Natural Harbors

[opus95]

In the Civ game, it's 'way too easy to build super harbors in places at which it shouldn't be possible. There are only a relatively few locations which would make great harbors...most costal areas have no natural inlets and bays (like New York Harbor, or Sydney, for instance). In this game, it's no problem building an equivalent to New York harbor in a place with no inlets at all (like the bland coast of west Africa).

I suggest that there be special coastal squares (at the mouths of rivers, and also on convoluted coasts) which would make great harbors, and that ONLY at these places can civs build the sort of harbors which can build modern warships. At any other places, it should be very difficult to build a great harbor. Now, civs will have to search for great harbor locations, just as they have to search for resources.

Also, there should be a small limit, except at the Great Harbor locations, to the number of ships that can be harbored at any location.

 

[Vael]

I'm not sure I agree with this. Ships are already left wanting with regards for being useful... limiting them even further doesn't seem like a good idea.

 

[rhialto]

The benefit of a natural harbour location should be that teh city gets a free harbour city improvement (when teh appropriate tech is discovered).

I'd also like to see about 1/4 of all coast tiles replaced with 'shallows', which are impassable to the largest ships (battleships and heavy carriers) due to the lack of depth. Submarines should also lose any special submarine bonuses in such tiles.

 

[opus95]

The benefit of a natural harbour location should be that teh city gets a free harbour city improvement (when teh appropriate tech is discovered).

I'd also like to see about 1/4 of all coast tiles replaced with 'shallows', which are impassable to the largest ships (battleships and heavy carriers) due to the lack of depth. Submarines should also lose any special submarine bonuses in such tiles.

It certainly ought to be easier to create a harbor at a Great Harbor location, but I'm afraid that it would still make it too easy to build massive harbors at other locations where they really shouldn't belong.

I agree completely with your "shallows" idea. As for someone else's statement that ships are of little use in this game ... Naval power should be emphasized more. That's the only way that the British Empire could be constituted as it was by the early 20th century. Based on my experiences with the TeTurkhan, playing England, I think that good harbor to harbor links should go much further in limiting corruption over great distances.

Opus95

 

[rhialto]

Problem is, what is a harbour? By modern times, it is possible to make an artificial harbour of impressive size quite easily, so we can certainly discount any modern examples. If there is any lack of great harbours in Africa, it is more due to the depressed economy in the hinterland than due to geography (there are good natural harbours there anyway).

And in pre-industrial times, on almost any given 80-mile stretch of coast in normally-habitable regions, there is somewhere a stretch of coast that is suitable for teh kind of harbour size that would be suted for almost any normal purpose.

 

[sealman]

I agree with rhialto. However, I would like to see a limit to the number of ships that can be in the harbor at any one point. The amount of ships could be dependant on the size of the "natural harbor"

 

[tidho]

I love the shallow water idea.
I also agree that there should be some benefit to placing the harbors in the right places. At least early on, maybe lower maintenance costs.

I'd also like them to be independent from cities, although this may be considered taking a step back given how airbases have changed the last few versions.

 

[GoodGame]

Perhaps steal from the RAR mod, and add shipyards, with the stipulation that shipyards can only go in certain places.

Like the idea of natural harbors = bonuse tiles that give free harbors.

 

[opus95]

Problem is, what is a harbour? By modern times, it is possible to make an artificial harbour of impressive size quite easily, so we can certainly discount any modern examples. If there is any lack of great harbours in Africa, it is more due to the depressed economy in the hinterland than due to geography (there are good natural harbours there anyway).


And in pre-industrial times, on almost any given 80-mile stretch of coast in normally-habitable regions, there is somewhere a stretch of coast that is suitable for teh kind of harbour size that would be suted for almost any normal purpose.

1 ) A harbor is an enclosed inlet that's capable of protecting large numbers of vessels from stormy seas, etc., in a good location to be close to important shipping lanes. A place like New York Harbor is a Great Harbor location, while a place like, say, Ocean City, New Jersey, isn't. Ocean city, in game terms would be just as likely to be used as a harbor, (it would be only about 1 or 2 tiles from NY) but I'm sorry, it's just not possible in real-life, without spending (vainly) vast resourses trying to do it.

2) Yes, and that proves my point ... the reason that the African economies are depressed is partially BECAUSE there were no good locations for Great Harbors. Even the rich colonial powers could not create any good ports there, because it was not possible.

3) That's my point ... a Great Harbor location is NOT one that would be used for normal purpose, but for the extraordinary basing of aircraft carriers, etc. I'm not talking about a few galleys.

 

[Hyronymus]

2) Yes, and that proves my point ... the reason that the African economies are depressed is partially BECAUSE there were no good locations for Great Harbors. Even the rich colonial powers could not create any good ports there, because it was not possible.

