Is there really no build queue?

[Ryika]

And if, while building your first galley, you pop the 2-galley eureka from a goody hut, you might want to rethink that second galley.

But if that rare case occurred I could still switch my production. Or not if i can't be bothered to do it and instead just finish that second galley anyway. .

It's just silly to force players into that level of micromanagement. It's good to make it the standard way of playing to make people understand that I might be important, but I should be able to opt out of it. That's especially true later on, when the decisions what to build in smaller cities really don't matter that much anymore.

The work queue allows me to do exactly that. Well, would allow me to do exactly that.

And then there's also an argument to be made that the work queue is a good "reminder" of what you were planning. Marbozir's Civ 5 let's plays are a good example for that, because that's what he does a lot of the time; queuing what he wants to construct over time and then switch things around as stuff happens. Switching things around easily is of course only possible because of the brilliance of the EUI mod, but imho that's exactly the direction the devs should have taken - make the queue more usable, not remove it.

 

[TruthfulCake]

A good strategy game Should spread out the decisions.... but it should spread out When you WANT to make the decision, not when you Have to make the decision.

The idea is to think of why I would not want to put something in a queue and instead make the decision later

The reason is available Information might change, there is no point for me to queue up a bunch of Catapults on turn 1 if I don't know whether I want to attack my neighbor in the Classical Era or the Renaissance Era. (because I don't know who my neighbor is)

There is no point in queuing up 5 settlers to begin with if I don't know if there are that many good spots yet.

Maybe I won't get Stonehenge, so I will need to build an early Holy Site to get my religion, etc.



The point is "set and forget" isn't always the best play... but sometimes it is, and if it isn't... you can change it make a decision Every single turn (change the queue or leave it).... you make that decision every turn, the only issue is when the game UI forces you to make a decision, having the UI force you to make a decision should be reduced.

The player should be the one to determine 'optimization' v. 'fun' not the UI.

I agree. I do feel like I will end up abusing the queue feature if it returns, but it should indeed be an option in-game. Sometimes I just want to stop being that careful and ease up on the micromanagement a little bit.

 

[SupremacyKing2]

I suspect that the devs don't want players to just load up their "go-to" queue every game and forgetting about the city. It was pretty easy in civ5 to always do the same build queue in every game. The lack of a build queue adds more micro but it forces payers to actually think about what they want the city to do.

 

[KrikkitTwo]

I suspect that the devs don't want players to just load up their "go-to" queue every game and forgetting about the city. It was pretty easy in civ5 to always do the same build queue in every game. The lack of a build queue adds more micro but it forces payers to actually think about what they want the city to do.

But they do that with districts.... you will want to have different districts in different cities, and you have to place them on the map, and they seem to increase the cost of other districts when you place them.... I could definitely see districts not being queued.

 

[Magil]

I suspect that the devs don't want players to just load up their "go-to" queue every game and forgetting about the city. It was pretty easy in civ5 to always do the same build queue in every game. The lack of a build queue adds more micro but it forces payers to actually think about what they want the city to do.

The "devs" should only force the player to play a certain way when it's absolutely critical. The changes to workers/builders mean no more automation, fine, I get that. Districts and such mean no more city governors/automated production, sure. But scrap the production queue entirely? I don't think anything justifies that. You can adjust your queue if you need to, but sometimes it's beneficial to the player to plan ahead and avoid "forgetting" things X turns later.

 

[paulmclem]

Seems a complete overreaction to completely remove an optional feature. Why not simply nerf it as a compromise i.e. can only queue up to 3 items.

 

[KrikkitTwo]

Seems a complete overreaction to completely remove an optional feature. Why not simply nerf it as a compromise i.e. can only queue up to 3 items.

A short queue as a compromise seems stupid..it gets the worst of both worlds

....I'd allow a long queue including of units/buildings you can't build yet (for whatever reason)

as a compromise I can see maybe leaving districts out of the queue.

 

[paulmclem]

That seems stupid....

What does?

Being honest, I don't queue that much but I don't think we should prevent people who want to. That's forcing your game style onto others. Strange move.

 

[Magil]

When I was much younger and playing Civ II, I automated every settler that wasn't founding a city and automated the production of every city. I just wanted to move units around the map and throw them at each other. I don't play that way now of course, but that's how I got into the game. Things might've gone differently for me back then if there wasn't a way to do that.

 

[nokmirt]

There is no build queue, and I don't miss it either.

