Rail Road Movement.

[Harrier]

Should railroad movement stay the same - infinite or be editable to a number of tiles per turn or per unit.

 

[CamDawg]

In a previous thrad on railroads, someone had proposed the option of having to pay maintenance for your railroad, based on how many tiles it covered, ie 1 gpt per 10/20 squares covered by RR. I don't mind the infinite movement, but I do like the idea of an 'infrastructure tax' for railroad crazy Civs. That would be my only recommendation for changing railroads.

 

[KaNick]

I dont mind the rr movement points. What bugs me is that an airlift takes away all movement points even though air travel is faster.

 

[Zarn]

Originally posted by GrandMasta Nick
I dont mind the rr movement points. What bugs me is that an airlift takes away all movement points even though air travel is faster.

Ships are too slow as well.

 

[Becka]

Railroad should be the same, since it wouldn't take you more than a year to travel to another city by rail, unless you left on December 29th and arrived on January 2nd but you know how it is.

 

[Higher Game]

Road movement should be at 1/2 points and railroad movement should be at 1/4 points. This would balance them both very well. Workers could still get infinite movement. And I do like the idea of maintenence.

 

[Algernon Pondlife]

There was a very detailed and complex discussion previously. This poll offers a set of options that do not adequately address the problem, but offer a number of equally crude conditions because they do not address the fundamental issue which is the ability to mobilize defenses instantaneously (nothing to do with a whole year, because the turn based system conceals the nature of short events).

 

[ssmith619]

Although it would make sense for them not to be infinite, I've been so spoiled and cannot imagine it without. I'd say that there are more things to worry about (an AEGIS taking 10 turns to circumnavigate the globe in 2040) concerning geography etc. Although, I do like the infrastruction tax. That wouldn't bother me too much.

EDIT: Ahh! There is no infrastructure tax option! Oh well, I'll just go with keep it the way it is.

 

[KaNick]

Ships are too slow as well

I agree, nothing is worse than waiting 16 turns just to get you troops into position to attack. Too bad you can't buid railroads on ocean squares.

 

[Lt. 'Killer' M.]

editable would be nice for scenarios.

 

[JonFitt]

Transport really can't be treated accurately, because even in the C19th it was theoretically possible to circumnavigate the world in 80 days!
You could have it like this.
Units would still have the same move values which represent their relative speeds of attack etc. But with each passing era the move value for land squares would go down. (Even travelling across unroaded grassland is fairly easy when you have a car!)
And 1980 pikemen would be modern people fighting with pikes, so they'd have cars! While they wouldn't even rate against tanks, they'd still be able to get from Boston to Mexico fairly easily.
So a 1 move ancient square, would change to a 1/2 move medieval square, and a 1/4 modern square. This way even though rail is super fast, road/normal is still faster.
Movement in hostile territory would revert back to 1/1 as this also represents the locals making it hard going for you.

 

[Jon Shafer]

Guys guys, get out of the 'such and such an action takes 15 days to do which is less than a year so it should be able to do whatever it wants'. The first turn is 50 years... that's clearly not realistic... so forget about the time-span, you just need to balance things for gameplay. Even infinite messes up gameplay, and the paying 1 gpt for 10 tiles or 15 tiles or whatever is much more accurate and better for gameplay.

 

[Crazy Jerome]

I selected editor, but that would be only part of what I would like to see. I'd also like the AI to be very good with railroads in particular, but make them harder to build (whether separate, more expensive unit, longer turns to build them, or whatever.) For this to work, the AI has to be good enough to build a rail net, instead of around the cities. Then the incentive ought to be changed. Instead of +1 mine or +1 irrigation on individual squares, it ought to be increased trade in cities that are connected.

Combined, that would make the rail net a strategic, commerical asset, with no reason to flood every square. You'd still have movement issues when fighting off of the rail net.