Which is your least favorite trait?

Which is your least favorite trait?


  • Total voters
    179
Aftershafter, what exactly did you have in mind? Obviously, charismatic and expansive would have higher value on higher difficulties due to lower initial health/happiness, but other traits seem to scale well enough on all difficulties.

Yeah, those were two I was thinking about... But what I was most curious over was the poor performance of philosophical and the high performance of creative on the "What is your favorite trait?" thread - though, perhaps I should have asked that question there. And while my favorite military trait is everyone's least favorite by a long shot, I have no vain hopes that that is anything but a chemical imbalance in my own head making me love protective :D
 
Expansive is the most boring and therefore I voted for that. Protective is probably the least useful for a human player given they'll tend to be attacking more than defending. I do agree with the idea that one poster had above about castle/wall defences not obsoleting until Artillery, but I'm not sure if or how that's psossible given the fact that defences becoming obsolete seems tied to gunpowder units...
 
I said Imperialistic, and must say I'm aghast at all the protective bashing here. It's a solid trait. Perfect for a renaissance rush. Combine with Great Wall, let the baddies come to you, get plenty of GG's. Tech like crazy till rifiling and conquer the world with Drill III, CG I Riflemen. And hold the territory you conqured.

I know Imperialistic is probably great for constant warmongering, but I'm still getting the hang of it, and prefer Aggressive. I didn't even realize until now that the +100 bonus only applies to hammers, makes me dislike it even more.

Question:

I seem to recall someone saying in another discussion that Organized only affects upkeep resulting from civic use, not the maintenance from distance to palace. Is this true?
 
Protective is AWESOME. When paired with Imperialistic (Charlemagne) it is almost impossible to lose a war if you're not completely stupid.

I voted for Financial because I can't tell the difference when I have it and when I don't because I balance my funds well I guess.
 
Question:

I seem to recall someone saying in another discussion that Organized only affects upkeep resulting from civic use, not the maintenance from distance to palace. Is this true?

AbbieRevo,

That is correct. Organized reduces civic costs. Distance to palace is a city cost, and not reduced by the Organized trait.
 
That's a drag man. I guess it explains why the trait needs cheap CH, LH, and Factories to balance though.

Hell, if it was just cheap courthouses it might be worth it.
 
That's a drag man. I guess it explains why the trait needs cheap CH, LH, and Factories to balance though.

Hell, if it was just cheap courthouses it might be worth it.

AbbieRevo,

I disagree. Organized lets me utilize higher cost civics (Slavery, Bureaucracy, and Organized Religion) in larger empires with minimal financial impact. A penny saved is a penny earned. And early on my civic costs end up in the tens and close to 100. Saving 50 gold per turn from a trait is HUGE, at least to me, as I like to push my economy to the limit.
 
AbbieRevo,

I disagree. Organized lets me utilize higher cost civics (Slavery, Bureaucracy, and Organized Religion) in larger empires with minimal financial impact. A penny saved is a penny earned. And early on my civic costs end up in the tens and close to 100. Saving 50 gold per turn from a trait is HUGE, at least to me, as I like to push my economy to the limit.

Oh, i'm not saying it doesn't have its uses, and like I said, if it was just a trait that gave cheap courthouses and nothing else it would still be worth looking at IMO.

I was just disappointed that it wasn't what I thought it was, though it explains why I haven't had that much success with Organized leaders.
 
One thing I think should be considered about each trait is that the UU's for some traits are vastly better than others.

For example, yes Charasmatic on its own is better that Imperialistic, but look at Imperialistic's UU's - they totally rock!
 
Part of the Protective crowd here. My personal beef with it was how it turned Tokugawa from a superb warmonger (Agg, Org, Samurai) to a very run-of-the-mill militarist for whom there's no dominant and powerful strategy. Now speaking in general, all the other traits just seem able to work harder for you than Protective does--and work together as well. Not that it's impotent, but that pretty much every alternative is better.
 
I'm not all that fond of Philosophical. I get plenty of great people anyway, and it only has one building it speeds up.
 
protective. possibly the dumbest trait ever. should be removed or only apply for AI. half the leaders are polluted with that idiotic trait. after its been removed, the game designer who came up with it should have his head shoved into a bucket of piss until he drowns.
 
protective. possibly the dumbest trait ever. should be removed or only apply for AI. half the leaders are polluted with that idiotic trait. after its been removed, the game designer who came up with it should have his head shoved into a bucket of piss until he drowns.

Arkatakor,

Which difficulty do you play on?
 
Creative seems to be the only trait which everyone seems to find useful. I don't know how to exploit it really. I'd rather spread a religion or build stonehenge for the first border expansion. And what's the point of expanding your city border beyond that?

As for happiness, I'd rather hunt for market resources or use civics (like heditary rule, free religion) instead of expensive hapiness buildings.

I'm playing on prince difficulty.
 
Creative seems to be the only trait which everyone seems to find useful. I don't know how to exploit it really. I'd rather spread a religion or build stonehenge for the first border expansion. And what's the point of expanding your city border beyond that?

As for happiness, I'd rather hunt for market resources or use civics (like heditary rule, free religion) instead of expensive hapiness buildings.

I'm playing on prince difficulty.

SinkingDutchman,

I'd take Industrial over Creative any day. I really don't like Creative or Financial.
 
Imperialistic. But then again, I dislike constant warmongering. Although my highest score was with Ghengis Khan. Hmmm . . . .
 
I play everything from Monarch to Deity, and I definitely think some traits vary greatly in usefulness depending on level; for me the most extreme case is Industrious though.

On Monarch, I get all the wonders I want anyway; IND is good but I would just as happily spam wonders with a PHI leader to increase the rewards.

On Emperor and Immortal, it's my favourite trait by far. Without it, wonders are costly and might cause me to neglect other, more important stuff like expanding and defending adequatey.
I'll still spend more early hammers on wonders than anything else, so it is still superior to other production-oriented traits like Imperialistic or Expansive. Also, Forges are an expensive building that is very very beneficial to have early on; I still have enough leeway to build them over the usual high priorities and it gives me a considerable edge.

On Deity, I can't get any decent use out of the trait. I kill my economy all the time just grabbing the land I need to make a comeback, eliminating or at least crippling a rival or two becomes a high priority and I simply have too many other things to do.
I'll occasionally build one or two wonders (prime suspects: Great Wall, Oracle, Great Lighthouse) but the trait isn't doing me a fat lot of good. I can't rely on an Oracle Slingshot to get me Metal casting, and I might not have the luxury to build forges anyway (cultural pressure, crippling maintenance costs, whatever).
On Deity, I prefer traits that I don't need to actively leverage because I'm not exactly in control most of the time.
 
Back
Top Bottom