I do because there are so many things to take care of. Just got used to it in V.

 

[TJ Solo]

What does?

Being honest, I don't queue that much but I don't think we should prevent people who want to. That's forcing your game style onto others. Strange move.

It's their game though. Everything in the game is them forcing their concepts onto others.

 

[Zhahz]

Well, if there is one, I'm failing to find it too. There's also a weird bug that I keep seeing where the bit at the top that tells you what you've just finished producing is in fact the previous thing to that, ie. If I build a monument then a warrior, when the warrior is built it will show the monument as just finished instead.

I haven't even looked for a build queue. Not the end of the world to me but it would be an odd thing to not have.

I saw in LP's and have noticed the same thing with "last thing built" on the city panel. I'm surprised this was never fixed as it's been mentioned for weeks now in LP's.

Sometimes for me ti tells me I just finished a district when I build something in a district and sometimes it tells me what I actually did finish. It's inconsistent and/or very lacking.

 

[steveg700]

It does not take decisions away to have a queue... it just means you make the decisions at an earlier time.

Well, having a queue is a design for the style of Civ gameplay that is all about finding some rote procedure for playing every game. Indeed, many people here regard that as the definition of experience. In Civ V, you were considered a scrub if you ever built your own workers in the ancient era, or didn't beeline to specific techs, or build a Great Library by turn 100, or go with Honor instead of Tradition, et cetera, et cetera. You queue-dumped because every city always followed the same build formula.

Hope that all changes significantly.

 

[plasmacannon]

It will be of greater concern on the largest maps when we have 15-20 cities and we just want to queue up 5-7 units or a repeat build, in an inner city not likely to get attacked. Doing this in 5 cities would reduce our micromanaging and make multiplayer games have quicker turns.
We could still deal with the barbarian or opponent on our border cities every turn.
Hopefully we can still relocate say, tanks from one city that is repeat building them to another city or tile near the border where battles are taking place.
If queueing, repeat building and relocating troops are all removed, this will create a very tedious game as every city on every turn must be looked at.

 

[KrikkitTwo]

Well, having a queue is a design for the style of Civ gameplay that is all about finding some rote procedure for playing every game. Indeed, many people here regard that as the definition of experience. In Civ V, you were considered a scrub if you ever built your own workers in the ancient era, or didn't beeline to specific techs, or build a Great Library by turn 100, or go with Honor instead of Tradition, et cetera, et cetera. You queue-dumped because every city always followed the same build formula.

Hope that all changes significantly.

All that means is that it would not be a good idea to put everything into a queue. It doesn't mean that
1. it wouldn't be reasonable to put some things into a queue
2. you couldn't just change a queue in regards to new information/changing plans

 

[Arvedui]

There's also a weird bug that I keep seeing where the bit at the top that tells you what you've just finished producing is in fact the previous thing to that, ie. If I build a monument then a warrior, when the warrior is built it will show the monument as just finished instead.

I too noticed this bug.

 

[dirtrobot]

as someone who has played hundreds of hours of civ 4 I'm surprised I don't miss the queue - but one thing I'm loving that probably absolves its absence is that civ 6 throws you more curveballs than I remember in 4 or 5 - thus I would be doing a lot of reorganizing of the queue anyway.

 

[MentatYP]

Well, if there is one, I'm failing to find it too. There's also a weird bug that I keep seeing where the bit at the top that tells you what you've just finished producing is in fact the previous thing to that, ie. If I build a monument then a warrior, when the warrior is built it will show the monument as just finished instead.

That bug is infuriating. It's bad enough that there's no build queue, but on top of that I can't tell what the last thing I built was in order to remind myself of my plan and what I had planned to build next. Double whammy.

 

[historix69]

If you play a "small" game with 5-10 specialised cities, a build queue is optional, but if you play on a Giant World Map (Civ 3-5) and plan to found 50+ cities, you need some kind of build queue or a template ...
(I still have to find the (Giant) World Map. It seems that Civ 6 currently only provides a "Continents" script but no "World" Map.)

I suppose the districts might be the reason they removed the queue since a district needs a tile where to be built and has a population requirement.

 

[anandus]

On the other hand, here's a topic on Reddit, with people only finding out yesterday that Civ 5 had a building queue. People with thousands of hours of gameplay:
https://www.reddit.com/r/civ/comments/58gcbg/11_hours_to_go_until_vi_and_i_just_found_out_you/