BNW would make canals even more useful

[Hawaiian]

Okay,

I've been wanting canal improvements for sooo long, and BNW would make the argument even better!

Think about it, trade routes over the ocean could really be improved with canals (think Panama in real life). And if you have a canal in your territory, your open borders agreement would be worth more money (in trade) to others who could use it for their own overseas trade routes.

If the limit were two connected land tiles maximum length, I don't think it would be overpowered. After all, you have to give up tile yields if it goes nearby a city.

 

[Verified_Confection_Being]

I think it should be limited to one, or limited to two ignoring any connected cities between them (ie only one either side)

Simply a maximum of 2 could allow canals of up to 5 tiles in length if a city were placed strategically.

I agree with you, they would be awesome though.

 

[Eagle Pursuit]

I'd like to see canals too. But I think that's a feature they would've announced up front.

Also:

We know you don't need a civ's permission to trade with them, so open borders are probably not required to move a trade unit through occupied areas.

At some point caravans become able to cross water. So if an otherwise good sea route is obstructed by land, just use a caravan to cross it.

I could be wrong though. We know long ago they had planned the Panama Canal as a wonder, it could be making a return along with more mundane canals.

 

[turingmachine]

We know you don't need a civ's permission to trade with them, so open borders are probably not required to move a trade unit through occupied areas.

At some point caravans become able to cross water. So if an otherwise good sea route is obstructed by land, just use a caravan to cross it.

Are we sure about either of these? Land and sea trade routes are completely separate, with separate caravan units. I don't believe you can make a single trade trade route that goes over land and see.

And what do you mean my not needing a civ's permission. I assumed you needed open borders at least to trade with a civ.

 

[jacer21]

Can't you just put a city on a 1 tile thick strip of land and move ships through it anyway? I mean, that's basically a canal the way I look at it.

 

[Eagle Pursuit]

Are we sure about either of these? Land and sea trade routes are completely separate, with separate caravan units. I don't believe you can make a single trade trade route that goes over land and see.

And what do you mean my not needing a civ's permission. I assumed you needed open borders at least to trade with a civ.

I can't find anything to back myself up here, but think about the open borders question. If trade routes are initially available in the ancient era, but open borders come in the Medieval era, how would you trade with other civs for the first third of the game if you don't have open borders? Are you only allowed to trade with city-states and yourself until civil service?

 

[Snoopaloop]

I can't find anything to back myself up here, but think about the open borders question. If trade routes are initially available in the ancient era, but open borders come in the Medieval era, how would you trade with other civs for the first third of the game if you don't have open borders? Are you only allowed to trade with city-states and yourself until civil service?

I hope so. I don't want civs to be able to freely send caravans into my territory. I think early game trading between your own cities and city states is fine.

I already hate that missionaries are able to enter my land with out open borders.

EDIT: Oh yeah, 2 tile max canals would be great.

 

[Matthew.]

Yes, canals please

 

[AriochIV]

They don't even have navigable rivers, so it's hard to see how canals could be used.

 

[9gkj548hkm20vk79dj689bnj4]

Maybe if rivers went through tiles instead of between them...

EDIT: But that would remove movement and attack penalties for land units.

 

[blash]

i'd like to see canals too. but i find it hard to come up with a good solution that allows boats to cross the tile while not restricting land movement in a way that is abusable.

you could just dig a trench in front of your border cities if canal tiles were simply handled as coast tiles.

 

[jacer21]

It already works in game if you settle a city on a 1 tile thick coast. Ships can pass through. Am I missing something here?

 

[turingmachine]

i'd like to see canals too. but i find it hard to come up with a good solution that allows boats to cross the tile while not restricting land movement in a way that is abusable.

you could just dig a trench in front of your border cities if canal tiles were simply handled as coast tiles.

What? It would work the same way it did in Civ IV and not affect land movement at all.

 

[blash]

It already works in game if you settle a city on a 1 tile thick coast. Ships can pass through. Am I missing something here?

yes, that is the current way to create an one-tile "canal".
the op is asking for some kind of improvement that allows players to create a canal/small river by himself though.
mainly to move one's fleet "through" a continent rather than circle around it or to allow naval production from inland seas, i suppose.

