You really did forgive me! ;-)

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.

1. choose the city, from a rolldownlist, from where goods are to be taken away
   
2. choose the kind of goods (iron ore, timber, cotton, weapons etc.) from a rolldownlist,
   
3. choose the city, from a rolldownlist, where goods are to be brought
   
4. choose the kind of goods from a rolldownlist, which are to be left in this city
   

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.

Settlers vs Public Works

Settlers-type model 38 / 50%
Public Works-type model 36 / 48%
Dont know/Dont care 1 / 1%

1) Can be killed; so you can stop the enemy from building improvements at all
2) Must be managed better, to save your citizens
3) Really ARE population, not just excess production. Production doesn't build itself, you need vast amounts of workers to build railroads and dig mine complexes.

quote: Originally posted by Der_Wachter on 04-12-2001 01:03 PM 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.

why should you see workers building a road??????

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.

If it's only adjacent to your own cities, then I can't see much percentage in PW, because as has been commented above, one of the main benefits of settlers/workers - which I've exploited a lot - is to build (rail)roads in advance of your armies to facilitate a quick 'blitzkrieg' campaign. If that only happens once you've founded a city, I would find it very limiting.

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.

quote: Originally posted by MarkG on 04-12-2001 01:51 PM in civ game so far, you dont see - people building improvement in the cities - soldiers being recruited - scientists working in their labs - entertainers singing - "tax people" collecting taxes why should you see workers building a road??????

But Mark, you are comparing apples and oranges.

There is no difference between seeing scientists working and not seeing scientists working; the result is the same regardless. In contrast, settlers are not merely a "picture" of public works; they are an altogether different system that gives different gameplay results.

It's not just about seeing the workers building the road. It's about getting them there, building the road, protecting the settlers, and being able to think strategically about where your settlers are needed next and how you are going to get them there.

IMO settlers are better because they allow you to do more; you can build a fortress in enemy territory without having to build a road all the way there, you can actually directly disrupt somebody's attempts to clean up pollution and build stuff (you can't do that with PW), and you can build up a cities' infastructure before you found it. PW is limiting; settlers set you free!!!

PW takes away the choices settlers force you to make. Can somebody tell me what PW adds to the Sid model of decision-based gameplay? If auto-worker was the only option you had to build a road, then I would understand the complaint about auto-worker. But it's not. Many players never even use the auto function and that makes it a game STYLE issue, not a game PLAY issue. If you want PW for your game style, I certainly understand. And if the auto-settlers in Civ 3 are as poorly functioning as they were in the past, you have my sympathy.

But why adcovate a style improvment at the cost of game play? You are taking away the basic mechanics and economics of the game -- such as having to choose which city will spend the resources to support the unit who builds the road to get to another city that spends the resources, and so on. If that is silly to you, than we have nothing to discuss. But these ARE the economics of the game, status quo. And having to choose between building swords or plows are extremely important economics of city production as well. Their absense from CTP is one reason why that game is nothing near the game that Civ is. Because the bottom line is each of these concepts that I mention here are represented on every Civ game map, where they can be directly opposed and defeated by an oponent.

By contrast, the PW system is abstracted at the highest level of game play, and its only contribution as far as I can tell is the afore-mentioned improvement in gaming style, a boon to those players who prefer not to micro-manage settlers.

Can somebody explain to me how PW would improve Civ for a player who neither uses auto-workers nor chooses so unwisely as to build "300 settlers" to cover the map with improvements? (This latter complaint isn't really valid because it implies a player who would remedy their own wisdom deficiency by simply taking away any choice that required it).

quote: Originally posted by raingoon on 04-14-2001 05:21 PM Can somebody explain to me how PW would improve Civ for a player who neither uses auto-workers nor chooses so unwisely as to build "300 settlers" to cover the map with improvements

- there are very few people that never use auto-workers(eitherwise PW would not have almost half of the votes in the current poll )
- there are lots of lots people who end up being forced to use auto-workers in the last stages of the game and having to face their deficiency since eitherwise they would spend an incredible amount of time

now, do you want to add more choices in the PW system? fine. dont have one nation-wide PW resource. have one for each city, or for a group of cities. or take the choice of the percentage of production that goes to PW from the nation level to city level. but remember to add 1-2 screens to manage the above easily...

quote: Originally posted by raingoon on 04-15-2001 05:36 AM What does PW add to actual gameplay to make up for what it takes away?

thanks to PW and other features, in CTP2 you can have more turns in the same (real playing) time, which means more realistic turn time(not 50 years for each turn), more time for spent on the early periods, etc...

You are still talking about the time spent playing, etc., and with the possible exception of changing the game's time scale, I don't see any game-PLAY enhancements to this at all. But even though I believe the results in this poll are more accurate than the last (in favor of Settlers -- so far at least) it's very curious to me that so many DO seem to prefer the PW system. In fact, PW might even win this poll over time.