Ozymandous read this.

[Jen Dragon]

Based on a review of a movie that says it uses the F word extensivly I wont take my daughter to it, she is 3. Based on research of this game, admittedly (sp) this forum, I do know my attention span and limitations. I played CivII and moved all those units per turn didnt like it about that game either. I played CTP2 liked some of the inovations but overall didn't like the AI and several things about it either. I do know I would only suffer through moving 150 settlers a few times befor i shelf the game, I remember CivII and the new has worn off so I'm not as tollerant of tedium, to me that is a game KILLER. I dindnt judge the game on all the discussion on corruption, boarders, trade, diplomacy, wonders, whatever.... i thought i would have to try that for myself being a leader I dont let people form my opinion of the game but that being said...Moving 150 settelers per turn seems to be a fact no one can get around. If I open the game I dont have the option to return it so it will go back unopend to be repurchased at a later date if stacked momement is implemented.
Thats it. I will continue to read this board due to my interest in the game I hope it works out. I truly dont have an hour to spend moving semi worthless units per turn. So i ask you than is the 150 settlers per turn true or untrue. I will go by your answer.

[Libertarian]

[...justing taking a peek...]

Not settlers. Workers. They're the only units that can build roads and other terrain improvements.

[Ozymandous]

Well...

Hi Jen,

Well to be honest I can't answer about moving 150 settlers because I've never had that many cities to found all at once.

(As Lib said workers build stuff Settlers only make cities )

Seriously, moving units in general can be a tad tedious if you had 150 of them, regardless of the game.

I don't know if I have EVER had 150 workers to move, because I don't think you have to have 12+ workers for every city. After all, why take the population from your city to make that many workers, thus stunting the city growth, when the city won't even be big enough to utilize all of it's territory until the advent of Sanitation and hospitals anyway???

The most workers I have ever had was maybe 75 (rough guesstimate), and 25 of those were captured enemy workers which I piled on 2-3 squares and let them work slllooowwwlllyyy...

All of my workers I usually split into two to five worker groups depending on what they do, time period in the game, etc. These workers aren't that hard to manage and I don't usually have to move ALL of them each turn (as mentioned if you have a size 2 city, do you HAVE to develop it all in one turn if it's going to take at least 22 turns, growing 1 pop every other turn to use all of it's city squares?)

In any event, you asked about unit movement tedium. Yes it can be a little tedious, especially if you move a lot of the same unit, like cannon or artillery. You move a stack of 25 or so up one square and then wait till the next turn to bombard with them all. I'd love to move them as a stack but also like to be able to move them around if I think I won't need them all at once.

Depending on your style and tolerance level this all varies however. My question to you is this: Did you ever play Civ2? If so, did you ever have "Settler brigades" that you moved around in clumps terraforming everything? If so you probably won't mind having to move all the workers you may have (depends on your play style).

If you have never played Civ2, mainly played CtP series where there were no workers, only public works or have little tolerance for moving units around (Oops, I only needed 10 tanks to take that city, not the fifty I brought, dang now I have to move them) then you might not like the game.

With this being said there are also small maps which you can stuff with up to 16 Civ's. It's highly unlikely you'd have 1090 workers on those maps. From my expoeriences and those of others it's only the HUGE or large maps that seem to foster the absurb unit numbers in the game at time that people get bored with.

Ultimately it's up to you if you want to buy the game or not. I know how frustrating it can be to buy software and not be able to take it back if you don't like it, but my feeling is if you liked Civ2, SMAC and/or any of the CtP series you'd like Civ3 if you realize it's not the same as the other games exactly but in principle. As for people complaining about how boring it is to move a lot of units... Well if they play smaller maps this usually isn't as much of a problem, especially since you can now turn off the AI's move's to speed things up.

[GodSpawn]

I just automate all my workers. They don't do as good a job as I could, but it's good enough for me (so I'm lazy...)

[Ozymandous]

I automate the "Jungle clearing only" and "Clean pollution" workers (roughly 50-75% of my workforce, depending on the game map), but with the new patch they all seem to limit to 2 workers at a time, which is a drag.

Hopefully they will spread them out like now, i.e. Hit "Shift-P" and one workers will be assigned to a pollution patch, Shift-P again will asign the worker to the next pollution patch etc.

