Simplification?

[PieceOfMind]

What is it that's so bad about the civ4 gold/science slider? Is it just because the devs said so?

The only thing I've heard so far is "you usually just run the science slider as high as possible for most of the game anyway". That's not a problem with the slider - it's a problem with how important tech advantages were in the game. At this point it seems apparent that in civ5 a tech advantage will be just as, if not more, important than it was in civ4 so maxing out your science rate will still be an important goal like it was in civ4.

All this condemnation of the slider is sincerely baffling me. Like I said, I think the only reason I'm seeing it is because the "devs said so". How many complaints about the slider can one really find before the news of its removal in civ5? I don't remember ever seeing one. Now all of a sudden it's a common opinion that it's good riddance. I can appreciate that everyone is entitled to their own opinion but I often wonder where people get their ideas - from playing the game or dev announcements.

 

[Thyrwyn]

What's wrong with the slider? It's a trap - that's what's wrong with the slider. It offers the appearance of flexibility and choice, when in reality there is none. An ideal game feature is one in which a novice player sees limited options, but an experienced player sees many. The slider works in exactly the opposite way: the novice player sees choices in increments of 10% - the experienced player sees only two: the most science I can afford or none at all.

This cascades to other facets of the game: in truth, science buildings are more valuable than those that increase gold, since the experienced player will be running max science more often than max gold. This only further compounds the "slider trap".

In essence, the slider offers the appearance of complexity where there is none.

 

[AriochIV]

What is it that's so bad about the civ4 gold/science slider? Is it just because the devs said so?

There's nothing "bad" about it at all. I was initially very surprised to hear that something so central to the core mechanics of the original Civ I was being changed.

But consider, something doesn't have to be a "problem" to be updated in a new version of the game. I hear a lot of the Civ V boosters complain about how terrible stacks of doom are in Civ IV... and I think the case is overstated to a great degree. I still play Civ IV and I very much enjoy the combat system. But that doesn't mean I don't realize that the combat system could be much better, and I'm very excited about the changes in the Civ V tactical combat system.

When you want to overhaul a game system -- and there's no point in doing a new version of Civ if you're not willing to make changes (otherwise we can happily play Civ IV until the end of time), you need to be able to ask yourself whether every mechanic in the game really adds to gameplay value or is just there because we're used to it.

Lead designer Jon Shafer's rationale for the change to the commerce system is as follows:

A big change that veterans will notice is that the age-old "slider," which required players to choose between focusing either on scientific research or on producing wealth--or some kind of middle ground between the two--has been eliminated. Gold and science have been completely split up and come from different sources now. We just didn't feel that the slider was adding a whole lot to the experience in Civ V. In previous games, the objective was nearly always to run with as much science as one could afford, making the occasional change to upgrade units or trade for a tech or something. The new system requires less turn-to-turn management and better rewards long-term planning. Most science now comes from your population, though specialist populations and unique tile improvements also contribute.

He also explains that gold has many more uses in Civ V, and running constantly with minimal gold reserves as we did in Civ IV doesn't fit the new style of play.

Now, you can decide for yourself whether that makes sense to you or not. For me, it makes sense. And that has nothing to do with being "because the devs said so."

 

[PieceOfMind]

Yes but developers are often reluctant to mention any drawbacks to their new systems. For example he talks about there now being less turn to turn micromanagement (honestly, turn to turn adjustments of the slider did not exactly occupy much player time!) and he then goes on to say there are tile improvements and specialists that also contribute. The fact that a player can long-term plan things is missing the point. A good human player is one who can adapt quickly to new situations. For example in civ4 it may have meant that if you were surprise attacked you turned down the science rate if you were researching a non critical tech and put more gold in to upgrading your units. What will you do in civ5? Get all your workers to start changing the beaker-producing improvements to hammer or gold improvements, and turn all your science specialists into something else? That's not something that can be done with 1 click like with the slider. If the only way to make long-term planning more important is by making it more difficult or more tedious to adapt to rapidly changing circumstances then I don't agree with that piece of game design.

I'll say again I don't really wish to complain about the new way of doing things in civ5, especially before I even have a chance to try them, but I believe the slider itself is a fairly elegant game feature and the complaints about it all seem retroactive.

