Apheirox Apheirox

The races should not all be alike!

▼

The races should not all be alike!

Different innate race abilities give the races more personality and add to the game experience

from GalCiv2 Forums
In Civilization 4, the factions are all very different from each other. For example, Gandhi is a peaceful builder whereas Genghis Khan is a militaristic conqueror. Hatshepsut is a gifted diplomat while Asoka is a technology expert.

It is not just the AI's of the factions that are different - they also have different abilities. For example, to reinforce Gandhi's incitement to play as a builder rather than a conqueror he gets a discount on wonder production speed. Napoleon gets a bonus to military units. Mansa Musa gets a bonus to finances. In this way, the factions are given very different personalities and styles of play.

In this game, the races are unfortunately all the same, making for a bland, generic and boring experience. Sure, a few races get distinctive boni (the Yor get a huge loyalty bonus, for example) but most of the time this isn't the case. The Drengi are supposed to be cruel and militaristic yet they get no boni to military. This is a critical design flaw and I can't believe the developers have overlooked it. It is stuff like this that makes Civ 4 stand out as a much better game than this.

My suggestion is to look at what worked so well in Civ 4 and implement it in this game. Give the Drengi boni that will incite them to be militaristic. Give the Altarians military penalties so they will want to be peaceful, but give them boni in other areas like research and influence. This would make this game so much better. This is another change to the game that should be given high priority by the developers.
31,312 views 61 replies
Reply #51 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
Just a few thoughts:
I liked Civ4 fine, but I'll probably never play it again now that I have GC2.
I don't find the races to be alike at all & I enjoy their differences in playstyle and abilities. The latest version is a great update & the AI is very much improved.
The Drath are (as someone else said) never very powerful and never a threat...so let them have their bonuses and be happy while you dominate them.
The Torians (and the other races) do build influence starbases--in very good spots, too, where up to a half dozen planets benefit from them.
The Iconians seem to be very good at rapid expansion and will flank & absorb you if given the chance.
The Arceans generally have a large military and aren't afraid to use it if you get on their bad side.
The Drengin start out slowly, probably from researching military tech early, and early is the best time to attack them (before they start building their forces up). I have never seen them win, though, because the other races will gang up to stop them cold.
The Terrans start out slowly too, but if given time can produce some powerful fleets because they often research several levels of miniaturization early.
The Yor can be aggressive & dangerous if they have room to expand & develop...if not, they have not seemed to pose much of a threat because they can be out-researched.
That's how it seems to me so far, after about three weeks of constant play. I may never go outside again.
Reply #52 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
But broad generalities about things that most of us know are unfounded just makes you look silly to say the least. I haven't played Civ4 because it is the same as Civ3 which was the same as Civ2 which in my mind was the best of the series.


Now you're the one spouting broad generalities. How can you say a game is just like the one before it if you've never even played it? Trust me, Civ 4 is much different than any of it's previous incarnations. It's by far the best of the series so far, and I've played all of them so I am indeed in a position to be able to judge.

But getting back on topic, I have to agree with all the rest of the posters who are asking "What game are you playing?" I can certainly see differences in personality and style between the races. And with DA, each one gets a super ability. So what more do you want?

PS: I just realized how old this thread is. Who would bother to drag this one up?
The Political Machine 2024
Reply #53 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
Well this is strange, an active thread that one, except me, has posted in for almost a year. How did this get back on top?
Reply #54 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
@ Belanos - there was an obscene spam post that brought it back. Looks like it has been removed.
Reply #55 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
Ahh, I see. I feel rather stupid now for responding to a post that was made over a year ago.
Reply #56 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
Ahh, I see. I feel rather stupid now for responding to a post that was made over a year ago.


Hee, hee, hee.
I thought something looked wrong with this picture!
Reply #57 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
Beside each races superpower and their distinctive AI, they also have race-specific points assigned to a skill/ability.

For example, If you create a custom race, you can never get as high research as the Altarians, since they have an innate research bonus, that you can add points to get to +75.

I can definately see a difference in all the races and their behavior.
Reply #58 from GalCiv2 Forums Top

I can definately see a difference in all the races and their behavior.



Yes, so we will just slowly back away from this thread and let it lie peacefully in its grave once again.
Reply #59 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
Ahh, I see. I feel rather stupid now for responding to a post that was made over a year ago.


These old posts must stop being recycled through the recent posts tab!
Reply #60 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
Actually the topic is still an issue IMO. There could be some improvement.
There's no doubt that the races are not really well balanced - even though some balancing has been made BUT using different aspects of race construction. The factors are many - homesystem PQ, moon/rings, # of asteroid fields, # of customization pts, racial abilities, starting techs, super abilities. Now, SAs and starting techs should be balanced seperately, because the former can be turned off and the latter - the bonuses they grant - will eventually become available to all races (not sure if there's even the risk of some civs bypassing some bonuses because of already having higher techs, like passing PlanImp (at least until needing farm or terraform) because they already have XEco and XIndTh; or the Thalans passing GalWF because of having SpMil; etc).
Some things are hard to miss. The Yor and the Krynn do have a boatload of racial abilities; the Thalans and the Korath aren't too far. The 1st generation races all have rings or moons, with the corresponding 10% production bonus, plus the better asteroids; the DA races have crappy asteroids.
A few notes on the Strong/Weak descriptions. A few races have Weak Research, yet they have the best tech start of all. The Drath are reported as having Weak Economics, but they have a nice Morale boost and an additional Trade Route. The Thalans are supposed to have Weak Military but have a huge Military Production bonus and a Miniaturization bonus. The Iconians and the Krynn have identical reports, maybe there should be more variety there (can't do much about Korath/Drengin though...).
Reply #61 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
I want to add that some of the races are also hugely unbalanced. The Yor, for example, are almost impossible to culturally subvert yet they have no weaknesses. The humans are very weak with few starting techs, low starting logistics and no boni whatsoever. The Drath are the strongest race with a ridiculous number of very powerful traits. Developers, what the *BEEP* were you thinking when designing this? Not thinking much at all, I suspect.color="#FF0000"][/color]

I played a game on suicidal with the Yor and had all my worlds flipped by the Iconians so 100% loyalty is not an absolute