 

[jacer21]

yes, that is the current way to create an one-tile "canal".
the op is asking for some kind of improvement that allows players to create a canal/small river by himself though.
mainly to move one's fleet "through" a continent rather than circle around it or to allow naval production from inland seas, i suppose.

I think allowing more than 1 tile "canals" would add an unnecessary amount of micromanagement to the game, and could possible be OP. I think it is fine as is, though that is only my opinion.

 

[blash]

sometimes you puppet an opponents city and the ai has placed the city just one tile above a possible one-tile canal spot.
you either have to travel ridiculous distances with your fleet or you need to raze and reestablish the city. simply creating one canal tile would allow a third option in situations like that.
in other games you have cities at inland seas or near polar caps. it might take a while til you notice that the city is coastal but basically part of a small pond. you have no choice but to disband all previously created ships or to hope for a suitable spot to create/conquer a city to be able to get out of the sea and into the "real" ocean. you also cannot use the coastal cities for naval production anymore (except for subs in the case of the polar caps). again canals would make a third option available.

 

[vcutag]

It already works in game if you settle a city on a 1 tile thick coast. Ships can pass through. Am I missing something here?

Yes. The big problem is when a City-State or a capital is built within a 3-tile radius of that crossing point; you can't build a city there as a result, and you can't raze the other city to enable you to build a city there. Thus, canal.

 

[Snoopaloop]

They don't even have navigable rivers, so it's hard to see how canals could be used.

I've always imagined a wonder that would create a 1-2 tile canal between two bodies of water. Which would eliminate this problem

you could just dig a trench in front of your border cities if canal tiles were simply handled as coast tiles.

i'd like to see canals too. but i find it hard to come up with a good solution that allows boats to cross the tile while not restricting land movement in a way that is abusable.
.

My idea continues as:
The canals would be 1-2 coastal hexes and completely remove the two land tiles and any luxury/resource on it. Thus there is a trade-off decision to make: Passageway or more productive land tiles. Anyways, ships can now pass through. There would be 1 or 2 (depending on hex arrangement after the canal is built) large bridges that would cross the canal (the entire water hex). Troops can end their turn there. No boat/embarked troop stacking through a canal because of canal locks: this would eliminate stacking problems with troops who end their turn on the bridge. http://www.history.com/videos/panama-canal-locks

So the wonder provides you with a functioning canal and still allows troop movement.

There could also be financial benefits to the canal as well. Something that could symbolize fee's the canal owner charges others to use it.

1. You get X% gold from any trade routes that come through your canal.
or 2. You get X total gold from each individual opponent ship that passes through
or 3. I imagine some fanatic here could think of something better/more balanced than my 1 and 2

I think allowing more than 1 tile "canals" would add an unnecessary amount of micromanagement to the game, and could possible be OP. I think it is fine as is, though that is only my opinion.

How can something be OP and cause to much micromanagement when no one has even fleshed out a full idea on how the could actually work in game yet?

I think a Panama, Suez,, whatever canal Wonder which would give us a new gameplay experience would be an amazing wonder. What do you all think...love my idea, hate it, have ideas how to improve it?

 

[AriochIV]

They could always do what they did in Civ IV allow a structure (in was Forts in Civ IV) to permit naval units to enter a hex. You could just string these together to form a crude canal.

The problem I have with this is mainly aesthetic; it's a scale issue. Real canals are much, much smaller than real rivers. Having rivers that are small and not navigable, but allowing canals that are visually much larger and navigable breaks the sense of scale. If they want to add canals, I think they need to make rivers navigable first, and I don't see how they can do that without completely changing the way rivers have always been modeled in Civilization.

 

[Matthew.]

It already works in game if you settle a city on a 1 tile thick coast. Ships can pass through. Am I missing something here?

And what if that entire continent was connected by two tiles instead of one?

They could just make it a visual thing to not mess with balance, how ground troops are blocked, etc. Just have the ships move across the canal in a single turn, kind of like how aircraft is transported from city-to-city. Purely an animation thing--they won't even be able to stop on the tile itself. That way you can't just create a moat around city and keep battleships parked on your landmass