Roads and Rails

[Silurian]

Railways represent highways as well

 

[Gre_Magus]

Railroad spam in Civ 4 (and the earlier ones, I think) comes from having workers with nothing else to do. After you've built improvements all over your empire, you end up with a stack of workers with nothing to do. Why not build roads and then railroads on every tile? All it costs is worker-turns, and without any other improvements to make, those are basically free (except for the worker upkeep cost)>

 

[Jean-Luc Picard]

And what do you think about this idea:
Let roads and railroads deteriorate over time and let workers need to repair them (and maybe apply this to other improvement). This way workers wouldn't be left "jobless"

 

[Trias]

And what do you think about this idea:
Let roads and railroads deteriorate over time and let workers need to repair them (and maybe apply this to other improvement). This way workers wouldn't be left "jobless"

That would be the ultimate micromanagement nightmare. Similar to the old pollution whack-A-mole.


To really stop rail proliferation it must be disadvantageous to build rail after a certain point has been reached. Having roads and railroads cost an upkeep is one option.

I also see a potential for railroad causing a -1 in the tile in which they are build with a minimum of zero. That will mean that most players will avoid building roads in their farmed tiles reducing the spam to about half the tiles. If this penalty seems to harsh you can give a + to railroaded tiles that already produce 2 or more

 

[LordRahl]

I agree as far as having a mechanism that would prevent you from wanting to cover everything with Railroads. They should only give you movement bonus, but take away something else on the specific tile they are built. This way you would only build them to connect your cities, and avoid building them anywhere else.

Perhaps each city could have a total of 4 railroads in it's radius, without negative consequences. This way you could still link your cities without penalty.

 

[Yakk]

Here is hoping for....

Cities build improvements in nearby hexes, not workers.

Working a hex causes automatic improvements at a slow rate in the direction that it is being used under. You might be able to work "food", work "production" or work "commerce" in a given hex.

On top of that, you can "build improvements" like you would build a building. The radius of this is beyond the city borders -- you can build improvements outside of the fat hex of the city.

Transportation technology advances. There are a few kinds...

None -- default
Paths -- beat down dirt. 1/2 movement cost.
Roads -- roman-style. 1/3 movement cost.
Bridges -- makes crossing rivers cost 1/2 movement cost, instead of full. Crosses rivers.
Canals -- early industrial revolution in England relied on Canals to transport goods. 4 squares/turn movement. Must be adjacent to a river or freshwater lake tile. Boats can enter these squares.
Railroads -- industrial-revolution style. 6 squares/turn movement.
Highways -- second industrial-revolution style. 8 squares/turn movement.
High-speed rail -- maglev trains. 10 squares/turn movement.

 

[Luckystrike77]

And what do you think about this idea:
Let roads and railroads deteriorate over time and let workers need to repair them (and maybe apply this to other improvement). This way workers wouldn't be left "jobless"

Better make each worker turn cost 1 gold. No more micro management then today, and more strategical choices. You have to decide if it's really worth it building out your land so fast.

 

[lovepack]

I very much disagree with your assessment of railroads. The only down side should be an economic cost whether it be an initial cost or an upkeep. I prefer the former as most freight is self sustaining. You make the assertion that there should either be an unhealthy or unhappiness effect associated with the production of rails. I am curious to know as to how you arrived at such a conclusion when railroads offer a cheap and efficient method to exchange goods; which not only clears the already congested highways of semi trucks but allows for the consumer a larger selection of products. With that being said it is fair to assume that with a larger selection of goods you will see an increase in not only happiness but health. The benefit is not only with freight but with Public Transportation. Public Transportation for which trains are included is a must for larger Urban areas as they provide cheap clean transportation. As the worlds oil supply diminishes it is important that we maintain and improve upon our pre-existing railroad infrastructure. Including the introduction of High Speed trains between areas with high population densities. California has taken the first step now it is time for the midwest(Chicago, St Louis, Indianapolis, The Twin Cities, Madison, and Milwaukee) and the Eastern seaboard to do the same.

 

[fishlore]

I'm late to the CivV discussion party. Has it been explicitly stated that they are continuing on with the Civ1234 way of doing roads/rail and they are not doing a Civ Rev type of system? I always hated the every tile covered in rail thing and for what CivRev was, it solved the problem succinctly. I could also see issues though migrating that system to a grown up Civ version.

 

[axi]

Have RRs increase trade for each worked tile but each RR tile (even unworked) cost upkeep of 100% of it's crude wealth output. In this way you get either gold, beakers or culture, but have to pay for it. Trade bonuses will help tip the scales. Most importantly, have each unit of coal not used to maintain a unit or traded away to give free upkeep for X RR tiles. With internal combustion tech, add surplus oil towards the free upkeep. If there is some electricity resource, add this to the mix later and obsolete coal. Have a wonder like Transiberian Railway to provide free upkeep for all RRs in continent/civ.

If highways are added to the system, they could be made to cost less upkeep (or provide more trade) but have no cost mitigating resources and add unhealthiness (reverse the bonus of forest). A national wonder like the Interstate, Autobahn or Autostrada (enabling tech - Fascism?) could cut the upkeep in half. Highways should be faster than RRs until high speed rail technology.

 

[Sqwerlpunk]

Here is hoping for....

Cities build improvements in nearby hexes, not workers.

Working a hex causes automatic improvements at a slow rate in the direction that it is being used under. You might be able to work "food", work "production" or work "commerce" in a given hex.

On top of that, you can "build improvements" like you would build a building. The radius of this is beyond the city borders -- you can build improvements outside of the fat hex of the city.

Transportation technology advances. There are a few kinds...