****************

Thyrwyn, yes I can agree with you that the slider is to some extent a trap. Especially in the first couple of years of civ4 there were many argument threads about the implications of the slider and how to best use it in managing the economy (I know because I got involved in them and learned the errors of my ways). It's possible it gives a false sense of the economy being simple to manage. But I view it more as a useful tool for players who know what they're doing. Yes there were complications like multiplier buildings having unequal benefit because of the slider being to one side for most of the game, but complications like this are nearly unavoidable IMO. We have to expect that there will be similar micromanagement "optimisations" or considerations like this in civ5.

IMO a feature should not be scrapped just because it doesn't do everything that the newer players want or believe it to do. And on that point, for newer players the slider was not really that big a trap. It still did mostly what they needed it to. New player issues were usually more along the lines of not building enough commerce improvements like cottages and failing to grasp the new exponential nature of rising city upkeep costs. I think just about every single person who played civ4 had a game where they over expanded and crashed their economy!

For newer players who were playing the game mostly to have fun (as opposed to for a challenge) they could have a reasonable expectation of winning most of the games they started. With that in mind, players did usually have a freedom to use the slider how they wanted. The "trap" bit only came into play when they wanted to move up the difficulty levels. As far as traps go, it's not unusual for some strategies that work at easy or moderate difficulties to fail hard at the higher difficulty levels. Take for example the mass-religion founding strategy. It was quite popular in the earliest days of civ4 but gradually over the years it dwindled to the point where it's the most criticised strategy. In PIG Mod we've even experimented with ways of making the religious path stronger so it was more viable at higher difficulty levels.

In summary, I think describing the slider as a trap is still taking things too far. It was only a trap insomuch that strategies at Noble did not work very well at higher difficulties.

One more point: The slider would have been a lot better understood if the documentation with the game had been better. The way the slider works is fairly simple really but because it was never explained well (was there much mention in the tutorial? I forget) there were a lot of newbies confused at why their empire at 100% science slider was scientifically inferior to someone else's that was running 70% slider. In BtS you are shown the beaker rate beside the slider - something that should have been in vanilla civ4 from the start! (to lessen confusion)

 

[lietkynes]

In summary, I think describing the slider as a trap is still taking things too far. It was only a trap insomuch that strategies at Noble did not work very well at higher difficulties.

If there was an option "keep research to max" everyone would enable it, and just adjust the slider if you occasionally need money.

 

[Shurdus]

If there was an option "keep research to max" everyone would enable it, and just adjust the slider if you occasionally need money.

Very true.

 

[PieceOfMind]

If there was an option "keep research to max" everyone would enable it, and just adjust the slider if you occasionally need money.

And how does that lead to the conclusion it should be removed? I'm guessing that's what you advocate?

And funnily enough, your suggestion is something I suggested to the BUG Mod team a while back, probably at least a year ago. I suggested a checkbox option that allows you to automatically run the science slider as high as possible while maintaining a positive gold income, along with the option to fix the other sliders at some minimum value. e.g. you might want to fix espionage slider at 10% in addition to the above maximising the science slider.

Problem is it's not all that easy to make, and you don't gain all that much with it anyway. It's pretty easy to press the + or - button a couple of times to adjust it as necessary.

I'll say as I did before: Running the science slider as high as possible was a consequence of technological advancement being the most reliable way to get an advantage over your opposition. It's not something inherently wrong with the slider itself.

 

[lietkynes]

And how does that lead to the conclusion it should be removed? I'm guessing that's what you advocate?

Nah I'm not asking for it to be removed. I'm just saying that it wasn't a feature that brought some amazing complexity, it was almost a no-brainer. I dont care much if they remove it, and I also don't care much if they leave it.

But I don't think it should be taken as an example of Civ5 having less complexity then Civ4, that's all.

 

[Thyrwyn]

It isn't a question of "should the slider be removed". it was "should the slider be included". The slider inherently adds nothing to game play. Civ V is not Civ IV 2.0 - they built it from the ground up. They have replaced the slider with other ways of managing your economies commitment to science/culture/gold. The control is now at the city/citizen/tile improvement level, rather than global. If anything, it could be argued that this is actually more civ-like, in that the city has always been the core management mechanism for civ. Now science, gold, culture, and production are all managed on a city by city basis instead of through a hybrid local/global system.

 

[tom2050]

It's the same stuff, the sliders are just the absolute horrible thing that everyone suddenly hates through all the years of Civ because it was removed in Civ 5. Same thing with stacks, same thing with everything else that has changed.

Suddenly, no sliders means more depth? How would anyone know that with the slim to none info released so far on economy inner workings.

The sole reason anyone agrees and now says the slider is worthless and a horrible thing is because Civ 5 got rid of it. If they didn't get rid of it, everyone would still love the slider. It's just how it is.

