Firaxis wants to remove "unfun"? Eliminate WORKERS!

[geishapunk]

@dh_epic

Before someone misunderstands this: i respect your ideas and the work you put on it.

But, IMO, what you describe is an explosion of micromanagement.

Here a some different thoughts:

- What about the point that with buildung workers you reduce the pop of a city (For me an important thing)
- Not seeing the workers on the map: how to capture, how to hunt them?
- What if i want to build road to nowhere? (Maybe for military issues)
- What with roads not directed to a city?
- What with work on island that have no workers on it?
- What with working many projects at the same time?
- Ever imagend how micromazing you system would be on a huge map with a lets say 154 city empire (still growing)
- I think you are complicating things with the priority thing
- In my opinion you loose some control of the working process with that system

It´s just my opinion, but i am sure that micromanagament will increase. So that´s the logical arguments i have against this.

Personally, disregarding my opinion that micromanagament will increase, i don´t like your idea for CIV 4.

 

[dh_epic]

- What about the point that with buildung workers you reduce the pop of a city (For me an important thing)

Actually, it does take one population head away from the city work force. One less person producing food and shields on a square, and one more person producing roads and mines. Almost the same effect. A worthwhile sacrifice to simplify the game and make more room for concepts.

- Not seeing the workers on the map: how to capture, how to hunt them?

Workers WOULD still appear on the map. you just wouldn't control their movement points. as a foreign civ, you'd see roads and mines and irrigations, and then some kind of "work in progress" square. A scaffolding, a hammer, a little worker unit, just for nostalgia. You go and occupy / pillage that work-in-progress square? You've got yourself a worker.

- What if i want to build road to nowhere? (Maybe for military issues)
- What with roads not directed to a city?

You can still draw a road to nowhere if you want. (You couldn't, say, draw a traderoute to nowhere.)

What with work on island that have no workers on it?
- What with working many projects at the same time?

Truthfully, this barrier is removed in my system. Your workers team up and work through stuff in a queue. It goes through the highest priority stuff and then so on. There are no movement barriers, so islands are easier to manage. But if you still want a barrier, it could be financial: improvements on islands cost more money.

- In my opinion you loose some control of the working process with that system

That's the idea. You lose control, and thus there's less micromanagement.

- Ever imagend how micromazing you system would be on a huge map with a lets say 154 city empire (still growing)
- I think you are complicating things with the priority thing

It´s just my opinion, but i am sure that micromanagament will increase. So that´s the logical arguments i have against this.

Personally, disregarding my opinion that micromanagament will increase, i don´t like your idea for CIV 4.

You can't say that you lose control and then you create more micromanagement. But I'll pretend you're not contradicting yourself and address this:

There is less strategy because you're not moving individual workers around, simple and plain. There is now less of a difference between automating workers and doing it yourself -- meaning that it can no longer be an important thing you do to win the game at deity. The movement point game is the most tedious element of it.

The only micromanagement here, if you so choose, is drawing the improvements. Faster than pressing "I" on individual squares.

The priority thing is strictly for micromanagement fiends, when you want to see to it that one road gets built before another. E.g.: build roads to cities with the highest priorities, and then build roads everywhere else with a slightly lower priority. But automating this certainly wouldn't hurt you. Automating individual workers does hurt you.

 

[geishapunk]

Sorry, i truly mean that you loose some control and there will be more micromanagament. That maybe sounds contradictional to you, but it isn´t.

Im my post i forgot the point about drawing. On wich map or screen you want this drawing actions happen? On an overview map? This would give you a look which is too small! On the normal map? There you are not seeing enough!

Actually, it does take one population head away from the city work force. One less person producing food and shields on a square, and one more person producing roads and mines. Almost the same effect. A worthwhile sacrifice to simplify the game and make more room for concepts.

Yes, but now it totally takes this pop point away! In your system the city stays beeing a pop 6 city for example, which i maybe not want at the moment i chose building a worker.

