POLL 20: Settlers vs Public Works

[Gramphos]

quote: Originally posted by Der_Wachter on 04-11-2001 08:47 PM Personally, I prefer settlers (or Workers as the case may be with Civ III) because I like to bring these units along whenever I'm on a military campaign. I simply cannot visualize fortresses, roads, and railroads popping in the middle of my army's advance into enemy territory without some way of justifying the sudden appearance of terrain improvements.

I totally agree. The working units are very useful in war.

[MarkG]

quote: Originally posted by Der_Wachter on 04-11-2001 08:47 PM I simply cannot visualize fortresses, roads, and railroads popping in the middle of my army's advance into enemy territory without some way of justifying the sudden appearance of terrain improvements.

but you can visualize the "birth" of a new legion in one of your cities??

[Vrank Prins]

quote: Originally posted by Der_Wachter on 04-11-2001 08:47 PM I simply cannot visualize fortresses, roads, and railroads popping in the middle of my army's advance into enemy territory without some way of justifying the sudden appearance of terrain improvements.

Now that I come to think of it, in CTP you can only build PW's in tiles adjacent to "processed" tiles in your own territory and not just way outside of it. Pretty nasty when you want to solidly fortify whatever unit in noman's land just outside, just inside, or even in the middle of your enemies territory.
In CIV-II you can do so by just bringing a settler or engineer along with your troops who can do the job whereever you want him to do that. In CIV-III this should stay that way.

[Der_Wachter]

MarkG:
Come to think of it, I don't think I can visualize the birth of a legion in my cities either. But I think it's easier to imagine soldiers being recruited (even though the game (Civ II) doesn't properly reflect this with a drop in population points) in a city where there is a large concentration of people than to try to visualize terrain improvements being built without a "physical" presence there to account for it.

[MarkG]

quote: Originally posted by Der_Wachter on 04-12-2001 01:03 PM But I think it's easier to imagine soldiers being recruited (even though the game (Civ II) doesn't properly reflect this with a drop in population points) in a city where there is a large concentration of people than to try to visualize terrain improvements being built without a "physical" presence there to account for it.

in civ game so far, you dont see
- people building improvement in the cities
- soldiers being recruited
- scientists working in their labs
- entertainers singing
- "tax people" collecting taxes


why should you see workers building a road??????

[airdrik]

Actually, they could fix that so that you can see all those things if you wanted to, but that would get very boring after a while.

And besides it is better for the gameplay, as most people agree. The two big problems with settler/worker is that 1: they increase the micromanagement of your civ, and 2: putting them on auto-mode means that they do some pretty wierd stuff. 1 is just a matter of preference that most people just learn to get used to and even enjoy. 2 requires extensive programming to determine what to improove, and the more options that are given the easier it is to program solutions. Neither of these two problems will occor at the same time since if you set the worker on auto-mode, then you don't have to micromanage him, and if you don't want to put him on auto-mode then you do have to deal with the micromanagement.

One of the main reasons why people like it over PW is that you can actually micromanage your workers as they build your empire. You get the feel of doing it yourself, etc. Some people even enjoy the micromanagement of it just because they like micromanagement.

[Martin Gühmann]

What should I do with two or tree hundrets of settlers after building terrain improvements everywhere? I moved them to the poles and parked them there. I won't delete any settler, because asettler is a pop and a pop is too much worth to delete it simply. It costs too much time to move every settler, I blowed up the turns to one and half an hour, only to move the units! Therefore I preferre the puplic works concept, that was one of the reasons to buy CTP1. But there would be another solution for the problem the publics works could be generated by puplic worker. Units that must be produced and they will appear where a tileimprovement is put. They can't be moved like normal units they are there like the caravans in CTP1/2.

-Martin

[SerapisIV]

If workers cost a pop point, they should be able to rejoin a city for a pop point (though not able to found one themselves)

[Ilkuul]

A question for information: I've never played CTP, so I don't know how the PW system operates (tho' through browsing these forums I've picked up the general concept); but can someone tell me, does PW create roads etc. wherever you have units, or only adjacent to your own cities?

If it's only adjacent to your own cities, then I can't see much percentage in PW, because as has been commented above, one of the main benefits of settlers/workers - which I've exploited a lot - is to build (rail)roads in advance of your armies to facilitate a quick 'blitzkrieg' campaign. If that only happens once you've founded a city, I would find it very limiting.

[- Groucho -]

Another reason Settlers/workers/engineers are needed:

The game needs more non-military units, not less because I want to have the option to do more non-military stuff, not less.

Go Settlers!

[Chronus]

"The game needs more non-military units, not less because I want to have the option to do more non-military stuff, not less."

My feelings exactly.

"but you can visualize the "birth" of a new legion in one of your cities??"

That's twice now MarkG you've used that argument so let's put it this way:

I'd rather put up with legions "birthed" in a city (or "tanks dropped from the sky" as you said in another thread) instead of putting up with both tanks AND roads dropping from the sky. There's enough pollution in the air as it is ;-) By the way, I enjoy the challenge of frantically rushing my settlers around trying to keep the pollution down.

In regard to those other micromangagement concepts you mentioned, I say, BRING THEM ON! :-) I'd welcome more non-military concepts (especially unit-wise) any day!

[SerapisIV]

Thats one freaken huge woman to give birth to a whole legion. Must have a diet high in iron too.


Okay, that was stupid, but I couldn't resist
[This message has been edited by SerapisIV (edited April 12, 2001).]

[LzPrst]

another fun thing with settlers is that you can build a heap of them send an army with and do a large-scale migration. building a couple of cities and using settlers to boost size and build a few irrigations. especially in rugged terrain this is great for creating "colonies" in faraway lands.
i admit its costly and time-consuming but its fun and gives a little history to the game for example:
"in the 26th year of the rule of Khan XIX the people were crowding their cities, squabbling over food and resources so Khan our great King, son of the unending line of kings, ordered that the second son of every family was to gather his belongings and leave for the unknown land far east accompanied by 10 of the lands finest legions. for three generations they wandered until they reached the end of the Ahklmenn river where it emptied out into the sea where they settled. and it was so the small inland kingdom of Mongl became a great seafaring nation"

[Cyclotron]

quote: Originally posted by MarkG on 04-12-2001 01:51 PM in civ game so far, you dont see - people building improvement in the cities - soldiers being recruited - scientists working in their labs - entertainers singing - "tax people" collecting taxes why should you see workers building a road??????

But Mark, you are comparing apples and oranges.

There is no difference between seeing scientists working and not seeing scientists working; the result is the same regardless. In contrast, settlers are not merely a "picture" of public works; they are an altogether different system that gives different gameplay results.

It's not just about seeing the workers building the road. It's about getting them there, building the road, protecting the settlers, and being able to think strategically about where your settlers are needed next and how you are going to get them there.

IMO settlers are better because they allow you to do more; you can build a fortress in enemy territory without having to build a road all the way there, you can actually directly disrupt somebody's attempts to clean up pollution and build stuff (you can't do that with PW), and you can build up a cities' infastructure before you found it. PW is limiting; settlers set you free!!!

------------------
- Cyclotron7, "that supplementary resource fanatic"

[MarkG]

quote: Originally posted by cyclotron7 on 04-13-2001 11:10 PM But Mark, you are comparing apples and oranges. There is no difference between seeing scientists working and not seeing scientists working; the result is the same regardless.

i was discussing the realism part of the issue. some people say that they cant imagine "roads falling off the sky". i replied to that comment only...