an alternative model for the use of railroads

[Shigga]

Some idea that flashed into my mind while I was discussing what rr will be in the new cIV. I liked it so much I made this thread. Pls comment!

Make the railroad an instant transportation device like the airport. It should work only with connected cities and should not give any movement bonus other than the "teleport". Limit the number of units a city can RECEIVE per turn, make it improvable through different buildings (f.e. trainstation +1, marshaling yard +1, depot +2, cumulative) and have them cost more upkeep. This would be a neat capacity limitation, because I agree with the others that commented it is not a matter of speed but rather one of capacity. Also, it would make for interesting offensive strats (the disruption of the enemy rr-network by bombarding key points, trying to bombard those above mentioned city improvements) and defensive strats (defending those vulnerable points, unit placement for defensive action). It would also make it crucial to improve your cities on the border either as a defensive measure or as part of war preparations.

Keep the bonus for terrain like hammers and food. But make it dependant on the city size. Larger cities = more goods. so you don't have a bonus per terrain unit but a bonus of like one hammer per city population point. The map won't be crowded with those rr's anymore since they don't give you a bonus through terrain inside the city radius.

EDIT: Come to think of it, make the same capacity limitation for airports, but give them a higher number of units they can receive per turn from start on (like 3 instead of 1 for rr).

 

[Texan General]

While I do believe something must be done about the RR system I do not agree with your means of changing it. I feel it doesnt take into account several things and ultimately doesn't fix the matter in such a way as to keep it fixxed. In short, I find this model too limiting. I cannot drop units in between stations and this doesn't take into account the fact that in reality you could build as many trains as you have money and resources for. (In this model you get an equal number with how much your city improvements will allow, no more.) Props, on a good thought though. It did take some thinking to find a fault. I believe I countered this in the general discussion thread surrounding this subject and I look forward to your opinion on the matter.

 

[Shigga]

The thing is, it's not about reality, but about gameplay as serveral others already pointed out. And the fact that you can't drop units between the stations is exactly the factor which reclaims some of the strategic challenges that got lost with the infinite rr movement.
The whole point is limiting the number of units a city can receive, because it would otherwise be possible to send ridiculous numbers of units to a city. Then it would do the same thing as the airports in Civ3 and it not only made strategic planning far too easy, it also made building transports and fleets totally unnecessary in later staged of the game.
So the limits that you criticise are actually expanding the depth of the game in matters of strats and gameplay.

 

[Texan General]

I do agree that it adds another level of strategy, however I must contend that there is a way to both add this level of strategy and keep to a realistic system. Afterall, one of the major complaints against the current system is the lack of reality. I can't see substituting one unrealistic system for another when it will inevitably lead to many of the same complaints. I understand your protest however and I intend to submit a counterplan but I have not worked out the details yet. Suffice to say it depends on several changes involving resource distribution and amounts, adding the concept of locomotives themselves with the ability to improve, and several logistical/military considerations. While a change of this magnitude is unlikely to be accepted by our developers (or even acknowledged for that matter) I think you will find it extremely meritous in its own right.

 

[Dudedudeyo]

I think that times 5 or 6 movement would be fine.

 

[searcheagle]

I would like to see unlimited capacity and unlimited move ended for RRs, Periods. However, If I can only get one, I'll still be happy.

@Shigga-

EDIT: Come to think of it, make the same capacity limitation for airports, but give them a higher number of units they can receive per turn from start on (like 3 instead of 1 for rr).

The LAST thing airports need is a higher capacity the RR. I think capacity should work like this:

Sea->RR->Road->Air

Speed should work Like THIS:
Air->Railroad->Road->Sea

How they work in Civ 3
Capacity and speed:
RR->Road->Air (Due to the long transport range)->Sea

The ideal system would be to force the player to diversify his assets. Air for time critical movement, Road when required (ie shipping cant move it) and Sea most of the time.

 

[Aussie_Lurker]

Hmmm, I kinda agree with the gist of what you are saying, Searcheagle, but think that Sea should come in higher than road when it comes to speed, as historically sea has often been a much preferred method of moving goods over long distances-where available portage existed.

Yours,
Aussie_Lurker.

 

[searcheagle]

Hmmm, I kinda agree with the gist of what you are saying, Searcheagle, but think that Sea should come in higher than road when it comes to speed, as historically sea has often been a much preferred method of moving goods over long distances-where available portage existed.

Yours,
Aussie_Lurker.

That's True. When I wrote that I was thinking of modern times. However, up until the advent of autos, Seas were faster then roads to travel.

 

[hamtrigger]

Like most of you, i hate the unlimited RR's. I'm thinking that roads should be x2 movment, and RR's x6.

 

[Colonel]

I dont see why threads like this are always around, why not just double Road movement for rr, and get rid of monatary and food bonus from RR. If that doesnt help enough, add in a Highway improvement 9x for one move, and have it cost maintaince. Solves everyones problem, adds strategic bombardment useful.

 

[megaclom]

It took a while to realize this:

RRs ought not to have food or production bonus, rather only movement. "Shaft mines" and "mechanized farms" would replace the current bonus' for RRing a mine or irrigation. That would be close to historically accurate, as although many nations are covered in a road network, no nation is covered with rails. That one non-realism always bothered me: the need to RR every tile.

 

[apatheist]

Oceans are still better for transporting large quantities of goods. That's why there are so many ports on the coasts of North America, Europe, and Asia. Otherwise, there would just be one port on each continent and they'd drive the rest of the way (not really, but you see the point).

 

[Dudedudeyo]

Thats why there sould be times 6 on railroads no food bouns and modern ships have 8 or more speed! Why wont the developers listen to us!

