I don't like the Civ 5 rivers ... the Civ 4 rivers flowed

[Semmel]

and there is a bridge of almost 2 km in japan, and a tunnle from japans honshu to hokkaido, which is 23km. That can be considered as one tile away for the same argument as there are archers shooting over one tile. Why not allowing tunnles of one tile length? Underneath mountains and underneath sea? It wouldnt hurt much if they cost a lot of gold or hammers to build.

 

[Ahriman]

There is a bridge linking Denmark to Sweden across Öresund and a planned bridge from Sicily to Italy across Messina

And these are all very short distances across narrow straits; 1 tile at most.

The idea that separate continents should be linked together, or islands that are 3-5 tiles off the coast, is absurd.

And also; what's the gain? Land units will already be able to cross water without needing a separate transport unit.

That can be considered as one tile away for the same argument as there are archers shooting over one tile.

Because it improves tactical combat gameplay? How so?

It wouldnt hurt much

Now *there's* a reason to add a feature...

 

[timtofly]

While some of us would like to build a SIM of the earth and call it Civilization, the Civ series is more a board game (with all due respect) turned into a Computer game than could never "fit" everthing that ever happened in history into it. That is what a mod/scenerio is for. If a person takes a map and puts all the right detail into it, they can come up with a scenerio that would build these bridges in the proper perspective they deserve. But a scenerio is just a fraction of Civ and not Civ as a whole.

edit: could someone texture the spaceship parts and "allow" them to create a bridge?????

 

[Semmel]

Now *there's* a reason to add a feature...

No.

1. It is a counter argument for all the people who see the end of the world approaching.

2. You forgot the conditions I wrote.

3. The argument is, that there ARE tunnles and bridges over sea and connecting large land masses that previously only be able to cross by boat.

 

[Rusty Edge]

Yes, I've often wished for the abillity to bridge a tile, or tunnel through a mountain range, or build a canal. Actually, on a hex grid more people may see the need for them, since there will be no more diagonal breaches in natural barriers.

Thing is, these kind of things are on the order of Wonders, and ought to have qualifying techs, a similar hammer cost, or cost a Great Engineer, or have a one per continent limit.

 

[Ahriman]

Again; how many tunnels are there through mountain ranges outside of a handful in the European Alps?

It would also defy the whole purpose of mountain ranges, which is as a natural barrier.

Canals I can definitely see, and they vaguely hinted that such a feature might be possible.

People also have too much recentism here; even the Chunnel and some of the super-bridges are very modern occurences. We definitely wouldn't want anything like this to be possible before the very modern era. In which case... what's the point?

Canals are rather older.

 

[mjs0]

Something like the Chunnel might make a good late game wonder if you could place it on the map and use it to connect two tiles separated by a single water tile.

 

[Tomice]

And remember none of these huge bridges would be usable during a war. Way too vulnerable!

Although it could be interesting gameplaywise... new connections and all. more than 3 tiles would be weird, though. 2 max IMO

 

[Calouste]

Something like the Chunnel might make a good late game wonder if you could place it on the map and use it to connect two tiles separated by a single water tile.

Could be implemented as a late game, wonder-priced version of a workboat. Well, easier than as a city based wonder. Might even be modded in if you add a specific resource to all tiles/hexes that border two different land masses that will only be revealed by a certain tech, the same tech that also allows you the very expensive work boat that you need to work the resource, and working the resource will add a road to that water tile/hex.

 

[henryMCVII]

I personally wouln't like if they made such 1 tile bridges an tile improvement in main game. Anyway I wouldn't mind if they made the wonder thing.

But it would be great, if there would be a new terrain or feature tile in worldbuilder, allowed to pass by sea- and land units (kinda bridge/tunnel). Just imagine ice caps: submarines may dive under and explorer units move on the ice. Something like that... As far as I know, in Civ4 this was impossible to do. With 1UpT there could be very cool tactical scenarios with such "bridges".

 

[Carver]

I personally wouln't like if they made such 1 tile bridges an tile improvement in main game. Anyway I wouldn't mind if they made the wonder thing.

