Ideas for New Civ Traits

[Meffy]

I can see that working. And how to rationalize diplomacy without alphabet is easy -- the leader is so dedicated to diplomatic discourse that he or she sends personal envoys to neighboring civs. (Not actual units, this is just back-story.) The envoys' status would be somewhere between hostage and advisor. Surrendering their freedom, they would attach themselves to the other leader's court, learn the other civ's language and ways, and so forth. No exchange of documents required, messengers and an agent considered trustworthy by both parties would do.

Now: Would it broaden playing possibilities for players of many skill levels?

 

[gettingfat]

Wow, I wasn't aware my diplomatic trait idea will have so much complication, particularly since I seldom play MP.

How about that:

Diplomatic (revised, or may call charismatic): Other civs attacking the civ of this leader will receive -1 happiness penalty in each of their cities. The penalty become -2 happiness when there is open-border. With mass media an additional -1 penalty applies. Result of goodie huts as if one level of difficulty lower.

Another idea:

Nomadic/colonial: Palace and Forbidden Palace at half cost. Like palace, Forbidden Palace can relocate (by building the new one the old one disappears). Pillage gives you +10% gold. Animal resources (cow, sheep, etc) provide +1 shield.

 

[Lockesdonkey]

How about this:

Imperialist:
Cities under foreign control with your citizens more likely to revolt; cities under your control with citizens that are not yours less likely to revolt. Mix with Colonial above.

 

[Dueck]

Athletic:
Worker actions take 25% less time. After combat 1, foot units can upgrade with Cross Country Runner, for +1 movement point. +2 health in cities with Colosseum

Sneaky:
Units have the ability to Hide (in ambush). After 1 turn, that unit becomes invisible until moved again. Guerilla or Woodsman units are concealed when in hills or forest, respectively. Double production on Spy.

 

[vinstafresh]

Since when did a leader's sparking good diplomatic attitude have anything to do with how its empire came about the alphabet? Look at this in the historical perspective, you NEED a common language or symbols to communicate and trade. Really, there it is in the nutshell.

I did my post in red so people will read it and stop the spamming of half-baked ideas (no offense towards anyone)...

Offense taken... Since when are you moderator on this board? Perhaps you could put your half-baked criticism in normal fonts like everybody else and come off your high horse? Thanks (no offense)

Have you ever been to a foreign country where you didn't speak a language? You can still communicate! If I were to show you how to make pots, I would get some clay and started sculpting a pot, lay the clay pot in the sun and let it dry. I don't have to speak or write a language to do that. Same goes for masonry, archery, hunting, bronze working, iron working, metal casting, fishing, sailing, animal husbandry, horseback riding. I do think you would need some sort of graphic imaging to tell people about god(s) though.

All this can be established like Meffy said before. I'm pretty certain that's historically accurate. People were very resourceful back in the day...

 

[ADHansa]

I don't think any more traits are necessary.

But if there is to be a trait to improve the hayppyness i think it should be a Populistic rather then optimistic. And +2 happyness of the bat is very strong. Maybe +1, then another +1 with Mass media.

 

[Lockesdonkey]

Generally, when peoples meet, they often learn one another's language pretty quickly. Considering the time span per turn in the early game, I think it's not difficult to assume that in one hundred years, at least some of your people will speak one another's language.

 

[mitsho]

I don't think any more traits are necessary.

But if there is to be a trait to improve the hayppyness i think it should be a Populistic rather then optimistic. And +2 happyness of the bat is very strong. Maybe +1, then another +1 with Mass media.

One or two more traits are necessary, to avoid doubling of trait combos.

On diplomatic, the "you can trade before alphabet" doesn't sound too bad, and not too strong imho too. To make it more feasible in the end and middle game, you could also give it a bonus on spies (and/or missionaries) which sort of fits also into the theme.

m

 

[thenooblet22]

Offense taken... Since when are you moderator on this board? Perhaps you could put your half-baked criticism in normal fonts like everybody else and come off your high horse? Thanks (no offense)

Have you ever been to a foreign country where you didn't speak a language? You can still communicate! If I were to show you how to make pots, I would get some clay and started sculpting a pot, lay the clay pot in the sun and let it dry. I don't have to speak or write a language to do that. Same goes for masonry, archery, hunting, bronze working, iron working, metal casting, fishing, sailing, animal husbandry, horseback riding. I do think you would need some sort of graphic imaging to tell people about god(s) though.

All this can be established like Meffy said before. I'm pretty certain that's historically accurate. People were very resourceful back in the day...

That still doesn't explain how being Diplomatic suddenly gves your civilization an alphabet. I think your missing the real point of my last post.

Have you ever been to a foreign country where you didn't speak a language? You can still communicate!

That's because they already have an language of their own, as you do as well. Stop thinking modernly and think about the primitive times. It was different. Alphabets were huge breakthroughs has well displayed in-game.

If I were to show you how to make pots, I would get some clay and started sculpting a pot, lay the clay pot in the sun and let it dry. I don't have to speak or write a language to do that. Same goes for masonry, archery, hunting, bronze working, iron working, metal casting, fishing, sailing, animal husbandry, horseback riding.

