Do the traits on Leveling Leaderheads stack or does level 2 replace level 1? I ask so that I can know what to put on my XML for 2nd and 3rd level traits (which I'll be working on this weekend).
the lvl2 (3,...) of a certain trait should be more valuable (stronger) than picking a new lvl1 trait.
Let me show what I mean with numbers:
lvl 1 trait gives +10% XXX
lvl 2 of same trait gives +25 % XXX
like promotions, once you pick lvl 2 of a trait, lvl1 of it is replaced as you suggested.
Specializing on traits would also mean that the downsides of the traits stack as well, so maybe specializing might not always be a good idea!
Once - as I drew out in my previous post - the trait (lvlups) are tied to certain technological progress, this will be a beeline vs broadband strategic approach. It may pay off to go for a trait lvlup tech but you can't say for sure if it will work all the time...
What I think is that although a lvl2 of a trait should be a bit better than a lvl1 trait this really should be a relatively minor extra, coming back to the example above:
two lvl1 traits compared to just one lvl2 trait
first lvl1 trait +10% XXX
secound lvl1 trait +10% YYY
vs
lvl2 trait +25% XXX (or +20% XXX +5% YYY etc)
Conclusion: diversity may be the right choice for some situations, specialization could be better for others. There should be small incentives to specialize, though.
the lvl2 (3,...) of a certain trait should be more valuable (stronger) than picking a new lvl1 trait.
Let me show what I mean with numbers:
lvl 1 trait gives +10% XXX
lvl 2 of same trait gives +25 % XXX
like promotions, once you pick lvl 2 of a trait, lvl1 of it is replaced as you suggested.
Specializing on traits would also mean that the downsides of the traits stack as well, so maybe specializing might not always be a good idea!
Once - as I drew out in my previous post - the trait (lvlups) are tied to certain technological progress, this will be a beeline vs broadband strategic approach. It may pay off to go for a trait lvlup tech but you can't say for sure if it will work all the time...
What I think is that although a lvl2 of a trait should be a bit better than a lvl1 trait this really should be a relatively minor extra, coming back to the example above:
two lvl1 traits compared to just one lvl2 trait
first lvl1 trait +10% XXX
secound lvl1 trait +10% YYY
vs
lvl2 trait +25% XXX (or +20% XXX +5% YYY etc)
Conclusion: diversity may be the right choice for some situations, specialization could be better for others. There should be small incentives to specialize, though.
I have spent most of this morning making level 2 and 3 traits, but just realized that it won't work without some new code, as I can't plop a replacementcondition on something that the loader sees as non-replaced XML (as there are no level 2 or 3 traits in the core). Is there a way to get around this using AIAndy's replacement system, or is the only option for someone (hopefully not me) to add core XML and then make mine the replacements?
For now, rather than programming them as replacements, which you'll need to go back and convert back to later if you do this, you can use the OnGameOption tag to limit your traits to your option.
If you wanted to make additional traits outside of the core design but only showing up for the games with your option, this would be the way to go about that too. So that's basically what you're doing by use of this tag.
I just thought about how we could aproach the for example "lvl2" naming to make it more "fun" to choose specialization .... maybe the lvl1-lvl5 of let's say the scientific trait would
be
"Curious" (lvl1 trait, available with a certain prehistoric tech)
then
"Imaginative" (lvl2 in ancient)
then
"Academic" (lvl3 medieval)
then
"Polymathic" (lvl4 late renaissance/early industrial)
then
"Ingenious" (lvl5, extremely hard to get available with "genetically enhanced inteligence" or something? )
The "pick a trait menu" would then show the "(former) scientific traitline" with a certain colour to it (turqouise I think), or the traits icon would display a scientific bulb or whatever.
Same could be done with the other traits, I suppose - but I can't tell you for sure as I am no native speaker.
The naming idea IS very interesting. So that we keep the naming of the traits along the trait promotionline consistent, SGTSlick and I will be trying the proverb method at first at least.
Thus the first step would be Slightly Scientific, second Moderately Scientific, etc...
Your suggestion is cool but we could get hedged into having used up our synonyms and find we still need more.
I have spent most of this morning making level 2 and 3 traits, but just realized that it won't work without some new code, as I can't plop a replacementcondition on something that the loader sees as non-replaced XML (as there are no level 2 or 3 traits in the core). Is there a way to get around this using AIAndy's replacement system, or is the only option for someone (hopefully not me) to add core XML and then make mine the replacements?
