POLL 20: Settlers vs Public Works

[Pedrun]

You have a point Mister Pleasant, but still i think the PW should be change for money. With settler or without settler.

[Chronus]

"Control and flexibility"

Hmmmm. The problem I have with this is that it nibbles away at the idea of logistics. With settlers, you have to deal a bit more with logistics which I find more realistic and enjoyable. If you make a mistake with your settler, you pay for it. I don't want my civ (or the others) to have some quick, easy-fix way of undoing their mistakes.

"In civ2 I've got to move my entire heard of emgineers over to the west cost"

The ENTIRE herd? When we had a bunch of fires out here in the west, we wouldn't consider sending our ENTIRE fire fighting force to assist the other states. I usually keep my settlers near their home cities and send them far away only for crucial situations (and even then, it's still not my entire settler force).

"and if I don't have railroads or roads out there yet - this just isn't happening."

You now have engineers and your cities are STILL not connected by at least a road? Now who's fault is that? I see this as more proof about the concept of logistics. PW allows you to quickly fix years of poor planning - unrealistic, unstrategic, unfun (to me, anyway).

"Under PW, like in real life, I fund/subsidize Union Pacific, AT&T, or ADM to build a transcontinental railroad, telephone system, or farm. I can do what I want, I can switch strategies quickly - control and flexibility"

WOW! New Orleans must really have its act together! ;-)

All kidding aside, large scale construction takes much time and planning. Switching strategies can be done, but doing so mid-stream is COSTLY and time consuming. Settlers reflect this better than PW.

"I do this instantly without 80 years of redeployment"

I agree with many people's argument about the time scale. However, if you are going to grumble about how long it takes to move the setter to its destination, etc. then your complaint is with the movement of any units, not to mention their construction, or the construction of city improvements.

We are all aware of the fact that the time scale (even when down to 1 year per turn) is just too long a length of time. Instead of changing everything to fit a more realistic time scale, change the time scale to more realistically match the gameplay. Or better yet, IMAGINE the time scale as something different. In the ending turns of my games, I like to picture each turn as a month. Obviously, this doesn't work with everything, but it's better than letting it bug me.

[Cyclotron]

quote: In civ2 I've got to move my entire heard of emgineers over to the west cost - and if I don't have railroads or roads out there yet - this just isn't happening. Control - under PW, I build what I want when I want it as long as I have the funding. Flexibility - if I deside that the east coast is up to snuff while the west coast needs to be improved, I do this instantly without 80 years of redeployment.

If I was in this situation, I would either rush buy engineers on the west coast. If I establish a tiny city on a foreign coast with PW, they won't have skilled engineers, miners, railroad directors, and all the other skilled tradespeople it takes to build infastructure. I need to send skilled work crews over to develop this new territory. Theoretically, under your defenition of control, you would have even more control if improvements are free. So why not do that if you want control? What exactly do you define as control and flexibility?

------------------
"Third option, third option!"
Let's have civ bonuses that YOU control!

[Theben]

Activision may have a copyright on public works, and I haven't seen any indication that Firaxis will use it. So what we need is an improved auto-worker function.

1st off we need to be able to customize the priorities of the worker, preferably in-game, for each tile and each tile improvement. FE, on a plains square the priority might be: 1-irrigate, 2-road, 3- RRoad, 4-farm, while a grassland square would have 1-road, 2-irrigate, etc. Modifiers would be necessary for the various govt types or SE factors, depending on which is used. FE, in the example above, irrigation would be flagged off in despotism.

There would also need to be one for the AI. This one should NOT be in-game, but only in a .txt file.

Then the player should be able to drag a box, or select specific squares, for the worker to auto-improve. Perhaps even assigning which tiles to work 1st, 2nd, etc.

And the player should be able to assign (a) specific tile improvement(s) to be done over an area or a given path. This would be mainly necessary for road & RRoad construction.

Lastly, ALL improvements should be performed after all other units have gone or waited, to allow the player to get to any workers auto-stumbling into an enemy army!

