There just shouldn't be worker units.

Discussion in 'Civ5 - General Discussions' started by Some guy, Oct 17, 2010.

  1. Some guy

    Some guy Warlord

    Joined:
    May 26, 2008
    Messages:
    213
    One thing I liked in CivRev was that you could purchase roads to connect to other cities.

    I'm not saying there shouldn't be improvements, but I think it would be better if you could build improvements on tiles from the city screen.

    It already does this if the improvements are pillaged, so I think it would be better if you could just utilize your population to temporarily construct improvements.
     
  2. pagh80

    pagh80 Warlord

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2001
    Messages:
    276
    Location:
    Denmark
    Call to Power had a nice system also. It offered something similar to gold. With that you could buy improvements.
     
  3. Chassit

    Chassit Chieftain

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2010
    Messages:
    18
    I miss the old days where you'd build your settler, have him build a road to the place the next city would be and then plant the city, pre attached.
     
  4. Stefanskantine

    Stefanskantine Angry Partisan

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2003
    Messages:
    242
    Location:
    Busan, ROK
    I support this. CTP had the best system, you set a Public Works tax on production with which you could buy infrastructure. Infrastructure should be abstracted, its not fun to bother moving around workers imo.
     
  5. Stoney the I

    Stoney the I Prince

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2008
    Messages:
    531
    Location:
    Netherlands
    I can highly recommend you play the old civs again! I played a game of 1-4 before the release of Civ5 to get into the spirit of it again :)

    I for one like where a road on a tile gave more commerce there. more roads = better. It is now the other way around. you need as little road as possible.

    So on topic: I agree. workers end up automated once much of the groundwork is there anyway. In another thread it was mentioned it is (for a large portion) the workers that slow the late game down. I think with the civ5 culture system (1tile per culture pop) it should be easily implemented to simply buy the improvement on those tiles, and automating it on a percentage of yr income in late game. (or simply like : spend x gold/turn on improvements as an option)
     
  6. poncratias

    poncratias Prince

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2010
    Messages:
    336
    and maybe a first-person-view-mode too?
     
  7. DaveGold

    DaveGold Emperor

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2009
    Messages:
    1,058
    I agree. You should be able to give instructions on how your land will be worked and let some invisible process carry it out. This could be still by workers just let the player produce them, let the automation move the workers around, and keep them out of sight. It would be less efficient but the game play would be better for everyone.
     
  8. jjkrause84

    jjkrause84 King

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2010
    Messages:
    959
    Location:
    UK
    You have to be joking.....

    That always drove me NUTS!

    Athough I do miss the 'slaves' from Civ3.....
     
  9. Doctor Phibes

    Doctor Phibes Prince

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2010
    Messages:
    486
    Location:
    London
    I second OP and pagh80. Workers are well past their sell-by date. The micromanagement was bad enough in Civ4, but they could get by if automated (and only improve the nearest city. They did it badly, but at least they didn't run amok). Now you shouldn't dare to automate them, plus they block up the roads for each other and other civilian units and cost you a fortune in maintenance.

    The only reason, I think, that CTP's Public Works system hasn't been introduced by Firaxis - and it would be cool to have had it in Civ4 - is NIH ('Not Invented Here'). A charge usually levelled at NASA - but hey, Firaxis ain't NASA...
     
  10. HanWuDi

    HanWuDi Chieftain

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2009
    Messages:
    56
    Buying improvements is one option, but I like the OP's suggestion for tiles to be improved by your city's population. My thought is that using a tile would slowly improve it. It'd be more realistic too: land is usually brought under cultivation by the people who will cultivate it in the long run. At a certain stage, I suppose, you'd have to give an order for a tile to develop down a food/produce/commerce track, but since we already do that with workers anyway...
     
  11. Thormodr

    Thormodr Servant of Civ Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2005
    Messages:
    4,913
    Location:
    Vancouver, Canada
    PW (Public Works) actually worked very well in the Call to Power series. :)
     
  12. cf_nz

    cf_nz Prince

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2006
    Messages:
    414
    Location:
    New Zealand
    I wasn't totally a fan of this largely because I felt it took control away from me as the player, roads weren't always put in the 'right' place. I think you would need to specify exactly where the road went (tile by tile) rather than having the game pick the route for you.
     
  13. Qoojo

    Qoojo Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2010
    Messages:
    11
    When I took a worker off automation in my last game, I swear there was an option to build a road to a specific city. I don't mind workers. I typical create a few and then automate them all the time, then occasionally pick one out to do something specific.
     
  14. PawelS

    PawelS Ancient Druid

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2003
    Messages:
    2,803
    Location:
    Poland
    I like managing Workers, and I never automate them. Checking which cities need improvements and building them is one of the things that make the game fun for me. And I like the fact that they don't stack - there should be a minimum time to build an improvement, massing Workers to build it faster seems "cheesy" to me.
     
  15. Doctor Phibes

    Doctor Phibes Prince

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2010
    Messages:
    486
    Location:
    London
    As long as they just keep on building trading posts ad nauseam, then automation's a fine thing. But they will eventually get bored and gift you a lovely road network, I'm afraid...
     
  16. Lightzy

    Lightzy Warlord

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2005
    Messages:
    274
    Location:
    Israel
    I don't think it would be wise in CIV5 to put even MORE ephasis on gold generation as opposed to tactical/strategic decisions.

    At least workers force you to actually watch and defend them, and allow you to take risks too.
     
  17. zonk

    zonk Prince

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2005
    Messages:
    572
    Might as well.

    Might as well just make food a global progress bar, too.

    Maybe in VI they'll find a way to get rid of cities entirely.
     
  18. afa2000

    afa2000 Time to die

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2007
    Messages:
    339
    Location:
    Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
    I second that.
     
  19. gilmore606

    gilmore606 Warlord

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2010
    Messages:
    193
    I agree, workers are just pointless micro. For that matter why even have tile improvements? Just make mines/farms city buildings that up your food/hammer output.
     
  20. KrikkitTwo

    KrikkitTwo Immortal

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2004
    Messages:
    12,413
    I'd really like that to happen. The only difficulty would be tiles+improvements outside city radius (access to resources, roads, forts) all those could be covered by direct gold payments.
     

Share This Page