 |
|
|
results below....
Last edited by MarkG on 31-05-2001 at 13:07
|
|
| |
|
|
- Groucho -
|
|
Go Settlers!
As frustrating as they can be (typical interaction with SMAC former: "What? - noooo - stop building sensors, ya little numbskull!") they are one of the best parts of the "builder" game. It's a cool feeling when two settlers/engineers meet to finally complete a trans-continental railroad on a big map.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Chronus
|
|
Hey MarkG,
You really did forgive me! ;-)
GO SETTLERS!
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Zanzin
|
 |
Sydney, Australia
Mar 2001
time: 15:12
|
|
Look, worker units would be just peachy if the computer knew how to use and how to make their use (i.e. worker automation) easy for you. Unfortunately, at least in Civ2 and SMAC, it doesn't and they don't (computer stupid, and you can't trust the automation options). Considering that Civ3 is going to based, at least to some degree, on the code from SMAC, are we really going to see things changing?
As for tile improvements being strategic, I couldn't agree more - but they're not very strategic when the computer doesn't know how to take advantage of the situation.
Hence, for a part of the game that isn't overly important because of the silly (in this area) AI, Public Works has my vote, because it makes things much easier.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Vrank Prins
|
|
Haarlem, Netherlands
Sep 2000
time: 05:12
|
|
In COLONIZATION there is this possibility to automate the tranport of resources and tradegoods by wagontrails. Each term you can see these wagontrailunits you've build and programmed by yourself riding around out of themselves from one place to another. A bit like the camel in CIV-I&II, but also significantly different and more sofisticated.
The transportprogram, a kind of a small game"macro"program, takes away a lot of micromanagement.
When you open this program a matrix appears on your screen. You'll have to fill in the next things, from left to right in a line:
- choose the city, from a rolldownlist, from where goods are to be taken away
- choose the kind of goods (iron ore, timber, cotton, weapons etc.) from a rolldownlist,
- choose the city, from a rolldownlist, where goods are to be brought
- choose the kind of goods from a rolldownlist, which are to be left in this city
You can let the wagon run to another city to do the same again by just repeating this kind of order in a line under the upperone. Thus you can make a list to have the wagon make a "loading- and unloadingtour" in a route which hits up to six cities. The wagon automatically chooses the fastest way, I've never been really annoyed by "buggish" behaviour of a wagon.
Quite handy.
I can see something similar for the "programming" of workers or settlers, and, why not, other units. A list of things to be done for a unit could look like: "Go to xx" (and you would just have to point that out with your mouse(like in CTP, I love that feature !!)) "Then fortify, pillage, stack with, build road/irrigation/fort, etc." (from a rolldownlist of functions).
If "tileproccessing"units don't get that automatated functioning I choose for the Public Works like I know it from CTP. After having used this feature in CTP I was really fed up with having to do all the micromanagement in CIV-II.
Besides terraforming (changing mountains into hills, deserts into plains or grasslands etc., tileimprovements in CIV-II) takes way to long in CIV-II compared with CTP. Firaxis ought to do something about that too.
[This message has been edited by Vrank Prins (edited April 11, 2001).]
|
|
| |
|
|
|
amazing! 
Settlers vs Public Works
Settlers-type model 38 / 50%
Public Works-type model 36 / 48%
Dont know/Dont care 1 / 1%
Total Votes: 75
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Kevin Ar18
|
|
I love sending out workers to do stuff to the terrain. It would just be plain boring without them.
Also, this idea about a queue system for the workers may not be too bad.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Der_Wachter
|
|
Richmond, BC, Canada
Apr 2001
time: 05:12
|
|
Hello! I'm new here, but I'd like to give my two cents on this Settler/Public Works issue. Personally, I prefer settlers (or Workers as the case may be with Civ III) because I like to bring these units along whenever I'm on a military campaign. I simply cannot visualize fortresses, roads, and railroads popping in the middle of my army's advance into enemy territory without some way of justifying the sudden appearance of terrain improvements.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
airdrik
|
 |
Nampa, ID, USA
Oct 2000
time: 22:12
|
|
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.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
- 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!
|
|
| |
|
|
|
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!
|
|
| |
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
11-04-2001 03:35
But I think it's easier to imagine soldiers being recruited (even though the game (Civ II) doesn't properly reflect this with a drop in population points) in a city where there is a large concentration of people than to try to visualize terrain improvements being built without a "physical" presence there to account for it.
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.
|