POLL 20: Settlers vs Public Works

[raingoon]

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.

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. But even though I believe the results in this poll are more accurate than the last (in favor of Settlers -- so far at least) it's very curious to me that so many DO seem to prefer the PW system. In fact, PW might even win this poll over time.

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. And if so, then maybe this thread and others will serve to remind Firaxis how important the issue is to so many players like yourself.
[This message has been edited by raingoon (edited April 15, 2001).]

[raingoon]

Doesn't make any difference if it's abstracted at the city or national level, either way it's still an abstraction. You haven't answered my question.

And since PW is actually NOT winning this poll, the majority would presumably like to know -- What does PW add to actual gameplay to make up for what it takes away?

quote: Originally posted by raingoon on 04-14-2001 05:21 PM Can somebody explain to me how PW would improve Civ for a player who neither uses auto-workers nor chooses so unwisely as to build "300 settlers" to cover the map with improvements

the problem my friend as that

- there are very few people that never use auto-workers(eitherwise PW would not have almost half of the votes in the current poll )
- there are lots of lots people who end up being forced to use auto-workers in the last stages of the game and having to face their deficiency since eitherwise they would spend an incredible amount of time


now, do you want to add more choices in the PW system? fine. dont have one nation-wide PW resource. have one for each city, or for a group of cities. or take the choice of the percentage of production that goes to PW from the nation level to city level. but remember to add 1-2 screens to manage the above easily...

[dognheat]

What I want to know is why not a combination of the two ? You could lay down prefab packs of the improvement you want to build and then any available settler/worker that you have set to terraforming would auto-develope the tiles that had packs on them. It would still take time for the improvements to be built, but you wouldn't have to micro-manage your settler/workers in making sure they arent building farms on mountains. You could also prioritize defense improvements, roads, farms, etc..

------------------
*PLOP*

[raingoon]

I'm confused why this is even a debate.

PW takes away the choices settlers force you to make. Can somebody tell me what PW adds to the Sid model of decision-based gameplay? If auto-worker was the only option you had to build a road, then I would understand the complaint about auto-worker. But it's not. Many players never even use the auto function and that makes it a game STYLE issue, not a game PLAY issue. If you want PW for your game style, I certainly understand. And if the auto-settlers in Civ 3 are as poorly functioning as they were in the past, you have my sympathy.

But why adcovate a style improvment at the cost of game play? You are taking away the basic mechanics and economics of the game -- such as having to choose which city will spend the resources to support the unit who builds the road to get to another city that spends the resources, and so on. If that is silly to you, than we have nothing to discuss. But these ARE the economics of the game, status quo. And having to choose between building swords or plows are extremely important economics of city production as well. Their absense from CTP is one reason why that game is nothing near the game that Civ is. Because the bottom line is each of these concepts that I mention here are represented on every Civ game map, where they can be directly opposed and defeated by an oponent.

By contrast, the PW system is abstracted at the highest level of game play, and its only contribution as far as I can tell is the afore-mentioned improvement in gaming style, a boon to those players who prefer not to micro-manage settlers.

Can somebody explain to me how PW would improve Civ for a player who neither uses auto-workers nor chooses so unwisely as to build "300 settlers" to cover the map with improvements? (This latter complaint isn't really valid because it implies a player who would remedy their own wisdom deficiency by simply taking away any choice that required it).



[This message has been edited by raingoon (edited April 14, 2001).]

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...

[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"

[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"

[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).]

[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!

[- 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!

[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.

[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)

[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

[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.