Killing the MANTRA (that killed the workers... and other little things...)

[Lazy sweeper]

I basically created Civ8 around the idea of workers.

Unions?

 

[Lazy sweeper]

Yes, it does.

So does Unions need to befriend their Masters also?

I don't think so.

Spartacus didnt make friends, he made warriors from slaves.

Look at Frostpunk what they did with childrens... migrants...
building roads in 20ft of snow to cut some frozen branches just to keep the fire burning...
how many tasks could be assigned to workers...
they could even earn perks... become specialized...
Roman Roads and bridges built so well they still stand 2000 years later at close to zero maintenance...

Despite, you might want an influencer, but that is not me...
I'm sorry... you might have some elsewhere...
I'm just not fit for that...

Frostpunk was innovation...
HK was map improvement but the game was dull...
and guess what? No workers either...

 

[Patine]

So does Unions need to befriend their Masters also?

I don't think so.

Spartacus didnt make friends, he made warriors from slaves.

Look at Frostpunk what they did with childrens... migrants...
building roads in 20ft of snow to cut some frozen branches just to keep the fire burning...
how many tasks could be assigned to workers...
they could even earn perks... become specialized...
Roman Roads and bridges built so well they still stand 2000 years later at close to zero maintenance...

Despite, you might want an influencer, but that is not me...
I'm sorry... you might have some elsewhere...
I'm just not fit for that...

Frostpunk was innovation...
HK was map improvement but the game was dull...
and guess what? No workers either...

Mistag?

 

[Naokaukodem]

Post in thread 'Killing the MANTRA (that killed the workers... and other little things...)'

Dec 16, 2025

I basically created Civ8 around the idea of workers.

Unions?

• Lazy sweeper

I've created a topic in I&S where I detail a bit more the idea. But unions are not a part of it. (unless you see China as a union of sort ?) Any idea ?

 

[Lazy sweeper]

In Civ 3 (I guess 1-4, but I know it from 3) there was just a bonus for a road having a tile on it (1g, I think). So you built roads on every tile. It ended up looking like this:

View attachment 750749

This was because there was a lack of choices for the workers actions.

When automated every worker tried to drain swamps, cut down woods and jungles.
Expert players never automated their workers, because having an old growth forest near your Capital, with maybe Deers or Fur on it, meant it had more production than just cut down with a generic mine on it... Chariots could not enter nor Jungle nor Swamps. That meant you always wanted to maintain a natural line of deep Wilderness between you and your enemies, with only one road cutting through, with forts every two tiles heavily guarded...

Civ Beyond Earth had the Harmony way... where Miasma instead of being cleaned was being studied and would bring bonuses down the road if un-altered... Animal species could become befriended and act as "proxies" in a way. It's not just workers that went away... All kind of Animals went away...

National parks in C6 had to have high value tiles, no industrialization or improvement nearby. But there were no Kangaroos, No Lions, No Elephants, No Gorillas... HK made some cute little animations, and in C6 we could see some birds flying... now there's crabs resources going up navigable rivers??
What about Beavers??? Then you had to decide if send a worker to destroy its dams or instead tell your worker to PRESERVE the ecosystem... like... fighting poachers... or instead hunt them down to make some warm hats and gloves... C4 had Beavers, Lions, Panthers, Grizzlies, Wolves...
In Africa you don't stray from the one and only road into the bushes...

I feel like we lost the way ever since... Civ V took a different path and I can't un-see it...

 

[Lazy sweeper]

I've created a topic in I&S where I detail a bit more the idea. But unions are not a part of it. (unless you see China as a union of sort ?) Any idea ?

Unions in North America Vs Slavers in the South?
Apartheid?
China had Classes, like Eunuch Zhang Ye Vs the Mandarins...
It's just a possible perk, it could bring societal benefit in the long run
or lead to revolts and even wars...

In a game like Civ overstretching your borders, taking control of too many resources, will
definitely have repercussion in International relationship... but I'm not sure what you really meant for Union of sort...

in C3 you could turn your citizens into policemen or draft them under Nationalism...
Also produce worker "migrants" and seed other cities for a fast growth...

 

[Vandlys]

No. I don't miss it. Pointless micromanagement.

I voted no for the following reasons:

1. It's a horrendously biased poll that I don't think should impact developer decisions.
2. The OP likes changing peoples' votes for their own, subjective reasons.
3. Oh, and I think that the removal of workers was a good thing, and that custom build actions can still go on unique units to perform flavoursome, useful actions.

Well said.

 

[Head_North]

I enjoy workers but the poll is a bit biased. I also respect that people don't want to micromanage little guys. In the same way that people don't want to micromanage soldiers all the time, which lends itself to people hating on the 1UPT.

The workers to me represent civilians in a very real way. I really enjoy that improvements are not instant. Instant improvements feel really shoddy, like sort of cheap in a way, like the buttons on a children's toy or something.

You press one button and the farm is instantly produced. Well it doesn't really show that the farm needs work to be built. And so the limiting factor is just the number of instant buildings you can build at any one time rather than work effort of your citizens.

In other words getting a silver mine brought up in an older Civ game required time and investment and it feels nice to connect it at the end. In a new Civ game it requires to basically just click on it and it magically appears in your inventory.