But it would be great, if there would be a new terrain or feature tile in worldbuilder, allowed to pass by sea- and land units (kinda bridge/tunnel). Just imagine ice caps: submarines may dive under and explorer units move on the ice. Something like that... As far as I know, in Civ4 this was impossible to do. :( With 1UpT there could be very cool tactical scenarios with such "bridges".

And choke-points generally. I think C5 really will make it easier to defend yourself with a smaller army than your opponents, depending on tech and geography, of course. Situations like "the 300" (which, IIRC, was more like 1300) against the Persians will be more possible to emulate.

I wouldn't mind seeing intercontinental maglevs that boost commerce to the connected land masses in the future era. Of course I also wouldn't mind space stations, spy satellites, hydroponic farming, underwater cities, a mission to mars, a nanite defuser, and (rather than Utopia) an ultimate energy source that can be created to win the game.


(Some of that may sound familiar.)

 

[Semmel]

Again; how many tunnels are there through mountain ranges outside of a handful in the European Alps?

Longer than 100km: 2 (0 in alpes)
Longer than 50km: 7 (0 in alpes)
Longer than 20km: 34 (3 in alpes, one of which is the CERN particle accellerator.)
Longer than 10km: more than 100
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_tunnels_by_length

Sure, most of the long tunnles are water supply tunnels. But they are huge, having between 5 and 70m² cross section. Much more than tunnels for trains and cars. But all this shows: it can be done and it IS done. So it is not unrealistic.

It would also defy the whole purpose of mountain ranges, which is as a natural barrier.

Well.. Of course they would be available with the invention of deep modern technology like.. radio? Or you can just make a new modern technology: "Large constructions" which allowes you to build Tunnels, Aircraft Carriers, and increases the yeald of mines by 1 Hammer due to deep mining.

Tunnels must be expensive enough so the player doesnt spam them and they should be useful enough to make them more profitable than long roads around mountain chains. Which is exactly what they are in reality: the expensive and short version of a long and cheap road. But on the long run, they might even be financial more productive.

Canals I can definitely see, and they vaguely hinted that such a feature might be possible.

People also have too much recentism here; even the Chunnel and some of the super-bridges are very modern occurences. We definitely wouldn't want anything like this to be possible before the very modern era. In which case... what's the point?

Canals are rather older.

The Panama Canal was completed 1914, the Zues Canal in 1869. This is earlier, so you are correct there, but in terms of civ, its the modern area as well. So they might be able to be build with steam power or something in that area.

 

[Souron]

Canals would basically serve as civ4 BTS forts though.

As for Tunnels: in civ, roads serve 2 purposes: trade (routes), and military transit. For the former, I suspect that by that time, the maintenance cost of roads would not make it a huge benefit to replace a slightly longer already existing route with a tunnel. For the later, it would not make sense to move many types of late industrial and modern units though tunnels. Case point a tank. Simpler to not have tunnels at all, then to work out the complexities of which units can and cannot pass though them. Besides, tunnels would only be used on the home front, never on the front lines, as they can easily be destroyed.

 

[Songkok]

The Panama Canal was completed 1914, the Zues Canal in 1869. This is earlier, so you are correct there, but in terms of civ, its the modern area as well. So they might be able to be build with steam power or something in that area.

Canals in China used for large scale water transport are dated as early as 400BC.
The longest canal in the world is the grand canal in China, completed in 609AD.

Check out Ancient Canals in:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canal

The usage of canals in ancient china is mainly for transportation of food to the Capital.

Also, I agree with building of tunnels, maybe a expensive specialized tunnel building unit which will be consumed upon using. This should appears only in very late game though (modern era). The length of the tunnel to be built shall also be limited. and they will cost a lot of maintenance in compare to roads. A LOT MORE.

 

[Semmel]

Canals in China used for large scale water transport are dated as early as 400BC.
The longest canal in the world is the grand canal in China, completed in 609AD.

Check out Ancient Canals in:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canal

The usage of canals in ancient china is mainly for transportation of food to the Capital.