The loader will see it as replaced and add an empty info class that it replaces (as it needs that for ID purposes. Now it depends on what other code does with an info class that only has its type set but all other values are on the default values.
The naming idea IS very interesting. So that we keep the naming of the traits along the trait promotionline consistent, SGTSlick and I will be trying the proverb method at first at least.
Thus the first step would be Slightly Scientific, second Moderately Scientific, etc...
Your suggestion is cool but we could get hedged into having used up our synonyms and find we still need more.
I just think a caveman tasting some herbs or accidental crushing some nuts while throwing stones at rivals can't really be described as "slightly scientific"
yeah maybe he's "curious" as how the nuts got crashed and he throws some more stones at the unprepared and calmed down rivals
(because he thinks that killing rivals with stones crushes nuts^^), thus successfully passing on his curiosity --- but you see, what I try to explain is that maybe the naming of the early traits should reflect the level of ability to aquire them in the first place...
but of course that could be a problem of language, as in german we wouldn't say a caveman's personality could have been "wissenschaftlich"/scientific.
I really don't know if the era-adjusted naming could be concerning other traits as I have no list of them in my head. But I suppose for example "idealistic" (you'd need to invent something to believe in first before being idealistic about it) would be a later trait or lets say megalomaniac (at megastructure engeneering - i mean the stonehenge tech-- or maybe masonry ---or even the later pyramid tech -> making it more valuable which it needs imho)? like being lvl2 of industrial traitline? (industrial being lvl4 of it?)
The question is if we really need 30 traitlines or maybe less ones
but combining many existant boni traitsets under some roofs
(like megalomaniac within industrial traitline, idealistic in philosophical traitline etc)
The loader will see it as replaced and add an empty info class that it replaces (as it needs that for ID purposes. Now it depends on what other code does with an info class that only has its type set but all other values are on the default values.
So theoretically it would work to have a replacement that doesn't replace anything then? I suppose this would mean that if we had additional traits in an alternative set that aren't reflected in the original, it would work to simply write them up as replacements even though the replacements did not exist huh? Interesting... I'd not suspected that would not create a problem.
@DrJ: I can see your point on the slightly scientific as an example. @SGTSlick... what do you think about his naming suggestion?
Keep in mind that theoretically each trait line has a game effect focus and its not just all about its moniker.
So theoretically it would work to have a replacement that doesn't replace anything then? I suppose this would mean that if we had additional traits in an alternative set that aren't reflected in the original, it would work to simply write them up as replacements even though the replacements did not exist huh? Interesting... I'd not suspected that would not create a problem.
@DrJ: I can see your point on the slightly scientific as an example. @SGTSlick... what do you think about his naming suggestion?
Keep in mind that theoretically each trait line has a game effect focus and its not just all about its moniker.
Some additional thoughts on the above (sorry I am kinda creative these days must be the combination of spring and my inspiring wife^^)
....the integration of negative traits boni-sets into "traitlines" for example (megalomaniac at level 2 of industrial traitline) would also be interesting as specializing would mean also to take some hits to reach a higher goal
(maybe being rewarded with lvl 3 of the traitline whereas lvl4 of it is a neutral positive/negative lvlup, maybe just furthermore increasing some production stats, of course on the cost of health and unhappiness as well as maybe disgruntled humanitarian or ecological influenced leaders --> what about "ecological" as a later lvl of "nomadic" in a "nature trait line"? humanitarian in side a philosophical traitline?
The traitlines itself could be giving different choices for example inside the former "philosophical" traitline -you could chose either "idealistic" or "opportunistic" as lvl3 - "opportunistic" would unlock "populist" at lvl4 a and idealistic would unlock "humanitarian" also - at lvl4 b
A tree diagram about this could show it better but you can imagine that both, humanitarian and populist could then again unlock "politician" as lvl5 of philosophical traitline
you could even keep philosophical (maybe at lvl2 of the traitline?)
As for namin', why not keep some of the actual lvlups as descriptions?
so if you would go down that line you could combine the lvl3+4+5 traitnames to like [cruel,...], [...,megalomaniac], [opportunistic, populist politician]. [...]=traitline
boni of latest level only, names of latest 2 or 3 lvls?!
There should be a price for the badest boy combo personalities people are able to create
So the traitlines would essentialy blend in the negative traits in the old sense and enforce a rather radical or smoothly steps towards a grown out trait personality.