 

[apatheist]

Thats why there sould be times 6 on railroads no food bouns and modern ships have 8 or more speed! Why wont the developers listen to us!

I disagree that railroads should be just super roads. I think simple upgrades like that don't add much to the game. It needs to do more than just speed things up.

Also, railroads are faster than ships in reality. People use ships not just for speed but for low cost. That's modelled in civ by you having to devote workers to building railroads, whereas a ship can just sail on the open sea.

 

[BrianJ]

It took a while to realize this:

RRs ought not to have food or production bonus, rather only movement. "Shaft mines" and "mechanized farms" would replace the current bonus' for RRing a mine or irrigation. That would be close to historically accurate, as although many nations are covered in a road network, no nation is covered with rails. That one non-realism always bothered me: the need to RR every tile.

I agree with this. A railroad STATION could provide some city bonus and linki it to the railroad net. A road is just a road. Specific bonuses to improvemetns like farms and mines could be done through engineer abilities like Civ2 (at least for farms)

For that matter, spead could be doubled, lets say, for all roads oned by that empire once they discover railroads, but bonuses will only exist for cities with the station.

This adds to realism since plenty of cities grew up around railroad stations, or had their fortunes improved by having RR stops.

 

[mrgenie]

I read alot of reasons for railroads about restrictions on speed, quantity etc. its all fine, but the main thing is, if you can transport 1000units in 1 turn to your border, you loose any aspect of strategy, its nothing strategy like in WWII where adolf hitler has 2times little forces then France Brittain Russia, and even 3times smaller then the rest of europe he also wedged war with, he had a strategy, and if the russians/french/brittisch had the possibility to get their forces on 1 location in 1hour it would be a fight of maybe a week and dang, bye bye waffen SS. so, all those people talking about unrestricted railroads and dont want RR to be like an upgraded version of roads, you dont understand strategy or you simply dont want it, but civ is just for strategy and not for some 1000 vs 1000units realtime full scale war game. it is MORE! and railroads in reality are not always the cheapest way of transportation, i dont know why some people think that, but on smaller items, not heavy weighted, low density populated areas and so forth it is much much more commercial to just let trucks do the job instead of a billion investment for railroads with tunnels etc etc..so go to college, learn, think, then comment such things, for the critics, I know this is a game, but reality is best strategy, and thats what we all want right? if i didnt want strategy like this, id rather play C&C, right? about the food bonusses which some poeple critisize, i can agree with that, but think, large quantities of goods on large distances can be transported more commercial by railroad then by truck and some regions suit for vegetables while other for patatoos and railroads in reality are used for such transports, since we cannot write down a usefull algorithm in gameplay to do such animations it does make some kind of sence to have railroads boost up food production(although i agree with all of you, crops dont grow faster because a train is running nearby) but for the strategy i can understand the people at firaxis somehow.
but now the big part, strategy during war, because that's what we've been playing this game for all those years..i think it is a mistake you can build railroads everywhere! i would say railroads should be build mainly for long-range transports or people migration(boost a new formed city linked to RR-system from bigger cities) and the long range system, well, you should only need 1 or maximum 2 RR connections per city and write down some algorithm that railroads can maximal connection on 2 sides..so you cannot build RR everywhere on every single tile, in case of war you now must bomb around 40tiles if you really want to isolate a city which is rediculous! it should be somehow that if you get into war that 10bombers(1Aircraft carrier) could bomb the surroundings of a city enough, and not like in civ 3 that you sometimes need 60 or 70bombers(a complete fleed of 200turns of production) just to bomb some stupid RR on every tiles near the city, this is mad war! like hills, you should only be able to build RR after you got some discovery like tunnels and that a tunnel will cost you around 500gold to produce, and Mountains need tunnel at cost of 2000gold..it is mad that people build those railroads everywhere, btw, there should be some option like: Roads 2moves, Highway 4moves Railroads 6moves, and 6moves is more then enough!! if you have a tank with 3moves a turn it means you can move 18tiles in 1 turn!! on most maps that is more then you need..for the restriction to cities to transport only 5units a turn, thats fine, but then there should be an option of countryside Trainstation also able to unload 5units, maybe upgradable to unload 20units, and so that the trainstation can be bombed..that would be more strategic so you are forced to defend against arial strikes, and to defend against spies, or other special forces..anyway, i think the potential of strategic of railroads is all gone because of the unlimited movement and the unlimited ability to build them everywhere and the unlimited amount of moved troops..its like, hey, if my forces are bigger, you can be smart as you are, soon as i got railroads, i win always, even if i dont know war-tactics, i just move all my forces the same turn to the place they need to be. That is so unstrategical!!

 

[apatheist]

Whoa. Can I get a line break?

 

[mrgenie]

sure you can get a line break, but it was a brainstorming to open up some minds on the people who critisize the RR. I dont think my ideas is the solution, i read some points in others post which i can agree more with as what i posted myself, but, some are so blacklined in one direction thinking, it is so wrong!! people should open their ideas to get a more strategical civ5, because for civ4 its already to late to comment on that

 

[I am the Future]

That's True. When I wrote that I was thinking of modern times. However, up until the advent of autos, Seas were faster then roads to travel.

Well i have always thought that they should have paved roads as an improvment this could come along with internal combustion and give you a x10
while railroads only give you a x6 or 7 then unpaved roads a x3 I also think that sea trade routes should have to be built just verry quickly like in one turn. that way you have to build a trade route wit other countries and to offshore platforms. but it is just an idea.

 

[I am the Future]

Their are a few problems with the 2 sides rule because their are such things as railroad hubs. I am from northern Illinois and Chicago was and still is the cente hub for the northamerican train system and it has trains out of every possible side.