Civ type games without setttler management?

[El_Cid]

How about Rome:Total War?
.............
I'm having trouble locating info about the turn based strategy part of that game.

The battles are very much 'micro manage', if you want to do well in them(you can auto-resolve them also).

The tbs section is very simple compared to Civ type games, you dont build cities for example, they are on the map and you fight for control of them. Good series in general though and if you havent tried any of the Total War games, then Rome is a good place to start(best with mods mind you).

Personaly i like the first Medieval game the best(it was the one released before Rome TW), with some good mods. The TBS section is more boardgame like than in Rome, and i like that; and it has a large slice of interesting history to take part in. If you go for Rome, look for the Gold edition which has all the expansions etc(actually the gold editions on any of the TW series are good to look for).

[Aeson]

Automating them isn't the same.
I still would like to decide what needs to be built where, but not have to move each worker and possibly have to drag a worker in from another city if none is available.

I know, I was responding to the idea that the tedium makes it not worth doing. At the point where the benefit of micro is less than the benefit of automating, automate. (To be clear, I don't think that point ever really comes from an in-game analysis. Only player discomfort can make it so.)

To me, moving the workers is just busy work.

In cases where it is, you have too many workers, and could have better invested that food and production into other projects. When you have the optimal number of workers (or less) each move is important.

A leader just need to say build more of this or that in this or that city.
The PW system comes closest to that. I just do things as the money becomes available.

Everyone will have an opinion about what level of involvement is "best". But remember that Civ is a unit/tile based game, moving units from tile to tile and performing actions with those units really is the core of the gameplay. Removing the units changes the game. (Imagine someone taking your concept of removing units to military units. "A leader just need to say invade X or defend Y...[then your military budget and tech level is compared to X's and the war is autoresolved based on the ratios and maybe some dice rolls]")

[Lemmy]

Everyone will have an opinion about what level of involvement is "best". But remember that Civ is a unit/tile based game, moving units from tile to tile and performing actions with those units really is the core of the gameplay.

And CTP isn't?


Imagine someone taking your concept of removing units to spy units. "A leader just need to say perform operation X at location Y...[then your espionage budget is compared to X's and the operation succeeds based on the ratios and maybe some dice rolls]"...oh, wait.

But i suppose that is a good idea because Civ4 does that

[robinp]

You've not tried Freeciv? Quoting from its on-screen help:

The Citizen Governor (formerly called the CMA) helps you manage your cities. It deploys the available workers on the free tiles around the city to achieve maximal city output. It also changes workers to scientists, taxmen, or entertainers, if appropriate. And the governor has another ability: whenever possible, it keeps your cities content.

[Adagio]

Workers or no workers? I really hated the pw system in ctp and I'm very happy it's not in Civ games. Sure, the way it's done in Civ games is far from perfect, but a lot better than the pw system IMHO

Are their any Civ style games that use a system similar to Call to Power's Public Works system instead of having to micromanage settlers and engineers.

Don't remember ever having seen any other games like that