Culture Level 3 working

[Azuarc]

Originally posted by LordShiva
Too complicated.

Not really that complicated, unless you're one of those min-max people that checks their cities every turn. You don't have to know how it works exactly, only that it does. And it's certainly not too complicated for the computer to handle.

[padillah]

Originally posted by Azuarc


Not really that complicated, unless you're one of those min-max people that checks their cities every turn.

We still have to plan for growth. If we don't know what that growth means or what it is how can we plan?

I'm sure you've seen Vel's strat thread, you really think those guys are going to settle for "it just does"?

Tom P.

[Azuarc]

And has the idea that "the best city is one founded in the center of a bunch of good squares" changed at all? Not really.

At this point, I guess I have to take a stance of "let it be complicated and people won't care" or "let's simplify it so it makes more sense to the player." I'd rather do neither and see what evolved out of people's opinions, and simply picked my city sites based on what's generally around. The Vel strategy thread people might not be able to distill the first 50 turns of the game into near-exact science, but it's not like the rest of the game remains that way anyhow.

[padillah]

Originally posted by Azuarc
And has the idea that "the best city is one founded in the center of a bunch of good squares" changed at all? Not really.

At this point, I guess I have to take a stance of "let it be complicated and people won't care" or "let's simplify it so it makes more sense to the player." I'd rather do neither and see what evolved out of people's opinions, and simply picked my city sites based on what's generally around. The Vel strategy thread people might not be able to distill the first 50 turns of the game into near-exact science, but it's not like the rest of the game remains that way anyhow.

First off, I probably play quite a bit like you - I do my best and see what happens. I have a hard time planning 50 moves ahead when I don't know what the yahoo over the hill is going to do 3 moves from now.

That being said my response was directed at your refutation that the system you proposed was not complicated - it is. We, as players don't have to think about the complications if we don't want to but it is, in point of fact, complicated.

It would add to the general complexities of the game and of testing since several scenarios would have to be walked through to make sure the calculations were being done correctly. Then every modifier in the game has to be evaluated to make sure that it's handling the rise in production and food output... It is complicated.

We've had bugs with certain improvements not improving anything (I think it was windmills) and that would have been a nightmare to discover under this kind of system.

I have no disillusions about using this system if it was implemented, I would continue on the way I'm going hoping I was making the right choices. But the method you have proposed is complicated and would complicate the rest of the game in turn.

Tom P.

[Azuarc]

Well, ok, in the literal sense, yes it is complicated. A simpler version could be used instead, or maybe I'm just off my rocker completely. I was more viewing it from a "so what if it's more complicated, cause it's under the hood" vantage; I hadn't considered the aspect of testing things.

[Datajack Franit]

COMPLICATED