Railroads with Oil

Bananafish · Jan 16, 2006

I am not sure if this has been requested before, but I would like to see it possible to build railways with Oil as well as Coal. In fact shessh, if I have no coal and no oil, I would like to build a railroad with uranium!!!!

I can understand why Coal is required, but if you have no access to Coal (and none if the beggars wish to trade), then it makes sense that you can't build the railways, but once you discover oil? or even Uranium - surely you shoul then be able to power your trains?

Personally I see this as a must have. (but then I am playing a scenario where I don't have coal, and I so want to have trains).

Desert-Fox · Jan 16, 2006

You can use coal only for railroad, coal plant and ironclad... ironclad is a joke and coal plant... also because hydro plant is a lot of better. So if you could make railroad by using oil, it makes coal useless.

MRM · Jan 16, 2006

Desert-Fox said:
You can use coal only for railroad, coal plant and ironclad... ironclad is a joke and coal plant... also because hydro plant is a lot of better. So if you could make railroad by using oil, it makes coal useless.

- it would not make coal completly useless because you don't have always oil and IMO would it make more sence to make the iron clade better or add a better coal fired ship to make coal more importen ( since those American Civil War style Irionclades are neither the most common nor the best coal fired ships it would make sence to add a better one here )

Desert-Fox · Jan 16, 2006

yup, you can make ironclads better, now their great negative is that they can travel only on coast... I would better use frigates.

Oil is a lot of powerful resource, you need this for tanks, planes, modern naval...

so if railroad would be made by another resource too then coal would be removed from resource list.

Karl Townsend · Jan 16, 2006

your right iornclads are a joke cause they cant enter the oecen

trundle · Jan 16, 2006

Desert-Fox said:
You can use coal only for railroad, coal plant and ironclad... ironclad is a joke and coal plant... also because hydro plant is a lot of better. So if you could make railroad by using oil, it makes coal useless.

Hydro plants aren't always available (depending on your access to rivers), and coal plants usually come significantly earlier in the tech tree (and building them earlier means you get that much more benefit out of them). If you're not having food/health problems, coal plants are usually a pretty good deal, and recycling plants aren't too far off.

I think coal is intended as a transitional resource, just like copper. Sure, copper has its unique uses, but it's really not necessary if you have iron. Likewise, coal can do a few things oil can't, but in most games it will get replaced by oil (just like coal was replaced, by and large, in real history).

Bananafish · Jan 16, 2006

I think coal is intended as a transitional resource, just like copper. Sure, copper has its unique uses, but it's really not necessary if you have iron. Likewise, coal can do a few things oil can't, but in most games it will get replaced by oil (just like coal was replaced, by and large, in real history).

My thoughts exactly. Coal still has it's place, as it allows all those things to be done earlier than you could with just oil...

ArsenicEpidemic · Jan 19, 2006

u kno, coal is still in effect in some power plants today. yes coal can be replace in every way because its only use is for engery, you dont extract anything from it. its use is for economic purposes. coal use is much cheaper to construct, maintain and refuel. its just one heavy pollutent.

Caprice · Jan 19, 2006

Desert-Fox said:
You can use coal only for railroad, coal plant and ironclad... ironclad is a joke and coal plant... also because hydro plant is a lot of better. So if you could make railroad by using oil, it makes coal useless.

Nothing wrong with obsoleting a resource... happens with another one (or two) other(s) if I remember correctly.

I do think that railroads running on oil should move faster (I know that isn't necesarily an easy thing to implement) than those that run on coal.

And yeah, coal to operate coal fired power facilities would still be a big deal for civs with few hydro power applicable sites.

rupertlittlebea · Jan 20, 2006

early battleships were powered by coal including the HMS Dreadnought.
http://www.royalnavalmuseum.org/Dreadnoughtexhibition.htm

Previous armored vessels were also powered by coal.
Many trains in the USA were also powered by oil (ok, 20th century)

It would therefore make sence to allow major ships including transports and destroyers to be powered by coal or oil
and to allow railroads to be powered by oil or coal.

However uranium trains are an interesting idea. Demonstrate a real world occurence please.
If you mean - electric trains powered by Atomic power plants . . .
try 3 gorges dam.

Desert-Fox · Jan 20, 2006

I would agree only when ... there would be a tech where you can build better railroads with oil... For example with coal you can build 10step railroad, later you have to discover a new tech "Monorail" what is optional... leads to nothing and you can build 15step railroad.

edit : plastics would lead to monorail.

But I usually ignore coal plants... the extra 25% is not very much usually... -2 health means that I may lose 1 population what reduces it's effect. In higher difficulty levels every health point is important.

About copper, it also seems a bit useless resource unless you need it for some wonders and one spaceship part needs it.

Marble/stone get obsolete later but in early games you would be very happy when you have them both near your starting location

Lordclane · Jan 24, 2006

Railroads were spreading long before coal. Originally they used wood. I suggest that several "levels" of railroad be allowed, with different added movements. A limited railroad could be based on wood; a faster one on coal when you develop that technology (if you have coal); and an even faster one when oil comes along. One might even go back to unlimited movement railroads when future technology appears (maglevs?).

Thalassicus · Jan 26, 2006

Desert-Fox said:
But I usually ignore coal plants... the extra 25% is not very much usually... -2 health means that I may lose 1 population what reduces it's effect. In higher difficulty levels every health point is important.

Coal plants actually boost production by 50%, for a total of 75% with the Factory.

I always build Factories and Coal Power right away after researching Assembly Line. Nearly doubling the hammer output of your cities is nothing to pass up.

Railroads requiring Coal makes sense to me for a gameplay point, coal is essentially the resource that allows you to greatly improve your empire's production, through railroads and power plants. Oil serves a seperate purpose, as a military resource that allows you to build most modern units. 40% of the world's power is still generated from coal, after all, only 10% is derived from oil. (info)

It would make sense for Oil to boost railroad movement though -- or better yet, the Electricity tech (further gap between the two).

Railroads with Oil

Bananafish

Chieftain

Desert-Fox

King

MRM

Prince

Desert-Fox

King

Karl Townsend

Prince

trundle

Warlord

Bananafish

Chieftain

ArsenicEpidemic

Chieftain

Caprice

Warlord

rupertlittlebea

Prince

Desert-Fox

King

Lordclane

Chieftain

Thalassicus

Bytes and Nibblers

Similar threads