Spiritual Trait

[Holycannoli]

Strategy games are not a matter of personal preference? That's what's strategy is all about...preferences. If I prefer to be a warmonger then aggressive will be one of the most powerful traits there is. If I prefer to build wonder after wonder then industrious is one of the most powerful.

It's all about preference, otherwise there'd be no strategy. Strategy is about making choices. I'll give an example: I don't consider Age of Empires II a strategy game, but I do consider Rome: Total War a strategy game. See, the former doesn't allow much strategy; you just build the most powerful units and send them off to fight. In the latter you choose what comprises your army and there is no clear-cut best unit to use, unlike AOE's paladins and trebs.

I know that in CivIV, financial is obviously a powerful trait. But we can't define a trait like spiritual as powerful or not powerful because in the hands of someone who wants to use it it can be very powerful.

 

[acidsatyr]

What i ment was, untill we discover methods to fully calculate the game from the very beggining, we will continue to use opening(s) that we feel are best for us.
And i think you didnt quite understand what i had to say, not the other way around.
and yeah i'm getting tired from this thread.

 

[yavoon]

Strategy games are not a matter of personal preference? That's what's strategy is all about...preferences. If I prefer to be a warmonger then aggressive will be one of the most powerful traits there is. If I prefer to build wonder after wonder then industrious is one of the most powerful.

It's all about preference, otherwise there'd be no strategy. Strategy is about making choices. I'll give an example: I don't consider Age of Empires II a strategy game, but I do consider Rome: Total War a strategy game. See, the former doesn't allow much strategy; you just build the most powerful units and send them off to fight. In the latter you choose what comprises your army and there is no clear-cut best unit to use, unlike AOE's paladins and trebs.

I know that in CivIV, financial is obviously a powerful trait. But we can't define a trait like spiritual as powerful or not powerful because in the hands of someone who wants to use it it can be very powerful.

I never impugned ur ability to do whatever u want, I merely meant that strategy games are objective. some things work better than others. if u wish to do things that dont work as well thats fine, just dont act like they are actually equally as good.

I wonder if this idea that strategy games as personal preference is some larger social movement based on self esteem issues and not counting score in little league games? because it seems way too many ppl are under this basic misconception of the idea of strategy.

 

[yavoon]

What i ment was, untill we discover methods to fully calculate the game from the very beggining, we will continue to use opening(s) that we feel are best for us.
And i think you didnt quite understand what i had to say, not the other way around.
and yeah i'm getting tired from this thread.

false argument. ur basically arguing that until we know 100% we should act like we know 0%. thats absurd.

 

[acidsatyr]

No, you dont act as you know 0%. You act only as far as you mind can comprehand the game.
And in case you want to label this as a false argument as well, just a note that this isn't one.....

 

[yavoon]

No, you dont act as you know 0%. You act only as far as you mind can comprehand the game.
And in case you want to label this as a false argument as well, just a note that this isn't one.....

completely ad hominem. I've stated before that I am willing to argue, but that arguing from a perspective of personal preference is blatantly wrong and useless.

and of course I dont act as though I know 0% considering I said its absurd to do so, I'm sure as hell glas I dont do things I think are absurd.

 

[acidsatyr]

you missread that.
you said: ...until we know 100% we should act like we know 0%.
and i said thats thats not the case, etc etc
I don't think i attacked you here

 

[Underdawg]

So Yavoon what do you think are the best traits and in what environment? SP/MP? What may be really good in SP (ie. financial) does not fare as well in MP. Cottages just get pillaged to death. Which is the right measure?

 

[yavoon]

So Yavoon what do you think are the best traits and in what environment? SP/MP? What may be really good in SP (ie. financial) does not fare as well in MP. Cottages just get pillaged to death. Which is the right measure?

I dont play MP so I couldn't tell u about MP. I've rated the traits before in threads, assuming generalized "normal" settings.

 

[JLH Fans]

Well, that's personall preference and and individual limitations in understanding the mechanics of the game.
Personally i hold Philo. and Spritual to be much more powerfull (if not the two most powefrull traist in the game together with Aggressive) than both financial and organized and especially charismatic. New traits suck majorly. But, whatever.

Phi/Spi nowhere near to a fin/imp.
I played dozens of games with Victoria Huana Capac was my ally against Philo leaders (one of them was Gandhi who Spi as well) and even they bulit Pyramid they had no chance at all.
( I mean continents custom cont or island map of course no team batlegrounds or a kind of map)

 

[Holycannoli]

I never impugned ur ability to do whatever u want, I merely meant that strategy games are objective. some things work better than others. if u wish to do things that dont work as well thats fine, just dont act like they are actually equally as good.

You're absolutely right that some things work better than others. But in this particular case about the spiritual trait you cannot say it works great or it doesn't work great, because it will vary according to who's using it and how. It's not a question of acting like they're equally as good as something well known to be good (like spiritual vs financial trait); it's a question of being good in the right circumstances.

