Cultural Impact on Agreements - Team Interview

[Jason Beaudoin]

Something caught my eye in that German interview with the Firaxis team that read:

Culture has a far bigger impact though, where culturally similar civilizations are more likely to make gracious agreements.

Link to German Interview - Page 4



Does this mean that Civilizations that have similar cultures, like the Japanese and Chinese will be more friendly to each other, or "make gracious agreements"?

Dan... can you help me on that one?

[ajbera]

This is similar to a thread I started on the Civ3 - Civilizations forum (http://apolyton.net/forums/showthrea...threadid=29258), specifically concerning the grouping of American culture with Iriquois and Aztec (my opinion being that American culture should be grouped with Western European nations - England, France & Germany.)

However, I just thought of another question - can we include new cultural groups? They need not be tied to architecture, but can a modder make cultural groups in addition to the exiting five? Many folks (myself included) will tweak existing civs, change some, add some, drop others, and trying to fit 16 civs within a mere 5 groups may be problematic. Also, scenario-makers may want to have more than 5 groups. This isn't a game-killer if not implemented, but I am curious.

And, I'd like to say for the record, that even with delayed MP, no stacked movement outside of armies, and a few other minor (IMO) disappointments, I am ultra-psyched to play this. Well done, Firaxians.

[squid]

As long as other civs don't declare war on you because they don't like your culture/government. That was the worst part of SMAC....I had a developed perfectionist democratic civilization who didn't fight anyone, and then the Hive declares permanent vendatta on me for being a democracy for too long. Then, I have to turn into something like the Hive to defeat the Hive.

[ajbera]

Originally posted by squid
As long as other civs don't declare war on you because they don't like your culture/government. That was the worst part of SMAC....I had a developed perfectionist democratic civilization who didn't fight anyone, and then the Hive declares permanent vendatta on me for being a democracy for too long. Then, I have to turn into something like the Hive to defeat the Hive.

That was actually something I liked about SMAC - kind of like the US and USSR hating each other due to conflicting socio-economic policies. However, it should be a measured response - simple culture clash shouldn't precipitate aggression, but perhaps clashing cultures vying for resources or a trade agreement may give way to hostilities.

[Akron]

I think the article means that if your civ's culture rating is close to another civ's you'll be more likely to make an equal deal than if there is a big difference in culture rating.

[squid]

Originally posted by ajbera


That was actually something I liked about SMAC - kind of like the US and USSR hating each other due to conflicting socio-economic policies. However, it should be a measured response - simple culture clash shouldn't precipitate aggression, but perhaps clashing cultures vying for resources or a trade agreement may give way to hostilities.

the Hive and my University had relations much worse than the USSR. I would give them whatever they needed, yet they were always "seething" and they chose to attack....

Despite my superior weaponry

[Asesino_Virtual]

Yeah, its like Akron says.

I would hate if the civs behave as "factions" with its own "agendas". That really sucked.

[Crouchback]

Originally posted by Akron
I think the article means that if your civ's culture rating is close to another civ's you'll be more likely to make an equal deal than if there is a big difference in culture rating.

That's how I read it too Akron, assuming they'd say nationalities if they meant similar peoples (ie. both are European civilizations) or that type of thing.

David