Railways?

[Depravo]

Until this, I'd assumed 'industrial roads' represented turnpikes. I took it for granted there would be railroads as well.

NO RAILROADS? In a game showcasing human civilisation? Please lord say it ain't so, or at least that 'industrial roads' are actually railways.

 

[EgonSpengler]

Railroads in Civ games is another instance of the series' ongoing mishandling of international trade. iirc, there is 1 country in real life that has no rail connections with its neighbors (I think it's Myanmar, but don't quote me).

 

[KrikkitTwo]

Railroads in Civ games is another instance of the series' ongoing mishandling of international trade. iirc, there is 1 country in real life that has no rail connections with its neighbors (I think it's Myanmar, but don't quote me).

Well it looks like Civ 6 fixes this because if you have a trade route with your neighbors, you have a route/road... and I guess the Industrial era road is basically a railroad.

 

[qadams]

Well it looks like Civ 6 fixes this because if you have a trade route with your neighbors, you have a route/road... and I guess the Industrial era road is basically a railroad.

That makes sense to me too. Although it might be nice to see it represented graphically as the game goes on.

 

[Lord Shadow]

To be honest, if you think about it, having all roads is more realistic than having all railroads.

Roads are, after all, far more ubiquitous than the rail alternative.

 

[Jabulani]

Same here, railroads are too important in history to be ignored.

I feel you, such a crime would be a show stopper for me.

 

[KrikkitTwo]

That makes sense to me too. Although it might be nice to see it represented graphically as the game goes on.

I would hope they also have it gameplay represented
Industrial roads (rail).. 1 MP , 0.5 mp with coal
Atomic roads (highway).. 0.75 mp, 0.25 with oil

(similar for embarked unit movement +2 if coal or oil)

 

[npburg]

To be honest, if you think about it, having all roads is more realistic than having all railroads.

Roads are, after all, far more ubiquitous than the rail alternative.

From a perspective of trade and military transport, during the 19th and early 20th century, railways were far superior to roads and critical part of the industrial infrastructure. That changed with modern roads and automobile transport but it is a huge leap technologically and historically to go from medieval roads with carts to modern roads with trucks. All 3 modes have their place in the game and should be reflected with increasing transportation and commerce bonuses.

 

[Lord Shadow]

From a perspective of trade and military transport, during the 19th and early 20th century, railways were far superior to roads and critical part of the industrial infrastructure. That changed with modern roads and automobile transport but it is a huge leap technologically and historically to go from medieval roads with carts to modern roads with trucks. All 3 modes have their place in the game and should be reflected with increasing transportation and commerce bonuses.

My point is that railways are probably represented by industrial roads, and ultimately this comes down to appearance. If all roads cosmetically look like such instead of railroads, it makes more sense than having them look like rails, like every Civ has done until now.

As for railroads existing in parallel with regular roads, well, no Civ has ever represented them in truly equal footing. Once you had the ability to build railroads, roads were simply obsolete.

 

[Jabulani]

Please remember Sid was the creator of the gorgeous and marvellous Railroad Tycoon.....

 

[Depravo]

Please remember Sid was the creator of the gorgeous and marvellous Railroad Tycoon.....

And the godawful 'Railroads'.

 

[Jabulani]

And the godawful 'Railroads'.

It wasn't bad, it was like civ vi compared to civ i

 

[Boris Gudenuf]

To be honest, if you think about it, having all roads is more realistic than having all railroads.

Roads are, after all, far more ubiquitous than the rail alternative.

Roads and railroads are NOT equivalent, neither in the Industrial Era when railroads were first built, nor today. Quick Comparison: one train on the average American railroad is 100 50 ton freight cars, which can be moved at up to 100 kph for 24 hours continuously by a crew totaling about 9 men (in 3 shifts). To move the same amount of goods by modern highway in '18-wheel' trucks would require about 75 - 100 trucks and a total crew of that many drivers and could only move (legally) for about 10 hours a day. If you have to move people or goods in quantity long distances you do it by water or rail. Period.

And, of course, in the 19th century the trains only carried about 1500 - 2000 tons each at 50 kph, but animal-drawn transport (the only land alternative) could carry no more than 5 - 10 tons/vehicle at about 4 - 5 kph. The advent of the railroad was the first time in history that a human being could travel faster than 30 miles in an hour anywhere on earth, unless they were blown by a hurricane or falling off a cliff. The railroad changed virtually everything about people's lives, expectations, and quality of life. It also made it possible, for the first time in history, to feed a city that wasn't on a coast or river from more than 50 miles away. If they ever represented that correctly in the game, then quite simply all your 'city radius' calculations would go right out the window as soon as you had a railroad connection.

Leaving railroads out of the game and expecting them to be represented by roads of any kind makes this a fantasy game, and a poorly designed one at that.

 

[Deggial]

Civ games are an abstraction. All railroads in the world wouldn'd have increased production without factories taking advantage of the increased transportation capacity. Factories, however, are part of the game. In this sense, the industrial revolution (railroads were part of) is represented - just without the visual representation of the transportation. I don't think, your harsh verdict is justified.