I find it strange that whatever Firaxis does a bit differently for 5, suddenly 'All other ways are shallow and the Wrong Way' mentality rears its head.

And it is correct that there have been no complaints in the past over sliders, they only Suddenly Surface now that it is known Civ 5 doesn't have them. Wow, just wow.

---

And yes, no slider is a form of simplification and the continued move to macromanagement. To deny this fact, is like an alcoholic saying hes not an alcoholic.

 

[Thyrwyn]

And yes, no slider is a form of simplification and the continued move to macromanagement. To deny this fact, is like an alcoholic saying hes not an alcoholic.

.....Uhm, the slider is the epitome of macro-management: it allows you to change the priorities of your entire empire with one click of the mouse.

Just sayin'.

 

[PieceOfMind]

It isn't a question of "should the slider be removed". it was "should the slider be included". The slider inherently adds nothing to game play.

Yes! Exactly!

It adds nothing nor takes anything from the core gameplay. It is a tool that is part of the interface. It gives the player the ability to quickly adjust his/her economy. It is however special to the type of economy used in civ4. It requires that there be a neutral commerce type that can be collected and converted into more specific types. If the neutral commerce type is gone in civ5 which it sounds like is true, then it's quite obvious there is no longer a need for a slider - I can agree with you on that.

Civ V is not Civ IV 2.0 - they built it from the ground up. They have replaced the slider with other ways of managing your economies commitment to science/culture/gold.

This is where IMO it's necessary to be careful with choice of words. We're not replacing the slider with anything. We're replacing the economy that had a neutral commerce type with one that doesn't and as a result the slider is no longer necessary.

Perhaps it would be better to describe the slider economy being replaced. I think I once argued in the CE/SE terminology debate (you know, the terms that TheMeInTeam tried to eradicate from the forum) that a CE or commerce economy can sort of be described as a slider-based economy while a specialist economy is an example of a slider-independent economy.

civ5 will have such a slider-independent economy, for obvious reasons.

The control is now at the city/citizen/tile improvement level, rather than global. If anything, it could be argued that this is actually more civ-like, in that the city has always been the core management mechanism for civ. Now science, gold, culture, and production are all managed on a city by city basis instead of through a hybrid local/global system.

Yes and all of this is making things sound more micro-'managey'. I am wondering how they are countering this possibility.

And yes, no slider is a form of simplification and the continued move to macromanagement. To deny this fact, is like an alcoholic saying hes not an alcoholic.

.....Uhm, the slider is the epitome of macro-management: it allows you to change the priorities of your entire empire with one click of the mouse.

Just sayin'.

Agreed. I suspect tom2050 meant micromanagement but I dont' want to put words in his mouth.

 

[tom2050]

And yes, no slider is a form of simplification and the continued move to macromanagement. To deny this fact, is like an alcoholic saying hes not an alcoholic.

.....Uhm, the slider is the epitome of macro-management: it allows you to change the priorities of your entire empire with one click of the mouse.

Just sayin'.

Agreed. I suspect tom2050 meant micromanagement but I dont' want to put words in his mouth.

Well, I suppose it could be looked at in 2 different ways. Sure, the slider was macro of all the other micro (of each city).

So either:
1. Removing the macro slider, could make the game more macro-based beyond the epitome of macro-management. This is if there is another mechanism to use to avoid using city management to fine-tune.
2. Or by removing the epitome of macro, it could make the game become a micromanagement nightmare, if you have to zoom to each of your 5 cities lol and change a couple citizens jobs, or adjust at the city level.

We don't know yet though. I am suspecting Option #1, that the ultimate of macro was removed to make the ultiMacro a MegaMacro of a game, and that no fine-tuning will be needed at city level.

Because the sliders could still be viewed as Micromanaging the MacroEconomy of the game.

 

[12agnar0k]

The reason why the slider is gone because it was just a means of putting all your gold into science, because gold wasn't worth a damn. Now because the slider is gone, gold has straight away become more important as its not simply a "means to get more science", now it has many purposes right from the start, such as rushing production, increased diplomacy options, gifting to city states, and so on. If the slider was left in the game, then the importance of gold production in civ5 would be right out the window again as it would simply be a means to get more science.

The seperation of gold & science is a good move, it makes each important in its own right and not simply having gold secondary to science in your concerns. Now if you choose to go with trading posts to generate gold you will do so not to "get science and ocasionally get some gold when its needed" but purely for the generation of gold, if you don't want gold then you will build a different improvement, as it should be.

