POLL 20: Settlers vs Public Works

quote: Originally posted by ChrisShaffer on 04-17-2001 02:32 PM Harrumph. I think you're wrong. Most people I know do not use auto-settlers at all. We're all agreed they're horrible at the job

perhaps that's why they dont use them? perhaps there are lots of people who like pw for exactly that reason?

[ChrisShaffer]

quote: 3) given that the majority of the people use auto-settlers to a smaller or bigger amount(dont tell me to do a poll about it), a good AI for the settlers is in fact crucial...

Harrumph. I think you're wrong. Most people I know do not use auto-settlers at all. We're all agreed they're horrible at the job (in Civ2 and SMAC at least, hopefully they'll be better in Civ3). I'm reasonably sure there's a pretty big contingent of people who never use auto-settlers.

So, I will _ask you_ (not tell you) do to a poll about it. Maybe you'd be as surprised about auto-settler poll results as you were about the settlers / pw poll, eh?

[Ralf]

quote: Originally posted by MarkG on 04-16-2001 06:31 AM i'm sorry, but i would like to choose how i play and not have the deficiencies of the game change how i play the game...

There is a difference between "deficiencies" and deliberately designed game-rules, MarkQ. Every strategy-game must have RULES.

Compare with a game like "Europa Universalis". In that game its MUCH harder to ignore good ally-relations, and conquer other provinses - not to say whole countries. A famous swedish historian however wrote in a newspaper game-review, that the degree of realism was at least 10 to 1, compared with Civ-2.

Now Civ-3 isnt EU and it never vill be, I admitt. But game-rules isnt automatically "deficient" just because certain players cannot do exactly what they want, within that game-environment. Infact it shouldnt be possible - thats the whole point with having game-rules in the first place.

[This message has been edited by Ralf (edited April 16, 2001).]

1) when i spoke about deficiencies i was referring to badly fucntioning auto-workers. when you responded a "general level" talking about game rules, i replied to that...

2) i never connected PW with a strong AI. on the contrary, PW doesnt need any fuctions to move settlers around, it just needs the functions to figure out where to place improvements. therefore it needs LESS ai(which is good cause good ai is hard to program )...

3) given that the majority of the people use auto-settlers to a smaller or bigger amount(dont tell me to do a poll about it), a good AI for the settlers is in fact crucial...

[Ralf]

quote: Originally posted by MarkG on 04-16-2001 01:33 PM so the fact that auto-settlers run around like... lemmings doing nothing is a game rule??????

Have i said that? Artificial intelligence has its very specific built-in limitations in any large random-map multi-optional game like Civ, whether one understand this or not. If the public-works system where such a wonder-recipe for a strong AI, why wasnt the AI in the CTP-2 game that god then?

Seriously speaking; if the AI is good or bad has nothing to do with if the human player use the settler-system or the public works-system. I advocate the settler-system because I like it better seen from a human player point of view. But I sure as hell dont advocate it for the AI-civs.
Maybe they can use AI-settlers though, if best possible AI-city placement "beacons" (invisible for the human player) have already been pre-calculated in conjunction the the random map-generation. Infact, they can even have visible city-area AI-workers, as long as the real work is done by some kind of tweakable AI-owned terrain-tile maturing-process. I sure hope so - otherwise we can say goodby to any hope of a noticeably stronger strategical/logistical AI in Civ-3.

[This message has been edited by Ralf (edited April 16, 2001).]

so the fact that auto-settlers run around like... lemmings doing nothing is a game rule??????

quote: Originally posted by Ralf on 04-15-2001 06:04 PM Auto-workers are not likely to be noticeably smarter then the terraformers in SMAC. So dont use them! Adapt and change your playingstyle instead.

i'm sorry, but i would like to choose how i play and not have the deficiencies of the game change how i play the game...

hey raingoon!

Settlers vs Public Works
* Settlers-type model 97 / 50%
* Public Works-type model 90 / 47%
* Dont know/Dont care 4 / 2%
Total Votes: 191

btw, yes, settlers are winning with 51% but there is a 45% out there that wants to know: how smart are the auto-workers going to be?
and your sympathy is not enough

quote: Originally posted by raingoon on 04-15-2001 05:36 AM What does PW add to actual gameplay to make up for what it takes away?

TIME not spent on micromanaging settlers or seeing silly automated settlers running around. TIME better spent on fun things...

thanks to PW and other features, in CTP2 you can have more turns in the same (real playing) time, which means more realistic turn time(not 50 years for each turn), more time for spent on the early periods, etc...