That's what "strategy" is. To someone who can make good use of the lack of anarchy and the cheap temples the spiritual trait can be more powerful than financial. I'm not saying I'm that person I'm finally starting to toy with spiritual and whipping my population vs avoiding spiritual and slavery in favor of other traits and letting my population and cottages grow.

A strategy game can only be so objective before it's no longer a strategy game. A lack of viable, varied and equally potent tactical choices would make for a very boring strategy game.

 

[yavoon]

You're absolutely right that some things work better than others. But in this particular case about the spiritual trait you cannot say it works great or it doesn't work great, because it will vary according to who's using it and how. It's not a question of acting like they're equally as good as something well known to be good (like spiritual vs financial trait); it's a question of being good in the right circumstances.

That's what "strategy" is. To someone who can make good use of the lack of anarchy and the cheap temples the spiritual trait can be more powerful than financial. I'm not saying I'm that person I'm finally starting to toy with spiritual and whipping my population vs avoiding spiritual and slavery in favor of other traits and letting my population and cottages grow.

A strategy game can only be so objective before it's no longer a strategy game. A lack of viable, varied and equally potent tactical choices would make for a very boring strategy game.

I assume all traits are used to their fullest. and ur last paragraph is patently false, equal potency is in no way a definition, a requirement or even a concept of strategy games. infact in game theory often strategy games develop dominant strategies.

 

[Underdawg]

Yes I side with Yavoon on this. If all the traits were compared on the grounds that each trait would be used to its maximum potency, there are some traits (ie Financial) that would do better than others.

 

[flamingzaroc121]

i like Spi Exp and Cre

 

[particle77]

I personally don't like to play spiritual, because the level of micro-management that it seems to require to actually make use of it makes the game stop being a game for me. That said, I strongly suspect that if the traits were played to maximum effect that spiritual would be one of the more potent traits. Just having the ability to switch to theocracy/vassalage/universal sufferage at the drop of a hat is rather nice. Or switching to pacifism/caste system for a few turns can turn out a great engineer at a pivotal moment. A spiritual civ can run serfdom when its not whiping, without loosing the flexability to whip when desired. That said, keeping all your cities in synch so that they all make the most of the current civics would take tremendous planning. Financial is an easy trait to make good use of. Spiritual is not.

 

[yavoon]

I personally don't like to play spiritual, because the level of micro-management that it seems to require to actually make use of it makes the game stop being a game for me. That said, I strongly suspect that if the traits were played to maximum effect that spiritual would be one of the more potent traits. Just having the ability to switch to theocracy/vassalage/universal sufferage at the drop of a hat is rather nice. Or switching to pacifism/caste system for a few turns can turn out a great engineer at a pivotal moment. A spiritual civ can run serfdom when its not whiping, without loosing the flexability to whip when desired. That said, keeping all your cities in synch so that they all make the most of the current civics would take tremendous planning. Financial is an easy trait to make good use of. Spiritual is not.

caste system doesn't give u engineers

 

[particle77]

duplicate post...

 

[particle77]

caste system doesn't give u engineers

true, the point probably would have been better made with a great scientist. However, not getting engineers from caste system does not make caste system useless for getting a great engineer.

Lets say you've noticed that under your settings the AI averages a certain completion date for a wonder you want. assuming you know you won't have the great engineer on time under normal circumstances, your odds of still getting the wonder might increase by diluting your great engineer points with great scientist points.

 

[azzaman333]

Spiritual trait is like fast workers. Some people love them, some people hate them.

@yavoon; I play a game as Julius Caesar and conquer the world in 500AD. Assume i played as Augustus instead, and conquered the world in 100AD. Does that therefore make Augustus' traits better than Julius'? For me, it probably does. So therefore it would be my preference.

As it is, I play best with Mali, so that would be my strategic preference if I want to play as best I can.

(Traits such as Financial and Charasmatic have benefits no metter what your planning, but traits such as Spiritual and Industrial require you to change your strategy to suit the trait)

 

[yavoon]

Spiritual trait is like fast workers. Some people love them, some people hate them.

@yavoon; I play a game as Julius Caesar and conquer the world in 500AD. Assume i played as Augustus instead, and conquered the world in 100AD. Does that therefore make Augustus' traits better than Julius'? For me, it probably does. So therefore it would be my preference.

As it is, I play best with Mali, so that would be my strategic preference if I want to play as best I can.

(Traits such as Financial and Charasmatic have benefits no metter what your planning, but traits such as Spiritual and Industrial require you to change your strategy to suit the trait)

I usually consider robustness of victory over speed, but speed is a consideration u can make. and ur own playing inadequacies dont play into which civ/trait/unit is better, its just a reflection of what u've learned and what u haven't.