Also, I agree with building of tunnels, maybe a expensive specialized tunnel building unit which will be consumed upon using. This should appears only in very late game though (modern era). The length of the tunnel to be built shall also be limited. and they will cost a lot of maintenance in compare to roads. A LOT MORE.

I red this section before but decided to not include it into my post. In Civ, ocean vassels never wer able to enter rivers. And it doesnt look like thats going to change in Civ5. So rivers served as an extension of rivers for irigation (which is possible in civ4 by chain irrigation) and for trade routs. This is not what was ment in this thread I beleave. Here, canals were ment to allow ocean vassels to go on land tiles. Which was possible in china because the ocean vassels were so small. But later, if you think of larger ships like a frigate, they cant use these canals.

 

[onedreamer]

The Panama Canal was completed 1914, the Zues Canal in 1869. This is earlier, so you are correct there, but in terms of civ, its the modern area as well. So they might be able to be build with steam power or something in that area.

considering that:
Zues = Suez
area = Era or Age

1869 and Steam Power belong to the Industrial Era, not the Modern Era.

 

[Geek113377]

When will we be able to move small naval vessels down rivers?!

I think i heard that you will be able to do this from some article on the web. maybe that's why the rivers are so wide and smooth. i'm really hoping that's true!

and rivers do flow, they just aren't as sparkly and lively as in civ4 E3 Video

 

[Geek113377]

And also; what's the gain? Land units will already be able to cross water without needing a separate transport unit.

It has been confirmed that land units will need to WAIT ONE TURN after going into the water (the time it takes for that unit to construct some type of makeshift transport). moving out of the water would probably also take all your movement points (like unloading from a boat in civ4). with bridges, you could be across the water and onto the other landmass in one turn, 1/2 the time it would have taken to move across the 1 tile stretch of water without the bridge.

 

[Ahriman]

Longer than 100km: 2 (0 in alpes)
Longer than 50km: 7 (0 in alpes)
Longer than 20km: 34 (3 in alpes, one of which is the CERN particle accellerator.)
Longer than 10km: more than 100
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_tunnels_by_length

The vast majority of these don't count.

A water supply system is not a road tunnel. And they're not similar engineering-wise; a water supply tunnel doesn't have to deal with exhaust systems, or fires, and can be much smaller.
A metro/subway system under a city (shallow distance underground, high value, cheaper to build, easy to access) is not a tunnel through a mountain chain.
You have to go 26 places down the list to get to a road tunnel!

Keep in mind as well; a 2-lane road tunnel (like many of these tunnels; 1 lane each way) is not exactly going to allow the same amount of traffic as an 8 lane superhighway between cities - and isn't going to allow you to ship large armies through it easily.

Look at the real world; are there tunnels through the Himalayas? The Rockies? The Pyrennes? the Andes? No, going through mountain ranges is a PITA, there are narrow roads through passes, or you go around.

Other than a few through the alps, building transport tunnels through big mountain chains is not something we do, because it would be hideously cost ineffective.

The Panama Canal was completed 1914, the Zues Canal in 1869. This is earlier, so you are correct there, but in terms of civ, its the modern area as well.

No, in terms of Civ, its the industrial era. There is a vast difference between mid 19th century (riflemen, cavalry) and end of the 20th century (stealth bombers). Remember that the game slows down, so that turns start being 1 year instead of 2 years or 4 or 50.

with bridges, you could be across the water and onto the other landmass in one turn

Why would this be a desirable gameplay feature? Water is supposed to be a barrier. Even the Chunnel doesn't connect England to the continent in the same way as if they were actually connected by land.

 

[kozzer]

Look at the real world; are there tunnels through the Himalayas? The Rockies? The Pyrennes? the Andes? No, going through mountain ranges is a PITA, there are narrow roads through passes, or you go around.

There are 2 on I-70 west of Denver, one of which being the Eisenhower tunnel. It's a couple of miles long or so. The highway follows Glen Canyon on the west side, and another canyon on the east, until it gets to the continental divide and tunnels through the heart of a granite mountain. So, for Civ purposes, it would appear to tunnel through the entire range, but could represent a setup like the Ike tunnel.

Edit: Just checked on Google Maps, and it appears to be just about 2 miles long.