If they would keep this and simply allow more than two workers per tile then this would not be an issue anymore.

[Dis]

I have never had more than 40 settlers. Usually less than 30. And after I build railroads I keep about 15 for pollution control. But this is because I only play large or standard maps.

I wouldn't recommend playing a huge map if you don't like moving lots of units around.

[muppet]

Hi Jen:

Being a new kid here I don't know if I really have the "right" to voice a semi-dissenting opinion. I think you may be taking word for word comments that were made out of frustration during an adjustment period to the new rules. You have to remember this is civ iii with civ iii rules. This is not a civii update patch!

Worker problems? I doubt it is anywhere as bad as what some people are saying. Maybe my difficulty level is too low. My experiences are at monarch, huge map, 10 civs.

Why do you need or even want to railroad every single tile within a city radius anyways? And if you don't want to, then you don't need so many workers.

Population:
Max optimized pop for city must be somewhere around 19!
19 pop is easy to get to for most cities without having to railroad every single irrigated tile. There are afterall, no more than 20 tiles to be worked inside a city radius, and you can't even railroad half of the tiles for a coastal city. Every tile with road produces 3-4 (river) commerce. Every pop beyond 19 produces 1 specialist (since there are no more tiles to work) that produces nowhere near the equivalent of 3-4 commerce plus shields or food per citizen on a tile. Practically, you want more than 19 pop in case you lose some to bombardment etc, and you may want that 20 or 21 pop guy to be an entertainer anyways.

Production:
Why railroad every single mined tile? Will the difference between 35 shields and 45 shields really be that significant? Afterall a 100 shield unit will still take 3 turns! OK, a bigger unit will show a difference, but will your mighty modern empire of 30+ cities really suffer if you produce 1 less battleship every 10 turns? Just thoughts off the top of my head.

Commerce:
No commerce benefit from railroads in civ iii. Again, why do we want to railroad every single tile?

Population Pollution:
Well, since it isn't that necessary to have cities much larger than pop 19, we will save ourselves from pop 30 cities that produces way too much pollution. Which incidentally are also really hard to keep happy during a prolonged conflict, assuming you are democratic. Afterall, i am not aware of many civilizations that are truly happy today that aren't at least close to being a peaceful free and democratic society.

Pollution from Production:
Shield production has no effect on production pollution.
Improvements cause production in this version of civ. Factory is 2 pollution points regardless of shields produced etc. etc.

Airports produce pollution too, but generate no commerce. So, do you need an airport in every single city anymore? Don't tell me you'll accept the extra pollution in every single city for the honor of producing veteran air units anywhere in the world at any time? I may be short on current events, but I suspect that even the US is not capable of that.

So, we really have no reason to generate so much population pollution, and no reason to have so many workers. Why do we have 150 workers on a huge map anyways?

Many people have very valid gripes. I just think some are not as bad as their frustrations are making them out to be. I really do have fun playing monarch on huge maps with 10 civs. With about 30-40 cities, pop average 25, all railroad connected, i'm really having fun and in the late industrial era i rarely have more than 20 workers kicking around. Most of them are sleeping anyways, i just don't want to add any more of the useless ones to cities that are already large enough.

Combat? Ok... i give in there. I agree that it is more tedius to launch a serious d-day type invasion or to make a serious effort to take territory from another serious power without a keep together command.

I also HATE, HATE, HATE the lack of a keep together command!!!!!!!!! I also really dislike not being able to sink a ship with a bomber! but those are combat gripes, and this isn't a game about combat.

For what this game is about, developing a civilization and all, i feel it performs to the level and flavor of its prequels. Remember, the previous civ games also had their own combat inadequacies. In fact, every game is inadequate in any area it was not designed to deal with. Why should civiii perform combat like starfleet command. Wouldn't you expect starfleet command to be inadequate as an empire building game?


WHERE'S THE FIX!?!?!?!?!

It never occured to me. Maybe i'm missing something. Someone tell me why you guys have 150 workers kicking around? What are they doing? what am i missing? doesn't the computer develop the terrain around the the cities you capture?

[muppet]

Hi Jen:

Being a new kid here I don't know if I really have the "right" to voice a semi-dissenting opinion. I think you may be taking word for word comments that were made out of frustration during an adjustment period to the new rules. You have to remember this is civ iii with civ iii rules. This is not a civii update patch!