Note that the traitlines themselves could be interconected by the use Great-Person -to-change-traits mechanisms I vaguely suggested
one trait level up then could have a certain amount of "traitpoints" to be spent,
The traitpoints for example can be used to pick some traits from the traitlines
(again, a trait-tree would be perfect to establish as an additional menu, maybe a little altered -copy- coded F6 techtree?!!)
So lets say the traitlevelup "1" (culture 150/150 on Eternity) gives you 3 traitpoints which you can put on for example 8 traitlines.
Those traitlines are locked and only the research of techs allow you to spend a traitpoint on them.
So if you levelup the first time you maybe have unlocked all of the first lvl1 traitlines' choices. You could now choose 3 traitpaths in the traittree^^ which would include that the tratlines could very well cross at some points or interconnect
You could either spend GP or traitpoints to change certain traits to have more points to spend elsewhere on other traits - maybe you unlocked a tech that accessed you a other brach? Your intolerant character becomes a academic and then humanitarian?
so if only the latest lvlups would stay as name, in this case at one time "intolerant cleric" or "humanitarian academic" --- also --- humanitarian cleric, academic cleric*
Gameplay factor: high! Characters literally begin to life and are able to change trhoughout history!!
(higher level of the traitlines would need more traitpoints .f.e. a lvl 1 of a traitline costs 1 traitpoint to unlock it, a lvl 3 costs 3 traitpoints etc.
Traitpoints are gained by culture treshold growth, each expansion would give you more traitpoints.
There could also be additional ways to gain traitpoints I guess.
Diplomatic traitline would be cool with lot of different diplomatic boni throughout the line
maybe not so interesting for multiplayer games where it wouldnt have to be picked of course^^
*
Spoiler:
(imagine a theologist at a univeristy [btw. here in germany even the state pays for the churches people in the univerities and such still a 400 million euros a year LOL its because when the church was losing their lands in 1806, the state agreed to feed the priests by alimenting them by taxpayers --> and here we are to today, as the modern german state as legal successor to prussia still pays the 400 million a year dues thanks to that old "compensation" for napoleon dismanteling the mdeival the churches "arch-duchies" LOL yeah we have a cristian democratic party at power so why bother for seperation of church and state, right? the church, the big money and the politicians are plotting against the polpulation, you see? )
Right... so it could well create problems that way right? Crashes and such by referencing infos that don't exist and all.
EDIT:
....the integration of negative traits boni-sets into "traitlines" for example (megalomaniac at level 2 of industrial traitline) would also be interesting as specializing would mean also to take some hits to reach a higher goal
That's really what the negative values on positive traits are there to represent - the indivisible side effect of the generally good policies. Linking particular negative traits to existing positive lines would either negate the point of having the blends we have (which is something you can eliminate with Pure Traits) or negate the point of having negative traits at all.
(maybe being rewarded with lvl 3 of the traitline whereas lvl4 of it is a neutral positive/negative lvlup, maybe just furthermore increasing some production stats, of course on the cost of health and unhappiness as well as maybe disgruntled humanitarian or ecological influenced leaders --> what about "ecological" as a later lvl of "nomadic" in a "nature trait line"? humanitarian in side a philosophical traitline?
Not quite sure what your suggesting here but it sounds like your saying some trait lines should branch off others and that's some advanced design moves that may be evaluated for possibility once the tier sets are designed as they are. For now, this kind of move would be exemplifying things to the point that balance would be very tough to maintain.
The trait point idea is... well it's another way we could've gone but it's not an addon or edit to the way its being done now but rather a rewrite. I see the potential but I'm working on perfecting the structure we have and I'm not inclined to go back and rewrite things. This current method has a lot more simplicity for the player... that's for sure.
And yes, I have a concept or two for Diplomatic focused lines in the trait set I'll be designing.
That's really what the negative values on positive traits are there to represent - the indivisible side effect of the generally good policies. Linking particular negative traits to existing positive lines would either negate the point of having the blends we have (which is something you can eliminate with Pure Traits) or negate the point of having negative traits at all.
Well my perspective is that "negative" is too judging - we can't really bring in morals here^^, no really as all, even negative has a reason, an upside somewhere inherent in the trait. The radical vs smoothly focus would be more accurately and advanced, so instead of positive/negative traits a smoothly trait combo would for example enable to become an idealistic, humanitarian politician, vs a opportunistic, populistic politician.