Nevertheless, I would also like to have a game mechanic dedicated to railroads implemented. They definitely should be built actively (tile by tile or by connecting one city with another by a single command, where each linkage consumes the unit).
I am not sure about the related benefit, though, without having played the game. For unit speed, we have roads. Commerce is also already related to them.
Another production increase? Maybe. But the area effect of factories (and other late game buildings, by the way) seems already pretty strong and also represents the related increase in infrastructure.

Maybe dedicated railroads are simply not needed any more, as all their effects are covered by other game mechanics.

 

[Stilgar08]

You will still get the Military Engineer, unlocked with the Military Engineering technology (surprise!), a unit that allows you to build your own roads.

Correct but in the actual version they only have two charges just like builders have charges. And since they have more than road/railway building duties they likely won't get "wasted" on that...
I'm quite sure I won't build 5engineers just to make a Railroad connection if it's not strategically important.
I'll have to play it to decide whether I like it or not...

 

[Lord Shadow]

Roads and railroads are NOT equivalent, neither in the Industrial Era when railroads were first built, nor today. Quick Comparison: one train on the average American railroad is 100 50 ton freight cars, which can be moved at up to 100 kph for 24 hours continuously by a crew totaling about 9 men (in 3 shifts). To move the same amount of goods by modern highway in '18-wheel' trucks would require about 75 - 100 trucks and a total crew of that many drivers and could only move (legally) for about 10 hours a day. If you have to move people or goods in quantity long distances you do it by water or rail. Period.

And, of course, in the 19th century the trains only carried about 1500 - 2000 tons each at 50 kph, but animal-drawn transport (the only land alternative) could carry no more than 5 - 10 tons/vehicle at about 4 - 5 kph. The advent of the railroad was the first time in history that a human being could travel faster than 30 miles in an hour anywhere on earth, unless they were blown by a hurricane or falling off a cliff. The railroad changed virtually everything about people's lives, expectations, and quality of life. It also made it possible, for the first time in history, to feed a city that wasn't on a coast or river from more than 50 miles away. If they ever represented that correctly in the game, then quite simply all your 'city radius' calculations would go right out the window as soon as you had a railroad connection.

Leaving railroads out of the game and expecting them to be represented by roads of any kind makes this a fantasy game, and a poorly designed one at that.

I never said they were equivalent. I said that if you had to pick one appearance to represent modern transportation, you'd pick the road, as it makes more sense to see roads everywhere instead of railroads everywhere, like in every Civ before 6. While rail is more efficient for freight transport, most land travel is done on automobiles.

Railroads everywhere does make more sense in the industrial era, however, since the contrast was greater then and personal transportation was minimal.

And to address your last sentence, to disregard regular roads by the modern era is far more fantastical.

 

[Xyriach]

Historical impact aside, railroads were a great game mechanic. Once you'd unlocked their tech you set your workers in action to rebuild your roads. To me, it marked the dawn of the late game and left a great footprint on the map where major cities were connected by railroad and outlying cities had only roads.

It'll be a shame if they're not in CivVI.

 

[stealth_nsk]

Historical impact aside, railroads were a great game mechanic. Once you'd unlocked their tech you set your workers in action to rebuild your roads. To me, it marked the dawn of the late game and left a great footprint on the map where major cities were connected by railroad and outlying cities had only roads.

That's really why they are NOT in Civ6 - the Worker and road building mechanic changed.

 

[AinEiken]

I would hope they also have it gameplay represented
Industrial roads (rail).. 1 MP , 0.5 mp with coal
Atomic roads (highway).. 0.75 mp, 0.25 with oil

(similar for embarked unit movement +2 if coal or oil)

Not sure about "Industrial Roads/Railways" - but there's a screenshot in the Natural Park-Thread that has a tooltip about "Modern Roads" 0.5 Movement Points (http://forums.civfanatics.com/threads/national-parks.575511/page-2)

 

[Manifold]

All railways in the world wouldn'd have increased production without factories taking advantage of the increased transportation capacity. Factories, however, are part of the game.

Not really, increased production of factories are only one part of the increase of the transportation capacity. I first mention about railways transport goods, persons, food, postal deliveries not only coal to the factories. There was not only a production boost also an enormously city growing and an economic boost while the Establishment of Railway Companies.

The building-costs of Railway are just to high that they can upgrade automatically. This could be represented by the need of workers and their working time per tile in game. This was the way the Civ games always did it. It was not perfect but omit it entirely is nothing.

Nevertheless, I would also like to have a game mechanic dedicated to railroads implemented. They definitely should be built actively (tile by tile or by connecting one city with another by a single command, where each linkage consumes the unit).

Yes it should be build actively. There was another game the name was Call to Power long time ago, maybe it was better then Civ3, and it has no workers at all. But you had to build your infrastructure with gold. Some gamers like this way some other do not. But anyway it was necessary to build the railways tile by tile.

Such huge infrastructure projects are enormously and a big decision for the government or company. It costs a lot and has to be very well planed. You actually see it in connection with the build of three/four-lane highways.
In the railway construction, the difficulties were even greater.

Maybe dedicated railroads are simply not needed any more, as all their effects are covered by other game mechanics.

As I wrote before the current non-implementation did not work in game, if one Civ has reached the era with railways and another Civ not and a city is conquered, it should switch the nature of the infrastructure back and forth. That makes no sense to me.