quote: Civilization III will utilize the same kind of system for terrain improvements that its predecessors did. That said, a new worker unit has been added to the game and the settler unit is now solely responsible for founding new cities. The worker will now handle all terrain improvements such as irrigation, mining, and building roads.

as someone who has played more ctp1/2 than smac in the last 2 years, the thought of waiting for 10-15 automated worker units to stop running around doing nothing makes me want to go AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH

quote: Originally posted by MarkG: please oh please, give us smarter worker units. much smarter!!!

AMEN to that!! Can't count the number of times I've had to put a settler or engineer back on manual in Civ2 because he was doing the most crazy things!

quote: Originally posted by airdrik: Maybe there could be different settings like: connect all cities w/ roads/railroads, build road/rr to x city/tile, road every square in the city radii, irrigate everything, mine everything, or maximise production.

Yes! That would be great, IF the AI is smart enough to make it work!

I still play SMAC quite a bit(although EU has taken away all computer time), and I like having standardized city designs, but I hate micromanaging 20 formers, it's damn annoying and sucks. But if I put them on auto, not only do they do stupid stuff like go through lots and lots of fungus(and then get killed by mindworms) but it builds boreholes right in the middle of 8 farms instead of a condensor and other stuff such as that.

I like the new settlers 2 pops ,but I hope they have an option for city planners like in CTP2, I would hate to have to rebuild cities from scrath.

------------------
Builder.

"Antisemites? They are just the descendants of monkeys and are jealous of the descendants of Adam and Eve"

Isaiah 41:15 "Behold, I shall make thee a new sharp threshing instrument having teeth: thou shalt thresh the mountains, and beat them small, and shalt make the hills as chaff."

LONG LIVE PUBLIC WORKS!!!!!!

quote: Trade only increases from roads if they connect somewhere, not if they go round and round

Roads do connect "somewhere." They connect outlying regions to your city center. Thus, farmers and miners in that square can more easily bring their surplus into your marketplace. Note: A road cannot generate extra trade unless one of your citizens is working the square.

Other notes:

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. I have never considered roads in every tile an "eyesore." I am quizzically amused at the prospect of players petitioning Firaxis to deprive me of my trade bonus because of their aesthetic taste.

quote: Originally posted by EnochF on 04-07-2001 02:21 AM This is a turn-based game. It's not a real-time wargame where civilized expansion can at times be a distraction when the player's attention is absorbed by military ventures. In Civ III, eliminating builder units in favor of Public Works would have been just as silly as eliminating military units in favor of a War Fund.

of course an worker unit adds more depth in the strategy part(pillaging etc), but i hope we will not end up with the problems of civ2 and smac.

imran, with pw you can micromanage all you want. it's a matter of choice whether or not you are going to build on road each turn or wait a few turns and build more....

You see a road drop from the sky and I'll rethink my position, until then, I am a worker, I've built or repaired lots of stuff (draw the line at cleaning up polution) and I like to be represented on the board. Now if we could just get armored cavalry... I know, the tank units.

quote: Originally posted by Mister Pleasant on 04-07-2001 07:37 AM (1) Granted, Lancer, roads don't fall from the sky. But then again, does it matter if work crews are represented by units or a PW fund? After all, scientific discoveries and engineering blueprints do not fall from the sky, but I don't hear you clamouring for scientist units.

As far as realism is concerned; the problem with the PW fund is that you can accumulate PW points. Since by far the biggest input into real-life public works is labour; this is essentially equivalent to stacking labour, which obviously cannot be done.

quote: (2) Activision stole the whole damn game concept. Firaxis should not feel bad about borrowing one of activision's innovations. Besides, if CTPII had a worthy AI it owuld have been a damn fine game.

Perhaps they could 'borrow' the PW concept, but why? I don't think it is superior.

quote: (3) High stakes?!? Had you payed attention when playing CTP1 or 2, Raingoon, you might have noticed the burdensome costs of developing squares. Believe me, you dreaded the AI pillaging fisheries, advanced mines, or hydroponic farms.

Well, this may be true, but I think what Lancer meant is that in Ctp you don't need to protect your building capabilities. Moreover, I hate the fact that in Ctp you can only build tile improvements in your own borders. What if you want to help your allied neigbour develop, or build engeneering works to support your advancing army?

quote: (4) The AI has real trouble pathfinding development-type units. Just watch SMAC terraformers. PW eliminated those problems. It would be a real shame to give up that "feeling of accomplishment" for something as minor as a challenging computer opponent. The same points were made during an earlier discussion about the pathfinding for settler-type units. Unburden the AI.

Firaxis said that this issue has already been solved and units now have 100% perfect pathfinding.

quote: (5) I hate moving tons of developer-types, building roads, building irrigation, followed by farms and railroads. It detracts from the game, does not expand on possible actions one iota, and Zanzin has it right. Worker units instead of public works is like transistors instead of ICs - a giant step backwards.

quote: In real life roads are not dropped from the sky, they are built by workers.

Roman

quote: this is essentially equivalent to stacking labour, which obviously cannot be done.

quote: What if you want to help your allied neigbour develop, or build engeneering works to support your advancing army?

quote: Firaxis said that this issue has already been solved and units now have 100% perfect pathfinding.

quote: In Ctp I always forgot to build public works, since I did not have a unit "flashing" when it finished its job as in Civ2

quote: with workers you even have hotkeys to accomplish this, which means less mouse clicks

raingoon

quote: PW took away my sense of accomplishment when I finally built that trans-continental railroad, etc

I hope there's a unit that comes around later that doesn't use 1 population, in 20th century level countries tens of thousands are people aren't used to create roads...

PWorkers

Vs

Woekers are a lot of the fun in the early game.

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.

quote: Originally posted by Par4 on 04-07-2001 03:09 PM I hope there's a unit that comes around later that doesn't use 1 population, in 20th century level countries tens of thousands are people aren't used to create roads...

A good point. Maybe, for greater realism, the worker unit could cost 1 pop up to a certain city size (12?), after which there would be no pop cost.

Not having played CTP, I'm not familiar with the PW setup; but I do like the idea of being able to automate workers to, for instance, connect cities with roads/railroads, rather than just building them within one city's radius (IF it works better than the automate function in Civ2!).

It would also be very good if workers could be instructed to irrigate/build farmland on a particular type of terrain, e.g. plains or grassland - to avoid the ridiculous situation you have in Civ2 where you can find an automated engineer irrigating a perfectly good and productive forest while there are un-irrigated grassland tiles all around it!

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?