{The List} Civilization Traits

[Tassadar500]

Current Traits:

• Scientific
• Religious
• Militarilistic
• Industrious
• Seafaring
• Agricultural
• Expansionistic
• Commercial

What other traits should we add?

[Jaguar]

I've got an idea. How about we add "Commercial" to that list.

[Kuciwalker]

You forgot Commerical

EDIT: shoot, JW beat me to it

[Jaguar]

[wrylachlan]

I would like the Traits to not be hardcoded. So instead of a "Commercial" trait you could simply assign different civs different bonuses, like commercial building bonuses, an extra road bonus, extra trade in the city center, etc. etc. This would allow a lot more differentiation of civs.

And I'd also like a lot more unit based differentiation (not UU's). Things like maybe the inca units travel along mountains as if they were grasslands. It still costs as much to climb a mountain or come down, but moving from one mountain to the next is just like grasslands.

And also it'd be cool if resources were somehow attached to civs. Like maybe there are like 3 times as many iron deposits in the game but only a one in 3 chance of finding them, and the chance is higher for certiain civs.

Or how about horses that tend to migrate towards a "horse-friendly" culture like the mongols. If there is a mongol city within 5 tiles of horses they'll move one tile every ten turns to get within their radius. Or maybe if you take care of them (irrigate their tile) they have a percentage chance of generating a second herd, and that chance is higher for the Mongols.

[Sandman]

I'd prefer flexible civ traits that you can change depending on your situation. Hardcoded civ traits are just another roll of the dice, who's to know if they will be appropriate to your starting location?

[DarkCloud]

Please. Don't start any threads with the { } brackets unless they're the official list threads... So that we can better organize things...

You can start as many threads as you want- but PLEASE don't put {The List} in front of them unless you're a category manager.

Thanks!

[Tassadar500]

Originally posted by DarkCloud
Please. Don't start any threads with the { } brackets unless they're the official list threads... So that we can better organize things...

You can start as many threads as you want- but PLEASE don't put {The List} in front of them unless you're a category manager.

Thanks!

Asmodean has not been here for quite a while. I'm not interested in waiting.

[mrmitchell]

Civtraits are a great idea, and they add a special bit to every civ (otherwise you'd might as well just play Banana). Each game's strategy is slightly affected by them (and the UU), and they need to stay.

And also it'd be cool if resources were somehow attached to civs. Like maybe there are like 3 times as many iron deposits in the game but only a one in 3 chance of finding them, and the chance is higher for certiain civs.

Or how about horses that tend to migrate towards a "horse-friendly" culture like the mongols. If there is a mongol city within 5 tiles of horses they'll move one tile every ten turns to get within their radius. Or maybe if you take care of them (irrigate their tile) they have a percentage chance of generating a second herd, and that chance is higher for the Mongols.

The migration idea might not work out. Let's say, for example, Bananatopia is a coal-friendly civ. How the hell does coal migrate!?

Resource distribution is fine as it is. Just because Bananatopia can use coal for its UU, the Steam Banana, doesn't mean it gets more of them naturally.

[POTUS]

Wellm if Bananatopia is coal-friendly, they should have better techniques to find coal (they get more coal), and then use it more efficently.

[Peter Triggs]

The text for today is:

Civtraits are a great idea, and they add a special bit to every civ (otherwise you'd might as well just play Banana). Each game's strategy is slightly affected by them

That's putting it mildly. Obviously I haven't seen the source code, but I'll eat my hat if these traits aren't crucial to the AI's assignment of strategies to civs. So when you say "Put in more traits" you're actually asking them to put in more strategies. And there's the rub: sure you can put in more strategies, but how different can they be while still maintaining some sort of balanced gameplay? Basically, what I'm trying to say is that you probably don't need more traits.

How different is one civ from another at the moment? When you play and one of your neighbours has the traits 'ABC' while another has the traits 'XYZ', how much difference do you notice? Do you base any decisions on the fact that those guys have the traits 'ABC', so I know that they're like *whatever*? Hopefully, people do notice this; otherwise, as mrmitchell said, you'd might as well just play Banana.

[Paddy]

I feel that they are working alright, and that they could be expanded upon a tad.

[Optimizer]

The idea that certain nationalities are militaristic, commercial et cetera by nature is nothing but racism.

The Mongols should not be born nomadic raiders; their way of life should instead be formed by physical (geography, available resources and neighbours) and intellectual factors (the thoiughts of their leaders and thinkers).

[DarkCloud]

Asmodean has not been here for quite a while. I'm not interested in waiting.

