Civ type games without setttler management?

**TLF** · April 12, 2009, 20:23

Are their any Civ style games that use a system similar to Call to Power's Public Works system instead of having to micromanage settlers and engineers.

I want the strategy without the tedium.

**Grandpa Troll** · April 12, 2009, 20:28

Originally Posted by TLF

Are their any Civ style games that use a system similar to Call to Power's Public Works system instead of having to micromanage settlers and engineers.

I want the strategy without the tedium.

Hey TLF, hope your doing well!

I dont recall any

But I do love the CTP system

If I come up with something, I will post back here

Have a blessed day!

Grandpa Troll

VJ · April 13, 2009, 03:13

Now that you mention it, I have no idea why didn't they use it in Civ4. Does anyone invent any reasons why not to use a public works system with PW points based on manpower and gold?

**Maquiladora** · April 13, 2009, 06:39

Originally Posted by VJ

Now that you mention it, I have no idea why didn't they use it in Civ4. Does anyone invent any reasons why not to use a public works system with PW points based on manpower and gold?

Usually someone will mention that workers require more thought to use, like where to move them. This is true for the first 25 turns, the rest of the game the PITA factor far outweighs this.

**Krill** · April 13, 2009, 07:05

Originally Posted by Maquiladora

Usually someone will mention that workers require more thought to use, like where to move them. This is true for the first 25 turns, the rest of the game the PITA factor far outweighs this.

Yes, they are more micro intensive. This requires some skill. Claiming it only matters for the first 25 turns is complete bollocks though

**DrSpike** · April 13, 2009, 07:19

If you want a simplified game Civ:Revolutions on the consoles might serve.

Also, Civ4 has very little micro and an overall system way better than CTP.

**Maquiladora** · April 13, 2009, 07:32

Originally Posted by Krill

Yes, they are more micro intensive. This requires some skill.

As does PW, without the extra micro of moving a unit every time.

Claiming it only matters for the first 25 turns is complete bollocks though

An exaggeration perhaps, but as the game goes on, they just become more and more of a burden on the player to manage. That is not good design. It should get easier as other elements of the game get more time-consuming.

Also, Civ4 has very little micro and an overall system way better than CTP.

Overall system? Please, be more vague.

**TLF** · April 15, 2009, 19:38

When I asked about Civ Type games I wasn't just referring to civ 3 or civ 4.

It could be any turn based strategy game.

I really can't stand moving all of those settlers and engineers. Deciding what to build and where to build it is strategy. Moving workers is just fiddly busy work.

Am I the King/President or some local deskjockey? Even a Mayor isn't wasting time deciding where Joe worker should be today.

**Aeson** · April 16, 2009, 04:55

Just automate the workers (IIRC there's a game setting to have them start automated) if you don't want to micro terrain improvement, and don't think doing so is helpful. Problem solved.

**El_Cid** · April 16, 2009, 06:46

'Public works' was one of CTP's wins over Civ. But CivIV, especialy with the expansions, is very CTPified - a bunch of people involved with CTP over the years got involved with CivIV.

Ok no PW, but as Aeson said, you have ways around just about anything. CivIV is very custom setting friendly.

I was trying to think of some other game examples, came up with the Imperialism(1+2) games; but they do have 'worker' units just much fewer than in a typical game of Civ i found.

Spartan by Slitherine isn't as complicated a game as Civ, but it is a tbs and you build stuff but it doesn't use a worker system(you just build city improvements).

But for a Civ type game without workers, the CTP games may be the only thing that hits it close.

**Unimatrix11** · April 16, 2009, 06:52

Actually, TLF made a point here, that i totally agree with. Moving the workers around is annoying, if you just have enough of them. When i hit like 10 of them, they go automated - suboptimal and, of course, not really part of the game for me anymore (since i dont decide much about them from this point on). And then you have the idle worker at late middle ages/renaissance... For Civ5, i´d like to see a CTP-approach on workers (not settlers though).

**TLF** · April 16, 2009, 07:43

Automating them isn't the same.
I still would like to decide what needs to be built where, but not have to move each worker and possibly have to drag a worker in from another city if none is available.

