slight change, and addition to roads and RR's

[Pathetic Leader]

I don't like the idea of instant movement, yet I understand how it fits in with the game to some extent.

As roads have a movement cost of 1/3, give Rail roads a movement cost of 1/6. example a unit can move 1 space on land, 3 on road and 6 on RR.

This then allows for the modern upgrade of the RR to the MTS (mass transit system). However, I believe this should still have a movement limit, say 1/9 or 1/12 to reflect its speed, but not infinite to reflect its limitations.

With such an invention we could have a new modern wonder... The MagLev.


Also, around the industrial age we could discover "Tunneling" This could allow a specialist unit to build tunnels under expanses of water. The tunnel would be visable on the map as a greyish outline and any units inside it would be faded. Shipping cannot attack tunnels as they are officially below the sea bed.

To build a tunnel unit in water, first a tunnel unit must be built on land. Once the land square has been built the tunneling "machine"(?) can move into the water square and start to build. To move any further through the water it MUST be adjacent to a previously tunneled square. To prevent cheating, to move onto land that does not have a tunnel square, the water swuare you are moving from MUST have a tunnel in it.

Also, until maybe the invention of floating tunnels, or possibly never, tunnels can only be built in lakes and sea, NOT ocean.

 

[TGNLPp]

I don't like the idea of instant movement, yet I understand how it fits in with the game to some extent.

As roads have a movement cost of 1/3, give Rail roads a movement cost of 1/6. example a unit can move 1 space on land, 3 on road and 6 on RR.

This then allows for the modern upgrade of the RR to the MTS (mass transit system). However, I believe this should still have a movement limit, say 1/9 or 1/12 to reflect its speed, but not infinite to reflect its limitations.

With such an invention we could have a new modern wonder... The MagLev.


Also, around the industrial age we could discover "Tunneling" This could allow a specialist unit to build tunnels under expanses of water. The tunnel would be visable on the map as a greyish outline and any units inside it would be faded. Shipping cannot attack tunnels as they are officially below the sea bed.

To build a tunnel unit in water, first a tunnel unit must be built on land. Once the land square has been built the tunneling "machine"(?) can move into the water square and start to build. To move any further through the water it MUST be adjacent to a previously tunneled square. To prevent cheating, to move onto land that does not have a tunnel square, the water swuare you are moving from MUST have a tunnel in it.

Also, until maybe the invention of floating tunnels, or possibly never, tunnels can only be built in lakes and sea, NOT ocean.

my 2 cents. change roads to 1/2, but not 1/2 a movement point, 1/2 the movement cost of the tile. Atleast for things like mountains. When you build a road on a mountain, especially pre dynamite and the days of tunnel creation, you build the road where you can, going up and down and twisting and turning all over the place, that you could cross it in the same amount of time as an open road is kinda silly. maybe it doesn't make sense(or atleast as much) for jungle tiles, where you could still cut straight through, but even then you are weaving around heavy growth prior to dynamite and bulldozers.

But this probably wouldn't work well with the current movement model.

railroads, make them a flat 8 moves for any unit on them. I find it equally silly that a tank traveling by train can somehow move faster than a marine who is presumable traveling on the same dang train. But yeah, anything is better, in my oppinion, than the infinite movement rate they grant now.
But in this case, your unit has 2 movement points, rides the train for 4 tiles , then he has 4/8 or 1/2 of his 2 movement points left.

at the very least, that a unit traveling by train can arrive at the same destination as one traveling by plane, yet the one travelling by train will still have all his movement points left while the plane unit is exhausted, detracts so much strategic potential from the game.

i do find your idea of tunnels interesting.

 

[Pathetic Leader]

yes, some good points, making it to the movement cost of the tile than the unit is a much better idea.

I also agree that trains should have a flat movement rate, it does make more sense.

I am glad you find the idea of tunnels interesting.

Any feeback on the idea of Mass Transit and the MagLev?

 

[The Omega]

Since a turn represents a year or more, it makes sense for railroads to have infinite movement.

My 100th post! [dance]

 

[TGNLPp]

yes, some good points, making it to the movement cost of the tile than the unit is a much better idea.

I also agree that trains should have a flat movement rate, it does make more sense.

I am glad you find the idea of tunnels interesting.