Workers WOULD still appear on the map. you just wouldn't control their movement points. as a foreign civ, you'd see roads and mines and irrigations, and then some kind of "work in progress" square. A scaffolding, a hammer, a little worker unit, just for nostalgia. You go and occupy / pillage that work-in-progress square? You've got yourself a worker.

Ok, you did not mentioned that before, or i missed it... ;o) ... but if they are only there for nostalgia or just as a symbol, hunting them would be propably harder. Second thought, it would be coincindence wich city will loose pop if enemies capture workers. I don´t like loosing 2 pop points in city for coincindece.

Another point coming to my mind. With the actual worker system you don´t have to supply the workers with food. In your system you have to. So the growth of your empire will be way more slower. Now i have a pop 12 city for example an three workers. With your system there only will be the pop 12 city. I don´t like!

As i mentioned before: the more i am thinking it over the more i dislike and the more reasons and arguments against it are coming in my mind.

P.S.: ughs, way long for a quick reply.... ;o)

 

[dh_epic]

Im my post i forgot the point about drawing. On wich map or screen you want this drawing actions happen? On the normal map? There you are not seeing enough!

The normal map seems good enough for pushing workers around square by square. If that's the case, then you should be able to draw individual squares of road (which will appear translucent -- planned but not completed). You should be able to drag all around the map. The view is no worse than it is in the current game, and more efficient to use.

Yes, but now it totally takes this pop point away! In your system the city stays beeing a pop 6 city for example, which i maybe not want at the moment i chose building a worker.

Another point coming to my mind. With the actual worker system you don´t have to supply the workers with food.

I think you're getting bogged down in details... the details are surrmountable. The real important thing is that you don't move around your workers, and you don't build them in the city screen. If you really wanted, you could make it so drafted worker pool does't require food and don't affect the population limit imposed by aqueducts -- just like the actual worker units. The most important thing is they're no longer actual units, and don't need to be moved around or built in the same way as before.

Ok, you did not mentioned that before, or i missed it... ;o) ... but if they are only there for nostalgia or just as a symbol, hunting them would be propably harder. Second thought, it would be coincindence wich city will loose pop if enemies capture workers. I don´t like loosing 2 pop points in city for coincindece.

I don't know what you're talking about, but you wouldn't lose two population points at a time. You'd still be able to see the workers -- they'd be right on the map, the key is you don't move them like units. They appear on the map to represent things that have been worked on in the most recent turn. It distributes your workers on all the squares that have been improved that turn, and invading those squares captures them as per usual.


Again, don't focus on the details. Focus on whether you can still put together the majority of the strategy with significantly less micromanagement and control of workers. The key is that I take away movement points from workers and let you queue up mass amounts of improvements -- reducing the need to play the movement point game with workers so people can automate them.

And for those who DON'T automate them, they can focus on the big decisions like "create a road from here to here" instead of congregating all their worker units into one area, economizing movement points, and switching to the keyboard to speed things up with hotkeys. As easy as paint.

PS: I really appreciate your ability to have an intelligent discussion about this. I'm finding it very useful.

 

[geishapunk]

Hmmm. IMO details shouldn´t be forgotten as they decide wether something is good/workable or not, plus IMO i am not that deep in details. I am talking of general problems and about details. I mixed it up. Just because i tell you my reasons why i dislike your idea i am not going to deep into details, as everybody should explain why he is on his point of view.

I don´t think the normal map is a good choice for your system, as if you got 2 cities that are not adjacating to each others it would be annoying drawing on the map, because you don´t see the whole line. Just an example.

Again, don't focus on the details. Focus on whether you can still put together the majority of the strategy with significantly less micromanagement and control of workers. The key is that I take away movement points from workers and let you queue up mass amounts of improvements -- reducing the need to play the movement point game with workers so people can automate them.

And this is the major point we both disagree. You say it would be less micromanagament and IMO it´s the opposite.

I think your system will work somehow, but IMO not that good, in the core. But on the borders or in new territory its kinda bad/annoying. On new continents or islands its getting even worse.

