Suggested New Civ Traits

[Teabeard]

I've been thinking of some ideas for new traits to add for Civs in Civ 4. In addition to the traits of Civ 3 I would like to see:

Diplomatic - A good trait for peaceful Civs such as the Indians under Ghandi and maybe the Americans. Maybe they get to build cheaper embassies and better diplomatic abilities. Perhaps better spies as well.

Nomadic - A good trait for the Mongols and Sioux and Bedouins, as well as others... maybe the Hittites? I guess one bonus would be they are better at using fast units such as horses (and later tanks). Maybe their fast units are cheaper and get an extra movement point, which is a trait nomadic civs like the Mongols sorely need. Couple that with the Militaristic trait and you have a very dangerous foe indeed.

Edit: I just thought of another one.

Artistic - A good trait for the French, the Dutch, the Byzantines, etc. Artistic Civs would get cheaper artistic structures as well as bonuses in things having to do with culture. This seems similar to religious, but it's quite different. This has to do with music, literature, entertainment, etc. Anything to do with Art.

 

[dh_epic]

America? Diplomatic? Not lately When I think of Diplomatic, I think of Canada.

I think this would be a valuable trait if there IS a lot more emphasis on allies and on sympathizers. I've talked about this in a thread where I talk about culture spreading, such that two nations can become very similar. I've also talked about this in a thread where some AI civs don't play to win so much as play to honor their loyalties AND their grudges -- a diplomatic Civ would be able to gain the admiration of said "Type B Civs" much more easily.

Nomadic is a tricky trait, though. By some definitions, to be a nomad is to be the opposite of civilized!

I once heard people throw out Environmentalist, though. Or maybe "efficient" if we want to avoid value judgements that have only started to manifest lately. Experience less waste, less pollution, maybe even less corruption. If Civ 4 had it, they could be more likely to experience cultural bonuses from natural landmarks (like mountains, forests and rivers), and get 50% more from their natural resources and luxuries (if they are actually quantified in Civ 4).

 

[Teabeard]

America may not be humble in it's diplomacy (at least not at present), but I feel it is diplomatic nonetheless and would give it this trait.

As for Nomadic Civs not being civilized: Mongols aren't very civilized, are they? And yet they are included in the game as a playable Civ. If you are going to include the Mongols, the Sioux, and others, you must include a Nomadic trait to represent them properly.

As for Environmenalist, who would get this trait? It would seem to me to be a very weak trait anyway.

 

[Teabeard]

I thought of another good trait to add:

Artistic - A good trait for the French, the Dutch, the Byzantines, etc. Artistic Civs would get cheaper artistic structures as well as bonuses in things having to do with culture. This seems similar to religious, but it's quite different. This has to do with music, literature, entertainment, etc. Anything to do with Art.

 

[Hugin]

America is largely diplomatic, but diplomacy is more than just appeasement. It means sometimes actually doing what you said you'd do.

Similar in concept to Diplomacy might be a "Friendly" (for lack of a better term) trait in which other civilizations just like you more. They are more willing to deal with you and deal with you generously. Possibly this might also raise the chance of culture flips, the "revenue" from trade, etc. Other civs might be more willing to forgive past "mistakes" (sort of like the Eiffle Tower in Civ2).

 

[rhialto]

The USA (acting on behalf of the USA, not counting actions as part of a multinational peacekeeping force) has been involved in more wars than any other nation since ww2. This is not a fact I would associate with a diplomatic nation.

True, the USA has often acted as a moderator in mediating 3rd party disputes, but I believe that is more a function of being the most powerful nation around, not of any diplomatic traits of the nation itself. Any time the USA has had its interests threatened with military force, not one US president to my knowledge has ever suggested talking it out with the enemy.

 

[Mr. Blonde]

What about xenophobic/chauvinistic: less flipping chance to or from your civ, less WW, but occupied cities would stay longer in resistance and foreign population would produce more unhappiness. Diplomatic relations will be harder, though.
Although this might somehow be related to Fascism I think this can be implemented as trait.

 

[Zild]

Xenophobic sounds perfect for us Brits! I'll take it!

 

[Zild]

Any time the USA has had its interests threatened with military force, not one US president to my knowledge has ever suggested talking it out with the enemy.

Cuban missile crisis? I admit this may be a bit of a loose interpretation of "interests threatened with military force", but then how often do nations with nuclear capability get any more directly threatened than that?

I'd also argue that they always go with the diplomatic (i.e. talkie-talkie) solution in the end, even if it is after softening up the opposition's military and economy first!

 

[rhialto]

Saying that they eventually go to diplomatic paths at the end doesn't really count. Short of doing a genocide on your enemies, everyone eventually talks to their enemy.

It is worth noting here that the US response was a military naval blockade and a troop buildup with an eye towards an invasion (thankfully aborted). The blockade was in effect several days before any formal diplomatic contact was made to Russia/Cuba regarding the matter. This isn't a counterexample to my initial point.

 

[Rubruk]

Nomadic - A good trait for the Mongols and Sioux and Bedouins, as well as others... maybe the Hittites? I guess one bonus would be they are better at using fast units such as horses (and later tanks). Maybe their fast units are cheaper and get an extra movement point, which is a trait nomadic civs like the Mongols sorely need. Couple that with the Militaristic trait and you have a very dangerous foe indeed.

