 |
|
Jon Miller
|
|
Workers are fun in the beginning. They just can get tedious later on. I would use the AI if it was good enough (more effeicient times wise if not more effienctc game wise).
Woekers are a lot of the fun in the early game.
Jon Miller
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Lancer
|
|
Oregon Coast, USA! or Bohol, Philippines!
Apr 1999 time: 05:12
|
|
-what Roman said 
Markos, actually I haven't complained about lack of realism in resources, I started a whole thread on it, now in its second edition. Recourses are well covered in my thread, "Making Trade Essential..." Regarding building tanks without factories, I'm on my way to "complain" about that now. Watch for my newest thread, "Manufacturing Capability Should Come Before End Product" which I'm about to manufacture in my threadmill... 
As far as factory workers being represented, I have no problem w/ that. I play Colonization now and again and enjoy the hunt for professional workers.
Mr Pleasant,
The "scientist" that designs roads is represented in the game, in your city population. Like most office workers, he doesn't get out much.
If there is to be a change, I think it should be in setting larger tasks for the new worker units. As connerkimbro said, be able tp program the worker to do more than one thing. Lay out the whole road, not just square by square. Perhaps being able to plan on the map every farm, road and mine to be build for the next 10 or 20 turns, and what order they are to be built in would resolve the micromanagement issues while still maintaining unit representation for the guys that get the job done, for the reasons mentioned earlier. Besides Mr Pleasant and his 'workers shouldn't be on the board because scientists aren't', I haven't seen anyone even try to debate my reasoning on why the should be there.
[This message has been edited by Lancer (edited April 08, 2001).]
|
|
|  |
 |
|
|
100% Pathfinding? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA. Even human players aren't perfect at this. Lancer, my point was that the role of workers can be represented by a unit or a PW fund, much as scientists can be represented as specialists or a unit.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Zeevico
|
|
Melbourne, Australia
Dec 2000 time: 05:12
|
|
What would stop you from building millions and millions of the in one city then? Why not have it that every three workers would take 1 pop point?
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Chronus
|
|
Hi Trachmir,
Well now I see where our thinking is different. I picture a service road leading up to the farm as well, but it's just a dirt (or badly paved) road. Creating a road in the tiles, to me, represents upgrading them to cobblestone (or whatever best reflects the time period), etc., not to mention more of them. Not only that, but as someone mentioned above, it represents a connection to other services WITHIN the city. The key idea here is that "trade" within a city does exist without the need for another city. Example: the lack of a good transportation system could very well affect my decision to see a movie that's on the other side of town. Consequently, the entertainment industry (when looking at this on a wider scale) would be affected. "Ugly" you say. You betcha! But that's how it is in real life, no? The big, wealthy cities have tons of ugly roads stretching out for miles on end, connnecting many miniature sources of trade within (as well as outside) that very city.
This all sidesteps the real issue IMOHO. Simply put, I enjoy aspects of the game that deal with economy and infrastructure. Taking the time to build roads in all my tiles results in a reward: more trade. Shouldn't I reap the benefits for such a task? Removing this bonus eliminates another aspect of infrastructure. One may say, "But it could be replaced with a better idea!" I suppose, but why not just add the idea instead of replacing?
Anyway, enough with my rambling! Happy gaming . . .
|
|
|  |
 |
|
|
Then perhaps it would be better to have "roads" and "highways", one to interconect your city (that would appear as a fine network of roads), and the other to connect cities (which would be much more noticable, like roads in civ2). I'll settle for that compromise...
...but with out PW, my enthusiasm for the game has taken a sharp decline!
|
|
|  |
 |
|
|
Yeah, but terraformers didn't cost one population!
Besides, SMAC was about taming (or being tamed) by an alien planet... terraformers fit, but why must we have an actual unit to represent workers! The thought of moving dozens upon dozens of workers every turn does NOT make me happy.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Chronus
|
|
CHRISSHAFFER QUOTE: "I'm perfectly happy to build my empire with my own workers."
Me too (I presume you mean your own units). Units give that "attention to logistics and planning" feel that PW didn't have. I don't care for the "roads falling out of the sky" syndrome either.
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
Lancer
|
|
Oregon Coast, USA! or Bohol, Philippines!
Apr 1999 time: 05:12
|
|
Well, here's an idea nobody will like. How about both workers and PW? A worker represents the labor and PW represents the materials, you guessed it, resources. 
Basicly, when you instruct a worker to build a mine, road, or railroad, PW's are expended.
[This message has been edited by Lancer (edited April 09, 2001).]
|
|
|  |
 |
|
|
we already had a pw poll in the past...
CTP's Public Works, good?
Yes 171 / 35%
Yes, but could be better 140 / 28%
No 92 / 18%
For certain tasks... 67 / 13%
No opinion 16 / 3%
|
|
|  |
 |
|
shuttleswo
|
|
Personally I feel that the reason that PW can be superior is because it is much simpler to write an effective AI for distributing PW than it is to write one that directs units to do tile improvements. I see this as an issue that is important whether the player wants to micro-manage his tile improvements with settlers or not, since in either case the strength and effectiveness of your AI opponents is partially dependant on THEM having the ability to effectively build tile improvements.
My bottom line is if the former/worker units in CIV3 are going to be only a small step up from the AI that ran them in SMAC it means inferior opponents and a less satisfying game. (I hate playing a game against civs that are no challenge, this isn't sim city afterall) and if you think this isn't the case, how often in SMAC or even civ2 did you have to move in a herd of settlers/formers to clean up the tile improvements around a recently conquered civ just to get the cities up to their full potential?
|
|
|  |
 |
|
shuttleswo
|
|
sorry, repost.
[This message has been edited by shuttleswo (edited April 09, 2001).]
|
|
|  |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:12. Apolyton Time is 00:12. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
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
|
|
|
|
|
|