That's not showing me anything. There is a big difference between between making pots and teaching pots. In fact, most of those technologies are more complicated than the name implies. Just by building a boat in front of my eyes doesn't gift me with knowledge of building my own fleet.

All this can be established like Meffy said before. I'm pretty certain that's historically accurate. People were very resourceful back in the day...

A Civilization needs something similar or common to associate with others. Without an alphabet, there is no established language, therefore no concrete comunication. To teach a technology, a civilization has to communicate somehow with another. Showing symbols, verbally or physically, is infact a form of alphabet.

However, THIS is not even my point I wanted to share. I'm not argueing against the Alphabet and how to trade technology. No, I am simply arguing that: A Diplomatic trait should not miraculously give your civilization an Alphabet. It is historically in accurate and, as many stated already, a flaw in gameplay.

Again, this is not a flame post. This is my opinion.

 

[Sabin Stargem]

In one of my history books, there was a form of trading described. This kind of trade didn't really need Alphabet in order to work. Here is how it was done. First, both parties place items on whatever can be considered a middle ground. Then they respectively add or reduce their respective goods, until finally both parties are happy with the results. Then the trade is done, and each party leaves, usually thinking they got the better deal.

Another way for a civilization to discover new technology and such is just through observation. Say a bunch of traders carry their heavy goods, and enter a city. They go to the market place, and find that there are other traders that have donkeys...loaded with bags. The implications of this is obvious: Animals can carry goods. Thus these donkeyless traders would strive to get donkeys, and the people in their own communities would see the donkeys...and apply them to their own transportation tasks. So it would go on...

 

[gettingfat]

Personally I don't think if there's a diplomatic trait, it should help the leaders before alphabet.

Conflicts between civs can be resolved either by wars or diplomacy (or more usually, a combination of the two). Wars were more frequent in the early part of human history (that's why warlike people are called barbaric), although as time goes on, the scale of wars was usually much larger than the wars in ancient era. At the mean time diplomacy has been getting more relied on since the cost of wars is getting higher and higher. Although the pre-alphabet tech trade could become a legitimate game feature, it does not reflect the true spirit and value of diplomacy.

P.S. I also don't think it's appropriate to discourage other posters from throwing out "half-baked" ideas. These so-called half-baked ideas usually have problems in their technical specifics, but the overall idea may still be great. If every idea has to be "fully-baked" before it comes out, there's a good chance we're still living in medieval time.

 

[thenooblet22]

In one of my history books, there was a form of trading described. This kind of trade didn't really need Alphabet in order to work. Here is how it was done. First, both parties place items on whatever can be considered a middle ground. Then they respectively add or reduce their respective goods, until finally both parties are happy with the results. Then the trade is done, and each party leaves, usually thinking they got the better deal.

That is not trading technology. In Civilization IV you can easily trade resources with an open trade route. Therefore, this is not the the kind of trade I was refering to.

Another way for a civilization to discover new technology and such is just through observation. Say a bunch of traders carry their heavy goods, and enter a city. They go to the market place, and find that there are other traders that have donkeys...loaded with bags. The implications of this is obvious: Animals can carry goods. Thus these donkeyless traders would strive to get donkeys, and the people in their own communities would see the donkeys...and apply them to their own transportation tasks. So it would go on...

Once again, the technological advances were more complicated than that. You can't just learn how to domesticate animals just by looking at another civilization. Yes, you can be inspired to teach yourselves, but ultimately, it has nothing to do with technology trading and teaching. If someone can make pots, but you don't automatically assume that you have to gather clay, mold it, dry it and bake it. However, in a CivIV example, if you see someone with horse archers, you might want to research and discover horseback riding yourselves.

 

[Sabin Stargem]

There is many ways to gain technology, or at least the benefits through offering something in exchange. Say for example, a daughter can be married off, essentially bonding the two parties in such a way that can be benefited by the daughter's father. A king may ask a potter to move into his domain and work for him, by giving shelter and plenty to eat. A person may flee from their country and offer secrets. Technology can be stolen - for example, a European king had his agents steal the secrets to China's silk. It was probably to his suprise that the major secret to it all was the silk worms. A new generation can grow up exposed to new things that the previous generation wouldn't accept.

There is a world of possibility concerning trade and technology. A lack of language...or rather, Alphabet doesn't eliminate the ability of a civilization to conduct trade or adaption.

 

[vinstafresh]

That's because they already have an language of their own, as you do as well. Stop thinking modernly and think about the primitive times. It was different. Alphabets were huge breakthroughs has well displayed in-game.

Funny that you say this, I was thinking the same thing with you! People or even animals communicate with each other by some form of language (including body language). This has been around way longer than alphabet. I do agree that alphabet speeded up things dramatically, but it doesn't mean that communication between different tribes wasn't possible.

Learning how to make pots or boats is not just showing some 'cool hip stuff' for an afternoon, it's a process of years. To put it in modern times for you: tribes train each other by practising making pots, boats and showing each other how to do things. At a certain point, they are able to do things themselves (and in their own way -> UU's for example).

