Shield carry over

[sir_schwick]

Actually a pause or partially completed system for buildings/units and other Civ products makes sense. This would also allow the idea of more fluid trading of techs(only pays for part of the tech) or damaging buildings as part of war, riot, or disaster.

You could even allow, with later technology, cities to work on damaged buildings, or shipping partially completed projects to other areas.

 

[mhIdA]

Timko
That's why a slider or a qeue with priorities in wich we could build several units/improvs at a time is more flexible to face things like that.

 

[sir_schwick]

You can accomplish the same things with 'there are shields left, how do you want to use them' system as sliders, but with less hassle. I know there are a few interface experts here who can back me up on this one.

 

[KrikkitTwo]

Yes, mostly because you Always want to put 100% of what can fit into a new 'thing'

So sliders would have to be 100% or 0 at all times Except when you were about to build something (if you put in penalties for being at 100/0, then you wouldn't prevent MM just make it more complicated)

The best system lets you prioritze what you want, and then Each turn you put all that you are allowed to into the first item, what is left over goes into the second item, etc. until all resources are used up (or you run out of things that can possibly use the resources... and Civ Always has units and wealth for production, and Future techs for research)

This way the system does what you would automatically in terms of optimizing.

 

[dh_epic]

I don't see what the big contraversy is. The solution should be mathematical, not a user interface one. Simply automatically carry the shields over, and let the user swap between improvements.

If you're really uptight, this is basically how the algorithm would work.

10: The total remaining shields this turn is that of the city's productivity
20: "Use up" remaining shields until current improvement is done.
30: If current improvement is done:
40: ... let the user switch improvements.
50: ... goto 20
60: otherwise (improvement is not done)
70: ... end turn / goto 10
80: print "i like donuts"
90: goto 80

Note that this is ALL automatic except for the opportunity given to the user to switch improvements after the old improvement is done.

 

[mhIdA]

Sir Schwick
Your sugestion is only related to allocated remain shields and with 2 units/improvs, but what you suggest to change shields allocation as Timko's example? That's the reason of my sugestion.

dh_epic
Thanks for alghoritmic lesson.

Our ideas and sugestions is to improve the gameplay and fun to civ addicteds, only that. If a better interface is one of that why not? Of course a better interface doesn't mean a good interface but better than old interface and much less an optimal interface wich is an interface who reduce time and and hands pain. If this include a rethought of game itself, so will be.

*Is just a title of a magazine article, not to offend anyone.

 

[dh_epic]

I'm all for new gameplay concepts, but when it involves creating a completely new interface with extra controls for the sake of playing with something as trivial as "how should my shields carry over", please count me out.

I'd rather see some of that interface complexity invested towards regionalism and seperatism, or new espionage concepts... high level decisions, not minor trivialities.

 

[mhIdA]

dh_epic: 'how should my shields carry over'
This is related to economical aspect of the game, is tied to social engineering, how to allocate wealth of a civ: 'military', 'economic', 'scientific', or change in strategie due a new treat, etc. Now Civ only have a trde advisor, it needs a economical advisor where the discussion in this thread is focused, like spionage and diplomacy.
Economy is the science that means how to allocate few resources, so it's not so trivial as you might thought.

 

[Idylwyld]

I find the idea of carry over to the next queued product being almost perfect. If nothing is in the build queue the shields are wasted, if something is there the shields are moved over seamlessly. If this results in multiple units or buildings being produced in a single turn then great for the player who set his queue well. If the player changes the product in midstream (during their turn) any shields accrued in excess of what is needed to complete the new product are wasted, reflecting in real life the costs associated with planning failures, etc... This would promote sticking with the current product and making changes in the queue which is just good management policy anyway.

 

[sir_schwick]

Sir Schwick
Your sugestion is only related to allocated remain shields and with 2 units/improvs, but what you suggest to change shields allocation as Timko's example? That's the reason of my sugestion.

Actually my system was supposed to work for an infinite number of improvements/units/wonders/other products. This can easily be applied to research or anything else that requires a build time.

Lets say a city produces 400 SPT. They are blue.

You build a Cruise Missles. 360 S left, still blue.

You build a Cruise Missles. 320 S left, still blue.

You build a Cathedral. 160 S left, still blue.

You build a Rifleman. 100 S left, still blue.

You build a Tac Nuke. Not enough shields to complete it, so shields are now silver.

Next turn you have 2 Cruise missles, a Rifleman, and a Cathedral.

 

[mhIdA]

Sir Schwick
Ok. But that is implicit what ? Next turn you must reassign city production.
If you noted you assign 10% of religion improvs and 90% of military units. Once we achieved all religion/cultural/improvs we have to readjust city production only to military units. What cities produce couldn't be our concern, if we choose a % to defensive, air, naval, nuke units.
More detail in my post above, quote # 26.
Something like that is what I like to see in cIV.

 

[sir_schwick]

THeorheticall you could have an infinite build queue and it would keep doing it according to the mechanics. That was just to show it is very flexible and accomplishes what you want it to without any sliders.

 

[KrikkitTwo]

Well, I think what mhIDA is proposing is actually a more advanced AI Governor system (so that I could tell all my cities to put some small % into units at various % and the rest into buildings (so a bit more control than build Often/Sometimes/Never,)

And the queue should be infinite, in the sense that whenever it runs out, it should query the user as to what to build (the "queue" is just prerecorded commands) so no shields are wasted (and with that the idea that a project that is 'stopped' saves its production until later whenever it gets resumed)

and better AI governors would probably be good (although if one can keep the number of "cities" a player controls to a dozen or so then they should only be used for beginning players, and those who like focusing on other aspects of the game)

 

[mhIdA]

krikkitone
You'll right, a better AI Governor is wellcoming.

Another thought I have is that city production could have a some degree of uneficiency (shield production wasted, and not as actually happens) that's start at level of 80%. With marketplace, bank and stock exchange that uneficiency decrease by 5% from each one at a full production capacity of 95%. This because this improvs allow a more eficient of capital allocation and because economies allways have some degree of uneficiency and don't full their entire capacity of production.