[MrFun]

This entire thread is meaningless now since it looks like Firaxis has decided to stay with using Workers for tile improvement.

------------------
Never submit to social double standards.

[JMarks]

quote: Originally posted by Mister Pleasant on 05-13-2001 02:16 PM To all of those who say PW was unrealistic, here's a question: How realistic is it for 10,000 people to spend 50 years building a road?

And how realistic is it to spend 50 years moving one or two tiles? That arguement should be used for more turns only. Also we could use the same arguement for PW. How realistic is it to take 50 years to build one tile of road?

[Ralf]

quote: Originally posted by MrFun on 05-15-2001 06:11 PM This entire thread is meaningless now since it looks like Firaxis has decided to stay with using Workers for tile improvement.

Agree! Lets make room for other new POLLS instead.

[Beckdawg]

I have an idea! why not be able to choose. You can have a box or something u can click that makes all the stuff that u would normally have to do w/ a settler/worker a public works. that way u can have the best of both worlds

------------------
"If peeping your pants is cool, consider me Miles Davis" - Billy Madison
don't have ICQ but my AIM is beckdawg83 and MSN is beckdawg83@hotmail.com

[C. Gerhardt]

The concept of settlers/workers allows you to build improvement along the world without problems for distances. If your gonna use public works you can build only improvements in a radius of 3 tiles from your cities. This means that if your cities are apart more than 6 tiles your get a gap in your city connections. The advantage of PW is that you can build sea tile impr. unless you add a Units Workshop!!!

There is a way of using both settlers and PW in the same game.

Like usual your cities collect trade arrows for taxes and so. Why not add a new bar in the Tax-rating screen for collecting Public Works. This concept will stand for maintenance for the impr. your settlers build. If your wont collect PW your tile impr. will vanish and you have to build them again with your settlers.

This probably works best if you raise every bar 5% a turn instead of 10%.

Think about this!!!

CG

[MarkG]

quote: Originally posted by C. Gerhardt on 05-21-2001 04:47 AM The concept of settlers/workers allows you to build improvement along the world without problems for distances.

wrong. this is just an issue of whether or not you allow such a thing(as a designer)

quote: If your gonna use public works you can build only improvements in a radius of 3 tiles from your cities.

wrong. in ctp1/2 you can build improvements in the entire area of your civ.

[Proximo]

Settlers are more fun

For me the settlers unit have always been a part of the game, and I think it's fun to see how the city, with surroundings, grow. To create the wealth of your city is as important as going to war, or keeping peace. I have always thought CIV was about building an empire.

The Public works system maybe more realistic, but wandering around with your Settlers are more FUN. And the reason for me to spend hour after hour in front of CIV are simply because it's fun.

I really think CIVIII will be a lot of FUN!!

/Proximo

[joseph1944]

Actually in CTP 1 you had to build a one tile road inside of your border and then connected the road one tile at a time outside of your border. Irrigations also had to start inside your border next to water and then again one tile at a time to your border and continual outside of your border one tile at a time.
In CTP 2 you can build Irrigation anywhere inside of your border with or without water. Road and Irrigation must start inside your borders and can be building outside when you build a fortress. However to build a fortress, you must have a unit standing within two tile of where you want to build it. A fortress will cover an area five tile in a big cross. That is three tiles wide and five tiles top to bottom, and side to side. And a fortress can not be build on another Civs Territory.

Mark G: The spell checker will not work for me.

[Andreiguy]

Go Public Works!
They make things so much easier; anyway, it is more realistic too.
Especially in later parts of a game, moving engineers all over the map gets frustrating.

[C. Gerhardt]

MarkG,

If the Firaxis-site Tells us there will be no Relationship between CivII and CTP (besides settlers only for colonization) then why are you asking this?

[Andreiguy]

Cyclothron, I believe you have convinced me.
I was a die-hard supporter of PW, but I see your point. Settlers ARE more realistic, and they give this feel of the "real-world" (Sorry, I'm repetitive). PW is a bit to un-civ for me! Go Settlers!

PW is not a Sid thing!