Unused Trait flags - why didn't they?

[bobbo008]

I very much agree with Unimatrix.

The circumstances and experiences of civilizations lead them to specialize in areas, they aren't usually inately skilled in a particular area.

[Metaliturtle]

Uni that is a very interesting concept. It could be made even more competetive if the number of traits are limited (only 2 civs per trait for example) which would create a rush for specific techs.

Also, not just techs but specific actions, like your first build (settler=imperialistic) (barracks = aggressive) (stonehenge = org/spi)

That would add a whole new level of depth to the game!

[wodan11]

Uni that is a very interesting concept. It could be made even more competetive if the number of traits are limited (only 2 civs per trait for example) which would create a rush for specific techs.

Seems like that will defeat the goal of making it more realistic and tying my civ's traits to what it does.

Also, competitve does not necessarily = good gameplay. If there comes a race condition which amounts to double or nothing then that's poor game design.

[Unimatrix11]

Yeah, i wouldnt like it to be like the religion race neither - after all, your competence in doing something can not really depend on the competence of someone else on the other side of the planet in doing the same thing. But to include first builts as criterium sounds interesting - like have 1 trait define by 1st built and the other by tech: 1 build-trait, 1 tech-trait, or somthing along these lines.

As to wether this is realistic, is a totally different question, and i dare to say, that nobody really can tell: Were the japanese good at fishing from the very start (whatever that is), or did they evolve into good fishermen, because of the terrain? Were the old egyptians ´spiritual by nature´, or did the Nile running through the desert (or something else) ´trigger the trait´? I wont go there. The answer can hardly be based on anything else than speculation.

If some people dont like the idea, while others do, it should be an optional feature (like ´free leader-civ-combos´ is).

EDIT - On the competition-side: Traits could also be comperative and temporary. Like you are only financial, while you are the only one with a market place (whatever guilds give you/bank/wall street) built - as soon as someone else builds a market place (...) you loose the trait. But this system would, despite being an interesting experiment, probably result in snowball-effects: The one ahead in a field, gets a bonus in that field and thus becomes even more dominant in it. Usually not a good idea in 4x-games, which already very often display a critical point in their matches, after which one player (in SP usually the human player) starts to rise over the others in an exponential fashion (thats when i usually drop my games, because they turn into a boring clickfest, lacking any challenge).