Before we start discussing it on and on we should agree that we disagree. You say it reduces micromanagament and i say it increases micromanagament. We both can´t prove, but everybody now knows that we disagree.... ;o)

 

[Longasc]

I like dh epic's approach, I already said this before, and I think it takes away a lot of micro-management and the annoying worker movement and problems with their automatization.

Less MM is not only more fun, it also creates new possibilities:

Really HUGE maps. Add a better interface for buildings/military units, all possibilities as icons with text and explanations on one screen, easy to click and easier to review, instead of a listing you will have to scroll down.

Then you can concentrate all strategy on a really large map of the world. I love huge maps because they just have a better feeling than small worlds, much more to explore.

But right now, a huge map becomes a nightmare in modern ages. Railroads are boon and doom - without them, the 150 automated workers would waste even more of your precious time watching them running around, even with animations turned off...


Combine this or another idea to reduce worker MM, perhaps with the mentioned one-click build overview, and we will have less MM, but much more "X" for explore.

There might be differences how to reduce MM, but it would be of great benefit for Civ4 if someone would find good solutions for corruption, micro-management and perhaps a stronger AI with more diplomatic possibilities, including much more sophisticated espionage and more complex and diverse forms of government.

 

[sir_schwick]

This is not an idea I particularily like, but I have thought about it, and it would be a good compromise for the two primary systems being proposed.

You paint the jobs you want done, and put high/extra high priority tags on the one you want down first. Your workers then automatically figure out the most economical way to do them according to your priority scales, terrain, etc. This removes the MM, but does not eliminate workers. The painting is simply to allow you map out worker strategy, rather than tactics.

 

[Kiech]

I just want a new button for workers that does the following:

Automate
do not change existing improvements
mine all grass
irrigate all desert, and plains
chop all trees not on tundra

And maybe a 'road/railroad' only button, concentrating on trade routes first.

 

[dh_epic]

For what it's worth, I'll say that I like sir schwick's idea -- only because it never lets users play the movement points game. Why am I so opposed to it? I've said it before, it takes a lot of calculation to move around workers, even without animations, and can become a real slowdown in the modern age. Plus expert players NEED to think about this to play at the deity level. If you prohibit them from controlling worker movement, you're actually taking away one more reason for the AI to cheat at high levels (since the AI pathfinding won't be as good as a human's ability to pathfind).

And pointing out a problem that exists in the old system too -- creating a road between two cities because you can't see the two cities on the same map -- is not a good reason to prohibit a new system.

And finally, on micromanagement, I'll prove scientifically that there is less micromanagement if I have to. I'm perfectly willing to concede subjective stuff like "it will be more fun" (even if I'll stand by what I think would be fun). But I guess I haven't done a good enough job of explaining the difference.


OLD SYSTEM:
Decisions you have to make:
1. where to put the improvement
2. what improvement to build first
3. which worker will I move there
4. what's the fastest, safest way to move there
5. would it be more efficient to build something along the way?

Buttons you will have to press:
1. clicking on the map to move it around
2. click on the worker
3. use the keyboard / mouse to tell the worker where to go to
4. click on the improvement (or use hotkey) to start it
5. repeat x times for x workers on the same improvement
6. repeat for multiple improvements

NEW SYSTEM
1. where to put the improvement
2. what improvement to build first
3. nope
4. nope
5. nope

Buttons you will have to press:
1. clicking on the map to move it around
2. nope
3. nope
4. click on the improvement (or use hotkey) to *select* it
- new: click on the priority to make it happen sooner / later
- new: click on the map to plop it down
5. nope
6. repeat for multiple improvements

COMPARISON:
- the new system removes 3 decisions
- the new system removes 3 clicks, adds 2 clicks = net of 1 click removed
- multiplied by X workers, this is actually a removal of X clicks
- the new system involves less micromanagement, and makes room for new concepts

This is assuming that building a worker in the old system and drafting a worker into the pool in the new system takes an equal amount of time. It doesn't. Drafting a worker into the pool in the new system can be done in the main map. Don't make me go through this one too I will I have have to, though.