Any feeback on the idea of Mass Transit and the MagLev?

Yes,but only if one of two conditions are met

-make them an instant upgrade, either when the research is acquired or at worse when some installation is built within cities(that ones hard to work).
-an earlier suggestion, that i can choose to build a maglev in a tile that lacks even a road, and the game will take care of all the upgrades in between

in short, if i have to micromanage a worker to build a road, then a railroad, then mts, then a maglev,on every tile, that would kill it for me. otherwise, i like.

@omega 2 points.
if i can get anywhere in a turn on a train and still be able to move, then why not a plane? infact, the purpose of airports only seems to be to remove any reason for a real navy.
i have, on several occassions, used a single tank to fight in 3 different battles on completely opposite sides of the continent. Its silly, i attack in the far east, move many tiles west, hit another enemy, move a bunch of tiles north and hit another enemy. the whole thing covers like 50-60 tiles easily. maybe a turn is a year, but given the relation of all the elements in the game, this is out of whack, in my oppinion.
Infact, im fairly certain a tank could drive from one end of the U.S. to the other , roads or not, in under a year, yet even with a 1/3 movement point over roads and 3 moves, a tank couldn't do this in the game.

 

[Aussie_Lurker]

I think that a Railroad should give a 'Fixed Movement Rate', regardless of the unit moving on it. Perhaps if you had that railways moved a unit X hexes in a single turn-after all, the train that carries them (even though you don't see it) is going to travel at the same speed no matter WHAT kind of troops its carrying. Movement through a given terrain might have a similar effect to what happens if the unit moved through it without a road or RR. For instance, lets say a RR had a movement of 10 hexes, then a unit travelling on the RR can move 10 hexes that turn-so long as its moving over plains, grasslands, deserts, forests and possibly even hills. On marsh, jungle and mountain terrain (and possibly tundra) each square travelled costs 2 mp-so the unit can only move 5 hexes in a turn! Also, this movement rate should increase over time (and perhaps more terrain types can be ignored) and it should be editable!
Anyway, know its out of left field, but its just something which hit me!

Yours,
Aussie_Lurker.

 

[Lennon]

Also, until maybe the invention of floating tunnels, or possibly never, tunnels can only be built in lakes and sea, NOT ocean.

Aren't there a lot of scientists looking at the prospect of a transatlantic tunnel? I'm not for future techs, but if Civ allows a space ship to Alpha Centauri, surely you should be able to improve underwater tunnels to cross oceans.

 

[MSTK]

lol

IMO, this would be cool. I think that they're making a bridge accross the Gibralter (sp?). So, you'll be able to drive from Europe to Africa without going around the Middle-East!

It's all a part of a plan to connect all major landmasses so you can drive from anywhere to anywhere else.

 

[Pathetic Leader]

regarding the ocean tunnel, I was watching a program on discovery about that the other night, and while feasable, it would require the entire out put of the steel mills in the world working 24/7 for a year.

so it isn't going to happen soon, not to mention the funding of it. That is teh reason for keeping it to the seas and not the oceans for now.

Back to MTS and the MagLev, I agree on thee micromanagement aspect of it and yes, maybe it should take a turn or 2 longer, but RR then MTS on a previously untouched square to be built to the highest tech available.

NB: the MagLev was suggested as a wonder of some sort, as Metro's and Undergrounds, although the current MTS, are still wheel in touch with rail. However, all the MTS of the future.... can any one shout

MONORAIL MONORAIL MONORAIL

are likely to be a maglev of one form or othe when the technique is perfected.

 

[sir_schwick]

That's on transportation in general:

*Railroads should allow a single one-way free transfer from the square the unit is on to any other square along the railroad. AFter that, you move like your using the roads.
*Airports should allow one-way free transfers from that airport to another airport.
*Harbours should allow one-way transfer, with x% the units MP cost, to any other harbour. Transports limited to amphibious landings and non-harbours.
-Before Navigations, x = 100
-Before Combustion, x = 50
-After Combustion, x = 0
*Roads should progressively get better(Mass Transit, Asphault Road, etc.). Roads should reduce cost realtively until Dyanamite and Asphault. tHen Raod movement is flat fraction. Roads allow one-way, whole turn transfer from one city to another.
*Tunnels definitely belong.