Anyone ever get the "go to" function to work properly?

[Alexander's Horse]

What did you use it for?

I gave up on it pretty early.

[Mao]

I use it, but only to go from one end of the screen to the other, on standard zoom. Saves a lot of time in scenarios like Red Front.

[War4ever]

yes if you are travelling in a straight path.. the goto is fine... however if it needs to think on how to get there.... well it goes over mountains instead of taking roads, or goes under a lake a goes back and forth.... etc..... use it only in straight lines of command for best results

[Ming]

NEVER EVER use the go to command if the fastest route crosses the East/West 0 map coordinate. The unit will move in the opposite direction

[Hasdrubal]

After a while, you'll get to know which routes in a particular game the computer knows. I use several of these as 'subroutes' with a goto-order. You can't move all your units manually all the time, especially after a good railroad network has been laid down.

------------------
Ceterum censeo Romanem esse delendam.

[cavebear]

I think it is important to start units out manually. It seems to me that when you get them moving on roads/railroads, they keep to them, but they may start on a more direct route cross-country if not.

Also, it seems that the computer remembers routes. Once established for a unit (say, freight) to move between 2 cities, it always seems to repeat the route without problems.

One warning, though. I *never* move naval units "goto". They seem to have a bizarre notion of efficient routes. Maybe that is Ming's 0 coordinate problem. Land units are much more trustworthy than naval units.

A related question. Naval units *always* move out of straight path (though with no loss in efficiency) and they *usually* seem to shy away from unexplored waters if not controlled square by square. Is that just me or does it seem that way to others, too?

[johnmcd]

I use it when I'm in no particular hurry. If I'm launching an attack in 10 turns and have a unit about five turns away, I'll let it take six with goto and save myself the hassle. I never have the shocking navigation problems mentioned above though(except Ming's), that is to say I never suffer in the way War4ever describes

[shamrock]

Note that the Go To Command, while still not perfect, is much better in TOT.

[Ming]

If I run into a problem with go to commands, I may just have an settler/engineer add a road or rail to the point where they are getting screwed up. Later in the game, it is just to much of a pain to move caravans/freights manually within your own empire

[DaveV]

A *long* time ago, I theorized that two cities are considered "connected by road/rail" if a unit will stay on path when doing a goto between the cities. So I'm with Ming all the way on this one - fill in the funny spots with a road, and you'll benefit overall.

I use the goto command a lot in single player, where I tend to have huge armies. It saves tons of time, and once you learn the paths on your particular map, your units won't go astray. Sea and air units are best controlled manually, as other people mentioned.

[Andz83]

quote: Originally posted by Ming on 06-13-2000 09:31 AM If I run into a problem with go to commands, I may just have an settler/engineer add a road or rail to the point where they are getting screwed up. Later in the game, it is just to much of a pain to move caravans/freights manually within your own empire

show-off

[Mark von Wagner]

I've found that the more complicated the route, the better the computer does at following it via goto. For example, a route going from one island to another by way of a railroad through the antarctic does much better than a route from one city to another nearby city with a straight railroad connecting the two.

[Thue]

i WANT IN.

Because I made much of the goto in freeciv.
*shameless plug* And to my knowledge it _always_ works perfect.
-always finds the path with the smallest cost.
-it work fine where the map wraps in the x axis
-it never goes into loops
-when using airplanes the planes will stop at ways points to refuel, and never crash (MUCH easier than moving them yourself). btw, airplanes don't automatically loose all their movement when moved into a city

Actually making I have learned enough to see what they must have done wrong in civ 2, and it isn't pretty
[This message has been edited by Thue (edited June 14, 2000).]

[Ming]

No, it isn't pretty. The designers saw the need for a goto command, and then didn't follow through with it. The changes you say you put in Free Civ actually address the real reasons for having goto commands.
Hopefully they will provide a better system for CivIII.

One question about Freeciv... Do you have a "patrol" command? One where you can tell ships or planes to patrol a specific area every turn looking for enemy units. A command like that would really speed up play in the modern era.

[Oldman]

I gave up on it years ago, but thought i'd give it a go just for old times sake recently!!!

i was fighting a war on 2 fronts, the celts in the east and the spanish on my western coast! I smashed the celts no problem with a far supperior force but was struggling against the spanish, so i sent my victorious army from the east to the west!!!

Now the path was fully roaded, about 24 squares in all, now for my army of horses, elephants and knights, this should've taken 4 to 5 turns depending on time to get on to the roads!!! but NO!!! the stupid computer sent them across the mountians, around MASSIVE inland lakes, the majority of my force arived after about 7 turns, after i abandoned the goto command and sent them by hand along the road!! by which time i'd lost 2 cities?!?!?!

And finally after about 27 turns the lone horseman who escaped my control arrived!!!! the route was only 24 squares which ever way you looked at it?!?! so how he took 27, i'll never know?!?!?!?!?
[This message has been edited by Oldman (edited June 14, 2000).]