No civilisationtraits?

[wabatt]

What I've often wished for is a game where civilisation traits grow organically, rather than being decided from the beginning. For example, if in the first 100 turns you build a lot of cottages by a river, you might develop the 'Financial' trait; if you spend the first part of the game doing a lot of defending in forts and cities, you might get the 'protective' trait.

It's not impossible... FF2 did something like it with the "Adaptive trait" every 100 turns or so the player got to replace their trait with an new one. I think thats a ability id like to see appear in ciV

 

[kivanc]

generating a new unique strength to each of the leader is hard but if it was handled carefully, it would be very exciting to play all of them.
i agree EMT's list of civ/leader extras are overpowered.

i have 2 ideas how firaxis could generate leader extras.

1) Combo: This is the idea that i'm afraid of. by making hybrid extras from other extras, many extras might be generated. that would make leaders very similar (bad)

leader 1 : +100% GP birth rate
leader 2 : +2 happiness.
leader 3 : combo of 1&2. +50% GP birth rate and +1happiness



2) subgroups: i expect and hope they do such changes to make the game more exciting, giving each leader a totally different taste. they may divide each extra to sub groups instead of making combos.

a) you could divide SE features into many different leaders.
+100% GP birth rate
1free priest each city, permission to assign 1more priest w/o any building
1free scientist each city, permission to assign 1more scientist w/o any building
and other specialist types

b) you could divide CE features into many different leaders
+25% cottage growth rate
+1 commerce for tiles > 3 commerce
+1food on town
+1hammer on town
etc

c) you could divide free promotions into many
free combat1
free woodsman1
free guerilla1
free flanking1

similarly each trait, UU and UB of civ4 might be applied into civ5. but let me highlight again that, i hope leaders will really be different from each other. because IMO, the main success of civ4 was about its replayability.

 

[Loppan Torkel]

I like the leadertraits, but I'd like them to be of minor importance compared to the "civilisationtraits".

The mongols conquered a large portion of the world on horse, but have they ever launched a successful attack over seas? Give them a good boost for movement and attack by horse and a penalty in movement over seas.
No more doubled construction speed for harbors or 1 extra commerce for certain leaders and that's what differentiates two civs. It's more interesting if the bonuses and penalties are more distinct, unique and coupled to the civs, even if it becomes a bit caricaturized.

 

[kivanc]

I like the leadertraits, but I'd like them to be of minor importance compared to the "civilisationtraits".

The mongols conquered a large portion of the world on horse, but have they ever launched a successful attack over seas? Give them a good boost for movement and attack by horse and a penalty in movement over seas.
No more doubled construction speed for harbors or 1 extra commerce for certain leaders and that's what differentiates two civs. It's more interesting if the bonuses and penalties are more distinct, unique and coupled to the civs, even if it becomes a bit caricaturized.

hmm what u say is SMAC approach.
planned economy gave +2 growth, -2efficiency and +1sth else
while another gave +2efficiency, -2growth and+1sth else
sth like that

and the factions (corrsponds to civs) were similar

 

[climat]

I'm worried about balance.
Unique (dis)advantages will be cool but.. making balance will be more difficult in this system.
I hope Firaxis does their best for balance.

 

[Loppan Torkel]

It's more dynamic than unbalanced if you know that the advantages and disadvantages only are limited to certain events or periods.

hmm what u say is SMAC approach.
planned economy gave +2 growth, -2efficiency and +1sth else
while another gave +2efficiency, -2growth and+1sth else
sth like that

and the factions (corrsponds to civs) were similar

I know about the SMAC approach, but modifiers such as +2 growth, is what's boring about differences.

 

[kivanc]

It's more dynamic than unbalanced if you know that the advantages and disadvantages only are limited to certain events or periods.

I know about the SMAC approach, but modifiers such as +2 growth, is what's boring about differences.

yes. i agree that SMAC approach is too simple. A balanced but more complicated system I would like.

The features of pacifism is a good example then. +1commerce cost per unit is a military handicap while +100% GPP is great. Each leader bonus would be great if it was generated this way.

For ex: a militaristic leader, gains combat1 free while looses a 5% in science.
a philosophical leader, gains 100%GPP while he looses 1 health bonus (thinkers drink alcohol much )