Dynamic Traits

[Flay]

Post your ideas

 

[Flay]

Anyway, Dynamic Traits then? would you start out with any traits at all? How would we measure that a player was aggressive, what standards do we use to measure against?

.....

 

[Flay]

I will give it a try and will work further on it if it's something that can be made, and if other than me are interresting in it of course:

Dynamic traits

All player will start with the traits from them chosen leader after all we all are born with some quality? But traits will be dynamically changed through the game.
Traits will have to have some weight, to be measure to each other in order to decide what traits fit for the way the player is playing.
As a short example I will say a player building large Army especially unit gaining benefit from Aggressive Traits, and razing enemy city (include barbarian), will increase considerably the weight for “AGGRESSIVE”. As well if a player builds a big amount of farm but neglect cottage, the traits agricultural will see his weight grow.

Traits should not change every time one get heavier than another, but maybe every xx Years* the 2 (or 3 ?) traits with the biggest weight should be granted to the player.

The first trait must be the one with most weight, but second and maybe third must have a minimum weight to be granted.

*(I will prefer years in front of turn but if that is not possible turn will be fine, but it will have to be adjusted from era to era.)
The weight should be between 0 and 100, it will make it easier for coder if they want to use % I guess and it leave place.

The Traits and their Weight gain:

- Aggressive:
1 for each 10 unit in category melee, gunpowder, hi-tech, assault mech.
1 for discovery of Bonze working, Iron working, civil service, machinery, gunpowder, chemistry, rifling, steel assembly line (2 if first to discover).
1 if build of Barracks, dry-dock, stable.
2 if build of Heroic epic, West point, Red Cross, pentagon, Statue of Zeus.
1 if civic vassalage, theocracy, nationhood, police state, state property
2 per razed enemy city

- Agricultural:
1 per farm.
1 per worker
1 per building with food bonus.
1 if discovery of Agriculture, Agricultural tools, agricultural engineering, animal husbandry, aquaculture, biology, calendar, crop rotation, ecology, ecological
engineering, fermentation, fishing, hunting, (2 if first to discover)

- Charismatic:
1 per happy face (max 10).
1 for discovery of Mysticism, agriculture, animal husbandry, radio, mass media, (2 if first to discover)
1 for building of monument, barracks, stable, dry-dock, broadcast tower.
2 for Building of Stonehenge, heroic epic, west point, Eiffel tower, pentagon.
1 if civic vassalage, theocracy

.....

 

[Flay]

Oh, I absolutely love this concept. I'm going to post some ideas on how each trait could be measured. Whether it's actually feasible to calculate my ideas is something else entirely, but I'm going to post them anyway.

Philisophical: If I were to measure this, I'd probably be looking at a focus on acquiring Great People points, through Wonders and specialists. Plus, merely having Great People and many Great Specialists.

Aggressive: This could be measured by having a lot of units in general. If one could determine whether they're offensive units is another story. Some examples of offensive units could be modern tanks or ancient siege weapons. Not to mention you being a conqueror would undoubtedly be a factor in this trait.

Spiritual: A distinct focus on religion. Perhaps having multiple religions or making a ton of religious buildings/wonders, that sort of thing.

Expansive: A focus on healthiness. Making a lot of buildings based around health. Maybe even terraforming away floodplains and jungles in the extreme late game.

Industrious: A clear focus on production. Production-based improvements being built around cities, not to mention buildings such as Forges and Factories.

Creative: A clear focus on culture. Having your cities create many culturally-based buildings and wonders. And having many cities with an already high cultural rating. Every city above level 3 or 4 perhaps?

Financial: A clear focus on the economy. There are tons of things that could influence this. Civics that endorse an increase of funds, making a bunch of cottrages, villages, that sort, economy-based buildings and probably more concepts.

Organized: This is a tougher one to regulate. Perhaps being enthusiastic with your civics, changing many times, and often? Perhaps maintenance-reducing buildings such as the Courthouse, as well.

Charismatic: Making many buildings and wonders that make your citizens happy, and being a generally happier nation than average. Perhaps having several vassals that follow you, too. Any type of concept that inspires the people, domestic and foreign. Low war weariness could also be a factor.

Protective: Having many defensive units such the Longbowman or the Mech. Infantry. Anything involving the protection of your cities, including having cities having high defensive ratings, perhaps cities with at least a 75% defensive rating?

Imperialist: Having a lot of cities, by using a lot of settlers and/or conquest. Perhaps using a lot of Recon units to expose the map quicker, too.

Nomad: Perhaps having a lot of mounted or wheeled units, anything that moves quicker than your standard infantry units. Kind of hard to expand on this one.

Agricultural: Emphasis on growth. Many farms and agricultural buildings, such as the granary and cannery.

Seafaring: Having a lot of sea-based units. An emphasis on many sea-based buildings such as the lighthouse and shipyards. Also having many sea-based improvements. And rivers. Anything that involves rivers, including Marines.

Deceiver: The heavy use of spies and their respective buildings. The success of your spies could assist in classifying this trait as well. And perhaps a shrewd foreign policy, such as breaking treaties and embagoing nations.

Scientific: Anything that further science. Wonders, buildings, even having a lot of Great Scientist specialists. In fact, many specialists should go along with most of these traits. I'm not going to go back and fix that now.

