MyOtherName
Emperor
- Joined
- Dec 7, 2004
- Messages
- 1,526
Er, you do realize that siege units can attack stacks that aren't in cities, right?
Micromanagement & Exploits
- Thread starter kazapp
- Start date
Lord Chambers
Emperor
- Joined
- Nov 23, 2001
- Messages
- 1,004
Overall I thought your post did a good job of documenting current issues that are worthy of modder and developer attention. I think some people are being slightly dismissive, but that's somewhat expected whenever you focus on the idea of "exploits" which is horribly subjective. You didn't go too far into speculating on the "spirit" of what developers intended but did include a little bit of grander AI behavior in a post about Micromanagement and Exploits.
Anyway, I think this solution would be a good one, except the health bonus and the ability cities to work ones which are partially chopped needs to be taken into account. I doubt Firaxis would ever implement a system of fractional health and fractional hammers for citizens working the tile just to relieve good players of micromanagement burdens, but it is obviously the most ideal.
If the AI were to withdraw workers from its outer squares whenever your unit showed up then you could effectively cripple the AI without declaring war. If the AI were to escort workers then it would have less defense in its cities, which would be substantially important in early rushes. I think there can be a solution here, but maybe the issue more deeply concerns the AI's appraisal of military threat, and something that can't be fixed easily.
Assume the player is going to rush and build more units for defense? Assume the player isn't going to rush because he doesn't have an early UU? The factors here are a major part of AI intelligence. Not easily fixed.
Changing the mechanics of city attack and defense in order to remove the player's option of exploiting the AI's silly decisions will also penalize the player when he is on defense and trying to recapture his own cities.
Essentially in these three options you want the AI to take into account the units it sees and make more intelligent decisions. Well, that's no mere matter. We would all love to see this kind of change, but I don't think it's appropriate for this thread which is focused on more fixable issues than overall AI effectiveness.
Improving worker automaton to this level would not only be a greatly time-consuming and challenging fix, but cross the line into what is acceptable for a strategy game. No longer would a player need to understand how to prioritize tile improvements or conceive of different [misnomer] economies. He would only need to pick one and poof, he's producing great people or commerce.
One quick point first: You don't need to pre-chop at all to avoid several turns of no-growth. You can chop without thinking, then just switch to a settler the turn the hammers are deposited and the turn after that switch back. Because of this, if you pre-chop forests because you want to build a settler or worker without manipulating the build queue you are wasting the turns of your chopper by moving him on and off of unnecessary forest squares.
Anyway, I think this solution would be a good one, except the health bonus and the ability cities to work ones which are partially chopped needs to be taken into account. I doubt Firaxis would ever implement a system of fractional health and fractional hammers for citizens working the tile just to relieve good players of micromanagement burdens, but it is obviously the most ideal.
In brief I think there is no simple solution for any of these.
If the AI were to withdraw workers from its outer squares whenever your unit showed up then you could effectively cripple the AI without declaring war. If the AI were to escort workers then it would have less defense in its cities, which would be substantially important in early rushes. I think there can be a solution here, but maybe the issue more deeply concerns the AI's appraisal of military threat, and something that can't be fixed easily.
Assume the player is going to rush and build more units for defense? Assume the player isn't going to rush because he doesn't have an early UU? The factors here are a major part of AI intelligence. Not easily fixed.
Changing the mechanics of city attack and defense in order to remove the player's option of exploiting the AI's silly decisions will also penalize the player when he is on defense and trying to recapture his own cities.
Essentially in these three options you want the AI to take into account the units it sees and make more intelligent decisions. Well, that's no mere matter. We would all love to see this kind of change, but I don't think it's appropriate for this thread which is focused on more fixable issues than overall AI effectiveness.
I don't completely agree that the cash bonuses are too large, or that the nature of this trick is very exploitable. Keep in mind you have to have access to a wonder to use it for building wealth, you only get the wonder wealth at the unpredictable point when it is built somewhere else, and that you can only get wonder wealth in a single city in your empire, where it is not multiplied by any coin bonuses. Altogether I think this prohibits it's use to a large degree as a money maker, but perhaps it is just an under-utilized trick in Strategy and Tips and pretty soon we'll all be exploiting the crap out of wonder wealth™.