I too feel its to gamey with the instant build. Booth in civ vi and VII. To your argument about the sense of accomplishment when finalily have built the mine I would also like to add the notion of “timing”. In previous iterations you hade to time booth the construction of worker and the building of improvement so that the improvement was done in time to when the city grew. This often created decisionmaking between the immediate benefit of some building and the long time investment of worker/improvement.

I don’t miss workers, because they where tedious to micromanage. But perhaps the city’s could have a parallell buildque for improvements? A part of the city’s production went into improvement building? At least so you felt that the improvements where an investment.

I voted no!

 

[Bonyduck Campersang]

Unless you vote Yes, in which case no justification is needed. This makes the poll inherently, instantly useless.

The poll still just shows votes, if a no-voter chooses not to post in the thread his vote is still counted (unless CFC for some reason has given the OP the extraordinary power to reassign votes)

 

[Gorbles]

The poll still just shows votes, if a no-voter chooses not to post in the thread his vote is still counted (unless CFC for some reason has given the OP the extraordinary power to reassign votes)

That's fair. I was more grounding my opinion on how the discussion was being treated.

 

[Evolena]

The poll still just shows votes, if a no-voter chooses not to post in the thread his vote is still counted (unless CFC for some reason has given the OP the extraordinary power to reassign votes)

That may be, but nothing prevents the OP to claim in another post that his poll on the subject resulted in the votes the way he wants to count them instead of the real votes. Easily verifiable, but still misleading.

 

[GeneralZift]

What the OP said about the votes is not really relevant because the people who said yes and no are both putting their arguments in the thread anyway. I think it's just poor rhetoric.

 

[Patine]

No. I don't miss it. Pointless micromanagement.



Well said.

I find the term, "micromanagement," a tag word to remove whole features wholesale. Some players (a notable number) enjoy micromanagement in these kind of games. But, often the ones against micromanagement want it removed without even an option for such mechanics being available, or have it being something that can realistically be done to the degree of priority players want. They just want it absent, entire, and use terms for it like, "pointless," "distracting," "infuriating," etc. I loved MoO2, but when MoO3 boasted restricting and limiting micromanagement, whether the player wanted it or not, as a FEATURE they were proud of, I never bought it.

 

[disjointaccount]

I find the term, "micromanagement," a tag word to remove whole features wholesale. Some players (a notable number) enjoy micromanagement in these kind of games. But, often the ones against micromanagement want it removed without even an option for such mechanics being available, or have it being something that can realistically be done to the degree of priority players want. They just want it absent, entire, and use terms for it like, "pointless," "distracting," "infuriating," etc. I loved MoO2, but when MoO3 boasted restricting and limiting micromanagement, whether the player wanted it or not, as a FEATURE they were proud of, I never bought it.

It's impossible to please everyone and obviously most design stuff is inherently pretty subjective, but the fact there's such a trend of games seeking to limit or remove it (presumably in response to player feedback, data, research, focus groups, etc.) suggests that those who like it are in the minority.

 

[Siptah]

In civ 7? Hell no!

In civ 8: maybe, I’ve they are completely overhauled. Obviously with considering that they were super tiring in civ 6, and that a new solution could include them no longer being a unit, but you get other ways to get production in settlement A to development in settlement B that don‘t require clicks every turn. They could still be called workers if this pleases anyone. But I don‘t want to shuffle units on the map just to plat down roads and standard improvements any more. The thrill of that is long gone.

 

[Patine]

It's impossible to please everyone and obviously most design stuff is inherently pretty subjective, but the fact there's such a trend of games seeking to limit or remove it (presumably in response to player feedback, data, research, focus groups, etc.) suggests that those who like it are in the minority.

But even being hostile to the idea of such things being optional, if it can be arranged, is a bit too far. That gets to the point of exclusionary.

 

[Lonecat Nekophrodite]

Workers are good as gone. too micro, though migration system should be more continious streams as in Empire: Total War.

However population managements should be made flexible. such as relocating workmen and specialists.
and Culture no longer a reason of border growth as in previous game.

 

[Lazy sweeper]

To everyone complaining about my statements: I'm a bit intolerant rn.
I know it. I argue with anyone on petty things except at work, otherwise I would be without a job. Maybe it's my way to release the stress and you all don't deserve it.
I have been clearly deteriorating my "social credit" lately all on my own.
I don't need assist.
I hope the pool will proceed as unbiased as possible.
No, I don't have any special powers.

I will post a generic COD of city states, where a few "towns" are unconnected by any roads, which to me feel like it's enough of micromanagement that a few more roads and "out of borders" fortifications, made by workers, would likely alleviate.

(And if you complain that your "specialists" gobbles up too much gold, but can't turn them into farmers, architects, or road builders, just knows that they are workers anyway...)

Hope this makes sense to you. It does to me.

PS: If I could build four "Fort" town along that hypotethical road, all two tiles apart...
that may help, for the strategic part of their role... it wouldn't solve the underlying concept, but it may help. I don't think it's possible anyway. Also claiming territory along all road doesn't sound like very charming to AI or other players. It would end up much like Alpha Go...

 

[Nikolai II]

Moderator Action: This thread has run its course.