Who's that Worker?

[peter grimes]

A simple propostion: Non-military units are named for the citizens that make up our great Nation-State. So, rather than worker1, worker2, we can discuss what task to assign Black_Hole and CivGeneral. Nothing complicated, and yet easy to understand. Discuss...

 

[fe3333au]

Like it but but Black_Hole is also a city ... if that is OK then sure after all we are all working hard for the empire and fe3333au will no doubt enjoy cruising around on a curragh getting plenty of sun and sea air

 

[Meleager]

That would be funny...

Black_Hole has killed to make way for our new collony.

 

[fe3333au]

I was thinking about rules concerning the renaming of units specifically to mislead the rivals ...

While we all agree that this is

What about city names ... since The Black Hole has been viewed in the Top Five Cities ... does that mean that it shall be named this forever ???

I would say yes ...

Therefore I hope the administrators would look and ensure that others do not do this, even accidently

 

[Meleager]

I can just imagine... Every turn they check the top 5 cities and they see this city which keeps changing colours...
The Black Hole
The Blue Hole
The Red Hole
and so on.

But yes, I imagine this is definately a concern for the intelligence department.

 

[fe3333au]

Shhhhh What Intelegence Department ?

 

[peter grimes]

I would think that if a name was going to be changed, it would be alright as long as the old name was displayed with the new name:

The Blue Hole (nee Black Hole)

Do that for a couple three turns, then drop the maiden name, and everyone should understand. At least as long as they can 'see' our city names.

 

[Rambuchan]

I'd rather they stayed the same. But!..

It could have good opportunities for foxing the opposition early in the game. If a city is in 5th place, we can rename that and lead them to believe we have more cities than we really do, good ones at that! Is this making sense / within the rules?

 

[fe3333au]

I would say renaming a city that has been viewed in the Top Five F-11 would go against the spirit of the same rules regarding the renaming of units to suggest they are different ... perhaps a Lurking Administrator could clarify

Also - I assume that our Top Five Cities are the same as other teams ... am I correct?

If not then Black Hole has already been renamed ...

EDIT- I would suggest that Peter_Grimes has thought of the obvious solution ... beware the maximum text limit (I used to rename cities to indicate how I procured them and their history of ownership and soon discovered this limit)

 

[Rik Meleet]

Also - I assume that our Top Five Cities are the same as other teams ... am I correct?

If not then Black Hole has already been renamed ...

No you are not correct. I haven't checked it in this game; but I do know that the top-5 list is not identical for all teams.
Imagine an 8 player game. In turn 1 they all settle. In turn 2 player 1 sees 5 cities. A civ who owns a city not on the list will see their city on the list, in their F-11. Same with 2nd cities in a 4 player game. What 2nd city is seen by civs that have no 2nd city themselves varies from civ and turn.
This changes when a 2nd city builds culture.

 

[fe3333au]

Damn thought of just that during the day ... thanks for confirmation ... well we've done it already with name changing ... I suggest we don't change again the names of our cities

 

[peter grimes]

I totally agree. No name changing cities. I might also say, just to be safe and simple (a cue from KISS?) no name changing units.

Adding to a unit's name is not that complicated, though. If a warrior become a veteran, for example?