Unit queuing for civic changes is certainly something I would l like to see eliminated as an option. This solution is ideal, although barring all units begun under other civics from the experience bonus is acceptable as well.
Not any more than you should be able to tell the game to move your invading stack to the next city after the IMPORTANT ATTACKERS have healed.
Improving worker automaton to this level would not only be a greatly time-consuming and challenging fix, but cross the line into what is acceptable for a strategy game. No longer would a player need to understand how to prioritize tile improvements or conceive of different [misnomer] economies. He would only need to pick one and poof, he's producing great people or commerce.
Neg that Ghostrider. Check the date again on Zombie's Micromanagement thread. I know for certain that at some point between Vanilla and BTS fractional numbers were included. You can see them when you go to the city screen. I still believe you can glean bonuses with binary research due to researching already-discovered techs, but not any (appreciable) amount due to rounding errors.
Lord Chambers
Emperor
- Joined
- Nov 23, 2001
- Messages
- 1,004
The problem lies with the AI always recapturing a city, which the player can enable the AI to do, and then hammer it with city raider units, thus largely negating the issue of having to fight an enemy stack in the open. No need to diversify your promotions widely outside of City Raider 1, 2, and 3. No need to take higher casualties by an enemy getting a defensive bonus. A bait city has 0% cultural defense and functions like a grassland square that is vulnerable to city raider. Granted, it also gives the defender city defender bonuses, but the AI will typically have fewer of those than the player has raiders.
And, if you simply tweak the AI to promote more city defenders, then you encourage the player to stay in the city and weaken the AI's ability to retake that city. Damned if you do, damned if you don't.
Ideally the AI would notice your stack filled with city raiders is sitting right outside the city it is about to recapture, and decide not to take the city. However, I think solving that kind of thinking goes far beyond a simple fix.
Humans leaving a bait city is just one of many tactical advantages it has against the AI in war.
SevenSpirits
Immortal?
- Joined
- Jul 7, 2007
- Messages
- 512
It still rounds after summing up the science/gold from all cities, which usually means you lose 1 commerce per turn by not using the extremes. That's still noticeable in the early game when that is like 5% of your gross income.
The binary research problem really bugs me, because using it is so good. The research bonuses for researching techs after others do are quite significant. Not only that, but with BTS, binary research is better because it leaves you with money to pay for events nearly all the time, without having to delay your research at all if no event ends up needing the money. Also, it gives you extra flexibility by letting you switch techs with less invested in them.
I think this could be fixable by
a) Restricting the number of 10% adjustments that can be made each turn, and
b) Charging the player gold for making adjustments.
The best way I can think of to do this is, at the end of each turn, check how many 10% steps each slider (including the gold rate) is different from where it started the turn. For each one, charge the player 1% of their commerce (before divvying it up). If they can't afford it, raise the gold slider automatically (like it already does when necessary) and recalculate the penalty.
Also, to be idealistic, you should be able to choose more precise values than 10% increments. E.g. you should be able to click on a button that sets your gold % such that you are making exactly 0 per turn.
All right, I admit it's probably not fixable. But they should at least change accumulated numbers to floating point.
The binary research problem really bugs me, because using it is so good. The research bonuses for researching techs after others do are quite significant. Not only that, but with BTS, binary research is better because it leaves you with money to pay for events nearly all the time, without having to delay your research at all if no event ends up needing the money. Also, it gives you extra flexibility by letting you switch techs with less invested in them.
I think this could be fixable by
a) Restricting the number of 10% adjustments that can be made each turn, and
b) Charging the player gold for making adjustments.
The best way I can think of to do this is, at the end of each turn, check how many 10% steps each slider (including the gold rate) is different from where it started the turn. For each one, charge the player 1% of their commerce (before divvying it up). If they can't afford it, raise the gold slider automatically (like it already does when necessary) and recalculate the penalty.
Also, to be idealistic, you should be able to choose more precise values than 10% increments. E.g. you should be able to click on a button that sets your gold % such that you are making exactly 0 per turn.
All right, I admit it's probably not fixable. But they should at least change accumulated numbers to floating point.