How to implement nomadic? maybe with cheaper and faster fast units ignoring movement penalties of terrain like e.g. mountain or jungle. Or with a zone of control.

A scout with one defense and one attack point.

"nomadic" Tanks shouldn't get more movement points.

Nomadic civilizations had a hugh impact, so the player should be able to play them or to defend his civ against them. Its somehow modeled with the barbarians.

Maybe they get a food bonus on desert and jungle. Or in the ancient age they doesn't need roads to connect a lux or ressource. This are very significant advantages.

 

[dh_epic]

I think diplomacy comes from a certain credibility that you're on the side of truth, that you're a neutral or objective or stablizing force with no self-interest but puts the greater international interest in mind. Holding all the cards in the poker game that is sometimes negotiation doesn't make you diplomatic, it just helps you get your way.

I think "cultural" might be a better manifestation than "artistic" -- since it's flexible and ties directly into what Civ has right now.

Chauvenism and Xenophobia is more of a flaw... but I think it would be pretty neat for every nation to have a flaw. This would be more viable if it were tied to individual leaders, of which a nation could have multiple leaders -- so that way a nation isn't tied to a flaw, but its different leaders can be said to be flawed. "Megalomaniacal" -- Napoleon, Hitler, Caesar. "Brutal" -- Atilla, Gengis Khan, Stalin. "Hedonist" -- Churchill, Cleopatra, King Henry??

Not to diverge down something totally different...

 

[Moonsinger]

Rather than requesting a new trait, why not allow the user to customize their own trait? Like most D&D game, you can play with the default character/race/civ or you can just customize your own.

 

[mitsho]

no customizing, please. it's a game

First, I want to say that before defining the new traits in detail, we should wait and see how civ4 works. Perhaps it doesn't use traits. Or they are divided up in a percent-system (civ x is y % industrial, etc.). Or you can have a trait in three different sizes (civ x is industrial, size III (best bonusses), civ y is industrial size I (worst)). That would lead to no need for new traits. You get it.

However, if we had to create new ones, I would first create the opposites of already excisting ones.
What's the opposite of expansionistic?
--> we got a new trait: isolationistic (example civs: Japan, Switzerland, etc.) more resistand to exterior culture/religion/etc. ; mobilizing is more efficient
Besides that, the traits that are mentionned above (nomadic, diplomatic) are good. Artistic is a trait that could be used if a new one is desperatevely needed.

mfG mitsho

 

[dh_epic]

I think the problem is that isolationist has a negative connotation. Even perfectionist is kind of negative in the world of Civ. Traits generally talk about something you do better than everybody else, a bonus you receive.

 

[mitsho]

Ehm, of course, every trait has something negative, commercial? those money sacks, industrial? no sense for the good sides of life, expansionistic? those damn imperialists, you can do that with every trait. What's so bad about something having a bad connotation? every trait has this.

mfG mitsho

 

[dh_epic]

I hope you can tell the difference between the positivity involved in calling someone industrial or even religious, as opposed to the negativity of calling someone xenophobic or isolationist. I'd hate to try to explain it, because it's a lot of energy into something very trivially true, in my mind.

I think traits should generally be thought of as positives and bonuses, things you're really good at, your specialty. I'd hardly use a word like "Xenophobic" or "Isolationist" to describe someone's specialty.

 

[mitsho]

It's just point of view. I think, the isolationistic (which has nothing to do with xenophobic, mind!) attitude in the last few centuries was a benefit for my country. I mean, we managed to be out of two world wars, despite of being situated just in the middle of the two warring sides. You tell me that this is negative?
And this is just one example, I'm sure I'll find others if I search. Second example. Religious always good? You know what very religious means? Fanatic. And if something is bad, than this. Despite, what is the direct, logical, explainable benefit of being religious? There is none.

I see you are from America and I can therefore understand that you didn't think of Switzerland and of the benefits of NOT getting bigger and bigger and bigger. I'm gonna stop this discussion right now. I'll not answer any more cause I have better things to do than to drag a senseless disscussion further on.

mfG mitsho

 

[dh_epic]

Switzerland I think of as being prosperous because of their neutrality, as opposed to isolationism. They're very far from isolationist.

i·so·la·tion·ism - A national policy of abstaining from political or economic relations with other countries.

Maybe it's a sensible strategy, don't get me wrong. But I fail to see the bonuses in that, and how someone would boast their isolationist spirit, as opposed to their religious values or industrialist or entrepreneurial spirit.

But there's probably not much sense in focusing on the semantic game -- what kind of benefits do you see from the isolationist bonus anyway, Civ wise?

 

[rbis4rbb]

Chauvenism and Xenophobia is more of a flaw... but I think it would be pretty neat for every nation to have a flaw. This would be more viable if it were tied to individual leaders, of which a nation could have multiple leaders -- so that way a nation isn't tied to a flaw, but its different leaders can be said to be flawed. "Megalomaniacal" -- Napoleon, Hitler, Caesar. "Brutal" -- Atilla, Gengis Khan, Stalin. "Hedonist" -- Churchill, Cleopatra, King Henry??

Not to diverge down something totally different...

Wow. this is a great idea. Civ "Flaws". IE the French could be weak militairisticlly in some way. Or the Aztecs could be hampered by their history of sacrifice.