So much... micro-managing.....

[Zyxpsilon]

Unfortunately, they're buried under mundane, repetitive actions like using 34590834705897 keystrokes to queue up units in 5 cities instead of very few thanks to hotkeys, having units get their preset movement paths interrupted by nonsense, being unable to waypoint, being unable to loop, having to click on tiny boxes instead of using hotkeys, etc etc etc.

I can only fathom how incredibly busy we would become if Strategic Resources weren't preqs to most Units.
Exponential clicks to deploy any reasonably sized armadas. Yup, i've got me some Aluminum... but wood should also be necessary for Caravels & Catapults, etc.

Or am i (again) shooting fire_arrows to the proverbial stone walls of heavenly sweet restrictions for an otherwise worst turns lagging nightmare?

 

[TheMeInTeam]

Listen... I have no intention of disagreeing with the Great and Powerful TMIT...

And you're right when it comes to the UI... the lack of hotkeys is a dismal fail on the devs part.... but I would *think* that's fixable either by the devs or by modders (or has it already been modded?)....

Now my experience only goes back as far as cIV vanilla, but I've played tons of pre-ciV mods as well, and I don't remember pathfinder EVER being any good. It was far less noticable with SODs.... but pathfinder has always liked to leave a unit on a good defensible tile right next to an enemy unit rather than finishing on a less defensible tile but OUTSIDE THE ENEMY'S REACH!! You would think that math is simple.... chances of death on forested hill - 30%... chance of death on plains out of enemy's reach - 0%

Which all leads me to believe that someone thinks that a realistic pathfinder may be too:

- code-intensive
- processor-intensive
- some other resource-intensive

and 1upt seems to exacerbate that reality...

the processor has to calculate which hexes will be used, which units may interfere with movement (friendly or otherwise), the terrain for both move costs and finishing hex (def. value)....

then it has to do this for dozens of other units and all at different times during the turn... and then all these calculations that are being conducted individually have to mesh up with each other in the grand scheme... and even then units just freezing in place doesn't seem THAT common to me (except for the auto-garrison problem)....

It just seems that if it's so easy to design a good pathfinder... then why has noone done it yet?

That being said.... in all I am as annoyed as anyone by the clickfest that is the overriding theme of the UI... but it's unit movement that I have no troubles with, and am frankly lost that so many people do.... maybe I just don't build as many units as everyone else

We don't have any disagreements within this post. Pathfinding is an annoying issue for programming I'm sure, because the situation can suddenly change and it probably involves a lot of processing cycles in a game that ALREADY over-uses them and runs slowly.

When I mentioned preset pathing interrupted by nonsense, I mean the following scenarios:

1. Worker actions are interrupted by enemy units. Enemy units that can't reach them even on the following turn. This means you have to tell that worker to mine that silver mine 5x more than you would otherwise in the early game, because there's a barb that isn't even within attack range. Yes, interrupt the worker if it is threatened. Don't interrupt it if NOTHING can reach it!
2. Units traveling through cities stop in the city, requiring another click to advance. Why? That was ADDED into programming, the unit wouldn't stop unless they made it do so.
3. Units go on ridiculous pathfinding quests if blocked sometimes, rather than the game simply canceling that path and prompting you for a new one. While the latter sounds more micro intensive, it isn't because the former forces you to ALWAYS take extra care with long pathing orders, while the latter only makes it so you have to micro in special circumstances.

When I'm talking about UI, I'm talking about a control scheme that forces the player to do tons of unnecessary actions to do the same thing a good design would allow with fewer actions...but it seems you agree with me on that (especially that hotkeys for everything would be golden and not that hard to implement).

The one thing that really irks me when it comes to unit movement is that you are literally told one thing by the UI then the unit does another. I don't care if the path finding is simple, but WHEN THE PATH IS DISPLAYED, THE UNIT SHOULD EITHER FOLLOW THAT PATH, OR, IF SAID PATH IS INTERRUPTED, STOP AND WAIT FOR NEW ORDERS. It should not haphazardly calculate a new path and execute what is often a suicidal action - the programmers actually put EFFORT into making this aspect of path-finding WORSE.

Then you have issues like taking a trebuchet, and doing a "ranged attack", except instead of attacking it moves sideways. THAT is atrocious garbage. THAT should never happen. THAT is a disgrace to the civ franchise. Whatever is being displayed on the screen as your command is what should actually happen.

Trying to avoid things like that is yet more unnecessary micro.

 

[kaltorak]

Imo the problem is not the ammount of micromanaging, but the effect it has. Civ5 makes it I couldn't care less about all those small little things I need to waste time on, unlike previous civs.

 

[lschnarch]

Then you have issues like taking a trebuchet, and doing a "ranged attack", except instead of attacking it moves sideways. THAT is atrocious garbage. THAT should never happen. THAT is a disgrace to the civ franchise. Whatever is being displayed on the screen as your command is what should actually happen.

Trying to avoid things like that is yet more unnecessary micro.

Talking about siege weapons:
Am I the only one who wonders why I woiuld have to "set up" siege weapons?