A Diplomatic trait should not miraculously give your civilization an Alphabet. It is historically in accurate and, as many stated already, a flaw in gameplay

Where did you get this from anyway? Alphabet in Civ4 enables technology training. A diplomatic civ should be able to trade technologies before they research alphabet. 'It's from their foes, not their friends, that cities learn the lesson of building high walls'. These inspirations occur during war-time. Diplomatic civs can 'inspire' other civs in a friendly way and get 'inspired' by other civs as well. Because of this inspiration, figuring out a technology happens so fast, it's discovered in the same period a turn represents, simplified in a trade-screen gamewise.

 

[Junichiro]

Learning how to make pots or boats is not just showing some 'cool hip stuff' for an afternoon, it's a process of years. To put it in modern times for you: tribes train each other by practising making pots, boats and showing each other how to do things. At a certain point, they are able to do things themselves (and in their own way -> UU's for example).

Hmm, might be interesting addition to the game if the technologies would "diffuse" like they did in the real world. For example in prehistoric times pottery and agriculture did spread around for large part because of marriages between tribes...those were mostly women's jobs and when a girl married to another tribe she took with her the way she had learned to do pots or grow plants...often without active "research" on a subject.
Similarly, militaristic innovations spread in quickly in medieval Europe. When one army used a new tactic against you and it worked (but you lived to tell the tale), you might use the same tactic against your next opponent.

Would be nice to see things like this adapted to the game...if one empire is ahead on technology, there is a chance those technologies spread to neighbors. Especially if this chance was tied to amount of culture (you impose your culture to the neighbors -> you are more likely to spread technologies...same for open borders) it might bring in interesting problematics in strategies (when suddenly having a high culture can be a bad thing).
Maybe diplomatic and adaptive traits could be tied to a concept like this, both rising the chance of catching new technologies (and religions too, while we are at it).

 

[Dadrick]

I just finished watching a rerun of Star Trek:TNG. How about a leader trait based on the ----

Pakleds = Mimic ("we search for things to make us strong")
0% fixed Learn a tech when it is known by all other civs
+50%
Can only build "things" that units have incountered (i.e. cottages,other units) They would not be able to build World Wonders, but could build national ones.


Borg = Assimilationist
+2 per city
Enemy units < 1.0 Strength are captured (Assimilated)

Flames accepted

 

[mutax2003]

All those benefits for diplomatic are fine for single players, but doesn't work in multiplayer situation when you are up against other players, almost most games are set to "no tech trading". Any idea for diplomatic trait bonus in MP games?

 

[Zombie69]

(1) Optimistic: 2+ happy face, half cost theatre, double shield output from pop rushing

Ridiculous fluff wise and completely overpowered.

(2) Scientific: 100% birth of great scientist, half priced library and university, double shield output from cash rushing.

Too specific, and cash rushing is already overpowered without it so this is gross.

(3) Seafaring: 3+ movements on all navel units, half priced navel units, harbour, and lighthouse

Too map specific. Completely useless in some maps.

(4) Agricultural: 2+ food on all plot, half priced granary and worker

Completely overpowered. Maybe at +1 food, and only on tiles that already have 3 food or more. Half priced worker is too powerful in the early game for chop rushing.

Diplomatic: Leaders who are smart in avoiding confrontation (opposite of aggressive) and take advantage of a relationship. +2 rating in diplomacy; 10% bonus in tech trade (exact figures need to be tested to avoid over- or underpowered); results of goodie huts as if one level of difficulty lower.

Completely useless in multiplayer.

Adaptive: Leaders who perservere and make the most out of difficult situations. +1 shield in jungle tiles and workable tundra tiles, +1 gold in workable desert tiles. Half cost building hospitals and recycling plant.

Interesting.

Diplomatic (revised, or may call charismatic): Other civs attacking the civ of this leader will receive -1 happiness penalty in each of their cities. The penalty become -2 happiness when there is open-border. With mass media an additional -1 penalty applies. Result of goodie huts as if one level of difficulty lower.

Opposite problem of what you had before. This wouldn't work in single player, because the AI probably couldn't adjust its play properly.

Nomadic/colonial: Palace and Forbidden Palace at half cost. Like palace, Forbidden Palace can relocate (by building the new one the old one disappears). Pillage gives you +10% gold. Animal resources (cow, sheep, etc) provide +1 shield.

Very interesting, and seems balanced.

Pakleds = Mimic ("we search for things to make us strong")
0% fixed Learn a tech when it is known by all other civs
+50%
Can only build "things" that units have incountered (i.e. cottages,other units) They would not be able to build World Wonders, but could build national ones.

Completely overpowered. That's almost like giving the civ the internet right off the bat. Killing weaker civs makes you advance in tech. Also, +50% hammers at the cost of no wonders is way too good, for a civ that only needs hammers anyway (they only need enough commerce to pay for maintenance). Too sci fi, doesn't fit any real civilization.

Borg = Assimilationist
+2 per city
Enemy units < 1.0 Strength are captured (Assimilated)

Very weak trait, and hard to relate to any real world civilization.

 

[Zombie69]

Please ignore.

 

[Zombie69]

I wish they'd let you delete posts.