On Controlling the Number of Cities, Economies, Adjacency, and Minimizing Civic Micromanagement; or How to Remake the Entirety of Cities, only Not Really

Okay, so here's an idea.  Or rather, here's a set of challenges for gameplay we're all struggling with.

1) We'd like to limit the number of cites, and make them mean something.

2) We don't want to micromanage them, at least not very often.

3) We'd like some flexibility built into the city plan, so we can adjust to differing needs

4) We'd like to exploit the uniqueness of EWOM's city-on-map mechanic for something in addition to defense.

Some good ideas have been floated, like the combining of like tiles (say, 2x2 gardens) into one big tile that gets a bonus to food.  Or putting supporting buildings adjacent to gain bonuses to production, like a granary next to a farm improving the output of the farm.

So, now to the idea.

There are four basic resources cities can currently produce: food, materials, research, and prestige.  Yes, they can also produce ore, crystals, and shards, but those require special tiles, currently.  Suppose you can choose what 4 tiles you'd like to gang together.  Say you put together 2 gardens, a mill, and a pub (don't ask me what that would end up being; I'm guessing it'd be something out of Amish Girls Gone Wild).  Those four tiles would produce 6 food, 1 materials, and 1 prestige separately.  But now, you combine them into a supertile (2x2), and it can only produce 1 of those resources, but it quadruples the rate of production. 

But here's the trick:  You can choose which resource that is, and you can change it down the road.

Lemme 'splain.  No, there is too much.  Lemme sum up.  In our example above, when you create the supertile, you get a menu that asks which resource.  If you choose materials, the supertile generates 4 materials (quadruple the 1 material that the mill was producing).  If you choose food, you get 24 food (quadruple the 6 food that the two gardens were producing).  Same with the prestige, if you choose it, you get 4 prestige.

Now, say at some point in the game, you need the food more than the prestige.  Click on the supertile, and change it.  It will take one turn per level of the city (1 turn at village, 5 turns at city) to change over, during which you're producing nothing, but after that, your city is retooled.  It's faster than demolishing and rebuilding, and minimizes the micromanagement.  Instead of trying to manage all the little tiles, you just click and adjust the supertiles to adjust to your changing needs; it's effectively 1/4 of the micromanagement.

But Winni, you say, I adore micromanagement.  I plan on asking it to marry me next weekend when we're in the kitchen sorting individual grains of rice by texture.  No problem, I say, the old system still works.  Turn off the supertile (that should be instantaneous), demolish what you want, and build back up any way you want. 

But building supertiles offers a way to cut city management down significantly, gives you some flexiblity for city output that's faster than demolish and rebuild, and allows you to make specialist cities that do mean something (4 mills together=16 materials in a supertile, you just can't do anything else with that; you traded your flexibility for high output).  There's also a benefit to keeping a city from growing too big; the smaller the settlement is, the faster they can change their supertiles and adapt to changing conditions.

But Winni, you say, that makes us have meaningful cities, with little micromanagement, yet some flexibility and reward for civic planning, and exploits the uniqueness of the city on map!  That's all four of the problems; you're a genius!  Yes, I say, yes I am.  I wish I'd thought it up out of whole cloth, but the idea stems from specialist economies in Civ4, and the ideas of tile joining and adjacency from these forums.

-fin-

Winni

12,714 views 13 replies
Reply #1 Top

Managing and shifting around pull-down menus of supertiles is not very intuitive, and sounds like even more micromanagement than before. Not that I think there's much micromanagement now. I think the "micromanagement" problem is seriously overblown that's actually more a symptom of a weak UI. Plus, we've already got "supertiles", in terms of markets and full-size farms.

Reply #2 Top

Quoting MagicwillNZ, reply 1
Not that I think there's much micromanagement now. I think the "micromanagement" problem is seriously overblown that's actually more a symptom of a weak UI. Plus, we've already got "supertiles", in terms of markets and full-size farms.

Agreed...%100.


@ Winni:

It's not a bad idea, perhaps a little more refinement is needed though. If not carefully done I could see it being abused. Then again it could also be used to limit a players resources and cause them to make more strategic choices. It would need to be balanced "just right" though.

Note: You Win the Award for having the "Longest Idea Subject Heading Ever" :) :D Congrats!!!

Reply #3 Top

Quoting MagicwillNZ, reply 1
Managing and shifting around pull-down menus of supertiles is not very intuitive, and sounds like even more micromanagement than before. Not that I think there's much micromanagement now. I think the "micromanagement" problem is seriously overblown that's actually more a symptom of a weak UI.

Agreed too!

They should put serious efforts in streamlining the UI before adding more content, otherwise we'll end like dogs chasing their tails or chicken running beheaded.

(I hope these analogies make sense! :rofl: )

Reply #4 Top

Quoting Raven, reply 2

Note: You Win the Award for having the "Longest Idea Subject Heading Ever"  Congrats!!!
Do not encourage them...

