Lets Talk how strategies already appear to be dif from cIV

[mboettcher]

First I wish to start with a question: DO we have unique buildings too or just unique civ traits?

Anyway one of the most radical changes in play style I noticed is that many of the Civ traits would imply significantly different strategies from the way some civs were traditionally played in cIV.

For example, Furor Teutonicus would imply that Germany (of all civs), benefits from being ultra-aggressive and expansionistic early where they were a medium land grabbing (at most) and mostly a vertical development civ in the previous game with their late UB and UU and the economic traits of their two leaders.

Glory of Rome seems like Rome is gonna have an easier time transitioning from big empire grab to strong economy.

The Chinese are way more warlike in this version. This is definitely different. Kind of like a CHO KO Nu rush strategy from IV.

Egypt seems to be the same

The United States also appears to have taken the same radical change in play style Germany has, going from one of the latest bloomers to one of the earliest, aggressive civs.

Persia seems to have gone the opposite direction of the US and Germany to a degree, dialing down the early warfare and playing for those GA's.

Also doesn't it seem as if many of these traits are very strategy specific and if we have random personality generation wont many of the CIvs not play well to their strengths if they get an odd personality? A not so aggressive US or Germany early seems to have a big disadvantage mid game. And do traits effect naval styles too? Will England possibly not build a lot of ships?

Any further thoughts on what the traits mean for the game? I just cant wait...

 

[Lyoncet]

The answer to your first question can be found on http://well-of-souls.com/civ/index.html (the answer is some civs have a UU and UB, some have two UUs). Reading that could probably help you focus your questions and flush out your statements.

Also, don't know where you got the "economic traits of their [Germany's] two leaders" from. Leaders don't have traits now (they're really just an AI and a movie; the leaders themselves don't have abilities or traits), and as a result each civ only has one leader.

Not that I'm trying to be dismissive. Would probably be good to get a bit more up to speed first though.

One interesting thing you brought up was Persia. It's hard to tell whether they're going to be more or less militarily inclined. It certainly seems like a will-balanced civ, between having a special ability that helps in both peace and war (more war though) and a UB (even if we don't know what it does yet) along with a pretty nifty and very early UU. That'll probably be one of my first playthroughs, even if I'm a bit bummed that my man Cyrus is out.

 

[mboettcher]

I was refering to the leader's traits from IV

 

[Schuesseled]

Although germany's ability will allow it to build and maintain a large army early on, it gets a military bonus in the middle ages with awesome landerschnet and then again in industrial with the panzer.

Two of the most powerful units in Civ IV. I think Germany is going to be al around military power house throughout the ages.