You can still START threads- just please don't start them with the { }'s because it's CONFUSING... and this isn't a CATEGORY thread, therefore, you could have started this thread at any time you wanted-

[rendelnep]

The idea that certain nationalities are militaristic, commercial et cetera by nature is nothing but racism.

It could be describe as racism but it is also is a reflection of a civilization cultural tendecies.

For example a a certain culture may be that their policy of invading neighbouring states has been a very successful way of expanding and therefore becames militristic. Also it isn't racist if you descibe the tendicies of an perticular goverment.

Besides such labels are compliments reconizing the real world historical achivements of those Civilizations.

I would be proud if a software devolper reconized my country, New Zealand as being commercial or scientific and agricultural

[Frozzy]

Why would they bother doing that? I mean, what would the UU be, the exploding sheep? Inter-continental ballistic rugby ball? I suppose ANZACs is a suggestion, but an Australian Civ would take that.

We're more likely to see a Maori civilisation than a New Zealand one.

[Brent]

Let major civs give you a choice of different historical versions of that civ. Let there be 100 civs divided into many small culture groups, each civ in a group having all the same stats and the same special unit but different city names. Let there be default settings for each civ, with the option to change them in setup. Let Traits change because of things that happen in the game.

I like Wry's idea about all units of one civ having the same special abilities. Also based on his post, I want different kinds of animals native to different places and migrating.

I do want a somewhat larger number of main traits to choose from. I also want many forms of differences between civs.

[DarkCloud]

The idea that certain nationalities are militaristic, commercial et cetera by nature is nothing but racism.

If there's an option to turn off traits, then does that really matter Optimizer? Civilizations real life "Traits" WERE shaped by the areas they lived in, just as you want it to be... and if firaxis doesn't have the time to code evolving traits, then setting DEFINED traits is the best that they can do I mean, what else would they do if they can't code evolving traits?

[Brent]

I guess evolving traits compliments including more civs than can each be distinctively designed.

[rendelnep]

No I honestly didn't expect a NZ civ, too small and young. I was merely point out that the traits system should be regarded as a compliment to those involved

[Quezacotl06]

Traits should be linked to the nation's culture, not their "race", so it's not racism at all.

As for more traits, that, of course, depends on the new aspects of civ4. So the new traits available can take full advantage of it. Some that I came up with were extensions of the different things I came up with elsewhere. Anomalies (random events) like plagues and scisims and stock market crashes are mentioned a lot.

Trait I thought of:

- Trans-national -- AI treat you as if you are part of their cultural group (AI are initaly more friendly to civs of their own cultural group). Lowered vulnerability to defection/propaganda/breakaways. Assimilate rival civ's people quicker in conquered cities. Immune to militarism (+5 shields when producing combat units; increased AI aggression)

Canada, Israel, Spain, Tibet, and India could be examples of those with this trait, due to mixed ethnic and cultural background, they blend well with different cultural groups.

That's the only new1 i can think of adding. As for the old ones, I'd make some changes. Here are some additional things I'd want:

- Commercial -- Easier to build Marketplace/Bank/SX. Reduced effect of economic collapse (2x corruption)

- Industrial -- Every city has the effect of 1 extra public works citizen (see the improvements thread for more). Reduced effect of industrial bust (-1 shields in every city square).

- Agricultural -- Easier to build ecology/growth improvements. Famines end quicker (-1 food in every city square)

- Expansionist -- Cheaper embassies/embassy missions. Reduced chance of breakaways.

- Sea-faring -- Can trade across sea squares from the start (even if their trade partner can't). Pollution doesn't destroy fish/whale stocks.

- Scientific -- Can CHOOSE which tech they get for free at the era advancement. Immune to zealotry (which randomly destroys science improvements in nation)

- Religous -- Immune to religous scisms (which would randomly destroy religous improvements in nation)

- Militaristic -- Increased chance of militarism (+5 shields when producing combat units; increased AI aggression)

[MrWhereItsAt]

Although a new system could be interesting, a number of civ-style games now have had some kind of distinction between civs. Perhaps follow my dream - take the traits a step further towards the customizability afforded in SMAC, whilst keeping them balanced and bug-free.

So in short - keep the traits, maybe add some more, and make them customisable.

[Max Sinister]

Trans-national sounds too unknown, what about diplomatic?

[lajzar]

For religious trait, I'd drop teh free government changing, and grant an extra happy citizen in every city.

[Quezacotl06]

I like the free government change idea, because churches usualy help re-establish order in government turmoil (Just look at how Iraq's changing so quicky from despotism to democracy -_-)

[Quezacotl06]

what do you mean too unknown?