Civ traits

civilleader

Prince
Joined
May 1, 2003
Messages
326
Location
California
I think that we need far more civ traits than the six currently there. Why not a cultural and agricultural trait. A agricultural trait which makes food production faster and growth faster. Sumeria, Babylon, Egypt, China and India could have this trait. Cultural which makes cultural improvements such as university, library, and a theater (from CTP) or a circus (An idea of a new improvement as in the Circus Maximus) as cultural improvements.
 
"More food" means "faster growth" under the current game rules. That's why Expansionists start with pottery and why most players build a granary in their capital ("settler factory", really) as quick as possible. While Agricultural means something different to us in the real world it would be just a synonym to Expansionist when looked at from the game rules point-of-view.

More traits would be nice, though. They just have to be different enough in the game.

Mmm... but maybe there could be space for Agricultural if the Expansionist trait effect is changed to something else? Like you would get a reduced "distance to capital" in the corruption calculations meaning you could build a more far-flung empire under it. This might be too powerful, though...
 
There is a recent thread in GDs aboutnew civ traits ...some good ideas there, and I too wish to see more traits.
 
At the very least, each civ should be given three of the six traits. This would allow for 20 distinct combinations of traits (6 nCr 3), rather than the 15 combinations (6 nCr 2) that currently exist.
 
personally I think 3 traits each is too much...2 is a nice balance. The expansion pack will take the total # of civs to 32, so 3 more traits, 9 in total, will be enough for unique combinations.
 
I was thinking just the same thing about having 9 total civ traits in order to ensure uniqueness between civs; however, coming up with 3 new, good civ traits would be hard.

I would much rather have 1 new, good civ trait and give three civ traits per civ instead of coming up with 3 new, bogus civ traits just to ensure uniqueness.

Mathematically, it works out if all civs, including the new ones for Conquest, would get 3 civ traits each out of 7. I think each civ could somehow fit into 3 civ traits. Spain for example is as easy one because it could be expansionist as well as the default commercial and religious because most of the Americas speak spanish and are catholic.
 
I would like to see Commercial civs get a break on building Marketplaces (less shield cost), similar to Religious - Temples, Scientific - Libraries... etc.
 
An Agrarian civ trait would be nice they would recive one extra food in the city square(like indusdrious with shield and commercial with commerce), and have reduced cost on food related improvements such as grannary and harbor.

I think this would fit into the game perfectly. Any concern over agrarian civs recieving an "extra" bounus by getting veteran naval units would be made null if a sort of "naval baracks" improvement was added. does any one else thik this is a good idea.
 
Originally posted by PurplePacifier
however, coming up with 3 new, good civ traits would be hard.

[/B]

check out the link in my post a few above - in that thread alone, there were plenty of good ideas for new traits
 
I just read the thread and I especially liked your ideas very good. you should post them here too.
 
Sure, why not; this is my post outlining my own ideas in that thread:

I completely agree that there should be new traits, and a while back I posted some ideas on what they should be.

I like the diplomatic idea that someone mentioned above, but not stealthy. What is a stealthy civ? I can't imagine any particular nation in history being any ore decidedly stealthy than another.

First of all I would change expansionist and commercial slightly (the other civ traits are fine)

Commercial
1) extra gold in city center (as is now)
2) half price commercial buildings (marketplace, bank, stock exchange)

This would make commercial a powerful trait, up there with religious and industrious

Expansionist
1) get rid of scouts; change the explorer unit to be available to expansionist civs only, available from the start, cost 20 shields, move 1, all terrain as roads
2) longer GA, 30 turns instead of 20

Thus expansionists do NOT get better results from goody huts (something I've never really understood), but do have a special unit that can explore the map very quickly, and a longer GA is very powerful.

New ideas:

Artistic (eg Greece, France, Arabia)
1) non-wonder culture improvements generate 1 extra culture per turn (masterpieces)
2) wonders cost fewer shields to build (80% cost?)

Patriotic (eg, Mongols, Japan)
1) one extra citizen born content in each city
2) reduced chance of culture flips (related to number of citizens, say each native citizen reduces culture flip chance by x %)

Civil (can't think of a better name) (eg, Rome, England)
1) reduced corruption formula (that commercial now has)
2) half price civil buildings (courthouse, police station, collosseum even)
//End

Apart from this, I also liked several of the ideas other people posted. I liked Ribannah's idea of agricultural trait, with reduced cost granaries and aqueducts (possibly also hospitals? or perhaps that wouldn't really fit the theme); and irrigation w/o fresh water; alternatively, you could also have the city center tile producing extra food, as Slothman suggested (commercial produces extra gold, industrious extra shields, so why not agricultural extra food?).
Also, Hawkster's idea of naval trait is encouraging: applied, perhaps, to Carthage, England, Spain: ships get extra move points, you could half-price naval improvements (harbours, commercial docks, offshore platforms).

I think the most important point is that there are plenty of possibilities, and more traits would widen the game so much more that I am desperate for some to be included, if not in Conquests, then whatever comes next. Alternatively, and I'm bot sure if this is possiible, maybe Firaxis could make it possible to be able to add traits in the editor?
 
I would like the ability to add traits in the editor. Unfortunatly, I would probbobly take quite a lot of work on the part of Atari to make such an application in the editor easy enough to use for the majority of people. Mabey not in Conquests, but perhaps the first patch for Conquests(you know thers gonna be one).;)
 
Diplomatic sounds good. Could be cheaper embassies and spies (half price?) Spies could also be veterans in this trait.

And perhaps to spice this trait up a bit they could change government in half the "normal" time, so they won't be as good as religious in this aspect...but never get the awful 8-turn roll either.
 
I like a Diplomatic trait with cheaper embasies and spies as mentioned above. but rather they should be elite in experience. a quicker revolution time along with better negotiations with the AI would make this a very good trait indeed.
 
I think the diplomatic idea has potential, but it was not one of the ones that struck me because of a couple of reasons. Firstly, I'm not sure if diplomatic is a trait so much as an attitude. I mean, what exactly would it mean? Civs that are impartial in discussions? Or civs who are persuasive? Or pacifist? Or are you thinking civs that use a lot of espionage? Because I see those as attitudes rather than a trait; any civ can be impartial in fights; any civ can be persuasive, by haggling until you have the best deal possible; any civ can use a lot of espionage.

Secondly, what sort of civs would you apply "diplomatic" to? I can imagine civs that are NOT diplomatic (Mongols does leap to mind) but I can't imagine any civ in the game or in real life that I would describe as being particularly diplomatic (Switzerland was used in the discussion thread, but their neutrality is surely an attitude, not a trait).
 
Rank the traits that we have now.
1 though 6. 1 and 2 you get all benfits.
3 and 4 you get noting. 5 and 6 you get things cost more than normal.
 
I think I know what arkammler means but it is not an idea I'm in favour of.
 
Top Bottom