know, no military is without corruption and abuse! I'm just suggesting that they provide a little more order and stability.

Finally..

Yes, the biggest change with these traits is the addition of new specialists

-Like to see three traits per civ instead of two. With more traits, this really helps individualize the civs. No more cookie cutter Turkey/Persia or Japan/Aztec/Celts!

-I should have mentioned that in addition to the New specialists, the old 'wiseman' and 'taxman' specialists should be removed. Definitely keep the entertainer and policeman of course, but with the new spec's, it gives each civ more options regarding their city management.

-Last suggestion: Let's completely disregard the hardcoded civ trait per civilization altogether and allow Random trait selection at start, or chooseable traits for the player civ(s). Why should Germany always be a warmonger? Why should India always be a Pacifist? Let's truly have an Alternate history in Civ 4.

-Elgalad

Like your suggestions a lot too, Alvaro!

How to incorporate 'gaining' and/or 'losing' traits? Well, possibly the first civ to reach a specific discovery might gain a related trait? Or maybe each tech discovery is aligned with one or more traits and the ones you choose to research end up being a kind of personality test. As you gain points in say militaristic (by researching bronze working, iron working, horseback riding) you would lean towards that. Techs you 'learned' from other civilizations wouldn't count, only researched ones. There's a problem then of course, that if you gain most of your techs through trade (or Great Library), you wont be effectively aligning yourself. I've read in another post the suggestion to remove technologies from trade altogether. That might work.. To keep a civ from falling drastically behind the rest of the world though, maybe the civ would get a discount (like now, only enhanced) to researching techs that other civs know.. lower cost for each other civ that knows it.

My original plan of course was to use discovery thresholds to activate a civ's trait specialist feature. Each specialist had a different tech requirement, some came earlier, some later. No reason why the science tree couldn't be used to key in traits in the first place though. Maybe wonder construction would also affect trait 'alignment'.

-Elgalad

I think that in Civ4 every civilization should have different bonuses, instead of having a variety os traits to choose from.

Elgalad said:

-Last suggestion: Let's completely disregard the hardcoded civ trait per civilization altogether and allow Random trait selection at start, or chooseable traits for the player civ(s). Why should Germany always be a warmonger? Why should India always be a Pacifist? Let's truly have an Alternate history in Civ 4.

-Elgalad

Click to expand...

Great Idea. I love alternate hitory scenarios, what if the Iriqouis had wiped out the English colonies...

I also think that each civ trait should have a "% rank". And that all civs have all the traits, but not at the same ranks, Germany might for example have a 50% rank in military but 0% in religion, or whatever.The civ's could have the preset traits but if the player wanted a truly unique civ, he could choose to distribute 100pts (%) among the different traits but with a limit perhaps (to keep the powergamers from going 100% military or 100% commercial). Maybe a limit like no more than 50% in a single trait.

I think that each civ should at least have a rank in all the traits because i dont think any civ was just commercial and scientific, the greeks for example, the greeks had a long history of war, Sparta held the art of war very highly, so why shouldnt they have a military ranking, even their leader Alexander the Great was a famous general that conquered a lot of land....

Don't agree with the changes on the current ones, but IMHO your ideas on the new ones are quite inspiring...

If the number of different traits is expanded, three traits per civ can be justified. But with the present half dozen or so traits, giving 3 per civ reduces the rarity of each trait and turns them into a relatively homogenous mass.

Regarding ways to make traits distinctive, city specialists isn't the only way to go. Metropole bonuses, unique buildings, and unique units all work. RaR, for example, gives militaristic civs a "champion" unit at the start with 2-1-1 stats.

but drop the instant government change for religious. It doesn't reflect religioosity at all.

I just think traits are kind of a waste anyway. Most people want to write their own history for their Civilization with their own personalities, rather than having personalities hardwired right from the start.

Not that traits shoudl be taken out -- it should be an option for the few people who like them. But they shouldn't invest any more energy into traits than they have to.

I personally like the current civ trait system. The only thing I'd really change is allowing, from the normal new game screen, the ability to make a "Custom" civ and assign two traits of my choice and a graphics set/team color/generic leader head and play a game. I know almost every combination of traits is present in the C3C civ set but I think the ability to set up on your own would be nice.

I think a lot of people would appreciate that, Idylwyld.

Idylwyld said:

I personally like the current civ trait system. The only thing I'd really change is allowing, from the normal new game screen, the ability to make a "Custom" civ and assign two traits of my choice and a graphics set/team color/generic leader head and play a game. I know almost every combination of traits is present in the C3C civ set but I think the ability to set up on your own would be nice.

Click to expand...

Correction - Every single possible trait combo is present in C3C. The only complication is that of the countries individual UUs, which may influence your choice of a civ. Disregarding that, there is no reason to set up a custom civ of yours, other than for flavour, since all the possible trait combos have been provided.