 

[AlpsStranger]

What is it that's so bad about the civ4 gold/science slider? Is it just because the devs said so?

For my part, it's real simple. I hadn't thought about how nice removing the slider might be until they mentioned removing it. It just hadn't occurred to me. *After* hearing that they removed it I agreed with the idea of removing it.

Had some random fan suggested it I may have agreed with it as well, but I obviously can't prove that would be the case.

And yes, I do take the Dev's suggestions/ideas more seriously than John Q. Forum's ideas So if you want to accuse me of that... I confess.

 

[AlpsStranger]

It's the same stuff, the sliders are just the absolute horrible thing that everyone suddenly hates through all the years of Civ because it was removed in Civ 5. Same thing with stacks, same thing with everything else that has changed.

Suddenly, no sliders means more depth? How would anyone know that with the slim to none info released so far on economy inner workings.

The sole reason anyone agrees and now says the slider is worthless and a horrible thing is because Civ 5 got rid of it. If they didn't get rid of it, everyone would still love the slider. It's just how it is.

I find it strange that whatever Firaxis does a bit differently for 5, suddenly 'All other ways are shallow and the Wrong Way' mentality rears its head.

And it is correct that there have been no complaints in the past over sliders, they only Suddenly Surface now that it is known Civ 5 doesn't have them. Wow, just wow.

---

And yes, no slider is a form of simplification and the continued move to macromanagement. To deny this fact, is like an alcoholic saying hes not an alcoholic.

You have a point, but you know what? I'd rather listen to everyone talk about how much they are anticipating Civ5, even if occasionally blindly, than listen to everyone wail and gnash their teeth. If both sides are going to act foolish, and both sides are to one extent or another, I prefer listening to the blindly optimistic side.

Life is simply too short to listen to the doom and gloom side for more than a couple of minutes. It is, after all, just a game. If it becomes a source of misery, move on.

 

[Earthling]

I can't really complain about them removing all the Civ4 poorly implemented features like gold/science slider

Yeah, I've never really seen this criticized much before either, it's baffling where it comes from. Just about the only problem was that gold was not as useful as it could be throughout the whole game in civ4, but that's already easily solved by various features related to military, events, and more in various mods, and could and should have been done. The slider was still incredibly elegant.

An ideal game feature is one in which a novice player sees limited options, but an experienced player sees many

This isn't true at all. The "novice" view here is the people who apparently only ever put it on science and let it auto-adjust if they lose money. Experienced players will use the slider expertly for cultural games, or espionage, and even in an average game, make use of payrushing when reasonable.

it has many purposes right from the start, such as rushing production, increased diplomacy options, gifting to city states, and so on. If the slider was left in the game, then the importance of gold production in civ5 would be right out the window again

See, this really doesn't follow logically. Putting a slider back would not mean they would have to remove the other uses of gold. I agree civ4 needed more uses for gold, but it had nothing to do with the slider. For that matter, just as something to need, the AI would routinely use many different parts of the slider, they loved to accrue gold and espionage too.

The sole reason anyone agrees and now says the slider is worthless and a horrible thing is because Civ 5 got rid of it. If they didn't get rid of it, everyone would still love the slider. It's just how it is.

But hey, heavies really, really need a buff. Perhaps some sort of additional spy defense, and a helmet to defend against snipers.

 

[Ahriman]

The only thing that worries me about the slider is the possibility of an economic death-spiral.

In Civ4, if you had negative gold income, your treasury depleted, and then when it hit zero you could just turn the slider down and lose some science.
It was very hard to get into actual bankruptcy, because you had this huge buffer of all your science spending.

In Civ5, the only buffer is your treasury (assets sitting there not doing anything), so it could be much easier to suffer economic disruption that pushes you into bankruptcy.

 

[tom2050]

You have a point, but you know what? I'd rather listen to everyone talk about how much they are anticipating Civ5, even if occasionally blindly, than listen to everyone wail and gnash their teeth. If both sides are going to act foolish, and both sides are to one extent or another, I prefer listening to the blindly optimistic side.

Life is simply too short to listen to the doom and gloom side for more than a couple of minutes. It is, after all, just a game. If it becomes a source of misery, move on.

Then move on... I'm sick of listening to people constantly say how much Civ 2, 3 and 4 just suck and how horrible they are, because now that Civ 5 is doing something 'this way', it is the right way and 2, 3, and 4 are horrible and wrong.

