 |
|
MRT144
|
|
Seattle Washington
Oct 2002
time: 21:37
|
|
ability to build multiple units or facilities at the same time and allocate where the building materials went instead of being forced to choose one thing and stick with it or lose points for change.
example, building a wonder and a phalanx at the same time, and divide the cost or allocate the cost to each one accordign to your priority.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Proteus_MST
|
|
You have a similar thing in MOO3.
Here you have two different building queues, one for military units/spaceships and one for planetary buildings,
allowing you to build a building/planetary enhancement and a spaceship at the same time.
You also have sliders allowing you to control how much of the tax money goes into the military production and how much into the production of planetary buildings.
A similar system with 2 Buildings queues, one for units and one for city improvements and a single slider which determines how many percent of the city production go into military production and how much into the production of buildinge/wonders would be great, allowing us to produce 2 things at the same time and on the other hand also being easy enough that even a Civ-beginner could understand the concept.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
MRT144
|
|
Seattle Washington
Oct 2002
time: 21:37
|
|
based on government there could be bonuses or penalties for each que...
|
|
| |
|
|
|
wrylachlan
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by lajzar
Nice idea, but it completely destroys the concept of opportunity cost decision making. |
++ Count me firmly against this idea for the reason stated above.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Switch
|
 |
This just in, water has been discovered on Mars...
Apr 2002
time: 00:37
|
|
It's an interesting idea, and I can also see a way to make the war-time mobilization more useful too. For example, with a normal mobilization and a non-specifically war-based government (i.e., not Commy, Despot, or Fascism), you have a maximum unit production allocation of, say, 50%, except for primarily defence-based units, though only if the MP limit hasn't been reached for the city. Go into war-time mobilization, and you now have the option of going beyond that limit, to 100%, and now perhaps a lower limit of 50%, so you must allocate more than 50% to military units. War-time governments would have a similar limit, but would be better to have these limits higher than 50%, but with a correspondingly higher low-limit in war-time mobilization. Perhaps this might allow Fascism to actually be useful, with the highest military unit production rate allowable under normal mobilization...
Just a thought.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Falconne
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by lajzar
Nice idea, but it completely destroys the concept of opportunity cost decision making. |
Not quite - you still only have limited resources and you have to decide how to allocate them.
It's a feature I always wished the game had, but the issue I see is that the abstractions used by Civ make it not so appealing:
You can't get any benefit from a partially constructed building or unit. Therefore, instead of constructing two buildings at the same time and having them both build slowly, it is probably better to build one quickly using all available resources and reap it's benefits while building the other.
Same is true of units. If the game was more granular, you would be able to start using buildings and units after a certain minimum level. You could continue construction on it further later on, if you wanted to improve the efficiency and quality of the building/unit (upgrade in other words), but that's not the Civ way.
Another issue is all resources being abstracted by "Shields". If towns had a "workforce" based on population and each building had a limit on the maximum number of workers who can work on it at one time, then the simultaneous building could work.
Unless some fundamental changes are made in the game, after a certain period of time, it wouldn't matter whether you built one thing at a time or many, because you would have achieved the same end result. It would make occasional short term difference, for e.g. at the start of a war, but that's about it.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Falconne
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by TechWins
That's not necessarily true. If you enter war and in a high production city you've been working on a high production cost building it would be nice to be able to continue working on that building while trying to pop out a few cheap(er) units in the meantime. As lajzar said it takes away from the oppurtunity cost making decisions. Choosing to build that high cost building when you may enter war soon is apart of the risky decisions you sometimes have to make; granted some are more "risky" than others. |
Yes, but you would be dividing your available resources between multiple projects, so the opportunity cost is still there. It is still a decision you have to make as to how to allocate resources between that expensive building and making units. A realistic decision at that.
I just think that the abstractions the game has would prevent this kind of feature from showing it's full potential.