To me, moving the workers is just busy work.

A leader just need to say build more of this or that in this or that city.
The PW system comes closest to that. I just do things as the money becomes available.

**TLF** · April 16, 2009, 07:50

How about Rome:Total War?

How much city management is involved there?
If I am going to micromanage something I would rather it be the battles.
And if I don't want to then the computer will play out the battles ans decide then in a manner similar to Civ and CtP2.

I'm having trouble locating info about the turn based strategy part of that game.

**Kuciwalker** · April 16, 2009, 09:52

You should have enough workers that it's not really micromanagement, it's just a couple extra clicks.

The other advantage to having workers is that they can be stolen, which introduces more strategy.

**DrSpike** · April 16, 2009, 14:31

People that think Civ4 worker/economy management is too micro intensive should just play a different genre imo.

**El_Cid** · April 16, 2009, 16:02

Originally Posted by TLF

How about Rome:Total War?
.............
I'm having trouble locating info about the turn based strategy part of that game.

The battles are very much 'micro manage', if you want to do well in them(you can auto-resolve them also).

The tbs section is very simple compared to Civ type games, you dont build cities for example, they are on the map and you fight for control of them. Good series in general though and if you havent tried any of the Total War games, then Rome is a good place to start(best with mods mind you).

Personaly i like the first Medieval game the best(it was the one released before Rome TW), with some good mods. The TBS section is more boardgame like than in Rome, and i like that; and it has a large slice of interesting history to take part in. If you go for Rome, look for the Gold edition which has all the expansions etc(actually the gold editions on any of the TW series are good to look for).

**Aeson** · April 16, 2009, 18:30

Originally Posted by TLF

Automating them isn't the same.
I still would like to decide what needs to be built where, but not have to move each worker and possibly have to drag a worker in from another city if none is available.

I know, I was responding to the idea that the tedium makes it not worth doing. At the point where the benefit of micro is less than the benefit of automating, automate. (To be clear, I don't think that point ever really comes from an in-game analysis. Only player discomfort can make it so.)

To me, moving the workers is just busy work.

In cases where it is, you have too many workers, and could have better invested that food and production into other projects. When you have the optimal number of workers (or less) each move is important.

A leader just need to say build more of this or that in this or that city.
The PW system comes closest to that. I just do things as the money becomes available.

Everyone will have an opinion about what level of involvement is "best". But remember that Civ is a unit/tile based game, moving units from tile to tile and performing actions with those units really is the core of the gameplay. Removing the units changes the game. (Imagine someone taking your concept of removing units to military units. "A leader just need to say invade X or defend Y...[then your military budget and tech level is compared to X's and the war is autoresolved based on the ratios and maybe some dice rolls]")

**Lemmy** · April 17, 2009, 01:44

Everyone will have an opinion about what level of involvement is "best". But remember that Civ is a unit/tile based game, moving units from tile to tile and performing actions with those units really is the core of the gameplay.

And CTP isn't?

Imagine someone taking your concept of removing units to spy units. "A leader just need to say perform operation X at location Y...[then your espionage budget is compared to X's and the operation succeeds based on the ratios and maybe some dice rolls]"...oh, wait.

But i suppose that is a good idea because Civ4 does that

**robinp** · August 2, 2011, 00:40

You've not tried Freeciv? Quoting from its on-screen help:

The Citizen Governor (formerly called the CMA) helps you manage your cities. It deploys the available workers on the free tiles around the city to achieve maximal city output. It also changes workers to scientists, taxmen, or entertainers, if appropriate. And the governor has another ability: whenever possible, it keeps your cities content.

**Adagio** · August 2, 2011, 05:07

Workers or no workers? I really hated the pw system in ctp and I'm very happy it's not in Civ games. Sure, the way it's done in Civ games is far from perfect, but a lot better than the pw system IMHO

Originally Posted by TLF

Are their any Civ style games that use a system similar to Call to Power's Public Works system instead of having to micromanage settlers and engineers.

Don't remember ever having seen any other games like that