Humanitarian: Having a favorable foreign policy. Giving many gifts, honoring military alliances. Basically, seeing a lot more green than red in their leader's pop-up display. I know of some notable random events that could definitely play a role with this trait as well.

Well, that's all of them laid out generically for you. Please proceed to bash and/or endorse my ideas. It's 2:30 AM, and I'll look forward to seeing any responses to this when I wake up later in the morning.

.....

 

[Flay]

Flexible Traits sounds like a brilliant idea. Wouldn't it require insane amounts of coding though?

.....

 

[E_Pluribus_Unum]

Oh boy, nice idea!

After an hour thinking I just say that it's going to be VERY hard to figure out a good trait determiner algorythm.
I prefer 3 (or more) traits against 2. BTW engine supports 3 (or higher) traits?

 

[NotSoGood]

BTW engine supports 3 (or higher) traits?

It should. I think you can add as many traits to a leader as you want. Don't know how duplicates would work though...

 

[45°38'N-13°47'E]

Mmmm... since this thread started as a kind of spin-off from the thread I started about changing the leader... I actually don't know if Dynamic traits are so good (not to mention if it's feasible); I'd actually prefer to choose the traits myself when I want to change a leader (kind of revolution) as I proposed in my other thread. Let's say for example that I build a huge army and I raze some cities to have more room for my civ; when I'm satisfied with the borders of my civ, I'd like some years of peace and concentrate more on science or culture. Then if I can choose another leader as I am proposing, I could do it more easily; on the contrary, with the system you're proposing, I'd get an aggressive trait when I don't need it anymore. Isn't it kind of weird?
And I suppose is surely easier to find a way to switch from one leader to another (after all isn't this feature already present in the game when you play with Rev?) than to implement a new system of dynamic traits...

 

[Arakhor]

Unfortunately, what you want is basically a cheat. I want to become cultural so I am, rather than I have been aggressive so I am.

 

[Flay]

I don't know what would be realistic when it come to how often the traits should be re-evaluate, my logique tells me every 50 years (every 2nd generation), but my reason tells me it will maybe not be very good for the game play.
To be able to change leader or traits as we want anytime, I don't think it is very fairplay, I will not call it cheat if everyone can do it (both Human in MP and AI), but a bit to easy.
We got to deserve and work for the glory.
If you are at war to expend your empire you are obvously agressive and maybe allso imperialist, so you have to leave with that reputation for a certain time. and you can begin to act has a charismatic or cultural before your war has ended.
I am working on the entire list of how to be what, and you will see that many traits require comon way of play. Sometime it will need very litle to go from one to an other.
You see the traits of the leader as the influence of ONE person, I think it will be more acurate to see the leader traits has the reputation of a nation, because anyway a persone doesn't live many years but sometime the reputaion that this persone has "give" to his nation will existe for many generation.

 

[45°38'N-13°47'E]

I don't know what would be realistic when it come to how often the traits should be re-evaluate, my logique tells me every 50 years (every 2nd generation), but my reason tells me it will maybe not be very good for the game play.
To be able to change leader or traits as we want anytime, I don't think it is very fairplay, I will not call it cheat if everyone can do it (both Human in MP and AI), but a bit to easy.

Actually, my idea was to make it possible to change leader a limited number of times during the game (my idea was 2-3 times using Leaders already present in the game).
I think it's hard to call it cheating (especially since you don't know what the result would be) but it looks like many people think so.

 

[os79]

Personally, I'm leery of this idea plus the Dynamic Leader idea too.

Reason:
I view Leader's traits as a reputation like someone said above for that civ for the alternate history played in the game. Now that traits are defined out of the way, I move on to Leaders themselves. I view them as group of gods who actually exist but invisible to the people in civs. They are ones who influence (though literally because it is a game of course!) the people of the civ they are in charge of. This is a game of gods who took on names of famous leaders of the history to see which nation will stand the test of time as determined by the game .

Thus endeth the lecture . Hope you don't take this as cheapening your ideas. Because I'm not doing that, but rather trying to clarify the vision of the game while I'm playing this game.

PS: About Revolutions, I don't see them as revolts against me as much as against my manipulated influencing. If I influence wrong, another god will take over or even break away a small portion of my followers and set up a new civ .

 

[DRJ]

I support the idea of dynamic traits. I would gladly see the influence of my empires politics to be reflected with traits as some kind of benefiting "reputation". Traits, as they are right now seem so unused after I read about this idea.

 

[os79]

ON THE OTHER HAND HOWEVER:

If we were to make traits a part of spectrum, and have aggressive be the extreme end of one and scientific or whatever other peaceful trait be on the other side. Then let the game check your actions for last amount of turns (scaled to gamespeed). If your actions had been leaning to just building your cities and general maintenance of your empire's land then you have a chance of switching to ever more peaceful trait. If, on the other hand, you had been busy conquering the lands around you or at least be hostile to other civs then you have a chance of getting more aggressive trait.

If that can be workable, then it would be a fascinating way to see how empires develop different way. As always, AI will need to understand this and strategy accordingly.

 

[The Rusty Gamer]

Personally, as regards the traits thing, I think one idea is that during a time of anarchy, there is a chance of a leadership overthrow. The chance of this partly depends on the state of your nation. If for instance, some cities are unhappy due to other things, this could have an affect on how volatile the situation is. So, have more leaders for each nations with a different combination of traits (some could be negative as well) and the change of leadership will be a bit like dynamic trait changing.