realistic railways?

[snowmelk]

Originally posted by a_wanderer
i think perhaps the best solution is that the railway network of the country should have a 'total capacity', based on perhaps the lenghth of the network (the longer the greater the capacity) or why not ammount of money spent on 'transportation' (i.e. you put in 1 gpt in transportation - you get 10 trasport capacity, - 2 gpt = 20 transport capacity etc). the capacity itself should be distributed as a player seems fit. for example if you have 10 transport capacity - they you can choose to move a single unit 10 squares distance, or you can choose to move two units each of them for 5 squares of distance, etc. - the idea is that one unit of transport capacity should allow one unit to move one square.

I think it sounds good, better than having a fixed maintenance cost for railways
What if instead of buying transport capacity and using it up during transport just move an unit and loose the according amount of money? Basically the same but makes it easier.
Additionally I would like to have railway stations, since you definetly need some infrastructure to load large amounts of troops and material.
If you want to be able to transport troops by railway not only between cities, what about railway stations as tile improvement? After all, workers can build airports, too...

 

[Iztvan]

Originally posted by snowmelk


If you want to be able to transport troops by railway not only between cities, what about railway stations as tile improvement? After all, workers can build airports, too...

And a Colony should automaticaly count as having a RR station and a Harbour!

 

[Highgeneral]

i LOVE the train and highway idea

 

[Plug]

I vote for keeping infinite movement on railroads.

The game would be too slow in the modern age without it.

Sea units could be faster though.

 

[alpha wolf 64]

I would make simple changes. RR should be twice as fast as roads, and airports should only be able to airlift foot units, and then only as far as your most advanced bomber. I think its funny that I can barely reach a nearby AI city with a bomber, but I can airlift my military across the globe with no chance of being shot down. So if the most direct path between the 2 airports is within range of an enemy fighter on interceptor duty, then it could be shot down. I too would like to know how the AI uses airlift capabilities.

 

[Ivan the Kulak]

That's a good point alpha wolf. I remember in civ2 periodically receiving the message "Enemy fighters are based near our cities. They may shoot down our airlift!" or something to that effect. You never see that in civ3. The AI should have a chance of interdicting your airlifts. Given that with a few rush built airports in freshly conquered cities you can lift quite a few units in per turn this could have a big effect on war waging.

 

[Roland Johansen]

Very good point on the shooting down of transport planes. I fully agree

 

[Bane Star]

Originally posted by WillJ
If a standard map is the size of Earth, then it's about 12,760 km across. Since a standard map is 100x100, that's 127.6 km per tile (very, very, rough estimate, considering it's in squares, the Earth's round, etc.). Do you think a railway every 127.6 km is crowded?

Since Each Sq. is 24 pixels long(an edge) and the railroad is 3-4 pixels, this makes the Railroad 15KM WIDE, I think you could see that from space as messy as it is...

LOL.. Obviously I'm having fun here but Maybe some other 'representation' could be dispalyed to show the next level of movement.

 

[Bane Star]

Originally posted by Roland Johansen
I propose the following changes:
-With the invention of Steam Engine we get an automatic upgrade on the movement of all roads form 1/3 movement point to 1/5 movement point and roads get a more modern look (just like city graphics change between eras).
-With the invention of Steam Engine we get the ability to build a new city improvement: the railway station. Land units on the same continent can move between cities with railway stations in one turn and lose all their movement points doing so (something like the Airport).
-With the invention of Industrialization we can build a new terrain improvement, an improvement of the ordinary mine. This modern mine gives 1 extra production compared to the ordinary mine (just like mine + railroads in the present game).
-With the invention of Electricity we can build a new terrain improvement, an improvement of the ordinary irrigation (the farm). The farm give 1 extra food compared to the normal irrigation (just like irrigation + railroads in the ordinary game).
- With the invention of Refining we get the ability to build a new city improvement: the Shipyard. Ships on connected bodies of water can move between cities with shipards in one turn and lose all their movement points doing so (again like the airport).
-With the invention of Motorised Transport we get another automatic upgrade on the movement of all roads form 1/5 movement point to 1/7 movement point and roads get again a more modern look (just like city graphics change between eras).
-Airports should only be able to receive 5 units a turn and be able to sent 5 units a turn. Maintance of airports should be 0 and cost to build 80 because they're not as usefull anymore with the addition of railway stations and the limitations I suggest.

The only things that have to be changed to the game in order to achieve the above is the ability to add new terrain improvements and a limitation to the instantaneous movement of airports (to certain units and connected bodies of land/water). That should be doable.

Absolutely Brilliant... Well done. Firaxis & Atari... have a good read....

slight change... make airport movement NOT reduce movement of unit to give it the extra bonus above train-station

 

[Bane Star]

Originally posted by Ivan the Kulak
Lets say I have 6 cities arranged in a rough hexagon. The city on the right point loses its RR station. But, I have roads (and thus the theoretical RR) everywhere. Now, I want to move units from the left point city to a tile past the city that lost the RR station. I can still go around that city via my other road(RR) network, unless you are specifying that RR ONLY works from city to city.

Since Resources require 'connection' then railroads would use the same game code, If a city is disconnected via destruction of the railroad then you could only 'transport' to the cities with connected stations

Maybe I miss read something but I was under the impression that by putting in a 'Rail station' at two cities, then Rail road would be made on the map between those cities, and therefore disconnectable by distruction of that railroad, and Wokers would/could go to the sq, and re-connect. The Station could cost 1GP per connected city, Also Rail Stations could be made on the Map for troops to move to. This gives both the players who want instant movement and players who want sq by sq movement the choice. no game mechanic loss.