Sim_One
Emperor
- Joined
- Jul 28, 2002
- Messages
- 1,073
A little out of my league here, because I'm still a noob, but my response to the original post is that humans should have access to certain "exploits" because they act as a counter-weight to all the various bonuses the AIs have on higher difficulty levels. If everyone should find a particular exploit so egregious and makes the game way too easy, then there is general consent that that abusing that exploit is considered unsportsmanlike and avoided.
An example I remember from Civ3 was called the "Rights-of-Passage Rape" exploit. A Rights-of-Passage (ROP) was the Civ4 equivalent of an Open Border agreement, except that when it gets canceled, any troops in an AI territory do not get removed. The abuse involved an easy conquest of the AI simply by surrounding his cities with troops as sanctioned by the ROP and declaring war and letting the dogs lose. In this case, the exploit of the game mechanics is very clear and certainly it is considered an unfair advantage. From my limited experience with Civ4 so far, I have not noticed anything as unfair as the ROP Rape, and none of the things you say strike me as so either.
An example I remember from Civ3 was called the "Rights-of-Passage Rape" exploit. A Rights-of-Passage (ROP) was the Civ4 equivalent of an Open Border agreement, except that when it gets canceled, any troops in an AI territory do not get removed. The abuse involved an easy conquest of the AI simply by surrounding his cities with troops as sanctioned by the ROP and declaring war and letting the dogs lose. In this case, the exploit of the game mechanics is very clear and certainly it is considered an unfair advantage. From my limited experience with Civ4 so far, I have not noticed anything as unfair as the ROP Rape, and none of the things you say strike me as so either.
Sim_One
Emperor
- Joined
- Jul 28, 2002
- Messages
- 1,073
In response to your particular issues that you have about exploits, again I'm going back to Civ3 for possible solutions, so bear with me 
The Settler-Pre-Chop exploit was a non-issue in Civ3 because back in the old days, whenever you produce a settler, the city that produced it would lose a population. If the city was at population 1 to begin with, it would not be able to produce the settler unless enough food fills up to grow to size 2, in which case the settler is produced and the city goes back to size 1. I'm not sure why this was changed in Civ4 but I thought the old way was better.
The Worker Steal exploit was less useful because in Civ3, stolen workers are considered "slaves" and are only half as productive as workers you produce yourself. I believe, in Civ4, stolen workers are the same your own workers right? (Again, I'm still new to this game, so I could be wrong)
The 100% science research exploit was avoided (to some degree) in Civ3 when playing on higher difficulty levels, many good players would simply set research to 0%, save up the money, and buy/trade/extort technologies from the AI, and found that to be more efficient than doing own research. There was also a great wonder that was available really early in the game that gives you any technology owned by two other players - the same as the Internet in Civ4 except you can build it really early in ancient times, and many players would simply make a beeline for it and never worry about research again.
The Unit Queues and Civic Change exploit was a non-issue back in the days of Sid Meier's Alpha Centauri, because in that game the experience of your troops is not dependent on what civics you use WHEN you produce the troop, but rather dependent on what civics you are using currently. So even if you got a +2 xp when you produced the troop under a certain civic, you do not keep the xp if you switch to another civic that does not provide the xp bonus. I understand this may be a little harder to implement in Civ4, unless your troops can actually lose promotions. Civ3 did not have a civics system that affected troop experience so it was a non-issue for that game.
The Settler-Pre-Chop exploit was a non-issue in Civ3 because back in the old days, whenever you produce a settler, the city that produced it would lose a population. If the city was at population 1 to begin with, it would not be able to produce the settler unless enough food fills up to grow to size 2, in which case the settler is produced and the city goes back to size 1. I'm not sure why this was changed in Civ4 but I thought the old way was better.
The Worker Steal exploit was less useful because in Civ3, stolen workers are considered "slaves" and are only half as productive as workers you produce yourself. I believe, in Civ4, stolen workers are the same your own workers right? (Again, I'm still new to this game, so I could be wrong)
The 100% science research exploit was avoided (to some degree) in Civ3 when playing on higher difficulty levels, many good players would simply set research to 0%, save up the money, and buy/trade/extort technologies from the AI, and found that to be more efficient than doing own research. There was also a great wonder that was available really early in the game that gives you any technology owned by two other players - the same as the Internet in Civ4 except you can build it really early in ancient times, and many players would simply make a beeline for it and never worry about research again.
