Cannals

[c-mattio]

I am reasonably certain that the Ancient Egyptians did NOT build any kind of canal as I would have thought it would have been mentioned in the numerous books I have read on Ancient Egypt.

 

[BassDude726]

Don't they have canals on Mars? Yuk yuk, just kidding.

The implications of canal-building are interesting, but my concern is that it would give the AI another excuse to make war on you. The strategic implications of a canal are just too juicy for them to pass up.

 

[Verbose]

I am reasonably certain that the Ancient Egyptians did NOT build any kind of canal as I would have thought it would have been mentioned in the numerous books I have read on Ancient Egypt.

I've heard about it. Seems to have been a late effort, 600 BC or so and after the more well known periods of Egyptian history. Also, it wasn't a canal between the Med and the Red, but between one of the branches of the Nile delta north of Memphis and the Red Sea.

 

[airrahul]

Between the Nile delta to the Red Sea is feasible in ancient times. From the Med. to the Red is not though IMO. Also, the British and French (Ferdinand de Lesseps) financed the canal and it was built in 1867 if I recall. In 1882, Britain gained control over it and Egypt but French investors still held stock in the canal. The Panama canal was finished by 1908 I think or sometime around then.

 

[c-mattio]

I really had no inkling that the ancient egyptians built such a canal. It is fairly impressive. My reading is much outdated.

Canals should span two squares in the game. I like the idea of tunnels too.

 

[Pook]

I've heard about it. Seems to have been a late effort, 600 BC or so and after the more well known periods of Egyptian history. Also, it wasn't a canal between the Med and the Red, but between one of the branches of the Nile delta north of Memphis and the Red Sea.

Here's a link that discusses the ancient canal.
http://nefertiti.iwebland.com/timelines/topics/canals.htm
My earlier date for the Panama canal (1903) was incorrect, the canal officially opened in August 1914 with the passage of the SS Ancon. http://www.canalmuseum.com/

 

[MattII]

I saw a diagram in a book once that had it as going from the mid Nile to within 100 miles of Port Said and then back down staying about 40-50 miles west of the current Suez, and so it was at least 50% longer than the current one.

 

[xerox]

I, too, have used cities to simulate a canal and connect two bodies of water. Sometimes these cities are placed in an undesirable location just to get the benefit of passage. A canal would be a much better solution. The bridge concept should function the same as it already does for rivers. Also, if canals are used there need to be a movement cost associated with passage to each tile. Canals sometimes connect bodies of water at different altitudes and use 'locks' to raise and lower ships. The filling and draining of these locks takes quite a bit of time. It would not be unrealistic for it to cost 1 turn per tile. This would discourage extremely long locks. Overall I really like the idea.

 

[Punkymonkey]

The modern day Suez canal was built in 1854 by the french. The ancient one was built in 13th C. BC and was not maintained so that it became unnavigable by the 8th C. BC. So it should still be considered a modern wonder but i think a name should just be Grand Canal because canals have been built since the earliest times and perhaps the longest and greatest canal was built by the Chinese connecting the Yellow and Yangtze rivers back in 486 B.C. and later extended in 605-610 AD.

 

[Denarr]

I, too, have used cities to simulate a canal and connect two bodies of water. Sometimes these cities are placed in an undesirable location just to get the benefit of passage. A canal would be a much better solution. The bridge concept should function the same as it already does for rivers. Also, if canals are used there need to be a movement cost associated with passage to each tile. Canals sometimes connect bodies of water at different altitudes and use 'locks' to raise and lower ships. The filling and draining of these locks takes quite a bit of time. It would not be unrealistic for it to cost 1 turn per tile. This would discourage extremely long locks. Overall I really like the idea.

Except that this means taking at least a year to navigate the canals in the modern era, and up to twenty years in earlier eras.
With all the people needed to operate the locks, even a small city makes sense, plus any military needed to defend the canal system.
Maybe a new buildable structure along the lines of a Colony could be added, but it would end up belonging to whoever had territory in the square(s) on which it was built.
If Firaxis does decide to add a canal feature to the game, they will probably come up with something as balanced as the Airbase, or Colony is.
Or we could just resort to building cities at the right spots again.

 

[xerox]

The problem with using a city as a geteway between two bodies of water is that you are limitted to spanning only one tile. A canal should be able to span more than one tile. The movement cost penalty would prevent the California-Carolina canal concept. Perhaps the penalty needs to be two movement points per tile instead of one movement point normally found on water tiles. If you want to be really nasty you could have an additional penalty for canals through hills, forbid canals through mountains, and maybe have no penalty for canals through jungles (lower altitude?). Building canals through these areas might have the same cost as roads or railroads.