 

[EddyG17]

i still planes should be the faster trans. method, nothing beats the plane in speed except that bullet train in japan, i think

 

[Senkan Yamato]

The concept of railway stations is a very good solution IMHO.

 

[Lord Beverage]

I honestly wonder how many people would be complaining about the railroads here if someone just made a mod to make them look better?

Anyway, is our objective here to make land movement as ridiculously painful and slow as sea movement? Turns span YEARS. It is entirely conceivable that over the course of a year or two (or more if you're good ) a highly developed nation can with ease can mobilize and respond to an invading force with all of its military might. Consider it another deterrance to modern warfare and move on...

An interesting compromise I would perhaps be willing to make would be to give a railroad station a certain radius around the city in which railroads would give you infinite mobility. Otherwise perhaps a 1/5 to 1/8 ratio might be in order. Of course this would just add more tedium, which I think the game has a bit to much of.

Yes. They are ugly as hell. That needs to change.

 

[alpha wolf 64]

RR are too powerful. since an invading army cannot use my RR, I can literally rush my entire army at an invading army in a single turn. most ai invasions fail miserably because they are understrengthed against the force of my entire military. whereas b4 I invade an AI, I've amassed a huge force that can easily withstand the AI response. I've wondered if the current RR situation was an attempt by the designers to offset human invasions, but since they didnt program the AI to lightly defend its inner cities under these circumstances, the AI counteroffenses leave much to be desired. its become a HUGE human advantage, much like airlifting is.

 

[Lord Beverage]

The problem then is with the AI, not the railroads. Why not recommend improving the AI instead of nerfing the railroads?

 

[alpha wolf 64]

1. infinite movement RR will always be a human advantage,
2. RR speed is out of whack with the other modes of transportation except airlift,
3. reducing RR movement would be substantially easier than reprogramming the AI.

I prefer viable options over wishing for something that will never happen. FYI, i remember that someone did do a RR mod to increase its visual appeal.

 

[Pembroke]

Regardless of the AI there's still a railroad related problem: the current system creates no strategic challenge.

The best railroad strategy with infinite movement no-cost no-penalty railroads is: build them everywhere.

There's no thinking required where to build them. Any railroad tile anywhere is always a bonus and never a hindrance. Also there's little strategic value in bombarding enemy railroads. The enemy pillaged 20 RR tiles in its initial attack? Big friggin' deal. As every single tile was covered with RR in the first place your units still can go wherever they need to be.

What I would like is that you are forced to make HARD CHOICES of where to lay your railroad because of the <insert some good idea improving the RR concept> you can't afford to put them everywhere or it would be somehow disadvantageous to do so.

The key here is a trade-off: build as much RR as you want but each RR makes you forfeit something else.

If railroads aren't built everywhere then they also automatically get strategically more valuable. The AI bombs a few tiles and suddenly you _really_ do have a broken rail line thus forcing you to _think_ where you should put your forces so that they can reach all possible invasion points.

What's the point in having an easy game?

 

[Lord Beverage]

@alpha
1. Not with a better AI.
2. Right, the others need to be sped up in later ages.
3. Right, but it would be totally lame.

@Pembroke
Of course you'll build them everywhere! See the earlier post on the area covered by a tile and you'll see that a railroad on every square is perfectly realistic.

 

[Pembroke]

I'm not saying railroad on every tile isn't realistic. What I _am_ saying is that to have it that way in a _game_ makes the _game_ less enjoyable.

Heck, If I wanted a realistic railroad I'd go out to a railway station.

You are right by saying "of course you build them everywhere".

That's exactly my point! Because in the game there is every advantage to do so and no penalty for doing it you build RR on every tile. That's what I want to change.

Consider this: it is equally realistic that a ship can travel round the globe quite many times in a single year. That would translate into hundreds of movement points, but let's be conservative and give a ship only 100 movement points. Very realistic, isn't it?
Except this is a game and with 100 movement point ships I could leave harbor, travel all the way to the enemy, bombard, and then travel all the way back home to safety. Repeat with other ships.

And that's where the realism breaks down: Civ3 is a turn based game. First you move every unit without your opponen moving anything. Then the reverse. If you are going to have a game that is balanced and playable at all you have to sacrifice realism. That is the reason why ships have such a lousy movement ratio: it's a compromise to reflect manouverability and tactical speeds in the game without making the game a silly bombarding duel.

What the railroad problem boils down to is this:

Every tile railroaded in Civ3 the game: less enjoyment
Only some tiles railroaded in Civ3 the game: more enjoyment

 

[Lord Beverage]

Right. Naval movement needs an overhaul. Personally I would recommend unlimited movement within coast/sea under your control, enhanced speeds over open waters, normal speeds in hostile waters. These could perhaps scale with your tech levels.

Back to railroads:

Even if they were nerfed, movement rates of offensive units in the late industrial->modern ages are such that if you could reach any city in your empire for free, if you could reach even one or two cities away from an invasion point roads alone would give you more than enough movement to reach the invading forces. But it would be one less improvement you would have to bombard. To fix that if you were the invader. I see now...

Potential solution: Bombardment should destroy all transportation enhancements if successful.

I think a "Rail To ..." build option would be an better compromise. It would require upkeep of course, and allow for unlimted movement between the two cities. These could be chained indefintely. It would therefore allow realistic mobility while giving an easy way to cut off a city and while costing something to maintain. Of course I would want to see an Industrial Age road improvement as well then.