|
Author
|
Topic: City Production Current Date/Time:
April 05, 2000 13:31:47
|
OrangeSfwr
Chieftain
From: Pennsylvania
Registered: Feb 2000
|
 |
posted March 25, 2000 11:13
    
|
 |
|
One thing I have disliked about the Civ serious as of yet (Civ one and two, I have not played SMAC or CTP) is the production. You shouldn't have to choose between a domestic improvement or a military unit. There should be a production for military and a production for domestic improvements that go on simultaneously. For example, I'm building the Pyramids in Paris and I have about 2 more shileds to completion but my city is being attacked by the Romans...I have one unit left defending the city and I have to take my entire production of the pyramids to convert to one Phalanx. That doesn't make sense...how can the goods needed to complete the pyramids be the same goods to make a phalanx unit? It's not practical either. 20 turns of production sacrificed for a single military unit. Maybe along with this idea for a split in Domestic and Military production should be a seperate production box for wonders. And you can dictate where you want the majority of your production to go. Like if military is your first priority you can tell 80% of your production to go to the military production while 10 and 10 go to domestic and wonders. Also, if one civ starts work on a wonder of the world, you should not be able to work on the same wonder. It's a little dumb to have 5 Civs working on the Hanging Gardens and when one Civ completes it, the other Civs must abandon the production. It would make things a lot more simple I think. Plus you can tell your domestic and military advisers (and add in a wonders adviser) to choose for you if you don't want to deal with the micro management. And one more quick note, once you trade a commodity, it shouldn't disappear from your options of trade. The middle east has been trading oil with Europe and the US for over a century. Ok, that's it for now. ------------------
~~~I am who I am, who I am - but who am I?~~~
[This message has been edited by OrangeSfwr (edited March 25, 2000).] |
Thunderfall
Chieftain
From: Civilization Fanatics Center
Registered: b.02-15-99
|
|
posted March 25, 2000 14:48
|
|
|
Two production boxes is a good idea. But instead of a box for "DOMESTIC" and a box for "MILITARY", I think it's better to split production into "CONSTRUCTION" and "TRAINING". The "CONSTRUCTION" production box would build city structures and Wonders, while the TRAINING box would build/train (human) units. I think switching between productions is much more realistic with this model. I haven't read the List of Ideas thoroughly, is it on the List? OrangeSfwr, thanks for bringing this up! Civ2's production model really needs some modifications. I agree it's nice to be able to set how much resource going into each production box. Let's make another change: if the total resource going into the production boxes doesn't have to equal to 100%, we should be able to save some of the resources for later use! In another unrelated thing, I just got promoted from Settler to Chieftain...  quote:
Maybe along with this idea for a split in Domestic and Military production should be a seperate production box for wonders.
|
------------------
Thunderfall
Webmaster of Civilization Fanatics' Center
[This message has been edited by Thunderfall (edited March 25, 2000).] |
tniem
Settler
From: GR, MI USA
Registered: Apr 2000
|
 |
posted April 05, 2000 13:31
|
|
|
I think you need to have more than simply train a unit. You need to build its weaponry. I think the best way to do cities is Sid's Colonization. There you had to build the guns, horses, cannons, etc. and then man them with people in your colonies. It was more realistic. It could then lead to a percentage in your city of how many people have jobs, are in school (youth), military, and unemployed. This could force you to build improvements to give jobs. | |
Apolyton Civilization Site Forums