Reply #5 Top

Your example wouldn't work. Food isn't something you need every turn, if you destroy your gardens you don't lose population or housing. If people could do what you suggest they'd turn food on for one turn and build a bunch of houses, then switch it to resources or money right away until they need to build more houses. It would be an easy way to exploit the system, at least right now you have to actually destroy the buildings to switch it up, which probably isn't worth the lost resources.

Reply #6 Top

@RavenX

Hey, if I win a prize, where's my Karma?!

I can't imagine that the current mechanism of food only going to producing housing, and then no longer being necessary is correct; I'm hoping its a minor oversight that will be fixed in one of the B2 patches, so if you take away food OR housing, population collapses.

I'm also in the "micromanagement isn't so bad" camp.  I think with right click pull downs, you can make this pretty painless (the supertile idea).  I'm also thinking that we may eventually get to a right click pull down for construction anyway, rather than having to access the construction tab and pop up window as we have now; it would streamline the construction phase.

I'm not in the camp of a "fire and forget" economy.  Like all good 4x games, your cities should be something you have to tend to, just like your armies, and your strategy.  Balancing your attention is the key. 

Reply #7 Top

I'm also hurt, deeply hurt, by the callousness and unfeeling behavior of this forum community.  C'mon.  Sorting grains of rice by texture?  Amish Girls Gone Wild?  That's comedy gold, people.  Sheesh.

Reply #8 Top

Quoting Winnihym, reply 7
I'm also hurt, deeply hurt, by the callousness and unfeeling behavior of this forum community.  C'mon.  Sorting grains of rice by texture?  Amish Girls Gone Wild?  That's comedy gold, people.  Sheesh.

 

Forrest Gump:  You got your brown rice, your wild rice, Unlce Ben's rice, white rice, rice and mushrooms, rice and chicken casserole, fried rice, rice crispies, southern long grain rice, asian short grain rice, rice-a-rone the San Fransisco treat, rice noodles, baked rice, grilled rice, lemon rice, rice salad, rice soup, shrimp n' rice.... and that's about all I got to say about that!

Reply #9 Top

The idea has merit and may be doable at some level if the DEV pursue the Adjacency thought Brad spoke of. It would require that all buildings/resources would have a direct/plausible relationship to each other, unlike your 4. :annoyed:

A Farm, a Granary and 2 warehouses say could become a "Super-Tile" with associated bonuses, but it would be non-changeable. Any deletions would be total and costly to prevent abuse.

Perhaps one of the restrictions that could be applied is only 1 super-Tile per City level after Level 1 for a maximum of 4 super-tiles. That would provide 1 super-tile for each City based Resource: Food, Materials, Research, and Prestige.

Reply #10 Top

Quoting Winnihym, reply 6
... Like all good 4x games, your cities should be something you have to tend to, just like your armies, and your strategy.  Balancing your attention is the key. 

Indeed. And that also sort of loops back to reinforce the goal (not universally endorsed on these boards) of preventing city spam.

I very much want cities to be the opposite of 'fire and forget,' but I'd love to have a really good, long game on a the biggest map my machine can handle and *not* end up in the kind of late-game repetitive click saga that every game in the genre I know seems to create.

Reply #11 Top

Quoting Winnihym, reply 6
@RavenX

Hey, if I win a prize, where's my Karma?!

Just because you win a "Prize" doesn't mean it has to be Karma, but, since that's what you want, here you go. k1   Congrats again :)

Reply #12 Top

*Squeals in delight*

*Looks around confusedly*

Hunh, you know, you would have thought that would have been more...oh, I don't know...pleasurable.  I'm sure it's not you, it's me.

It's funny, GW, I feel the same way.  The pacing in the beginning of the game, and even the midgame before the "big fight" is very intense in these games, and then the end game, where you're doing cleanup, is nothing but a slog, due to decisions that don't matter to your economy (it's all so far ahead of the competition that you can't make a bad decision), and you know the map, so your strategy is set, so you're just moving your armies in a panzeresque slog to the finish.

I recall conversations on how to limit or minimize this.  Maybe once your economy gets to a certain size, you should stop managing cities, and just manage the global economy (ie, I want this much materials, this much gold, this much ore, etc), and let the game figure out how to array resources in your cities to best meet those goals.  Sort of a empire manager, once the economic game has been by and large won.

Maybe just set priorities: city growth, materials, commerce, magic, or what have you, and a (good) AI manager takes over the day to day decisions for you.  During the buildup phase, of course, I'd want absolute control.

Reply #13 Top

Quoting Winnihym, reply 7
I'm also hurt, deeply hurt, by the callousness and unfeeling behavior of this forum community.  C'mon.  Sorting grains of rice by texture?  Amish Girls Gone Wild?  That's comedy gold, people.  Sheesh.

Nuh uh. Politics is funny. Gaming is serious.