That is where the misery comes in. It's almost like they need something to blame, it is very strange indeed. CivFanatics should have some respect for the past classic games because they are what built up to the current 5 iteration. Instead, it's continual trashing them just because it's not Civ 5. This is done by the Fellowship of the Civ Horribles Squad.

The reason why the slider is gone because it was just a means of putting all your gold into science, because gold wasn't worth a damn. Now because the slider is gone, gold has straight away become more important as its not simply a "means to get more science", now it has many purposes right from the start, such as rushing production, increased diplomacy options, gifting to city states, and so on. If the slider was left in the game, then the importance of gold production in civ5 would be right out the window again as it would simply be a means to get more science.

The seperation of gold & science is a good move, it makes each important in its own right and not simply having gold secondary to science in your concerns. Now if you choose to go with trading posts to generate gold you will do so not to "get science and ocasionally get some gold when its needed" but purely for the generation of gold, if you don't want gold then you will build a different improvement, as it should be.

You mean Firaxis said that is why the slider is gone?

So economic control and fine-tuning of your empire is stupid and not worth a damn?

So from what you are saying; with no slider, gold is important because:
1. rushing units/production (could be done with slider)
2. increased diplomacy??? really, because there is no slider?
*** Exactly what diplo options would have to be nerfed if they put a slider back in (it's not treaties, that's for sure).
3. gifting to city states (could be done with slider)
4. and so on (could be done with slider)

Well, so now you are always stuck at w/e research rate you are stuck at. If you need more gold, tough. If you want more science, tough. If you need more happiness, tough. You can't have it, because no slider means more linear, streamlined, uber-macro management because even the macro slider is too micro for Firaxis apparently.

The same existed before, you build improvements to generate more of science or wealth, etc... It does nothing else, but increase your micromanagement of your cities by possibly making you have to tweak each citizen (if you can).

Otherwise, it just eliminates your ability to control the overall of your empire. I'm not a slider-junkie, but there needs to be some way to control output. I guess output is just always split between economy and research in some way, or if it is completely seperate, then cities produce gold and research points.

Sounds like more micromanagement to me.

 

[bjbrains]

Then move on... I'm sick of listening to people constantly say how much Civ 2, 3 and 4 just suck and how horrible they are, because now that Civ 5 is doing something 'this way', it is the right way and 2, 3, and 4 are horrible and wrong.

That is where the misery comes in. It's almost like they need something to blame, it is very strange indeed. CivFanatics should have some respect for the past classic games because they are what built up to the current 5 iteration. Instead, it's continual trashing them just because it's not Civ 5. This is done by the Fellowship of the Civ Horribles Squad.

Stop that. That's rude, and does not reflect what people are saying. People are saying that some mechanics in Civ 4 were not optimal/weren't as good as they could have been. There's no need to respond with hostility to that.

You mean Firaxis said that is why the slider is gone?

So economic control and fine-tuning of your empire is stupid and not worth a damn?

So from what you are saying; with no slider, gold is important because:
1. rushing units/production (could be done with slider)
2. increased diplomacy??? really, because there is no slider?
*** Exactly what diplo options would have to be nerfed if they put a slider back in (it's not treaties, that's for sure).
3. gifting to city states (could be done with slider)
4. and so on (could be done with slider)

Well, so now you are always stuck at w/e research rate you are stuck at. If you need more gold, tough. If you want more science, tough. If you need more happiness, tough. You can't have it, because no slider means more linear, streamlined, uber-macro management because even the macro slider is too micro for Firaxis apparently.

The same existed before, you build improvements to generate more of science or wealth, etc... It does nothing else, but increase your micromanagement of your cities by possibly making you have to tweak each citizen (if you can).

Otherwise, it just eliminates your ability to control the overall of your empire. I'm not a slider-junkie, but there needs to be some way to control output. I guess output is just always split between economy and research in some way, or if it is completely seperate, then cities produce gold and research points.

Sounds like more micromanagement to me.

What he's saying is that now that you cannot easily convert potential science to gold (and vice versa), along with the increased importance of gold (For unit/road upkeep, rushbuying from the start, city-state relations, and tile 'rushexpanding'), you now have make more decisions about your cities. You still have control over those incomes, but, unlike civ 4, you have to work to produce each one separately. Gold was pretty much irrelevant in Civ 4 beyond niche uses (late game rushbuying mainly), and city upkeep was just subtracted from your research (effectively). You get to control your output based on how you develop your cities, the same way you did in civ 4 with GP farms, Production cities, and commerce cities. Now you actually have to make decisions about gold and science instead of just running the slider.