Two choices:

1. be abel to construct units and buildings simultaneously, where the production of the city is divided (like trade is divided via tax rate)...

2. Have the possibility to upgrade the units with an amount of gold. When you research the new technology, you can spend a few thousands of gold coins to upgrade your whole army. Unfortunately, this wouldn't represent the realistic time it takes to upgrade the whole army of a country, so perhaps one should only be able to upgrade troups that are in a city not anywhere in the enemy country...interesting with ships that have to return from sea before they can be upgraded.

Think about it and answer!

P.S.: I hope this topic will get some replies b/c my last topic in this forum hasn't been replied as i expected (only 1 reply... )

I don't want to insult you but...

The first reply on my topic was made by a "chieftain". Well, you might be registered longer than me but in my last thread in this forum, that dealt with historical scenarios, the first (and only reply) was also given by a "settler" or "chieftain" or something similar.
That you are "chieftain" doesn't mean you're wrong but I recognized that mostly the posts of the ones with higher ranks (at least "prince") are really respected. *sigh* no Apolyton-veteran wants to reply to my topic *sigh*

Anyway, could you tell me about one of those threads that were made before?

both your ideas are great, certainly the first one indeed. Cities really should be able to produce military units while building a construction !!!

But don't take it to heart that "only" lower ranked people reply.
It is nonsense that they're less respected.

As for the topic, it's been brought up a few times before, and generally people have ended up agreeing that having two build queues is a little superfluous. After all, would you want to have an improvement and a unit finished building on your 20th turn, or would you rather have the unit built on the 10th, and the improvement finished on the 20th? After all, you're using the same resources, and having two queues isn't going to build either the improvement or the unit faster.

If you're worried about build queues, perhaps there should be extra categories that are available for selection when you're building your queue. For example, "Highest (Available) Defender", "Best Mobile Attack", "Best All-round", "Highest Bombard". That way, when you discover Metallurgy (sorry for using a Civ1 example), your build queue would stop building catapults and start building cannons. So you wouldn't have to change your queue, because the category would update it for you. How does that sound?

As for simply paying for an upgrade - I don't think I like that idea. How realistic is it that with a bit of cash you could upgrade a catapult to a cannon? I'd say, not at all. You still have to build the thing. Leonardo's Workshop was a very cool wonder, but it was a bit unrealistic.

"perhaps one should only be able to upgrade troups that are in a city not anywhere in the enemy country" Yes, but as troops return to cities they would be upgraded...

I am all for Andz's idea..
Perhaps you can fine tune your production to split it up into percentages for units, improvements, wonders. etc. You could save some presets and keep changing them.. Like for war time, you could devote 80% to knights and 20% to city walls..

PS. How nice it is to find a Metallica fan on Apolyton.. \

P.S.:I never wanted to say that "settlers", "chieftains" or "warlords" wouldn't say the truth, as WarVoid wanted to blame me for (if he talked with me when he called someone "buddy" ). I just said that I got the feeling that people with lower ranks, just like mine aren't as much respected as people with higher ranks. Some of you also made a statement to this point of view, so I can't have presented it wrong...

Looks like there's gonna be distinction in resources needed for different things.
I might be wrong of course.

Hmm,... I have to say I for myself thought about bringing more Colonization athmosphere into CIV (I mean: letting other people do that )...

Let's see. But if a resource system destroys CIV, I'll blame people like YOU for it, and I'll persecute you wherever you go.

I made my statements about two build queues based on the current production model. Would you agree with me that there shouldn't be two build queues if production remains the same? Or would you disagree anyway? Is there another reason?

I still find the idea of two build queues perplexing, even if there were resources. Like we've mentioned in another thread, building a marketplace isn't just finding the materials to put in some paving and set up a few stalls. The marketplace represents much more than that, and production shields represent the effort taken to establish that. So to say that units and improvements require different resources is perhaps simplifying it a little. That's the reason we've got production shields in it's generalised form at the moment. Because it's a lot easier. And resources should only be added if they improve the game (which they do under raingoon's Energy Model, and which they might under a good trade model). They shouldn't just be added for the sake of realism, or we'll never know where to stop. Besides, who's to say that the same metal that goes into making a tank couldn't be used in a nuclear plant anyway?

I think a large issue that hasn't been represented in this thread is that military units should take some amount of population from your cities when you build them. After all, if you're building a Phalanx, how much of that "production" is making the weapons, and how much is it training the troops in formations and getting them battle-ready?

I still think two build queues is a bad idea. And I'm still not convinced that you should simply be able to buy an upgrade either. Sorry if I'm sounding negative. It's great that all these questions are being raised again.

Colonization used some combos for buildings. You'd have to get so much production, plus have say 50 tools in your warehouses. Rush buying, or upgrading units could cost some money, but I don't think it should cost you only money. Sounds very unrealistic.
Do you think the Egyptians could have built the Pyramids in one year if they had all the money the world? It'd still take far longer than that.

I do agree that some upgrades to units are more plausible than others.

I hope that ideas aren't forgotten when the posts expire....

quote: Originally posted by Andz83 on 04-17-2000 04:21 PM I don't want to insult you but...

First of all lemme say that you didn't insult me. But I do have a response for you...

Second of all, it's ridiculous for you to base anything on the "level" I'm at. I guess I didn't really come back to this thread (no, not because you're only a warlord) but I'm glad I did...

You could post 999 times on this site and if your ideas are crap or you have no idea what you're talking about than who really gives a ---- what the hell you have to say. On the other hand, you could have great ideas for Civ 3 and found out about the site just last month. So I think it's extremely unfair to judge on how many posts someone has. I'm not saying my ideas are perfect, and I'm not saying a "prince" has lousy ones. Just don't be quick to judge. Beebee (a settler) has had some great ideas that I've seen, as well as DanM and a list of others. So you should just read a post and decide whether or not you agree without shunning the "lower" members of Apolyton.
Hopefully this post got read, I'm not sure. After all - I'm only a chieftan.

~OrangeSfwr

P.S. I found out about Apolyton in late February and I've been a proud member ever since. If I had joined in February of 99 and was currently a "King" would you respect me more?

People who've hung around here for a while tend to get into a mode of thinking because we've read all the models before. Someone who's just joined can have nice fresh ideas because they're not influenced by the models that are popular in these threads. Sure, 95% of the ideas newbies come up with have been thought up and considered before, but there's some real gems every now and then.

each building has a set build time...lets say an aircraft factory takes 20 turns to build but each turn it would need 10 minerals

if it didn't get ten minerals production would slow down and if it didn't get a set number of minerals a turn like say three it couldn't build at all

hmmm i haven't gotten it completely worked out but things should have a specified build time, and you could either speed that build time up dramatically or slow it down...however to build something four times faster wouldn't just take four times the resources...it would take a higher number than that, like maybe to build something four times faster might takes six times the resources for example

How would you account for a large city building wonders faster than a small city? If it's only resources, then it would just be a matter of getting the resources to the smaller town, and this wouldn't be an accurate reflection.

What problem specifically are you trying to fix by changing the way things are built?