ATTN Firaxis: Worker tedium solution - change the way orders are given!

[The Rusty Gamer]

The major issue with workers is the tedium that it produces, particuarly in the later stages of the game. Perhaps the answer lies in the way orders are issued.

Instead of giving specific orders for each worker, how about being able to give general orders similar to the CTP public works interface, except it isn't public works, you are simply giving general orders to all your workers that they will fufill as the workers are available. For instance, you place orders that a road needs to be built here, an irrigation there etc. One worker then sets off to build the road, another (if you have one) to do the irrigation etc. Therefore, effectively the game works exactly as it did before, it's just the way you give orders that has changed. I believe this easier way of giving orders, this slight alteration to the interface, would relieve the game tedium somewhat.

[Skanky Burns]

If Firaxis were just starting the design stage of Civ 3, then I would say yes, definately.

However, the amount of effort needed to change the game, the way workers work, the AI commands regarding workers, etc... Basically it would take way too much effort / time / money to change this now.

[WarpStorm]

I mostly use the automation features (pollution detail, railroad to, irrigate to, clear jungle, improve this city) for my workers as it is now. I usually only have a handful of workers on manual to deal with those special projects and to undo the occasional mistake the automated workers do. Very little tedium on my part due to workers.

Now, if only Firaxis would implement stack attacks and bombards that would relieve some late game tedium.

[Harovan]

I do the main tile improving in the medieval age. As soon as I have steam power and a hand-built linear RR network, I Shift-A all my workers, thus letting them make the railroad sleaze and pollution cleaning. As soon as the railroads are done, I disband my native workers and let the pollution cleaning be made by foreign workers only. Since all actions are automated in the late game, no worker tedium for me.

Your idea is cool tho, but I doubt that it will be implemented. Firaxis has more important things to do.

[SpencerH]

Once I'm past the early empire stage (1AD) I shift-A all but one or two of my workers. Sometimes you have to be fast to catch em if you want something specific done but micromanaging them for 2000 yrs is way too dull.

[Zachriel]

Originally posted by Sir Ralph
I do the main tile improving in the medieval age. As soon as I have steam power and a hand-built linear RR network, I Shift-A all my workers, thus letting them make the railroad sleaze and pollution cleaning. As soon as the railroads are done, I disband my native workers and let the pollution cleaning be made by foreign workers only. Since all actions are automated in the late game, no worker tedium for me.

Your idea is cool tho, but I doubt that it will be implemented. Firaxis has more important things to do.

Yes, that is my method too, with these modifications. Once the workers have "caught up," that is, once they are working unused tiles, then I start shift-A, as the matter comes up. This usually happens in my games in the ancient age actually. When steam power is deveoped, I increase my worker count and manually command that the cities be connected (ctrl-shift-R). Once that is done, back to shift-A.

I rarely disband workers, but usually join them to smaller towns. With this method you can take a small town and build it into a thriving metropolis in very short order. Of course, you have to have sufficient cashflow to build the improvements as needed, though, as in this example, FORBIDDEN PALACE (without a Great Leader for Rushing):



http://www.crowncity.net/civ3/ForbiddenPalace.htm

[Harovan]

Originally posted by Zachriel
I rarely disband workers, but usually join them to smaller towns.

I'm doing the same, just didn't write it very well. My bad.

[DeanToth]

yes, tedious is right. I feel Call to Power made a big improvement on Civ2 (and 3) with the Public Works method of tile improvement.

Firaxis just wanted to be as anti-Call to Power as possible instead of using some of the good ideas it had.... I am back to playing CTP with apolyton mods

Lack of Stacking armies is just plain inexcusable.

[kmill25]

I automate all workers either shift-a or shift-i, except for my royal engineer force who I use for special projects. There is no real tedium involved for me.

[asleepathewheel]

Originally posted by DeanToth
Firaxis just wanted to be as anti-Call to Power as possible instead of using some of the good ideas it had.... I am back to playing CTP with apolyton mods

When you mean "anti-call to power" are you referring to the fact that they actually patch and support the game after its released?

Why would Firaxis be threatend by Call to Power(2)? It sold what, 1000 copies? Wow, thats a hefty chunk of market share.

your public works arguments are old and tired.

[Fitz]

Terrible idea unless you have absolute control over prioritization.

For example, will the workers go to the nearest project, use the order of assignment? Will they all group up to deal with the project in one go, or will they distribute themselves evenly amongst projects available?

If this was implemented, I would need to see at least two axis of options:

1) Project priority:
[ ] Assigned in order placed
[ ] None
[ ] Manually assigned to each project (1 - 10)

2) Worker distribution:
[ ] Move to nearest (ignore priority)
[ ] Move to nearest (highest priority first)
[ ] Move to project with least workers (ignore priority)
[ ] Move to project with least workers (highest priority first)
[ ] Move to highest priority available if within [free text field] squares, else move to nearest.
[ ] Move to project with least workers within [free text field] squares. (highest priority first)

Note that taking either of the "ignore priority" worker distributions would default the project priority box to "none".

Taking the first two "highest priority first" options would group all workers together on a single project if the Assigned in order prioritization was chosen, or distribute equally amongst those you designate as equal in the choose your own version.

The move to highest, else nearest basically lets you say I want them to move to the highest priority on the map if it is within X squares, or else just go to the nearest one (regardless of priority).

The move to highest with X squares works the same as the first two highest priority system, but limits grouping somewhat. Obviously, if you chose this option, there would have to be some default response when there are 0 projects within X squares.


Basically, what you are proposing is very limited control over how the workers move and order their projects. Guess what, some of us like that kind of control. And when it starts to get too out of control (which it does earlier for some that others), there are a plethora of stack movement and automation options available, most of which actually work now, to chose from.

