Rail/Road Maintenance

[timberwolf4545]

A rail system should also requires some gold maintenance. Stations and tracks don't maintain themselves. I think the benefits of rails are not balanced out by any maintenance requirements. I think this would control rampant rail building which just gets out of hand. You would only put a rail where you would get significant shield or commerce bonus that would outweigh the maintenance. Not sure of how the math would work exactly. Roads would have the same type of upkeep. It would be interesting to be able to make choices to specifically pillage roads or rails on your own territory depending on economic necessity. Roads and rails would of course deteriorate beyond the players control if there is not enough money in the treasury.

 

[bob rulz]

I don't like this idea. It's too harsh. It would essentially ruin the economy of most nations.

 

[Khan Quest]

I don't like this idea. It's too harsh. It would essentially ruin the economy of most nations.

Assuming this is to also limit some of the infinite movement with rails, this is a good idea, but it should only apply to rail. Firaxis would have to adjust a cities income to cover, say, 4-6 tiles worth of rail. More than that would cost you. If they make such a limitation they would have to make up for it with some other improvement.

I think the reason they allow you to build rail in every tile is to symbolize modern transportation and distribution. You need to improve these tiles at this point in the game to grow your cities larger and to pay for more expensive stuff. For game play, it also makes coal a more valueble resource.

 

[Aussie_Lurker]

I actually think that this is a good idea! If you combine it with the ability of roads and rails to boost wealth for that city depending on the number of rail/road routes connect it to the trade network (or the total number of cities which are IN your trade network) then there is no reason why it would ruin your nations economy-unless you built a ridiculous number of them!! Its all about benefits versus costs!

Yours,
Aussie_Lurker.

 

[douche_bag]

nah.it's to complex,you souldn't have to worry about railroad breaking down or rusting or somthing like that.

 

[ManOfMiracles]

If you try to make it too much like RL, you'll end up abandoning some rail lines and converting them to scenic bicycle trails. I don't see a need for roads or rails to deteriorate unless pillaged or damaged by bombardment--just as it currently plays.

 

[The Last Conformist]

Realistically, RR nets increase state revenue by generating tax-paying businesses and travelling.

 

[Lumbergh]

the maitenance idea seems good, since the us civil war was greatly affected by the confederacy's inability to maintain its rr network and this would help the games realism

 

[Mr. Will]

I like the maintenance idea. It would force the player and the AI to build railroads only where they were needed, and it would also make destroying them in war much more strategic because you could cut off cities from resources, etc.

 

[timberwolf4545]

Does anyone know how to mod up something like this? I'd like to try it out and see what happens. I'd also like to try seeing if I can make RRs constantly require coal in order to keep functioning.