Worker problems? I doubt it is anywhere as bad as what some people are saying. Maybe my difficulty level is too low. My experiences are at monarch, huge map, 10 civs.

Why do you need or even want to railroad every single tile within a city radius anyways? And if you don't want to, then you don't need so many workers.

Population:
Max optimized pop for city must be somewhere around 19!
19 pop is easy to get to for most cities without having to railroad every single irrigated tile. There are afterall, no more than 20 tiles to be worked inside a city radius, and you can't even railroad half of the tiles for a coastal city. Every tile with road produces 3-4 (river) commerce. Every pop beyond 19 produces 1 specialist (since there are no more tiles to work) that produces nowhere near the equivalent of 3-4 commerce plus shields or food per citizen on a tile. Practically, you want more than 19 pop in case you lose some to bombardment etc, and you may want that 20 or 21 pop guy to be an entertainer anyways.

Production:
Why railroad every single mined tile? Will the difference between 35 shields and 45 shields really be that significant? Afterall a 100 shield unit will still take 3 turns! OK, a bigger unit will show a difference, but will your mighty modern empire of 30+ cities really suffer if you produce 1 less battleship every 10 turns? Just thoughts off the top of my head.

Commerce:
No commerce benefit from railroads in civ iii. Again, why do we want to railroad every single tile?

Population Pollution:
Well, since it isn't that necessary to have cities much larger than pop 19, we will save ourselves from pop 30 cities that produces way too much pollution. Which incidentally are also really hard to keep happy during a prolonged conflict, assuming you are democratic. Afterall, i am not aware of many civilizations that are truly happy today that aren't at least close to being a peaceful free and democratic society.

Pollution from Production:
Shield production has no effect on production pollution.
Improvements cause production in this version of civ. Factory is 2 pollution points regardless of shields produced etc. etc.

Airports produce pollution too, but generate no commerce. So, do you need an airport in every single city anymore? Don't tell me you'll accept the extra pollution in every single city for the honor of producing veteran air units anywhere in the world at any time? I may be short on current events, but I suspect that even the US is not capable of that.

So, we really have no reason to generate so much population pollution, and no reason to have so many workers. Why do we have 150 workers on a huge map anyways?

Many people have very valid gripes. I just think some are not as bad as their frustrations are making them out to be. I really do have fun playing monarch on huge maps with 10 civs. With about 30-40 cities, pop average 25, all railroad connected, i'm really having fun and in the late industrial era i rarely have more than 20 workers kicking around. Most of them are sleeping anyways, i just don't want to add any more of the useless ones to cities that are already large enough.

Combat? Ok... i give in there. I agree that it is more tedius to launch a serious d-day type invasion or to make a serious effort to take territory from another serious power without a keep together command.

I also HATE, HATE, HATE the lack of a keep together command!!!!!!!!! I also really dislike not being able to sink a ship with a bomber! but those are combat gripes, and this isn't a game about combat.

For what this game is about, developing a civilization and all, i feel it performs to the level and flavor of its prequels. Remember, the previous civ games also had their own combat inadequacies. In fact, every game is inadequate in any area it was not designed to deal with. Why should civiii perform combat like starfleet command. Wouldn't you expect starfleet command to be inadequate as an empire building game?


WHERE'S THE FIX!?!?!?!?!

It never occured to me. Maybe i'm missing something. Someone tell me why you guys have 150 workers kicking around? What are they doing? what am i missing? doesn't the computer develop the terrain around the the cities you capture?

[Dis]

well I do feel the need to railroad every square. But not all at once. I think people need to be playing that railroad tycoon game

Usually when I get RR's my cities are only size 12. So only 12 squares (less for coastal cities) need quick railroading. My first priority is connecting my cities. Then railroading key squares like mines and grassland.

[Jen Dragon]

thanks guys for the encouragement I will keep the game and now look forward to opening it Christmas morning, I know if its a Civ type game i will get way more than 50hrs out of it for sure. Looks like there is a way to manage workers than. I was calling them settlers old Civ2 terminology. I dont mind it being a different game, i kinda like that idea. I will get to learn to play it all over again i just hope my tainted CivII Smac Ctp mind wont have to many bad habbits to retrain. I just noticed it has a spell checker.....well you see how i notice things now

[GodSpawn]

Jeez, Ozy, just when I got to thinking that I would stop reading anything you wrote (based on the Stacked Move thread from the other day) you become civil and address the topic at hand... Guess I'll just get a feel for your mood and go from there.