The Unit Queues and Civic Change exploit was a non-issue back in the days of Sid Meier's Alpha Centauri, because in that game the experience of your troops is not dependent on what civics you use WHEN you produce the troop, but rather dependent on what civics you are using currently. So even if you got a +2 xp when you produced the troop under a certain civic, you do not keep the xp if you switch to another civic that does not provide the xp bonus. I understand this may be a little harder to implement in Civ4, unless your troops can actually lose promotions. Civ3 did not have a civics system that affected troop experience so it was a non-issue for that game.
MyOtherName
Emperor
- Joined
- Dec 7, 2004
- Messages
- 1,526
Er, the reason the AIs have bonuses on the higher difficulty levels is because the AI's are far inferior to the good players.
obliterate
Warrior Monk
OK this thread is really starting to annoy me.
PRE-CHOPPING
As K-mad said this was fixed because you still have to end your turn to receive the cop bonus. If you leave it in your production queue for too long you do loose production.
WORKER-STEALING
It's just good strategy with it's risks
QUEUCHA RUSH
Again good strategy with it's risks. The AI does whip units if it's in trouble but whipping isn't always possible.
THE NO-DEFENSE CITY DEFENSE
If you do this you obviously aren't playing the game properly. This doesn't help you in anyway. By doing this you lose all of your building and culture in your city. and anything else there (gpp, production,food etc...) You run the risk of the AI razing the city too. You also loose the flanking ability of your cavalry and if you destroy their seige with a half-decent denfence you won't have any problem. Anyway if you are at war what are your city-raiders doing defending cities, they should be out conquering more.
BEING BEAT TO WONDERS
By doing this you get a one off lump sum somewhere in the future. If you build wealth this research this money receives building multiplyiers to it and provides a steady stream and renewable wealth source. You get this wealth as you need it not in some obscure distant time. Before you say If your industrious, what if you've got the multiplyier resource', I'll say what if you're english with royal exchanges, what if you have markets and grocers, what if you have wall street.
UNIT QUEUES AND CIVIC CHANGES
I haven't come across this before. I wondr how prolofic it is. Remember, however, you loose production if something's been in your queue too long and you have to wait 5 turns to change your civic back. You also suffer 2 turns of anarchy unless you are spiritual. If you have the Cristo Redentor (which is bugged) it would be an exploit.
GENERAL MICROMANAGEMENT
What you call general micromanagement I call strategy. You can't expect the AI to play the game for you. You have to do some things yourself.
FRACTIONAL RESEARCH
This was definitely fixed (in BTS I think). So you can stop worrying about it or buy the expansion.
PRE-CHOPPING
As K-mad said this was fixed because you still have to end your turn to receive the cop bonus. If you leave it in your production queue for too long you do loose production.
WORKER-STEALING
It's just good strategy with it's risks
QUEUCHA RUSH
Again good strategy with it's risks. The AI does whip units if it's in trouble but whipping isn't always possible.
THE NO-DEFENSE CITY DEFENSE
If you do this you obviously aren't playing the game properly. This doesn't help you in anyway. By doing this you lose all of your building and culture in your city. and anything else there (gpp, production,food etc...) You run the risk of the AI razing the city too. You also loose the flanking ability of your cavalry and if you destroy their seige with a half-decent denfence you won't have any problem. Anyway if you are at war what are your city-raiders doing defending cities, they should be out conquering more.
BEING BEAT TO WONDERS
By doing this you get a one off lump sum somewhere in the future. If you build wealth this research this money receives building multiplyiers to it and provides a steady stream and renewable wealth source. You get this wealth as you need it not in some obscure distant time. Before you say If your industrious, what if you've got the multiplyier resource', I'll say what if you're english with royal exchanges, what if you have markets and grocers, what if you have wall street.
UNIT QUEUES AND CIVIC CHANGES
I haven't come across this before. I wondr how prolofic it is. Remember, however, you loose production if something's been in your queue too long and you have to wait 5 turns to change your civic back. You also suffer 2 turns of anarchy unless you are spiritual. If you have the Cristo Redentor (which is bugged) it would be an exploit.
GENERAL MICROMANAGEMENT
What you call general micromanagement I call strategy. You can't expect the AI to play the game for you. You have to do some things yourself.