I think letting gamers choose their own traits for their civ would detract from the game's personality, and may also imbalance the game.

As for ideas for new traits:

Lawfulness - Less corruption experienced, anarchy periods shortened. Civil disorder will not destroy improvements in city (peaceful protestation ).

You'll notice that this trait takes some benefits from both the commercial and religious traits. This is because I feel those stated benefits (less corruption, shortened anarchy period) fit the category of and orderly nation rather than commercial or religious nations. The commercial and religious traits should be changed in this case.

That might be an idea
Each Civ has several 'Traits'
1. Assigned Traits, allows game balance, along with UU/Start Techs
2. Acquired Traits

If Civ-Specific Bonuses are turned off
All Traits become 'Acquirable' or developed over the course of the game (probably with a limit, so that if you have two acquiring a new trait will either not be possible, or replace a previous trait...to do that traits would have to be balanced among the Eras..say expansionist giving a bonus to the space race)

dh_epic said:

I just think traits are kind of a waste anyway. Most people want to write their own history for their Civilization with their own personalities, rather than having personalities hardwired right from the start.

Not that traits shoudl be taken out -- it should be an option for the few people who like them. But they shouldn't invest any more energy into traits than they have to.

Click to expand...

Few people who dislike them? I wouldn't know. I think it would be bad to scrap them altogether though. Other than your UU and city names, what's to differentiate Rome from China from Zululand from England from the Iroquois from Babylon? If you mean get rid of hardwired traits, I agree with you entirely, but getting rid of traits completely, I would consider that about five steps backward.

I think it wuld be good to keep or even expand the traits for competitive/tournament play, but also have an option in the game civ editor to create custom civ's with bits and pieces taken from various different traits. Something like the way SMAC had its civ traits definable if you went into the right text files.

Yeah, like I said, not that they should get rid of them... but if they're going to try to "trick" us into feeling like Civ 4 is a bigger step forward by doubling the number of traits, I'm not gonna fall for it. I want them to focus their energy on genuine new featuers. No need to do any more than you did in Civ 3.

Traits should be dinamical during game and not be pre-defined. There are no assign traits only acquired traits. No unit bonus UU care about that.
Civs had 10%, 20%, 30% of a trait:
- 10% of a trait give 20% less time or costs to achieve trait techs.
- 20% of a trait give 50% less time or costs to achieve trait techs.
- 30% of a trait give free agricultural techs.

1 - Agricultural:
Before industrialization civs who has 70%, 80% or 90% of their population in food production, achieve respectively 10%, 20%, 30% of this trait.
After industrialization civs who has 20%, 40% or 60% of wealth or civ production as food production, achieve respectively 10%, 20%, 30% of this trait
Techs: Iron Working => Industrialization => Motorized Transportation => Genetics

2 - Seafaring:
Civs who has 20%, 40% or 60% of their city or population cost achieve respectively 10%, 20%, 30% of this trait.
Techs: Map Making => Astronomy => Navigation => Magnetism

3 - Militaristic:
Civs who has 10%, 20% or 30% of their budget or wealth assign to military expenses achieve respectively 10%, 20%, 30% of this trait.
Techs: Warrior Code => Chivalry => Gunpowder => Replaceable Parts => Smart Weapens

4 - Commercial:
Civs who has 20%, 40% or 60% of wealth from trade achieve respectively 10%, 20%, 30% of this trait.
Techs: Currency => Banking => Economics => The Corporation

5 - Religious:
Civs who has 5%, 10% or 15% of their population as clerics (priests, ulemas, monks) achieve respectively 10%, 20%, 30% of this trait.
Techs: Ceremonial Burial => Mysticism => Polytheism => Monotheism

6 - Scientific:
Civs who has 10%, 20% or 30% of their budget or wealth assign to scientific research achieve respectively 10%, 20%, 30% of this trait.
Techs: Literature => Education => Scientific Method => Computers

7 - Expansionistic:
Civs where their population or city # is 10%, 20% or 30% of world population or city # achieve respectively 10%, 20%, 30% of this trait.
Techs: Bronze Working => Iron Working => Medicine => Sanitation

8 - Industrious:
Before industrialization civs who has 10%, 20% or 30% of their wealth or civ production by artesans (no commerce or food production), achieve respectively 10%, 20%, 30% of this trait.
After industrialization civs who has 20%, 40% or 60% of wealth or civ production as industrial production, achieve respectively 10%, 20%, 30% of this trait
Techs: Construction => Invention => Steam Power => Industrialization => Robotics

9 - Imperialistic:
Civs who has 10%, 20% or 30% of their population as foreigners nationalities achieve respectively 10%, 20%, 30% of this trait.
Techs: Code of Laws => Monarchy => Printing Press => Nationalism

Techs could be change, add ones or subtract others. The % also could vary a litlebit.