(or for that case a humanitarian, populistic, Idealist etc.) The latter name the driving (latest picked) characteristic.
Not quite sure what your suggesting here but it sounds like your saying some trait lines should branch off others and that's some advanced design moves that may be evaluated for possibility once the tier sets are designed as they are.
Yes, I am thinking as of a traittree with a own Fx button to administeryour traits and occasionally switch between them like you do in techstree when you mark a teching path (so question to you hardcore hardcoders out there: cant the "pick tech code" be deleted out, filling the (f6) boxes with tech code with "pick trait code"?
I mean DYNAMIC TRAITS is a huge development feature.
The trait point idea is... well it's another way we could've gone but it's not an addon or edit to the way its being done now but rather a rewrite. I see the potential but I'm working on perfecting the structure we have and I'm not inclined to go back and rewrite things. This current method has a lot more simplicity for the player... that's for sure.
They stack.
Due to the fact that the trait trees won't be anywhere near the complexity of the promotion trees and the display doesn't demand the breakdown that the promo display does I decided, for now, to forgo the added effort to create a display mechanism such as we have for promotions along the same promo line. And to make each replace the predecessor is simply more complicated for no purpose.
I thought each trait level replaced the previous level.. well that complicates things. I need to get my head around this..
I'm glad I hadn't finished yet, I saved myself some time lol.. With the new tags you put in the traits threads and with the new knowledge that the trait levels stack - I will need redo what i've done. At least I have all the skeleton xml in place , this is a bit of a nightmare though
The loader will see it as replaced and add an empty info class that it replaces (as it needs that for ID purposes. Now it depends on what other code does with an info class that only has its type set but all other values are on the default values.
I think you misunderstood me. There are no replacements for this as there is no TRAIT_PHILOSOPHICAL2 anywhere except for my module (yet). Here is what the XML looks like for now.
Yeah, I feel both approaches would have validity and I can see his points but - meh - either way has its merits and flaws. This way makes it more clear for the player what they are developing at least.
I thought each trait level replaced the previous level.. well that complicates things. I need to get my head around this..
I'm glad I hadn't finished yet, I saved myself some time lol.. With the new tags you put in the traits threads and with the new knowledge that the trait levels stack - I will need redo what i've done. At least I have all the skeleton xml in place , this is a bit of a nightmare though
I'm very glad you've been able to get this clarified then. I thought this was self-evident but apparently not and I can understand that.
Funny you state how its a nightmare then smile... I know what you mean though. Just recall that YOU requested that most of playtypings trait abilities be enabled.
Some of those ideas are pretty much designed with the trait structure I'm planning in mind so don't feel like you HAVE to use them all. If it doesn't fit then don't force it. (Though we really DO need a couple traits to interact with the Religious Disabling pronto. That's just as critical on the non-Developing Leader traits too.)
I dont know if you guys can do something with it but I tried to make a little exel sheet about possible traitlines for leader lvlups
I didn't include yet what techs I suggest to unlock each traitline lvlup but some are really obvious cooperative trait might be available with cooperation tech for example
Note that although someof the negative traits are already merged in there, some like "excessive" aren't yet. I guess we could get the excessive effects in there somewhere.
No traitline should be better or worse I think, but each traitline lvl up could be differently strong/effective --> the agressive lvl 2 could be betetr than it's lvl3 but the scientific lvl3 could have more effects than lvl2 for example. This way, picking traits may be good at one time but also there's a relatively dry spell from time to time?
Anyway, here is the sheet
Edit: just realizing that lvl 2 cultural and lvl 2 religious are same "mystic"... well what about "jester" or something?
It does display your concept fairly well. I may try something along those lines with my trait set since ls612 is taking the I,II,III approach and SGTSlick has adopted the Fairly, Moderately, Extremely approach. The naming differences would help to keep the different sets different in the minds of the players who've tested each.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
) 
)
its because when the church was losing their lands in 1806, the state agreed to feed the priests by alimenting them by taxpayers --> and here we are to today, as the modern german state as legal successor to prussia still pays the 400 million a year dues thanks to that old "compensation" for napoleon dismanteling the mdeival the churches "arch-duchies" LOL yeah we have a cristian democratic party at power so why bother for seperation of church and state, right? the church, the big money and the politicians are plotting against the polpulation, you see? 
)
, this is a bit of a nightmare though 
I know what you mean though. Just recall that YOU requested that most of playtypings trait abilities be enabled. 
