(IS THIS A BUG??) 'Don't alter previous improvements' switch ineffective
- Thread starter Pilotis
- Start date
Was it in a city radius? Outside of a city radius a fort is effectively just a better version of a coal mine... the worker could have been programmed to 'improve' the square by adding the defensive bonus.
Random Oracle
Warlord
Forts connect resources inside your cultural borders, assuming you have the techs necessary to use said resource.
Chigau Jiji
Chieftain
- Joined
- Jul 2, 2002
- Messages
- 30
Although it doesn't seem to be documented anywhere,
forts now do count as "any improvement" too. it seems.
So if you have a fort on a gold, sheep, silk, whatever,
you should still get the resource and extra hammers, food, commerce.
Forts cost more to build and give other military benefits,
including ships can enter them.
One cool trick is you can buld a fort on any oil you've found
and as soon as you get combustion, voila, it's connected immediately...
forts now do count as "any improvement" too. it seems.
So if you have a fort on a gold, sheep, silk, whatever,
you should still get the resource and extra hammers, food, commerce.
Forts cost more to build and give other military benefits,
including ships can enter them.
One cool trick is you can buld a fort on any oil you've found
and as soon as you get combustion, voila, it's connected immediately...
Random Oracle
Warlord
It is documented in Civilopedia, check "Beyond the Sword Concepts". There's a section on forts, I believe.
EDIT: Picture: http://forums.civfanatics.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=155969&d=1184739609
EDIT: Picture: http://forums.civfanatics.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=155969&d=1184739609
Chigau Jiji
Chieftain
- Joined
- Jul 2, 2002
- Messages
- 30
Correction.
It appears you don't get the hammers, food or commerce,
but you do get the resource.
So, it's not in the fat cross of your city, a fort is better.
If it is in your fat cross, then it probably ain't,
unless you've being swamped by pillagers.
It appears you don't get the hammers, food or commerce,
but you do get the resource.
So, it's not in the fat cross of your city, a fort is better.
If it is in your fat cross, then it probably ain't,
unless you've being swamped by pillagers.
KrikkitTwo
Immortal
- Joined
- Apr 3, 2004
- Messages
- 12,418
Since the new AI is based on Blake's Better AI in part, I'd think this might be a "feature." If I recall from playing better AI, the workers will not alter improvements options will not stop all changes. The automated workers will removed improvements that prevent connecting a resource to your trade system.
For example if you built a windmill on a hill and you discover steam power then the automated workers will destroy the wind mill and replace it with a mine to hook up the coal. I think it is based on the assumption that one would always wish to hook up resources. If a fort is being built I can only assume it follows a similar logic. Building a a fort on a resource that is not a workable tile. If neither of these is the case, then It might be a bug.
For example if you built a windmill on a hill and you discover steam power then the automated workers will destroy the wind mill and replace it with a mine to hook up the coal. I think it is based on the assumption that one would always wish to hook up resources. If a fort is being built I can only assume it follows a similar logic. Building a a fort on a resource that is not a workable tile. If neither of these is the case, then It might be a bug.
KrikkitTwo
Immortal
- Joined
- Apr 3, 2004
- Messages
- 12,418
yes, but he indicates that there was already a mine there, so the resource was already hooked up
- Joined
- Oct 5, 2001
- Messages
- 30,080
OK - noted as "Is this a bug". A save would be useful though.
civictor
Chieftain
- Joined
- Jul 7, 2006
- Messages
- 65
I still wouldn't consider it a bug. There is no reason not to promote a mine to a fort outside the city radius and every reason to do so. I would rather the AI continue to operate as is even with the "Don't Alter" option checked.
Like Auren pointed out, "Don't Alter" is not an absolute command if there are truly better changes to be made (in a general sense). If you really don't want anything altered, turn off automation--that is the absolute "Don't Alter" option.
Like Auren pointed out, "Don't Alter" is not an absolute command if there are truly better changes to be made (in a general sense). If you really don't want anything altered, turn off automation--that is the absolute "Don't Alter" option.
a_civilian
Warlord
- Joined
- Jun 7, 2007
- Messages
- 161
What if you were going to put a new city there?
jprc
My dog is smarter than me
Yes it IS a bug...
