Can Any one tell my:: Canals --- Where are they??

[gorilladf]

This topic had come up earlier in the release. Also the flip side was asked. Why can't we build a bridge or "Chunnel" over a 1 sea square gap?

Bridge would block naval traffice, but could be destroyed. (I know, you can do this with a fortified ship)

Chunnel would still allow land and naval units to cross.

 

[Cruiser]

Building "a city" might not cover enough ground to allow transport of ships. It certainly wouldn't in the accurate maps of Earth.

The lack of canal building (at least across an isthmus) is another flaw in Civ III.

BTW, the Chinese also were building large canals in ancient times.

 

[vulture]

The Chinese canals were built for river trafic. Not for Ocean going vessals

 

[Lt. 'Killer' M.]

Originally posted by Richard III
Golly, Killer, I hate to say it, but you sound an awful lot like the captain of the USS Oregon in 1899, complaining that it took him several weeks sailing from California to Florida because he had to go all the way around South America. And guess how the US solved that problem? A canal in Panama, through, say, the Rio Grande to California.


R.III

Richard III, you do have a point, and I INTENDED to sound like that(!) but the Americas are an exception, as is the contact between Africa an Arabia (-->Suez Canal). Exception means that normal continents will be roughly ovoid to irregular clumpy things, not the streched out things we see in Civ maps.

If you read my post thoroughly you`ll see that building canals early on will be very expensive - realistic, isn`t it? And also you should check out my map - any civ in that world would have developed perfected ways of building canals early - our technological advances are partly predetermined by our needs, which are partly predetermined by our surroundings.......

So there`s the point: Panama canal was built when the need arose and it was possible. Suez canal was built when the need arose and it was possible (and tried before several times!!!).
Now if you play on a randomly generated map you`ll get places where 1 tile covered by a city doesn`t suffice all too often - that`s why I want canals. Not because the`re an integral part of the game but because they`d be a nice gimmick AND be pretty realistic!

 

[Cerberus]

Why one of the great Wonders of the World, the Panama Canal, continues to be ignored by Sid is another Civ III mystery.

 

[Ripley1]

I feel your pain, there should be canals (not just cities between two oceans on an isthmus)
It would have to either be a new terrain or a changed improvement
-if new terrains could be edited or created and then their properties could be changed to let land and sea units both pass through
-It would have to be next to an coastal square and take a long time to build

*So if anyone figures out how to change terrain properties to let sea and land units in a terrain (kindof like a city that any civ can go through without starting a war or destroying)

 

[Ripley1]

the thing now that makes Civ 3 NEED canals is that you cant move a naval unit from one sea square to another if land is on both sides:
land \ sea
_____\_(unit destination)
Sea \ land
(battleship)\

They cant move that way anymore.. this used to function as a canal in old civ versions

 

[Headmaster]

raze Chittagong, and rebuild it below (in one of the blue circles).

I think the canal thing is intended to be so. Ships use canal cities when you select 'Go To'. And you can't build 2 cities next to each other because Firaxis didn't want you to build longer canals.

Of course a canal SW would be nice but it would be too hard to implement. Firaxis wasn't able to make the Great Wall a real wall, and making a Canal wonder wouldn't be easier.


btw WTH did you do w/ your units' hitpoints?

 

[Lt. 'Killer' M.]

headmaster:

thanx for the suggestion! I actually built a city in the southern one of the 2 squares without raizing Chittagong - no problem. But still it sucks!

As for the unit hitpoints: i changed Civ3mod.bic so the it`s not 2:3:4:5 for Conscript to Elite, but 6:9:12:15.

combat takes a lot longer now, but I see very few strange results. Admittedly, as you`ve probably read in my statistics post (see here for news), it didn`t fix the problem all the way, but it sure helps!

 

[Gromit]

Pangäa is good, continent stting often sucks and archipelago is simply ridiculous!

Just a small gripe I have, i a bit off topic I know, but I couldn't find anywhere else to moan. Sorry...

I agree with the statement that Continent often sucks, 99% of my games on continent setting (16 civs) turn out thus:
They have about five land masses and two are made up of enough land for only one city. One is HUGE!! and contains 12 civs. One is made of Mountains and tundra and has one lonesome, Ancient age civ that never takes it upon itself to explore. And the other one has enough room for two civs (if you really push it) and invariably has three including mine. The latter incidentally is without fail a zillion miles away from any other land mass.

Pangea, for me at least gets too diplomatically complicated too quickly for a peacefully developing 'turtle' player like myself. I suppose that could just be an AI thing but it bugs me nonetheless.

Archipelago often leaves you without some crucial resource or puts you on a tiny island of icy nothingness with one other (sometimes TWO!!) competitor.

YES!! Canals are most definately a HUGE oversight and would make a huge difference to the game. My idea would be to make them a special type of amphibious terrain improvement. Farms would also be nice as this would make food a less precious resource and make production and science more of a focus in the late game. This would be more 'realistic' I think.

One final point - I would like to see some sort of Immigration/Emigration feature whereby rather than 'steal' whole cities, population just moves from one city (or more) to a city or cities in another country/civ. I mean, how often (in comparison to game frequency) do nations take control of (in every way, not just through trade...) another country's town or city?

 

[Zouave]

Originally posted by vulture
The Chinese canals were built for river trafic. Not for Ocean going vessals

That means they were suitable for galleys and caravels as they are not ocean going vessels. (Although the AI's galleys ARE ocean-going as it cheats).



BTW, there are often on the map THIN strips of land that prevent access to the ocean. They are much smaller than a tile. These would be PERFECT for the use of canals.

Give me canals!!