Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

C3C: Jacking w/ the Aztecs' traits

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 1
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous template Next
  • #1

    C3C: Jacking w/ the Aztecs' traits

    Do you think that the change to the Aztecs' trait from Religious to Agricultural was a good choice?

    It seemed to me to make more sense for the Aztecs to be Religious/Militaristic (as they were previously) than to be Agricultural/Militaristic.

    The Agricultural trait seems to be a fairly good one, but I just don't think that the Aztecs IRL were using any Agricultural traits as they were cutting-out the still beating hearts of their enemys and feeding them to the eagles high atop a large stone pyramid. That just seems to be Religious in nature. Not to mention that most of the slaves whom were sacrificed had been captured in war, or barring any military action they would use their own citizens. So, the Religious/Militaristic combo seems to fit the Aztecs better than Ag/Mil.

    Obviously, the Aztecs IRL 'were' able to feed themselves--as were every other culture about which we can only read historical accounts, but with my limited study of Mesoamerican history, it just seems that Firaxis/BreakAway should not have jacked w/ the Aztecs. I mean they've been around since the first Civ3. I mean IRL, the Americans produce more food than any other nation in the world. They didn't make the Americans Agricultural.

    I know that Civ is NOT Real Life and that parrallells are only coincidental. Plus, the combo of Religious/Militaristic was sort of 'overdone' in PTW. Most of the Rel/Mil civs have been changed to Seafaring or Agricultural and that's OK with me, but I just don't think that they did the Aztecs justice with this change.

    What do you think?
    "...Every Right implies a certain Responsibility; Every Opportunity, an Obligation; Every Possession, a Duty." --J.D. Rockerfeller, Jr.
    Tags: None
  • #2
    Woops, wrong forum.

    Moderator, could you please move this post to the appropriate forum.

    Thank you.

    P.S. where's the:
    "My Bad!" --Your posts will move automatically--
    selection
    Last edited by steven8r; November 25, 2003, 14:42.
    "...Every Right implies a certain Responsibility; Every Opportunity, an Obligation; Every Possession, a Duty." --J.D. Rockerfeller, Jr.

    Comment

    • #3
      Mark,

      I tried deleting this post in this forum, but I cannot.

      I created a similar post to the 'Conquests' forum.
      "...Every Right implies a certain Responsibility; Every Opportunity, an Obligation; Every Possession, a Duty." --J.D. Rockerfeller, Jr.

      Comment

      • #4
        I don't know. Maybe if they Aztecs had, in real life, not lived in mountains and jungles, they *would* have been agricultural, if you see what I mean. In other words, the Aztecs in real life had a starting position that didn't favour their traits... rather like the Iroquois needing horses for their UU. I do agree that there are enough religious/militaristic civilisations in the game as it is though.

        There are a few questionable trait decisions in the game though - I think it a little odd to make the Byzantines seafaring and scientific, when they, of all civilisations, are crying out to be religious (love the mosaic of Christ behind medieval Theodora though!). But really I think this is a matter of gameplay, they do need to have a good balance of the different combinations to keep things varied and interesting.

        Comment

        • #5
          I think perhaps the 'Scientific' trait is meant to represent the cunning and intrigue for which the Byzantines are remembered. I'm not sure how much piety the Byzantines were actually known for...

          If you're going to have one Seafaring/Religious nation it has to be the Spanish.
          Last edited by geniemalin; November 29, 2003, 20:42.

          Comment

          • #6
            Originally posted by Plotinus
            I don't know. Maybe if they Aztecs had, in real life, not lived in mountains and jungles, they *would* have been agricultural, if you see what I mean. In other words, the Aztecs in real life had a starting position that didn't favour their traits...
            If you do some research on Tenochtitlan/Mexico City, I think you'll find that the Aztecs were supremely Agricultural.
            (EDIT: Decided to go ahead and google this - first hit is http://www.agnr.umd.edu/howard/mg/schfloa.htm - the first couple of paragraphs illustrate why I think the Aztec should indeed be Agricultural in C3)

            IMO, this is an excellent, and historically supported change.
            "Just once, do me a favor, don't play Gray, don't even play Dark... I want to see Center-of-a-Black-Hole Side!!! " - Theseus nee rpodos

            Comment

            • #7
              [geniemalin] Ah, those cunning Byzantines, you might be right. A bit unfair to say they weren't known for piety (John Damascene? Symeon the New Theologian? Gregory Palamas? etc) - but then who said religion was all about piety?

              Of course, they might also be scientific to help them be culturally dominant, which is also interesting. In the one game I've had the Byzantines as opponents, I noticed that they seemed to build all the Wonders, and had truly awesome culture. I don't know if that was just that game, but if the Byzantines have been programmed to do maximise culture, then that's good - plus I love those snobby comments about barbarians!

              [ducki] Fascinating stuff - I think the point may be considered proved.

              Comment

              Previous template Next
              Working...
              X