The effect is completely the same as having a check about the unit to have at least 2 movement point left, no?
Yet, it once again requires me to click that little symbol, wait a second (for what, in the Lord's holy name, for what?) and then I'm allowed to shoot.

This is manual action for no gain. Bad idea.
Even worse, due to the unavoidable waiting time between setting up and firing, it is in addtion badly implemented.

 

[kaltorak]

Talking about siege weapons:
Am I the only one who wonders why I woiuld have to "set up" siege weapons?

The effect is completely the same as having a check about the unit to have at least 2 movement point left, no?
Yet, it once again requires me to click that little symbol, wait a second (for what, in the Lord's holy name, for what?) and then I'm allowed to shoot.

This is manual action for no gain. Bad idea.
Even worse, due to the unavoidable waiting time between setting up and firing, it is in addtion badly implemented.

I disagree. Needing to set up siege units before shooting makes sense both regarding real life and gameplay balance.

 

[lschnarch]

I disagree. Needing to set up siege units before shooting makes sense both regarding real life and gameplay balance.

It makes sense regarding real life, as would it make sense to have to reload and have a ammunition stock. Nevertheless, we don't have these features incorporated, as they would only add tediousness.

Regarding gameplay balance the check for at least 2 movement points left would fulfill the same purpose, as far as I see it.
The setup serves only the purpose of disallowing to roll into position and fire immediataly. Why this has to be done manually, is beyond me.

For the archer, you don't have to first span the bow either, do you?

Edit: the point is, the setup requires manual user input yet doesn't make for any decision.

 

[LegionSteve]

I disagree. Needing to set up siege units before shooting makes sense both regarding real life and gameplay balance.

I think he meant if you have enough movement points left to set-up and fire, you just select a target and it will set up and fire. If so, then I agree. I would also add that if it ends its turn with movement points left it should automatically set up (specially if it ends in a city and doesn't ask for more orders next turn.. and why is that exactly?).

 

[Olleus]

Talking about siege weapons:
Am I the only one who wonders why I woiuld have to "set up" siege weapons?

The effect is completely the same as having a check about the unit to have at least 2 movement point left, no?
Yet, it once again requires me to click that little symbol, wait a second (for what, in the Lord's holy name, for what?) and then I'm allowed to shoot.

This is manual action for no gain. Bad idea.
Even worse, due to the unavoidable waiting time between setting up and firing, it is in addtion badly implemented.

Wrong.

If Im on a road/railway, I can move my artillery, set up and then fire, even though I technically have 0 movement points left.

 

[southpw11]

we get people on this board moaning theres too much micro

we get people on this board moaning theres too little micro

its a joke.


the point of these games is in the detail, in the micro.

I disagree.

The point of this game is to have fun building a prosperous civilization from cavemen to aircraft carriers. It is not being able to individually control the minuscule aspects of developing that civilization (except combat and unit production). In this game, we are as the supreme leader and as such should focus a vast majority of our attention on overall high level strategy.

IMO an ideal civ game would allow you give each of your workers a queue (or give an entire set of workers a queue). The worker will improve the cities (according to govenors orders) or build roads in the order you say in the queue without building excessive/costly tile improvements or roads. The worker cycles through the queue until all orders are accomplished, then cycles the queue again in the event a city in the queue needs more improvement (more pop) or its purpose has changed (GP farm to production city).

In any event, I think Civ5 has made huge improvements in reducing useless micro. The combat system is a LOT better than it was. I'm glad the ridiculous stacks of doom and microing 100 units late game is over. In Civ4, I never finished a game because late game became such a chore of micromanagement of units.

 

[alpaca]

In any event, I think Civ5 has made huge improvements in reducing useless micro. The combat system is a LOT better than it was. I'm glad the ridiculous stacks of doom and microing 100 units late game is over. In Civ4, I never finished a game because late game became such a chore of micromanagement of units.

Totally disagree. In Civ4 I could set a rallying point for all my cities where they automatically sent units, then I just had to fortify them and when I wanted to attack I alt-click to select my whole stack of doom, then deselect a few garrison units. Now, I have to manually move all of my units every or every second turn because the auto-move along my roads will fail half the time because another unit moved to the target or whatever, and then I have to give each unit an order each turn rather than just giving the whole stack an attack order.

Civ4 had a lot more units on the map but managing them wasn't more tedious than managing the fewer units in Civ5 if you actually used the interface well. Now, I'm not saying I want SoD back but micro in Civ5 is as bad or worse than in Civ4. There are also a lot of other totally annoying micro-management "features": Before the patch we didn't even have beaker overflow. Now, you have to micro culture gain so you don't get your SP a turn before you hit the Renaissance. Citizen automation has become better, though, I grant you that. In Civ4 I never used it, in Civ5 I often partially do so.

 

[eric_]

I wouldn't mind the ability to multiselect units via cursor dragging coupled with the ability to select a tile near which all selected units should congregate.

But, that would only do me any good during an actual war, and even in that case, I'm rarely moving multiple troops long distances. Mostly, I'm positioning them one-by-one in tactically strong positions (and, I love that aspect of war). During peace, I have my units scattered across my empire.

So, all in all, it would be nice, but it's not something that would significantly improve ciV for me.