The dutch (sorry, mentioned them earlier today) had 'factorijen' along the westcoast of the African continent. These factorijen served as harbours and also resupplied the ships on their journey around Cape Good Hope. They became important trading points too where many ships safely loaded its bay.

 

[stormbind]

Natural harbours are very common, especially in the middle and industrial ages: almost any river inlet would suffice. As has been pointed out, most rivers don't appear on civ maps... so who is to say a natural harbour isn't on an aribitrary coastal tile?

Only in the modern age with the world's current biggest ships do you need something exceptional by nature's standards.

This is highlighted by the current Royal Navy dilemna of where to station their upcoming 60k ton supercarriers: they don't have a port big enough! This really highlights how the age changes requirements, because everyone knows the Royal Navy had no shortage of big ports the 19th century.

Incidentally, the RN plans to extend existing ports to accomodate the ships and this proves that you can build harbours wherever you like.

 

[stormbind]

However, to support this thread in a different respect... you could have naturally protective and naturally hazardous regions of coast!

 

[Hyronymus]

Yes, but that sounds almost like having weather effects that 'guide' you on where (not) to build ports (let alone other things).

 

[stormbind]

I always wanted weather effects!

 

[Komoda]

Not to endorse a mod or nothing, but a source for a wonder, Suiggon, exists in WH2. It is a great harbor established for trade. It consisted of a large stone dock jutting out from the coast and had great stone sea walls that protected the inner harbor from being affected by sea storms that would come ashore and cause large amounts of damage. Western Europe had them, Eastern Mediterranean also.

I do agree, that perhaps, the civ map needs to have natural bays in which to build harbors. As those areas along the coastline, were highly sought as places in which to built ports. Not only because they could easily be defended if attacked from the sea, but also protected the port from nature's hazards.

 

[searcheagle]

The benefit of a natural harbour location should be that teh city gets a free harbour city improvement (when teh appropriate tech is discovered).

I'd also like to see about 1/4 of all coast tiles replaced with 'shallows', which are impassable to the largest ships (battleships and heavy carriers) due to the lack of depth. Submarines should also lose any special submarine bonuses in such tiles.

What about before the discovery of the tech? It is a natural harbor afterall. That would also give the user an incentive to put cities there.

 

[rhialto]

You dont get teh benefit of a natural harbour until you have the tech that would allow you to build a harbour. That reflects teh fact that a harbour is more than just a nicely shaped (either naturally or man-made) curve in teh coast that protects boats. The harbour also represents the boats themselves, and more importantly, it represents the know-how to use them effectively.

 

[MattII]

I think rhialto's ideas would work best, but you should be able to place favourable coast in the editor like rivers.

 

[Ramalhão]

You dont get teh benefit of a natural harbour until you have the tech that would allow you to build a harbour. That reflects teh fact that a harbour is more than just a nicely shaped (either naturally or man-made) curve in teh coast that protects boats. The harbour also represents the boats themselves, and more importantly, it represents the know-how to use them effectively.

As far as I remember, in Settlers series you could only build harbour in some specific locations, those who could really support ships - the "natural harbours".

Maybe in Civ4 there could be an "anchor" on the map to indicate a natural harbour. When founding a city in these locations, a natural harbour would be already done, so can start doing ships and having trading routes. Then a tech (maybe at medieval or navigations age) can allow man to make "artificial" harbours.

 

[opus95]

Maybe in Civ4 there could be an "anchor" on the map to indicate a natural harbour. When founding a city in these locations, a natural harbour would be already done, so can start doing ships and having trading routes. Then a tech (maybe at medieval or navigations age) can allow man to make "artificial" harbours.[/QUOTE]


Yes! However, it should be a "hidden" anchor, which can only be discovered by actually stepping into the tile. Also, when exploring unknown coasts with a ship, the ship should be allowed to go into the "coastal tile", and only then actually discover the "natural harbor". Henry Hudson only discovered "New York harbor" by sailing into it...he didn't "see" it from 50 miles off-shore. Other explorers actually sailed past there without noticing. (Of course, the exploring ship shouldn't be allowed to go "overland" from one coastal tile to another. It should only enter a coastal tile from a water tile.

By the way (slightly off subject), I've always been sceptical of being able to "see" resources (at first) without actually stepping into the resource's tile, and "looking" for them.

For instance, I think that one should first "mine" a tile to discover the resource that's there ... such as iron, coal, etc. Maybe after a while (with certain tech advances), other tiles with the same resource would be easier to find, but I like the "search" aspect of discovery. The idea of sailing past an unknown coast, and "seeing" coffee, or furs 2 tiles inland is absurd.

Also, one should actually "see" horses within his territory in order to research "horseback riding".