 

[Denarr]

The problem with using a city as a geteway between two bodies of water is that you are limitted to spanning only one tile. A canal should be able to span more than one tile. The movement cost penalty would prevent the California-Carolina canal concept. Perhaps the penalty needs to be two movement points per tile instead of one movement point normally found on water tiles. If you want to be really nasty you could have an additional penalty for canals through hills, forbid canals through mountains, and maybe have no penalty for canals through jungles (lower altitude?). Building canals through these areas might have the same cost as roads or railroads.

What is the California-Carolina Canal Concept?

Canals are way the heck more costly than building a railroad.

The objection to a canal taking only one tile doesn't make sense to me.

I haven't seen any game maps that make the Panama larger than one tile at its narrowest point. In fact I can't think of any canals that were built through a span larger than that which would be taken up by a city on the Civilization map.

 

[Tomoyo]

The California-Carolina consept is digging a canal all the way from San Francisco to Savanna.

I haven't seen any game maps that make the Panama larger than one tile at its narrowest point. In fact I can't think of any canals that were built through a span larger than that which would be taken up by a city on the Civilization map.

What about the Grand Canal in China?

 

[Pook]

What is the California-Carolina Canal Concept?
Canals are way the heck more costly than building a railroad.
The objection to a canal taking only one tile doesn't make sense to me.
I haven't seen any game maps that make the Panama larger than one tile at its narrowest point. In fact I can't think of any canals that were built through a span larger than that which would be taken up by a city on the Civilization map.

The California-Carolina Canal is exactly what it sounds like- people (like me) would exploit the game by using hordes of workers to make transcontinental, game-unbalancing canals.
I agree that canals should be FAR more expensive than railroads. After all, the French quit making the Panama Canal because it was too hard (malaria really puts a dent in your workforce). The Panama canal was originally supposed to go through Nicaragua on a much flatter route. Even though it would have been longer, it would have been far easier to build. Political considerations forced it into Panama, going through hills.

 

[BassDude726]

I thought Savanna was in Georgia

 

[biggamer132]

I am reasonably certain that the Ancient Egyptians did NOT build any kind of canal as I would have thought it would have been mentioned in the numerous books I have read on Ancient Egypt.

From Encarta Encyclopedia Online:

The first canal between the Nile River delta and the Red Sea was excavated about the 13th century bc, possibly at the command of an Egyptian ruler, either Seti I or Ramses II. For long periods of time during the next 1000 years the canal was neglected, but several rulers at various times had it reexcavated or modified. All efforts to maintain it in good condition were finally abandoned in the 8th century ad. From time to time thereafter various proposals to dig a canal across the Isthmus of Suez were advanced, but no action was taken. In 1854 the French diplomat and engineer Vicomte Ferdinand Marie de Lesseps succeeded in enlisting the interest of the Egyptian viceroy Said Pasha in the project. In 1858 La Compagnie Universelle du Canal Maritime de Suez (Universal Company of the Maritime Suez Canal) was formed with authority to cut a canal and to operate it for 99 years, after which ownership would return to the Egyptian government. The company was originally a private Egyptian concern, its stock owned chiefly by French and Egyptian interests. In 1875 the British government purchased Egypt's shares.

Excavation of the canal was begun on April 25, 1859, and the canal was opened to navigation on November 17, 1869. The cost totaled about $100 million. About three times that sum was spent on later repairs and improvements.

They built it, but they didn't take care of it.

 

[Denarr]

Well I suppose that Firaxis could include the technologies that allow similar projects, but I would think that such a project would be gawdawfully expensive, and subject to destruction, revision, and conquest by other nations.

I'm not certain about the Chinese Grand Canal, but I do remember watching a documentary about a Monstrous dam that was being built...could be part of the same thing, and it's a project that would make the Grand Coulee looklike a beaver dam.

I believe the project was (comparatively) far more costly than the original Space Program, as well.

 

[Pook]

I'm not certain about the Chinese Grand Canal, but I do remember watching a documentary about a Monstrous dam that was being built...could be part of the same thing, and it's a project that would make the Grand Coulee looklike a beaver dam.

I believe you're referring to the Three Gorges Dam, which is a modern-day project of colossal proportions.
The Grand Canal of China is different. It's the world's oldest and longest canal. Building began in 486 B.C. during the Wu Dynasty. It was extended during the Qi Dynasty, and later by Emperor Yangdi of Sui Dynasty during six years of furious construction from 605-610 AD. The canal is 1,795 Km (1,114 miles) long with 24 locks and some 60 bridges. A more extensive description is here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grand_Canal_of_China

 

[Binnor]

The idea of canals is great. Perhaps enabled by a small wonder (it's too powerful for just one civ to have but should require some effort before a civ can build them). Also the idea of two classes of canals, one ancient (smaller, couldn't handle modern ships, more movement costs) and one modern, would be appriopriate.

 

[dresdor]

Technically, you could build a canal by putting city after city along the path you want...and then just pass the units through...best part: no other civs can use it.