[The Rusty Gamer]

Fitz,

A new Labour Advisor screen could be created with these various options you mentioned and sliders. It's possible that some workers would no longer be seen physically on the map (thus saving some RAM and processing speed?) and would become part of a pool (much like caravans in CTP2) but each worker built would increase the pool (or labour power) which would effect how quickly orders are fufilled. Thus worker manipulation would become more MACROmanagement than MICROmanagement.

A slider could be used on this new screen to specify how many go into the pool and how many are manual, that is, the manual workers would be seen on the map and given individual orders as now so you could make it 100% manual if you want to play it as now.

After placing the general orders (placing tiles) on the map, right-clicking on placed tile could be used to set priority or cancel the order (so far as I know you can't cancel public works that have been placed in CTP2).

Also, on this new advisor screen, you could set the defaults for future workers built.

[Inverse Icarus]

i wouldn't use it, but i see where this would come in ahndy for some people.

to set a slider to do soemthing like (50% roads/rails 30% irrigate %20 mine 0% pollution 0% deforest 0% reforest), and then have your workers work automatically based on that. would be nice for AI programming too (firaxis could improve the AI [oh dear god, where does it need improvement]). they could make it so the AI actually sets a goal (shields or food) rather then their checkerboard pattern of irrigation / mines.

[dawidge]

In the immortal words of The Critic,

It Stinks!

Why not just make the automated settlers work smarter.
Prioritize squares that are being used. Prioritize linking cities together with roads/rails before trying to build up an entire
city area. Maybe even give us some kind of global worker automation options like SMAC had, but expand it to allow our own prioritization. Your suggestion still involves too much micromanagement of the workers, only it shift the micromanagement to the sectors and away from the workers.

Heck, I'd be happy of the would just give me another option when I click on a worker to "Wait for orders after completing whatever I'm working on" instead of forcing me to a) throw away 15 turns of deforestation or b) Hope I get the opportunity (and remember) to click on the little mofo before he scuttles off to work on something else when the next turn rolls around (unless that's in 1.21f, I installed it, but haven't had the chance to run it, yet).

[Inverse Icarus]

Originally posted by dawidge


Why not just make the automated settlers work smarter.

firaxis has proven that they can't make a smart AI. we're trying to help them out.

[asleepathewheel]

Originally posted by UberKruX


firaxis has proven that they can't make a smart AI. we're trying to help them out.

maybe you should send them your resume, if you think you can help them build a better AI?

curious, but what game similar (or dissimilar) to Civ3 have you played where the AI is as good or better? I would like to know the measuring stick against which you judge civ3.

[Kilroy_Alpha]

Originally posted by UberKruX


firaxis has proven that they can't make a smart AI. we're trying to help them out.

SHUT UP.

[Skanky Burns]

Firaxis has made the single best AI* in a turn-based game that I have ever seen.




* That doesn't require "Deep Blue" to be able to number-crunch.

[Atahualpa]

While I agree that the AI is quite okay, it does make quite stupid descisions.

The good thing it tends to always search for my weak spots and attacks them. The bad thing is that I know it always goes for my weak spots.

For example the japanese built up a navy and navigate on the water all to the southest point of my island (I held the south and he held the north) and landed there with some troops. But he was so stupid to move inside my borders so I could see what he was up to and wasnt very surprised. Now if he would have navigated 2 tiles away from my border (outside my vision zone) I would have been much more surprised and he would have had more success. Good Tactic coped with bad execution.
The tactic was good because I would then have to divide my forces to fight the main border on the north and to recapture the city(ies) to the south. But well since he was so stupid to move within my visibility...


Soren, I think there is some work for you!

[wrylachlan]

To cut down on the tedium of the late game how about just the ability to toggle workers who are automated visible/invisible. If you have all of them on Shift-A you're not micromanaging. You don't need to see what the hell they are doing. I'm sure there is some overhead to recentering the screen every time a worker finishes a project and moves. If they were toggled invisible you could do away with all the screen recenters.

[dawidge]

I haven't gotten far enough in my 1.21 game to find out for myself, but have they fixed the problem of automated workers trying to cross through "at peace", non-ROP AI territory to reach an unconnected part of your empire? I really hate taking the diplo hit for my automated workers doing something stupid.

[chiefpaco]

Not a bad idea. However, I usually think of it a different way. I'm happy with the automation if I can set up with a "workers rules" page. In it, the dialog would show each terrain & what I want done with it when workers are automated.

For instance, I want my grasslands mined, deserts & plains irrigated, etc. Of course, I can still use workers to manually override it, but that would be the general rule.

Right now, I don't use automation until all my cities have sufficient improvements like I want. Then, I use the (Shift)-Improve City automatically command cause I don't care how the last improvements go.

My problem with the current automation is I feel the workers irrigate grasslands too much for my style. Of grasslands, I like at least 66% of them mined.

Of course, my theory has problems too. First, I don't think everyone looks at making improvements this way (set rules for each tile). Second, it might be tricky when cities don't have access to water, or have to work it across - then, what do the workers do?

The 3rd dialog should be made available under the city governors screen to show the workers prefs. Then, the user can set it for each city, for each city on the continent, or all cities.

[The Rusty Gamer]

A simple improvement to automatic workers as the game currently stands would be to prioritise squares that citizens are currently actually getting resources from as per the city management screens. I don't think it does this at the moment, it just improves whatever squares willynilly.

[exeter0]

... or maybe just a task queue would help.

I guess it would be implemented via a waypoint mechanism. At each way point you can click on the appropriate construction/clear function you want to perform.

[Grrr]

Anything could make this problem better .