I don't think it would cause micromanagement issues either. This could be implemented at a high level, like sliders to determine at the civ level how you want to allocate resources. It could be very high level (between civilian,military) or more detailed (civic, military, scientific, commerce, manufacturing, cultural, etc). Basically like the Galactic Civilizations model.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
shimmin
|
|
Illinois, USA
Sep 1999
time: 05:37
|
|
It worked well for the original MOO, but I think part of what made it work well is the paucity of game elements analagous to specific city improvements. Industry, planetary defenses, waste cleanup, etc., all had a high degree of abstraction in MOO.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Zoetrope
|
 |
Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
Sep 1999
time: 05:37
|
|
Space Empires 3 (late 1990's) was turn-based, and it had an unlimited number of queues per colony (at least I never reached the limit).
I built many space docks (queues) around each settled planet, and each space dock was continually busy constructing ships, starbases, other space docks, and/or whatever else it could.
Didn't slow the game one iota.
Combat was interesting too (unlike Civ's stupid "combat system").
Each player had their own tech tree.
You could design your own units (ships) and trial them against known enemy designs in the Combat Simulator (a simulated battlefield).
SE3 was especially addictive as multiplayer (PBEM), but the AI was fairly competitive despite all the strategems I used.
It did have spacelanes (which some MOO3 ex-players dislike) but SE3 also had large (about 12x12) solar system maps for each star, and those arenas were where the building was done, while the combat occurred on separate maps (about 30x30 each) representing the combat square in the solar system. If a planet was within the square, its defences took part.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
patcon
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Platypus Rex
If you guess wrong, to bad: if you switch a penalty
|
The switching penalty (losing half of your already allocated shields when switching from an improvement to a unit or vice versa) was in Civ2. I don't recall seeing this in Civ3. It was "realistic" in the sense that resources spent in building a temple don't really help building a phalanx, but I still hated it.
I'm not sure I see much use in multiple queues for improvements or units, unless you've got shields which are going to be wasted when an item requires fewer shields to finish then you are producing (i.e., your cathedral needs 10 more shields and you're producing 15 shields per turn.) It would be nice if you could use those extra 5 shields to get a jump on the next thing you want to build. A simpler way to deal with this, though, would be when the pop-up announces "cathedral done" and asks "what next?" any excess production already starts the next project. A major shield producer could conceivably go through several iterations in a single turn, if several items could be finished. That could lead to interesting choices - "Do I build multiple cheap units or one expensive unit in this city?" As it is now, once a city can produce Modern Armor why would I have it produce Mech Inf?
That being said about multiple queues for improvements/units, I would like to see something like multiple queues for dealing with wonders. While wonder building is usually a mad dash to try to finish before another civ, there are times when I might want to build a newly-available improvement or a needed defensive unit in a city which is working on a wonder. Dedicating a city to doing nothing but building "Hanging Gardens" for the next 40 turns, while you discover currency in the meantime and could use the marketplace to help keep the workers happy is ridiculous and "unrealistic". Does anyone think that all other building stopped in Rhodes while the Colossus was being built?
Suggestion: A city building a wonder can designate one other project to build concurrently. Any, or all, of the city's shield production can be allocated to this other project; allowing a wonder to be put on the "back burner" when other needs arise, without completely losing all the work which has been done. Of course the objection to this is that the AI would probably have trouble dealing with this option.
While I'm on the subject of building wonders, allow me this rant. I get so ticked off when the city that has just spent the last 40 turns working on a wonder and is 2 turns away from finishing it has its entire work wasted when another civ sneaks in. I've just built a 300-shield library! If my people have been building "The Great Wall", why should it suddenly be worthless just because somebody else built it first? It wouldn't be this huge cultural icon or draw visitors from around the world, but wouldn't it offer protection to my cities?
Suggestion: A great wonder only confers culture points and tourism revenue to the first civ to build it, but other civs who were already building it can still finish it (as a small wonder) to get the other benefits such as barracks or walls.
|
|
| |
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:37.
Apolyton Time is 00:37. |
top of page
|
|
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
22-03-2005 03:25
OTOH, not all good ideas can be implemented and at the same time keep the game good, so I'll survive without it if I have to.
|