 

[Diogenes183]

I think workers would be OK if a much better automation algorithm could be written. For example, as it stands now, an automated worker will mine half and irrigate half of the grassland tiles in a city radius in a checkerboard pattern. This is fine in many circumstances. But say the tiles around a city are one half hills and one half grassland. The optimal thing to do would be to mine all the hills and irrigate all the grassland. Basically what is needed is a worker AI that makes decisions nearly as good as an good human civ player. In addition, perhaps there could be some policy preferences that could be defined by the player to guide the workers in general.

 

[Brutha2]

I think workers are a good thing in certain situations, and can save time in the long run than if you control them from a city, unless you automated that system. The thing I really hate about workers is that you need to build a new one for every small island you settle on. A better way is for when you farmers are working on a square, they have the option to work as workers temporarily, maybe not producing anything from that square.

 

[geishapunk]

@dh_epic

I never said you have to prove! I only mentioned that we both can´t prove and that it is now clear that we both disagree. As we run in circles with that discussion i tried to stop the spam.... ;o)

P.S.: Your example is incorrect for my gameplay.

 

[sir_schwick]

I think workers are a good thing in certain situations, and can save time in the long run than if you control them from a city, unless you automated that system. The thing I really hate about workers is that you need to build a new one for every small island you settle on. A better way is for when you farmers are working on a square, they have the option to work as workers temporarily, maybe not producing anything from that square.

What if they still made food, but no shields or trade. The only problem is assinging on the citizens to become workers and vice versa. If you find a neat way to solve that problem, I am pretty sold.

dh_epic, Nice organization. I do see that some players still would feel comfortable with a physical worker unit, rather then a worker pool. I personally like the idea of a built-in worker pool, derived from population and tech. Automating the path-finding to the assignments should be implemented. This makes it so players have the same improvement ability as the AI, so they must play smart. Also, the computer needs to learn not to cheat.

 

[Milan's Warrior]

I would love to get rid of workers, but I fear it might increase micromanagement, unless it is done right. Just imagine having to click every single square yourself - a nightmare.
If you get rid of workers you also need to be able to automatize those tasks that automatic workers do.

 

[Ambiorix_be]

I agree that workers can be ditched. I found that part of the game in CTP2 more efficient. Instead of workers divert your income to 'public works' and use them for...public works like roads, pollution...etc

 

[sir_schwick]

If you ditched workers you would not have to click and set each square individually. You would paint the squares you want irrigated one color, the ones you wanted roaded another, if both, then it would look striped. You could even paint priority flags.

 

[t3h_m013]

maybe you dont remove workers, but use pop as specialists that work tiles (giving the speedhumps idea and avoiding to much irritating micromanagement i hope) and then still have the build worker option for out of city radius stuff??

 

[Diogenes183]

If you ditched workers you would not have to click and set each square individually. You would paint the squares you want irrigated one color, the ones you wanted roaded another, if both, then it would look striped. You could even paint priority flags.

This same method could be used to improve worker automation. The user could just specify what he wants done all at once and then workers would obtain their orders from the pool of tasks needed to be accomplished. Sort of a "set it and forget it!" Ron Popeil method.

 

[EddyG17]

we need better algorithm.
The AI's wants its cities to have the highest pop possible the fastes possible, instead the AI should concentrate in getting out the optimun number of shields possible of a city if it doesn't have a hospital. Once built, it should concentrate in working all the tiles of the city area (20) and mine enough tiles so that the city in question won't go much higher in pop. Ex. If a city is in a tile grassland and sorounded by it, why even irrigate, mine all tiles. if the city in plains, the it is half minied and half irrigated, unless there is resource that gives extra food, which then should be irrigated.

 

[Mistfit]

I actually like the workers the way they are right now. Taking out units and ideas from the game makes it very bland to me. You have the choice to automate them if you want. I personally like a game that has diferent levels of involment like CivIII. If I wanted to play a game that everyone could master I'd play pac man and just memorize the proper steps getting thru each level.