Different Types of Roads

[Teabeard]

Early on the Romans and Incas and Others built great stone roads which are still in use today and are of superior quality to dirt roads, then were also gravel roads, and finally what we have today with asphalt. Stone roads would take a long time to build and would require that a dirt road already be in place before you can upgrade it to stone. I think that stone roads should be available with the technology "construction", or maybe only industrious civs can build them (ie: Romans, Incas, Chinese, etc.)?

A dirt road consumes 1/3 movement point. How about stone roads, which are superior because they do not have potholes and do not turn to mud or have overgrowth, take only 1/5th movement point? Asphalt roads would perhaps be even better still, and would represent the superhighways of the modern era. Asphalt roads could perhaps consume a mere 1/10 movement point. We can do something different with railroads, too, like maybe make them cost some movement points, but not very much. Say 1/15th or 1/20th of a movement point to move on a railroad?

To summarize:

Dirt road - 1/3 movement point
Stone/Gravel Road - 1/5th movement point
Asphalt Road - 1/10th movement point
Railroad - ???

Stone roads may require access to mountains to build, from which to quarry the stones. Asphalt roads would require access to oil and if the supply of oil is severed then the roads should be reduced in effectiveness. With Railroads you need coal and steel to build but you need a constant supply of coal to maintain. If you run out then the railroads should become utterly useless.

Just some thoughts...

 

[searcheagle]

I am intrigued by the idea of different roads. The difficulties is also keeping ease of operation and not adding micromanagement. That being said:

Requiring a lot of resources to build roads is too complex in opinion.

Different levels of road movement is a possibility, although I don't know what they would be and think that yours are too generous with movement points, except in larger maps.

Different roads could play a critical part in a move to limit capacity on roads/ rails. Some threads are calling for that. Different roads could have different levels of capacity. More challenging.

Different roads could have different bonuses/ expenses. Limits the canvases of the map with improvements.

 

[Andu Indorin]

I entirely concur. My thinking was your basic beaten path (based upon on "established trade route"), i.e. 1/2 mp. Improved road (a la Rome) 1/3 mp (in recognition that many such roads improved upon already established "beaten paths."
And construction is the appropriate the tech for the improved/stone road.
With Modern Era, 1/5 mp (macadem?), with a "civil engineering" tech (roughly where Sanitation is on the old Civ 3 tech tree).

Part of my thinking here involves is placing a reasonable limit on rail movement, say 10 to 15 squares per turn ... an idea that's been kicked around once or twice over the last half dozen years.

 

[Tantor]

Road movement should initially only be 1/2 mp. Romans could have 1/3 roads as a trait. Roads could then be upgraded through certain techs to 1/3 and 1/4 without further use of workers. This to avoid more micromanagement. Ancient roads with only 1/2 mp will make ships more useful, wich is more historically correct too. Most of the trade and long distance movement went by sea if possible.

 

[Tantor]

I would also like to see the possibility of using roads in enemy squares which I have conquered. I do understand that local resistance may be part of why we currently may not do so. But if I choose to let one of my units fortify on a square to safeguard my "line of supply" I should be able to use the roads. This will bring new aspects to combined arms as I will use paratroopers and airborne inf (helicopters) to secure roads along my planned route of invasion. It will also be more important to guard your border and stop littering every tile with roads, as roads now will be more tactically important to seize/guard during an invasion. Roads will become natural alleys of invasion. Guarding important junctions will be necessary if you fear conflict is imminent with a neighbouring civ. The necessity for guarding a captured square should be until there is no more resistance in the closest captured city, this to reflect that resistance happens also in the squares around the captured city not just the city itself.

 

[Spatula]

There is already too much to build in Civ3.....I'd be happier if it became an automatic thing or something like that.

Let's not get into railroad movement points again. Please?

 

[Colonel]

This is a great idea... I like it besides it adding an extra little bit it adds realism and gameplay which is always a great combination.