Worker verus Public Works?

[Max Sinister]

@Adagio: Like others pointed out: The advantage of PW is that you don't have to move the workers to the tile you want to change in the first place.

[Adagio]

But I don't call that an advantage... it's not a disadvantage, but not an advantage either...

[Toby Rowe]

A system of both Public Works and the abilility to create workers for "other tasks" is fine by me. No more sending 6 workers to build a railway, square by square, Public works can do it. allowing your 20-odd workers to do what you wish.

I really see no conflict having both options available.

[Toby Rowe]

Couldn't agree more.

The greatest irony for moving multiiple units (especially once railways are available) is the removal of a key-stroke that at least allowed 12 units to move together- I miss that greatly. PW would negate much of this irritation, but as Civ 4 is going to be without pollution, and in 3D I reckon we're all moaning about problems that simply won't exist in Civ 4.

I still think Civ 3 is a cut-down version of Civ 2, with an odd trading system thrown in. (What were the legal costs in the battle for the right to make Civ 3?)

Toby ;-)

[BigJMoney]

I'm not going to vote without asking these questions about PW:

How would you move citizens from city to city?

How would you build colonies, outposts, fortresses, etc?

How would you build roads to other civs?

How would you be able "enslave" enemy citizens and put them to work on your structures?

If all of those factors can still be included in the game with PW, then I don't see why anyone would want a system that has BOTH workers AND PWs. That would be more confusing than what we have currently, since you'd have to manage two things!

=$= Big J Money =$=

[Dida]

Yes, all these can still be in the game with PW system. Play CTP to see how this works.

About building roads to other civ, you can only build to the border, not into another civ, working on the tile of another civ is act of war.

[Toby Rowe]

Hi BigJmoney,

The best system would be the one mentioned before by a Yank bloke earlier: You can still build workers/Engineers whilst able to enjoy a Public Works system.

If you have the very basic "right of passage" "treaty" this allows the building of roads and railways within their territory if none are built upon that tile. You can also irrigate a tile if needed to get irrigation towards your city that might not have access to a river- you may have seen the AI workers doing this within your territory? and is a good example of good AI for me in this game.

Being able to create a worker whilst still enjoying a Public Works system gives us all the best of both worlds- ie both of 'em!!

If Civ 4 has any resemblence to the prior 3, if they incorporate it, it's a win-win feature for 100% of us.

Toby

[b_ramsdell]

Originally posted by CyberShy


If all you n00bs would only know that you can automate workers. That you can tell "Railroad to" a certain tile.
That you can automate polution, automate irrigation, that you can automate a trade network.

Workers are MUCH more efficient then pw.
Workers give much more flexibility, if needed. AND at the same time can totally automate a continent, or a certain city.

the problems people have with workers would totally be gone if they would only know how it works. There are even simple icons at the bottom of the screen that can help anybody out.

I just wish you could set to automate the workers to build railroads on all squares.

[Shogun Gunner]

I won't do that for aesthetic reasons and functionality reasons. For many tiles, there's no production benefit to having a railroad built.

If there is anything else I can have more workers building, I would do it. Building Forts in potential battlefields/protecting key locations, for example, is a better use of worker cycles.

Shoot, I would even have those worker guys all camped a the top of a railroaded mountain just relaxing before they build railroads all over the place.

[lajzar]

I think PW are best. However, we should have worker units too. The workers have the following powers:

1 - They can allow specialied structures (airbase, radar post, fort, terraforming, canal, etc) to be started with PW resources.
2 - They can rush any ordinary PW tile improvement using PW resources.

Note that the special structures cannot be rushed. This is to prevent powerhouse economies from ignoring strategic planning.

[QuestGAV]

I found PW to be the only useful mechanic added in the CTP series. I admit there's something fun about scooting your 3-10 workers around in the early game in Civ3 to personalize your territory, but by the Middle Ages it's unwieldy at best and by the time Steam Power hits workers are the single biggest impediments to my enjoyment of a Civ3 game. Think of how many extra keystrokes are required each and every turn to railroad your Civilization and the territory you may acquire from that point forward. Moving them as stacks helps, and giving them orders as a stack would be even better, but it still requires extra MM as you divide the stacks for tasks that take a different amount of time.

Workers also present a balance problem - they're too damn efficient. The common theme in the advice given in the Civ3 strategy forum is to build more workers - lots of them. No matter how many you have, it's almost always beneficial to keep building more. On the other hand, a static investment for any given tile seems to make it more important to choose which tiles to improve wisely rather than improving every tile within your borders to the max ASAP.

With PW there seems to be a real tradeoff to make that has strategic impact. The "more the merrier" approach that workers requires isn't a strategy, just a timesink. If you have to make a real choice between tile improvements and science/treasury I think you're giving players more tools and more ways to win (or lose) with their brain rather than their willingness to spend time micromanaging which is always a positive.

[meriadoc]

Having played all of the versions of Civilization and Call to Power extensively, I have to agree that I would like to see both methods used in Civ 4. There are times when Public Works is better than Workers, and vice-versa.

But what I'd really like to see is somethat that wrylachlan mentioned earlier: the ability to "paint" desired actions on the map. For instance, I want a road to my new city. I "paint" the road on the map and any of my nearby workers that are free can go work on the road. This has the benefit of allowing me to put my plans for my workers on the computer, where they're safe, instead of in my head where I'll forget them.

[realpolitic]

PW, because that remains as a strategy concern throughout the game. With workers you can build or capture enough to coast though the later game. PW gives extra motivativation be peaceful, even at the later stages.

[Toby Rowe]

realpolitic,

Hi mate,

Do you actually use capured workers? As they only work at half rate I usually dispand them in order to gain a couple of shields, or else they inadertently end up mixed in with the workers proper, leaving me with a critical section of road incomplete, as I'd moved only 3 for the job eg.

When I first brought the game I did notice it was quite profitable to sell them to other AI players (put them in your Capital) early on.

On the being peaceful bit, I usually check only the Space Race and Total Victory- Victory as the AI makes it so hard to play a peaceful game, and the AI tech cheating makes it almost (not quite) impossible to stay ahead in tech due to the random trade embargoes the AI throws at you and tech swapping. And the fact that most of the nations become hostile to you anyway in this era I feel.

Toby