For example, if I can group planets into different control groups (Control Group 1, 2, 3, etc) and change the production wheel of each GROUP of planets it would save a TREMENDOUS amount of time in micro management. The problem right now with the production wheel is that it's ALL or ONE. So as a result to optimize play I have to change each planet's production wheel separately depending on the planet type.
I'd much rather be able to just change the production wheel for a CUSTOM GROUP of planets and leave the other planets unchanged.
This shouldn't be all that difficult to program in.
Also, not only will it save in micro management, it will also allow YOU and MODDERS to improve AI specialization. Once the concept of "Planet Grouping" is programmed in, you can specify how the AI will build up its worlds allowing the AI to specialize like a human.
THIS IS AN IMPORTANT ISSUE. With planet grouping, not only are you improving the AI but you're also significantly cutting down on micro management, killing two birds with one stone.
You're trying to convince them to do it, right?
Also, it's not an insult if it's merely an observation.
I am not trying to insult you. I am merely making the observation that microing as much as you claim you do while admitting that the AI can be beat without having to micro is a pointless exercise.
Yes, thought that was pretty obvious But as I said they probably don't even read these threads let alone change something based on them. There's not been a lot of evidence in the past that they have that I've heard or can think of.
Which is fine.
And my idea is to keep them this way towards your (not very good) idea.
I believe I am succeeding.
Calling someone a hypocrite and saying they have OCD probably qualifies whether it's true or not.
I am merely making the observation that microing as much as you claim you do while admitting that the AI can be beat without having to micro is a pointless exercise.
I respect and understand your opinion but I disagree with it. If I want to try to win a game as quickly as possible then a bit of extra micro helps even if the AI is terrible. If I wanted to play more casually then I would, generally I don't but that's nothing to do with a debilitating condition.
If the game developers had infinite time, they would create a second system that runs along with the first system. So that way players can choose between systems. Fine by me. Except that I think they have better things to deal with. Every time you colonize a planet you can tell the governor to turn off automatic upgrading.
Well if planet production micro isn't something they care to improve soon, I am going to burn out on this game quickly. Not a threat, just a likelihood. If it's just me, then Stardock shouldn't worry. But even some of the devs say during the stream that planet production micro is pretty intense and want improvements, so I am confident I'm not alone. Not to mention the vocal folks in the forums.
Oh and I have found I need to micro to beat the Gifted AI. I'm not skilled enough to do it with the global wheel.
And yes, I do turn off auto-upgrading every time. That is not relevant to the discussion.
But this is logically inconsistent again. If you are spending so much of your time microing, then how can you claim you're trying to win the game as quickly as possible?
Well if planet production micro isn't something they care to improve soon, I am going to burn out on this game quickly. Not a threat, just a likelihood. If it's just me, then Stardock shouldn't worry. But even some of the devs say during the stream that planet production micro is pretty intense and want improvements, so I am confident I'm not alone. Not to mention the vocal folks in the forums.Oh and I have found I need to micro to beat the Gifted AI. I'm not skilled enough to do it with the global wheel.And yes, I do turn off auto-upgrading every time. That is not relevant to the discussion.
They should add control groups for planets so you don't have to micro each planet individually.
In game turns, not actual minutes and hours.
Absolutely agree, and I would probably be up at the 9 or 10 mark. It is not uncommon for me to spend upwards of 45 minutes PER TURN in the mid-late civ4 game. What I basically don't want (and have seen it much too often) is for the vocal people on forums to have something changed to the point that it is so dumbed down there isn't any point in even playing any more. If the AI makes every decision for you anyway, what is the point of playing? You may as well just code in a spectator mode, make some popcorn and sit down to watch the computer play against itself.
As I have already said, I am not adverse to having solutions presented for the vast majority that do not play the way I do, eg Macsen's idea of the quick set buttons. What I don't want to see is that REPLACE the ability to micro manage exact figures. If all the buttons did was move the selector to the appropriate place on the resource wheel that would be perfect. Those that want 50/50 just hit the appropriate 50/50 button and it moves the slider. Those that want 52/48 have the ability to move it manually.
Macsen: Please don't feel that I am attacking you at all. I like your idea of the quick set buttons as I have said above. I just didn't like the "the resource wheel sucks and needs to burn in a fire" comment. You don't like it, and that's fine. A solution that gives us both what we want is the ideal one. I also like marigold's idea of being able to group colonies together to manage them in bulk easier (although I likely wouldn't utilise it as I like 100% control - it's still a great idea).
The thing is I probably do play similarly to you do I've just come to a different conclusion. You say you're a 9-10 mark I'd say I'm the same, people can actually watch my videos to judge, see if they agree too though I cut a lot of micromanagement from the videos past a certain point because there's so much. My last 21 video series would have been 40 odd if I hadn't. I'm definitely not a faux/pretend micromanager.
Dumbing down is a phrase thrown around easily often when people are resisting change, sometimes validly sometimes not. The changes I've suggested have nothing to do with AI taking over, and a loss of some control over percentage manipulation I think is worth the price for a number of positive knock on effects and the removal of something I don't think works well, but I know I have some convincing to do.
The reason I made that exaggerative fire statement is just to get across the point I really dislike the wheel nothing more, not an attack on anyone connected to it or that likes it. A "fiery" debate on these things is probably a good thing shows people actually care about about the game, as long as it stays relatively civil, not personal and stays here there's no problem. Disagreeing with other peoples ideas/interpretations is fine I certainly intend to if I disagree with something I don't like and I have no problem with people disagreeing with my ideas/interpretations if they don't like them either. I actually like the groups idea as well it could work in a number of economy systems.
Dumbing down is also a phrase that gets thrown around when depth is removed from the game rather than the UI being improved, which more or less sums up removing the wheel tbh.
All that's really required is grouping, and then you only need to set sliders 5-6 times in the whole game if you want to. But don't remove the option altogether.
Why is it okay for you to make exaggerative fire statements and not okay for marigoldran to playfully call you names?
I mean, to me, they both look like deliberate attempts to add confusion and hostility to a conversation. But it seems to you there is a difference.
I was working on understanding the points of micromanagers, but I guess distractions like this can't be avoided by either side. Shame really, I thought I was starting to learn something here and actually understand the issue.
Yes, exactly. It's important to have a sense of humor about these things.
Anyone who posts regularly on this forum is probably a little weird. Accept it and move on.
That's the bit where you lose me. I don't think it is worth it at all. I think we agree on a lot of things but our disagreement boils down to pretty much this. As you have said though, there is nothing wrong with a bit of disagreement! I quite like the fact that if I need 15.1 production to finish a building, I can get 15.1 production (well - at least as close as possible) and put the rest into something else. One improvement I would really like to see (and please let me know if I am just blind and haven't found it yet!) is for the progress bar of your building queue to show the actual resources invested and whats needed instead of me having to track what I put into each build every turn on a notepad!
I do as well to an extent up to about maybe 10 planets but when you've got 20, 30, 50 planets the level of micro you have to do is beyond ridiculous even if you're pretty casual with it. The scale of the game is too big for the existing system imo.
No don't think it does, I've noticed that too.
LOL, WOW that micro. That's a prime example why certain things need to be better represented in the game or streamlined because people will go to crazy lengths and waste their time and ultimately become frustrated with the game if Stardock don't. (I haven't done that but I've done some stupid levels of micro as well because of the games flaws)
In the spirit of "playfulness"
Good. Glad you got the message.
heh, I love it. Maybe I'm just a masochist
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:
Sign in or Create Account
