I have to say it again: end game unit micromanagement is DRIVING ME NUTS

[Alexander's Horse]

Is anything being done about this? I'm talking about a "keep together" or "group movement" command.

If they can't fix it for SP then they MUST fix it for any multiplayer version otherwise a good(ish) game will be USELESS for MP. Player turns will just take too long.

[Grumbold]

Generating a maximum of 3 captive workers from any razed city could help a lot but I agree, unless they come up with some fancy simultaneous turn mechanism its going to be hell.

[Libertarian]

Some of us are attempting, at this time, to reopen a dialog with Firaxis for the purpose of ascertaining their intentions with respect to many of our concerns, including the one you've mentioned. We don't know at this time whether Firaxis is reading the thread.

[Grumbold]

Sorry Lib, but if I were working for Firaxis there is nothing whatsoever that would persuade me to respond to that thread. It's just criticising them for electing to stay silent until they have something ready to implement worth announcing. They have been hounded so mercilessly over shipping the game without multiplayer that it is the only sensible course for them to take. Nobody at Firaxis is paid to surf the Civ 3 sites being helpful so the only place you can expect them to respond is in the "Ask the civ team" column. By all means criticise them for failing to update that for 2 months - assuming anyone is bothering to send them questions instead of demanding answers to any number posts buried on other sites.

[Ecthy]

Alexander's Horse, you used to be a great fan of Civ2. I can't remember there were any decent macromanagement options in Civ2

[Libertarian]

Nobody at Firaxis is paid to surf the Civ 3 sites being helpful so the only place you can expect them to respond is in the "Ask the civ team" column.

That stands in direct contradiction to Dan's own statement found in the thread. They aren't paid, but they do surf. These days, they seem particularly fond of... well... sites where there is an abundance of Intelgamesish users.

Furthermore, the thread I referenced opens a dialog without undue criticism and gives Firaxians a way to reenter while saving face. The crux of it is this: if they were willing to admit they were wrong in making overreaching promises, they might be willing to admit they were wrong in deciding to shut everyone out completely. It seems reasonable to position one's business in a less extremist stance.

[MrWhereItsAt]

How 'bout we try sucking up?

{{ Hi Firaxis, sorry we're so b*tchy, I guess that's just us fickle consumers!

You are God and we are mere worms at your feet, but we beg you - please grant us these few pitiful enhancements to your Magnificent Creation.

We'll even throw in yin as a sacrifice..

(Sorry yin, nothing personal, but you have committed heresy against the Almighty and must be sacrificed to appease our Lords)}}

So, whaddaya think? No, oh well, path of reason it is, I guess...

[Grumbold]

You could try sending that compendium of questions to ask the civ team and see what happens. If you've made it to Dan's ignore list then he'll never read your thread let alone respond to it (and it still reads as hostile to me). In his free time he's perfectly entitled to surf where he wants and post what he wants. Except, of course, items which would break any agreements of non-disclosure with their publishers.

[yin26]

If Firaxis is Yang, surely sacrificing Yin would end the universe or something. Yeah.

[MrWhereItsAt]

Aren't there another 25 yins anyway?

Or did you achieve Transcendence with them all to become - Uberyin.

[Libertarian]

yin26

[MrWhereItsAt]

Yeeaahhh... Sacrifice one, 25 more somehwere!

[yin26]

You see, 2*6 = 12 and 1*2 = 2
12*2 = 24
2*4= 8

26-8=18

18-8 = 10

1 * 0 = ZERO

Get it. Removing Yin leaves the world with NOTHING!

[MrWhereItsAt]

Damn... as a physicist I can't argue with the numbers.

So.. to keep you from leaving and ending everything, should we be sucking up to you?

[yin26]

Naw...I thrive off of abuse.