FRACTIONAL RESEARCH
This was definitely fixed (in BTS I think). So you can stop worrying about it or buy the expansion.
Excellent and thoughtful replies, overall! 
First off, thank you for correcting old/outdated info.
As I understand it, whether "fractional research" is still an issue remains undecided so I'll hold off removing it from my OP.
Then I should say I am fully aware there's a lot of subjective feelings regarding game interfaces (and any exploits).
And yes, I have both expansions, and so patching the game only in an expansion is not a problem for me
That said, there are a few posts I need to reply to...
Well, we use calculators when learning maths nowadays. And people use computers without knowing what an operating system is. That's called progress, and I'd like it to come to Civilization too! (And right about here it becomes important to remind you all I started my thread saying all these improvements/conveniences should ideally be optional. Default, though optional. I'm sure most of you won't ever turn back, just as most users don't long back to the days of command line interfaces and no graphical user interfaces.
But more importantly, I wish the game to use and teach the higher concepts of Civ, not only the nuts and bolts. Terms like "cottage economy" are really useful and so should be native to the interface as well, not just something you need to do manually. Just like you don't have to rearrange directory table entries when you delete a file. Just pick one and poof!
(Please don't turn this thread into one of GUI-bashing, or computer tech in general. I'm only using examples to show you - hopefully in a friendly and tongue-in-cheek way - how you make progress sound like a bad thing! )
Well, in general I agree with you, but I have tried (in my OP) to only include "features" that are not part of this category, to be frank.
Instead, I have included items which I feel could and should be handled by the computer, allowing us players to concentrate on the fun stuff instead.
With respect, if the only thing that separates a good player from a mediocre one would be the patience to make calculations the computer should have done, adjust to errors or miscalculations for optimal gain, and generally spending much more time on each turn; then I'm not sure I would like to be a good player, or indeed play the game.
Contrast this with making sound strategies, going for bold gambits, setting up the AIs against each other, etc etc which I do feel makes a good player.
Now I'm not sure about the status of the "fractional research" issue, but it is a typical example...
I cannot honestly say it's a "subtlety" if I'm feeling forced to switch science rate every few turns just because I've done my homework reading CivFanatics strategy articles. It's a manual step that's completely unnecessary and not fun at all (except, I imagine, for the one that first found the bug). If it is fixed, I am throughly glad and relieved.
Now I'm not saying you meant that issue with the text I quoted. I'm merely using it as an example, hopefully making my point come across.
And so I would be if some of the other items were fixed too.
First off, thank you for correcting old/outdated info.
As I understand it, whether "fractional research" is still an issue remains undecided so I'll hold off removing it from my OP.
Then I should say I am fully aware there's a lot of subjective feelings regarding game interfaces (and any exploits).
And yes, I have both expansions, and so patching the game only in an expansion is not a problem for me
That said, there are a few posts I need to reply to...
Well, we use calculators when learning maths nowadays. And people use computers without knowing what an operating system is. That's called progress, and I'd like it to come to Civilization too!
(And right about here it becomes important to remind you all I started my thread saying all these improvements/conveniences should ideally be optional. Default, though optional. I'm sure most of you won't ever turn back, just as most users don't long back to the days of command line interfaces and no graphical user interfaces.But more importantly, I wish the game to use and teach the higher concepts of Civ, not only the nuts and bolts. Terms like "cottage economy" are really useful and so should be native to the interface as well, not just something you need to do manually. Just like you don't have to rearrange directory table entries when you delete a file. Just pick one and poof!
(Please don't turn this thread into one of GUI-bashing, or computer tech in general. I'm only using examples to show you - hopefully in a friendly and tongue-in-cheek way - how you make progress sound like a bad thing!
)Well, in general I agree with you, but I have tried (in my OP) to only include "features" that are not part of this category, to be frank.
Instead, I have included items which I feel could and should be handled by the computer, allowing us players to concentrate on the fun stuff instead.
With respect, if the only thing that separates a good player from a mediocre one would be the patience to make calculations the computer should have done, adjust to errors or miscalculations for optimal gain, and generally spending much more time on each turn; then I'm not sure I would like to be a good player, or indeed play the game.
