Civ 5 - roads
- Thread starter V. Soma
- Start date
In the screenshots thus far, none of the resources appear to be connected by roads, and the roads only go from city to city (except for one or two exceptions where the road just leads out from a lone city to the edge of the cultural borders and then just ends). So Revolution-style city-to-city auto-road-building could very well be the case.
This is kind of a drastic way to reduce road spam, and introduces a lot of questions, such as what happens when an invading army wants to destroy a road tile.
This is kind of a drastic way to reduce road spam, and introduces a lot of questions, such as what happens when an invading army wants to destroy a road tile.
bjbrains
Man of U-235
- Joined
- Jul 14, 2007
- Messages
- 837
That's pretty much refuted by the shacknews interview where Schafer reveals that legions will be able to build roads/forts. That wouldn't make sense if it was restricted between cities.
KrikkitTwo
Immortal
- Joined
- Apr 3, 2004
- Messages
- 12,418
I'd say more likely (given the roman UU), that maintenance costs means it is only Profitable to build roads city-city.
(Especially since the Cive Rev model had a whole lot of wierd behavior.. potentially lots of MM)
Good point. I certainly hope this is the case.
Road building won't be restricted from city to city built in the cities like in CivRev, CivRev was much more simplified, workers didnt exist, so cities built everything. Where as ciV still has workers so they will be building the roads (and legions for rome 
), its just if roads cost maintanence which is what we have been told you will want to build as few as possible, some will restrict this simply to city to city road networks, others will place strategic roads to allow faster troop movements onto your "line" of troops. Saving precious time when you need to re-inforce your troops. Really the choice is yours, but if you build to many roads I guess you will end up simply stifling your economy just as building to many troops or cities did in cIV.
), its just if roads cost maintanence which is what we have been told you will want to build as few as possible, some will restrict this simply to city to city road networks, others will place strategic roads to allow faster troop movements onto your "line" of troops. Saving precious time when you need to re-inforce your troops. Really the choice is yours, but if you build to many roads I guess you will end up simply stifling your economy just as building to many troops or cities did in cIV.Schuesseled
Deity
- Joined
- Mar 31, 2008
- Messages
- 2,081
Yep exactly, roads provide trade routes, spread resources (possibly), increase troop movement (possibly) but they cost maintenance (possibly) so your only gonna build them where its profitable or necessary.
CornPlanter
Emperor
No need to panic (yet), there can be a lot of other reasons for different tile yields. In Civ4, different civics affected different improvements (i.e., Caste System for Workshops) and in Civ5 there could be more stuff we are just not aware of yet. Remember that it's way different game from Civ4.
Roads reducing tile value is such an obviously horrible idea I can't believe sane devs could have implemented that.
Roads reducing tile value is such an obviously horrible idea I can't believe sane devs could have implemented that.
I like the idea of roads costing maintenance instead of just time. We should not have the ability to build instantly (that would be too silly). But if you recall Railroad Tycoon, you hold down the mouse and stretch a road and it will tell you the cost (given all of the obstacles and barriers) and YOU have to decide whether it's worth it. Sometimes it is to provide a better transportation network, while other times the revenues that you bring will pay for the road over time (in addition to being able to use the resource).
Schuesseled
Deity
- Joined
- Mar 31, 2008
- Messages
- 2,081
As I said before, i believe i was mistaken, it seems far more likely a goldenage was the cause of the discrepency.
I wonder how roads outside of national borders work. Would they be free? could you spam roads near a rival civ, so that they get a tax penalty when their cities expand until they get rid of the useless roads? Will the AI be smart enough to get rid of useless roads?
Schuesseled
Deity
- Joined
- Mar 31, 2008
- Messages
- 2,081
it'd be interesteing if the roads decayed and destroyed if you chose not to pay maintenace, mayube even require military every X hexes to prevent bandit raids and other such stuff.
It looks like you could disrupt the trade of a civ you are at war at by putting a unit on a tile that says "trade route".
The bandits idea is interesting and a nice historical touch. Banditry was a big problem in France for example in the 16th and 17th centuries, and in the middle ages there were numerous local lords who in name swore allegiance to the king, but in practice pretty much did what they wanted in their own territory. Tiles that are worked by your cities wouldn't need any protection, as they are covered by the central government, but other tiles would need a unit or a fort, both with a certain zone of control, to make the trade route work at full revenue, with the lost revenue being a representation of robbery or the additional cost of having to protect every trade caravan. Cities growing bigger and extending their influence would eventually eliminate the need for those.
onedreamer
Dragon
Actually AFAIK in Civ4 roads and railroads contribute to global warming.
Shurdus
Am I Napoleon?
Kerploink? AFAIK they did no such thing.
Frank Drebin
Police Squad!
- Joined
- Jul 4, 2010
- Messages
- 456
why? you have no idea how balanced tiles and imporvements will be overall, so how can you say roads diminishing tile value will be unbalanced?
or what else do you mean by horrible?
Ahriman
Tyrant
It is totally ridiculous to have an economic model where improving transport infrastructure *lowers* the economic output of a tile.
Its a horrible idea not because of balance, but because of a horrible break in immersion and realism; improving transport infrastructure has been one of the single biggest causes of rural economic development throughout history.
It is 1000 times worse than archers shooting across lakes.
It would be like if building factories lowered your production, or building universities lowered your research output.
tom2050
Deity
- Joined
- Oct 12, 2005
- Messages
- 5,516
So you build a road, and your commerce (or tile output) is reduced?
I suppose this was the method they thought of to get rid of the spaghettification of roads? Hmmm.. not exactly a creative way to do it IMO. Like always I blame 2K for this
Something a bit different could have worked, like having a road maintenance fee (after all, roads do cost), and building too many of them will be a heavy burden on your economy. Or something like that. I guess in the end, it all works the same way, even if it is reversed in a sense.
This will definitely make you not want to ever build any roads at all.. ever.
I suppose this was the method they thought of to get rid of the spaghettification of roads? Hmmm.. not exactly a creative way to do it IMO. Like always I blame 2K for this
Something a bit different could have worked, like having a road maintenance fee (after all, roads do cost), and building too many of them will be a heavy burden on your economy. Or something like that. I guess in the end, it all works the same way, even if it is reversed in a sense.
This will definitely make you not want to ever build any roads at all.. ever.
Similar threads