None -- default
Paths -- beat down dirt. 1/2 movement cost.
Roads -- roman-style. 1/3 movement cost.
Bridges -- makes crossing rivers cost 1/2 movement cost, instead of full. Crosses rivers.
Canals -- early industrial revolution in England relied on Canals to transport goods. 4 squares/turn movement. Must be adjacent to a river or freshwater lake tile. Boats can enter these squares.
Railroads -- industrial-revolution style. 6 squares/turn movement.
Highways -- second industrial-revolution style. 8 squares/turn movement.
High-speed rail -- maglev trains. 10 squares/turn movement.

I like this idea in general. Makes a LOT more sense based on other upgrade options, and would make things like an intercity highway more realistic (not just a few workers working something for some reason, it's a city effort and project). Would also like to see upkeep on upgrades beyond a certain point, like more than 6 railroad tiles in a city radius.

 

[timtofly]

I'm late to the CivV discussion party. Has it been explicitly stated that they are continuing on with the Civ1234 way of doing roads/rail and they are not doing a Civ Rev type of system? I always hated the every tile covered in rail thing and for what CivRev was, it solved the problem succinctly. I could also see issues though migrating that system to a grown up Civ version.

If any one looks closely at those "gray paths" from the screenshots, the cities have one and some tiles have one. They cut across the middle of the tile. Unless this is just graphic "hype" there will be a road/rail system.

 

[Sqwerlpunk]

From the screenshots, it looked to me like those "grey paths" were something just generated by the city, not something workers would build. Firaxis is smart enough to know to make things like a worker improvement very easy to see, a tiny little grey path that's hard to see isn't what a worker built road would be.

I wouldn't honestly be surprised for those close by roads to be automatic (maybe even non-affective for units, just a graphic) and a road system similar to Rev being implemented (would support this, although I'd like the option to have the city "produce" the road, as well as buying it. maybe even both cities work to produce it, to lessen time).

 

[Woodreaux]

I just hope there is a way to remove roads and RR from your own territory. Not being able to dismantle or pillage your own routes in Civ IV made me rage a few times.

 

[BuckyRea]

Railroad represent the mobility of the postindustrial age. Just as every city doesn't literally take up 100% of its tile (it's still producing food, after all) we can't assume that every tile with a railroad is crisscrossed entirely by rail lines. It just means the people working that tile all have ready access to railroads.

 

[Sqwerlpunk]

I just hope there is a way to remove roads and RR from your own territory. Not being able to dismantle or pillage your own routes in Civ IV made me rage a few times.

Makes sense though. Imagine your gov't trying to remove a popular route used by citizens, no matter the reason, they'd have a fit.

 

[damnrunner]

I very much disagree with your assessment of railroads. The only down side should be an economic cost whether it be an initial cost or an upkeep. I prefer the former as most freight is self sustaining. You make the assertion that there should either be an unhealthy or unhappiness effect associated with the production of rails. I am curious to know as to how you arrived at such a conclusion when railroads offer a cheap and efficient method to exchange goods; which not only clears the already congested highways of semi trucks but allows for the consumer a larger selection of products. With that being said it is fair to assume that with a larger selection of goods you will see an increase in not only happiness but health. The benefit is not only with freight but with Public Transportation. Public Transportation for which trains are included is a must for larger Urban areas as they provide cheap clean transportation. As the worlds oil supply diminishes it is important that we maintain and improve upon our pre-existing railroad infrastructure. Including the introduction of High Speed trains between areas with high population densities. California has taken the first step now it is time for the midwest(Chicago, St Louis, Indianapolis, The Twin Cities, Madison, and Milwaukee) and the Eastern seaboard to do the same.

You are totally right that a direct cost is the most realistic way of doing things. But I think it would be better for gamely if it was health/happy based.

An upkeep cost would bring us back to the days of civ II and III where you can overbuild infrastructure and get crushed by upkeep costs later in the game (this was the case with city infrastructure but it is pretty much the same concept). It would be pretty lame to play a game and have to go back and pillage your own roads to curtail upkeep costs later on.

An upfront cost for building tile improvements is more workable – but it would have to scale up over time or else the cost would become really low towards the end of the game. Civ: CTP did a pretty good job of this – but it also used 3 increasingly expensive levels of improvement (I think) for each for sort of improvement. On the micro managing side this game could get a bit tedious at the end. Especially after an enemy pillaged a bunch of your super expensive late game improvements.

For these reasons I think small health/happy impacts make the most sense. As with city infrastructure in Civ 4, some buildings were changed to give negative effects (forges -1 health for example). That is my rational for using the same mechanism for roads/rails. As to the exact amount of the impact – that would involve a fair amount of experimentation and game testing to see what was optimal.

The hardest part of implementing this of course is actually on the AI side. That is a whole new concept that the AI has to be programmed to figure out.

 

[timtofly]

From the screenshots, it looked to me like those "grey paths" were something just generated by the city, not something workers would build. Firaxis is smart enough to know to make things like a worker improvement very easy to see, a tiny little grey path that's hard to see isn't what a worker built road would be.

I wouldn't honestly be surprised for those close by roads to be automatic (maybe even non-affective for units, just a graphic) and a road system similar to Rev being implemented (would support this, although I'd like the option to have the city "produce" the road, as well as buying it. maybe even both cities work to produce it, to lessen time).

Re-look at all of the cow or horse tiles. There is the "plain" tile, then the "fence" tile and then the "fence and path" tile.

 

[Sqwerlpunk]

Yeah, I see that one tile with a big grey "path" on it... still, strikes me as weird to have THAT as the color, see previous comments about improvements sticking out, but it is convincing evidence for workers.

 

[Woodreaux]

Makes sense though. Imagine your gov't trying to remove a popular route used by citizens, no matter the reason, they'd have a fit.

There's a mechanism to represent this popular outrage --> faces.