I'm a bit like that too, a fact for which I can't apologise enough...

[Heliodorus]

Jeez, Ozy, just when I got to thinking that I would stop reading anything you wrote (based on the Stacked Move thread from the other day) you become civil and address the topic at hand... Guess I'll just get a feel for your mood and go from there.

Jen, I have to admit that the late game movement tedium is detracting from otherwise enjoyable gameplay. In fact, the whole Modern/Industrial era is a bit tedious for MY tastes. This is because you are either doing next to nothing with very well built cities that are cranking on research and some sort of culture or space ship related production, or, you're trying to fight a foreign war (which can really only be done in the inferior Communist form of government due to civil unrest in Republic/Democracy). The game being the way it is, to fight offensive wars you need a lot of tanks and mech infantry and artillery.

Now, Ozy points out, and this is a KEY element of Civ3, that the various map sizes have a GREAT deal to do with the number of cities and units that you'll have to manage. I'm playing on Large maps (I run a system with the minimum system requirements). I'm going to reduce myself down to Standard sized maps and see how it goes.

The settler (worker) issue gets ugly, as you build your own workers, and capture enemy workers (who work at 1/2 effectiveness to normal workers), and you can capture a LOT of enemy workers. I think pollution is worse between the advent of factories/automobiles (no longer a civ-tree tech advance, but there's a point where pollution from population really explodes) than in Civ2, and it seems that the time between that pollution explosion and the advent of good recycling/mass transit countermeasures is longer (worse if you're fighting a war under communism and thus reducing research capabilities), and so, in my Large map game with about 25 strong cities, every turn I'm dealing with 2-5 new pollution squares, and having to control about 50-100 workers to contain it, build new improvements, or disband them. It's too much, and I quit that game last night (based on the military aspect of having to spend too much time bombarding enemy cities with my cannons).

I'll keep going with a standard sized map, though, which should help some. I'm fearful that with a smaller map, though, that I won't have as much fun in that I won't be able to do as much in terms of building wonders and cultural achievements. We'll see.

But for the record, Jen, I read a LOT of reader reviews that were cricital of the combat system, the diplomacy screen, and the distractions of strategic resources, and I originally decided not to buy it. On a whim, I returned one game and bought Civ3 instead, and I'm SO glad I did. I really enjoy Civ3. It's unfortunate they didn't steal the greatest parts of CTP2 and simply implement Civ3 diplomacy and Civ3 AI (those are THE strengths of Civ3 IMO).

I base my satisfaction on a game first on whether it's fun to play, and Civ3 is fun to play (up to that point of diminishing returns based on unit density). Then I factor in how much I paid for it and how many hours I got out of it. I have to get 50 hours out of a game for me to consider it a worthwhile purchase, and Civ3 is going to give my 50 hours sometime over my Christmas vacation (if my X-Box doesn't suck up all my time). So you have a tough decision to make. What else would you buy instead of Civ3, though? Consider that, too.

Yours
Heliodorus

[Heliodorus]

I forgot to mention, too, that I TRULY believe that a stacked movement feature is coming. I really do (but I'm also known for my devoted attempts to be optimistic and positive, because life is too short to go around being an a$$wipe).

This post sponsored by the shameless desire to graduate from settler status.

[Dadeo]

Everyone likes to find fault with things.. it is human nature. Expectations were so high for this game that it is understandable that when they were not totally met, people got angry.
You can count me in on that group but the bottom line is that I have played this game for over 200 hours and at $50 for the game my cost per hour is $.25. Not a bad return.
There are lots of problems with the game as there are in life; we should learn to deal with both.

[Unregistered]

Well, if ya have 150 workers at one time, I'd say you have too many. Playing 16 civs on a huge map w/ 45 or so cities in my own civ I've never had more than 50 workers at one time. & that was only because of a particularly successful combat round. Within two turns I was back to 30 something workers because I added the excess to cities that had room for more citizens. Imo you're better off using as few workers as possible, making them citizens is a better deal I think.

Cheers,