I Hate Mountains

bioelectricclam

Warlord
Joined
Jul 15, 2006
Messages
244
And ice too- at least the way that they are implemented in Civ IV. Who ever heard of ice/mountains being completely impassable? People climb mountains all the time...and they have ships to break ice up nowadays. Plus the idea of having a tile that I can never work ever sort of annoys me.

Basically what I wish they had where the mountains that earlier Civ games had; make them impassable to mounted units only...unless someone builds a road over it. I'd also like this because then we could have realistic mountain ranges....not goofy looking 1 square wide walls. Anyways end rant.
 
Impassable terrain adds an extra element of strategy, and provides more historical basis as well.
 
Since when can several thousend people plus machinary cross over the alps on foot? ;)

I agree with puglover, they add extra strategy.
 
There are passable mountains; In the Earth: 1000 AD scenario, there is what appears to be an impassible wall of mountains seperating the Yucatan Peninsula from the rest of Mexico. I was astonished when I witnessed a Barb. warrior crossing over them to pillage some tiles. There are other places like this, but they are mostly in the random non-earth maps; I saw one in a very long mountain range seperating me from another civ that used it to send troops into my land
 
You won't find too many instances of people sending entire armies over the mountain. You'll only see the occasional explorer hitting a mountain -- which is how Civ has it now.

Most mountain ranges have slightly lower parts, like hills, where people can make their crossings.

To me, it wouldn't be such a bad thing if a later game tech (e.g.: chemistry, metallurgy) allowed workers to enter a mountain and build a road (tunnel).
 
I don't know if this is new with the patch, but submarines have (at least in description) the ability to traverse impassible terrain - ice.

I can't say anything about those mountains though.
 
Top Bottom