Contrast this with making sound strategies, going for bold gambits, setting up the AIs against each other, etc etc which I do feel makes a good player.
Now I'm not sure about the status of the "fractional research" issue, but it is a typical example...
I cannot honestly say it's a "subtlety" if I'm feeling forced to switch science rate every few turns just because I've done my homework reading CivFanatics strategy articles. It's a manual step that's completely unnecessary and not fun at all (except, I imagine, for the one that first found the bug). If it is fixed, I am throughly glad and relieved.
Now I'm not saying you meant that issue with the text I quoted. I'm merely using it as an example, hopefully making my point come across.
And so I would be if some of the other items were fixed too.
SevenSpirits
Immortal?
- Joined
- Jul 7, 2007
- Messages
- 512
Wealth isn't modified by gold multipliers, only production multipliers. So it is like a wonder but without possible bonuses from resources or industrious. That said, I don't consider this a problem. Building commerce is supposed to be less efficient than anything else in the game.
Sorry, but what isn't a problem?
That asking a city to build gold for you isn't terribly effective?
Or that it has become a legitimate strategy for Industrious leaders to build a resource-fueled Wonder to one turn short of completion and then holding off until somebody else builds it, thus giving you the money you need to keep research at 100%, despite how that is completely lacking in any sort of even remote real-world analogy?
Regards,
kazapp
SevenSpirits
Immortal?
- Joined
- Jul 7, 2007
- Messages
- 512
This one.
The entire concept of wonders in CIV is strange and unrealistic, but for me that doesn't make using it an exploit. It's just a bizarre mechanic in the first place.
I would say "chopping" is analogous. Being able to make bronze does not suddenly give you the capability to clearcut acres upon acres of forest - in real life. That doesn't make chopping an exploit. The game also lets you choose between building an improvement and chopping at the same time, or chopping then building the improvement. Realistically, if you can't have a mine in the forest, it doesn't make sense you could pre-build the entire mine while the forest is still there, and seamlessly switch from one to the other. Yet I would not call it an exploit that you can choose between the two methods.
The whole wonder thing is a bit more abstract and removed from reality - the gold award has absolutely no basis that I am aware of. But assuming the gold award did represent something in real life, it would also make sense that you could get it by choice. For example, maybe it represents your civ building a would-be wonder that is overshadowed by an earlier, similar construction. Maybe you built some Pyramids, but someone else already built some earlier so your feat is not so impressive. Thus your Pyramids are soon forgotten, and only offer a transient benefit that is abstracted into a cash infusion. In this case, going for the cash awards means intentionally copying wonders that already exist, such that they seem cool to your citizens at the time but aren't worthy of remembrance in the history books. (The question of how making something second could ever conceivably be better than making it first is easily explained by the fact that people are afraid of new things.)
So I would say thematically there is nothing abusive about it. The theme just sucks. Mechanically, it is such an obvious application of the system that I can't call it an exploit.
Chopping isn't abusive in itself - it's a core game concept.
Especially if it was implemented to give a small hammer bonus each time you "worked" the forest.
As it is now, when you first play the game, you build a Settler unassisted, then you might realize you'll complete it faster if you chop during the build.
This is what the game is about at face value, this is what the game and its interface "tell" you is how you do it.
The fact that this is incredibly wasteful and that you should never spend more than a few turns building your first few settlers is completely hidden.
That makes for counterintuitive gameplay and a GUI that gets a low grade from me.
Of course, if the manual, tutorial and game hints already from the beginning told you how to use prechops to make a single Worker complete a Settler without losing more than, say, three turns of city growth; then that could be acceptable.
But just barely, mind you, because it would still still be far preferable in my opinion, if the game was designed in such a way that the most straightforward, most obvious, most intuitive and easiest way to do it was also the most efficient!
If you equate "skill" with "learning to abuse the game" then our opinions differ strongly. My ideal game is one where what separates the newbie from the pro is skilful use of the resources you've been given, not that you spend one hour on every turn doing the computer's job for it.
If there was two interfaces for Civ, one the familiar GUI and another text-based Command Line Interface; which do you believe should give the best results and the most intricate command of your empire.