Knowing if a fort is better or not is not really the point...
The point is to know if what YOU decide in the option screen is correctly executed or not...
If an option says "do NOT", it means "do not" and not "do a bit and perhaps also...".
It is not ainwood who will contradict this. He just has to ask to Helen to design options that can be ignored...
If you tick on the option "do not touch the old improvements" and the old improvements is touched, there is obviously something wrong, whatever is the usefulness of the next improvement!!
I have the same problem with choosing the religion in advanced start (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=235747)
It seems that (some) options are discarded or ignored when you launch the game.
Knowing if a fort is better or not is not really the point...
The point is to know if what YOU decide in the option screen is correctly executed or not...
If an option says "do NOT", it means "do not" and not "do a bit and perhaps also...".
It is not ainwood who will contradict this. He just has to ask to Helen to design options that can be ignored...
If you tick on the option "do not touch the old improvements" and the old improvements is touched, there is obviously something wrong, whatever is the usefulness of the next improvement!!
I have the same problem with choosing the religion in advanced start (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=235747)
It seems that (some) options are discarded or ignored when you launch the game.
weregamer
Gandhi of the Mongols
Exactly. The point of checking this option is that I want to remove the tedium of general worker management but still have the ability to specifically choose things in some cases. While the new fort features does make this not as egregious as it looked, this is still a bug. Put another way - even if putting a cottage on a certain tile is "more advantageous", I might have a reason for putting a farm there, or a watermill, or whatever. This is the same basic issue.
What I'd really like to see is slightly richer automation options like SMAC had. "Trade" is good, but so would be "roads/railroads" and particularly the old Civ2 "Irrigate to here". But that is a feature request and a tangent to this bug.
jprc
My dog is smarter than me
... weregamer, you said it in much better English than me, thank you ...
Ah!!... Alpha Centauri, it would be so nice to have it starting right after the Space Victory...
Adding also options to workers like:
"cut only jungle" :for keeping forests and removing unhealthy jungle
"stop automation after X turns" :among other thing: for avoiding, as I had already, workers to create a 96 square road ... just for going on a point that is on the other side of a little bay but blocked by mountains/closed borders
"Production first" / "Food first" / "Trade first" : for specializing more a worker. In this case, improved squares are off-limit to other automated workers (for not having a loop between 2 workers trying to improve differently the same square)
"Off limit" : the player manually select a square and flag it, automated workers can do nothing on this square until the flag is removed.
"Straighest way": regardless of number of turns for creating it, the worker will build the shortest junctions roads.
"Terraforming" : Ah.... Alpha Centauri ... : very very long special task, if 1 settler or more is placed along a mountain, or a 1 square only water tile, convert in hill or in (flood) plain. (only available at industrial age?)
I am sure I forgot some ...
I am a "builder", not a warlord, and workers are my boys...
Ah!!... Alpha Centauri, it would be so nice to have it starting right after the Space Victory...
Adding also options to workers like:
"cut only jungle" :for keeping forests and removing unhealthy jungle
"stop automation after X turns" :among other thing: for avoiding, as I had already, workers to create a 96 square road ... just for going on a point that is on the other side of a little bay but blocked by mountains/closed borders
"Production first" / "Food first" / "Trade first" : for specializing more a worker. In this case, improved squares are off-limit to other automated workers (for not having a loop between 2 workers trying to improve differently the same square)
"Off limit" : the player manually select a square and flag it, automated workers can do nothing on this square until the flag is removed.
"Straighest way": regardless of number of turns for creating it, the worker will build the shortest junctions roads.
"Terraforming" : Ah.... Alpha Centauri ... : very very long special task, if 1 settler or more is placed along a mountain, or a 1 square only water tile, convert in hill or in (flood) plain. (only available at industrial age?)
I am sure I forgot some ...
I am a "builder", not a warlord, and workers are my boys...
Similar threads
