Rivers and Roads

[MattII]

Just a simple idea I wanted to put forward. If a worker is beside a river another command box can be shown, which means build a bridge (when the technology is researched) and then you have to select the square (across the river) to bridge to.
I also think that rivers should be a barrier, somewhat, to movement and to enemy troops. In this I propose that a unit crossing a river that is not on a bridged section losses all remaining movement for its turn regardless of what it started with, with the exception that there is a settable flag (possibly called fording, though amphibious would also work) that allows a unit to cross without movement penalty.
In regard to the military idea, a unit defending from a cross river attack should recieve a defence bonus unless the unit attacking has the fording or amphibious ability, bombarding, however would not be affected.

 

[TheBB]

Personally I think this is piling too much complexity on the game. The current system is good enough. If you haven't noticed, in C3C, a whole movement point is lost when crossing a river, and after engineering, bridges are "built" (so that all roads crossing a river become bridges).

Units defending across a river get defensive bonuses in C3C also.

Your idea with amphibious ("fording") units may work though. I suspect this might become an upgrade thingy in Civ4. After all, we got "use enemy roads" already. Doesn't sound too far fetched.

 

[mastertyguy]

If you haven't noticed, in C3C, a whole movement point is lost when crossing a river, and after engineering, bridges are "built" (so that all roads crossing a river become bridges).

Units defending across a river get defensive bonuses in C3C also.

It is also in vanilla, TheBB. I think if your unit is better at attacking trough rivers, it should still get a penalty, just smaller (from 25% to 12,5%).

 

[Napo981]

Personally I think this is piling too much complexity on the game. The current system is good enough. If you haven't noticed, in C3C, a whole movement point is lost when crossing a river, and after engineering, bridges are "built" (so that all roads crossing a river become bridges).

Building bridges with workers could be a good add-on, though. It could create a situation where you could bomb your own bridges in order to slow down the enemy.

 

[MattII]

Thanks for the enlightenment. I still hold with the idea that bridges should only be built when you want them to be.

 

[Markus6]

I do think civ is missing a large chuck of tactical warfare. River are extremely important in defense of a position. Get a large enough river, destroy all the boats and the bridges, and one sides stuck on the wrong side of the river. One example that springs to mind is Wellington's capture of Oporto in the napoleonic wars. If the french had destroyed ALL the boats then it would have never have happened.

How you'd put it in the game without making it too complicated is another question. Theres lots of tactical warfare that can't really be presented in civ.

 

[MonRiverMonarch]

I also think that rivers should be a barrier, somewhat, to movement and to enemy troops. In this I propose that a unit crossing a river that is not on a bridged section losses all remaining movement for its turn regardless of what it started with.

I agree with MattII. Losing one movement point on a river is hardly a penalty. Rivers proved to be a major obstruction in many battles & changed the course of history in some wars. I like the micromanagement of Civ, so I wouldn't mind having to build bridges (and destroy them if necessary). It usually takes me 4 months to play a game anyway, so any addition is fun.

 

[Mark Anthony]

I do think civ is missing a large chuck of tactical warfare. River are extremely important in defense of a position. Get a large enough river, destroy all the boats and the bridges, and one sides stuck on the wrong side of the river.

But, in CivIII, a unit being attacked from across a river does receive a devensive bonus.

Also, since rivers no longer are part of a tile (as they were in earlier versions) but the border between two tiles, to destroy the bridge (available only after engineering), you must also destroy the road leading up to it. A simple "Pillage improvement" command will take care of that nicely and succeed in forcing advancing units to stop or slow movement when crossing the river anyway.

 

[Moonsinger]

In Call To Power, you can build under water tunnel which is a very cool feature. For example, an underwater tunnel to cross the English chanel connecting England to Europe. Of course, that would require a certain tech in the modern age.

 

[GoodGame]

Representing bridge building would be realistic and also tactical, especially in post-Industrial age.