If you say "the CLI" then, sir, I've lost you. The point of playing Civ isn't punishing yourself with bad interfaces (such as having to look at various secondary screens every other turn), it is to immerse yourself in the gameplay, and make in-game decisions!
Especially if it was implemented to give a small hammer bonus each time you "worked" the forest.
As it is now, when you first play the game, you build a Settler unassisted, then you might realize you'll complete it faster if you chop during the build.
This is what the game is about at face value, this is what the game and its interface "tell" you is how you do it.
The fact that this is incredibly wasteful and that you should never spend more than a few turns building your first few settlers is completely hidden.
That makes for counterintuitive gameplay and a GUI that gets a low grade from me.
Of course, if the manual, tutorial and game hints already from the beginning told you how to use prechops to make a single Worker complete a Settler without losing more than, say, three turns of city growth; then that could be acceptable.
But just barely, mind you, because it would still still be far preferable in my opinion, if the game was designed in such a way that the most straightforward, most obvious, most intuitive and easiest way to do it was also the most efficient!
If you equate "skill" with "learning to abuse the game" then our opinions differ strongly. My ideal game is one where what separates the newbie from the pro is skilful use of the resources you've been given, not that you spend one hour on every turn doing the computer's job for it.
If there was two interfaces for Civ, one the familiar GUI and another text-based Command Line Interface; which do you believe should give the best results and the most intricate command of your empire.
If you say "the CLI" then, sir, I've lost you. The point of playing Civ isn't punishing yourself with bad interfaces (such as having to look at various secondary screens every other turn), it is to immerse yourself in the gameplay, and make in-game decisions!
It is not undecided. It is still alive, and very annoying, considering that they tried to fix it.
Thats wrong. Just go and start a new game, then set your slider to 70% and play 1 turn. Note carefully how many gold and beakers you have gotten. Now reload and play that same first turn with the slider at 100% or 0%. You see? You have lost one commerce, aprox 10% of your civ output!
It would be so easy! I just cant believe they took the intra-city rounding out but then kept the civ-wide rounding.
obliterate
Warrior Monk
</p>
It gets rounded at the very end meaning you are only set to loose 1 gold or whatever, whereas before it got rounded in every step. Hardly gamebreaking is the new system.
nzcamel
Nahtanoj the Magnificent
As a player who's only just starting to play above Noble now I haven't used any of these stratergies so far. I do agree with Kazapp that having to micro manage is tedious and should be cut out where ever pos. The idea of chucking my research slider up and down every 10 turns or so is a big turn off. Thats not skill. It's just a pain in the ass.
However looking at many screens to glean your info is a skill. I'm not saying that there shouldn't be any more info 'presented' to us on a plate, but alot of it(like the real world) should be in a raw form. Don't take the depth out of the game.
I also agree that while the game can never be made to entirely represent real life, there is a spirit to it... That the makers intended it to reflect reality; and it is this reflection that makes me want to play the game. Hence the idea of keeping a rival civ at war and tied down in their own territory by drawing their stacks into a city that I keep abandoning just to retake does annoy me. It would be a legitamite move if the AI could learn from it... But as long as they can't I hope a fix is made to stop it.
The worker snatch however does reflect reality - slavery. You have to be at war thou to steal a worker and if the AI is too stupid to protect workers when a enemy is close then they're a lost cause. If improving the AI on this one is too hard then maybe the CIV3 slave worker(less efficient) mentioned above maybe the answer.
However looking at many screens to glean your info is a skill. I'm not saying that there shouldn't be any more info 'presented' to us on a plate, but alot of it(like the real world) should be in a raw form. Don't take the depth out of the game.
I also agree that while the game can never be made to entirely represent real life, there is a spirit to it... That the makers intended it to reflect reality; and it is this reflection that makes me want to play the game. Hence the idea of keeping a rival civ at war and tied down in their own territory by drawing their stacks into a city that I keep abandoning just to retake does annoy me. It would be a legitamite move if the AI could learn from it... But as long as they can't I hope a fix is made to stop it.
The worker snatch however does reflect reality - slavery. You have to be at war thou to steal a worker and if the AI is too stupid to protect workers when a enemy is close then they're a lost cause. If improving the AI on this one is too hard then maybe the CIV3 slave worker(less efficient) mentioned above maybe the answer.
Similar threads