[Ralf]

quote: Originally posted by MarkG on 04-15-2001 12:53 PM btw, yes, settlers are winning with 51% but there is a 45% out there that wants to know: how smart are the auto-workers going to be? and your sympathy is not enough

Auto-workers are not likely to be noticeably smarter then the terraformers in SMAC. So dont use them! Adapt and change your playingstyle instead. Go for quality before quantity. Go for space-race, with max 20-25 founded cities, and perhaps max 20-25 conquered ones. Never, or seldomly above 50 cities.
The days there (some) civers enjoyed to "expand their way to success", by founding/conquering literally hundreds of cities is numbered. And thats a damn good thing. I want a "tighter" game then Civ-2 ever was: a slightly "overpressured" game, instead of an "underpressured" one. I think Firaxis actually have expressed the same thing.

As for AI-civ controlled "automated" workers & settlers:

Well thats an entirely different cup of tea. I really hope that they have made the correct game-develop decision here, and consequently choosen to bypass the whole damn "visible AI-civ controlled worker/settler" idea all together. Both "AI-city area management" and "AI-city placements" is far to important (seen from a longterm logistical viewpoint) to be left in the hands of erratically moving AI-workers & settlers. There are other, much more effective ways to deal with these problems...

As for the PW-system. Well, I never liked the idea of being forced to move around that damn map anyway, in order to click-and-paste all those terrain-improvements. The map should autocenter automatically, with flashing units, and possibly also cities!! I want to have the option to be automatically guided. I dont want to be forced to manually drag around the whole damn map back and forth, each and every turn, just to check and doublecheck if I havent missed anything.
Anyway, since a majority (although a small one) actually have voted for the settler-modell - why not just give the thing a rest, heh? The choice between "PW" and "Settler" is a pretty fundamental one - something they most probably already have decided, perhaps 8-10 months ago. So any ideas of pursuade them to make such drastic reversal changes is pretty futile.

Besides; 51% is still 51%! If they instead would have chosen the PW-modell, then only 45% would be happy with it. Would that be a more vise decision, from Firaxis point of view? Theres an old saying...

"If you try to please everybody, you might end up with pleasing nobody".

[This message has been edited by Ralf (edited April 16, 2001).]

quote: Originally posted by cyclotron7 on 04-15-2001 04:17 PM It seems to me that PW is like inventing rubber gloves to deal with a leaky pen. You don't like and don't appreciate the settler system, so instead of trying to improve upon it you just decide it would be "easier" to scrap it and make some arbitrary slider for it.

PW is not "some arbitrary slider". you can micromanage all you want with PW. you actually place each improvement one by one by hand. it is just that it takes less time to place many improvements at one time and you can choose when you are going to place them

quote: Originally posted by raingoon on 04-15-2001 03:57 PM Neither is your " " enough to prevent you from sounding rather bitter, frankly. I am genuinely sympathetic if this is a case of a good thing being overlooked by Firaxis, I hope you can appreciate that.

i didnt mean to offend you in any way.

quote: You are still talking about the time spent playing, etc., and with the possible exception of changing the game's time scale, I don't see any game-PLAY enhancements to this at all.

being able to spent time on more fun things is a change in the gameplay, no?

quote: So if I understand you now, this is all based on a general lack of faith in Firaxis' ability to implement a well-programmed auto-worker.

it's not so much lack of faith, as being realistic(i'd like to think). making a well-functioning auto-worker will probably not be on the top of list of priorities. if you add that the problems with auto-workers will show up late in the game when they will have little stuff to do and that a common game will take lots of time, when beta testing time comes, it is more logical that testers will be looking for crashes rather than the efficiancy of the auto-workers...

[Cyclotron]

I for one have NEVER auto-managed my settlers (and I mean never!) and I don't see how managing settlers takes away your "fun time." I consider managing settlers to be just as fun as managing armies. I like being able to manage them... Heck, if you don't like to micromanage, there are tons of other things we can cut out, too...

It seems to me that PW is like inventing rubber gloves to deal with a leaky pen. You don't like and don't appreciate the settler system, so instead of trying to improve upon it you just decide it would be "easier" to scrap it and make some arbitrary slider for it. Heck, anything can be made into a slider, right? In the meantime, for all of us that do want to improve the settler system and see its possibilities, we get your simplistic slider. Its not very fair, is it?


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

[raingoon]

Btw, dognheat, that was a very good suggestion. You could lay down "pre-fab packs" of the improvements you want, then build the settlers who will auto-work the tiles you basically told them to. That's PW in the concrete, not abstract. I wonder if that would please the PW folks.