Why is coal a requirement for RR in the modern era?

[starrider]

People complain when they have no iron...and not having iron sucks....but nothing sucks more than having no coal.

For some bizarre reason, I will have islands and small continents with NO COAL. Coal has to be one of the most scares resources on the map, because I never have luck with this. I've had such bad luck that I've taken to building up an army just before I discover steam power....

but this brings me to my question: why is coal still required for RR in the modern era? Generally I can sell my soul for coal (and believe me, the AI knows they have you over the barrel when you come asking for coal) and this is understandable...to a point. In the modern era everything is powered by the internal comubsion engine. I have done my duty as a ruler, and siezed a supply of coal...everything is cookin along and I'm connecting and buildign the last of my rail...and "This suppy of coal has been exhausted" @#$@#%@##$%@#%^@%#^#@!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Why is it when I have 5 sources of oil, I'm building MA and MechInf, but railroads are still using the steam engine???

[/rant] just had to get that out

 

[knacki]

Well this has already been discussed here (I mean in Civ Fanatics), sorry but I can't remember where I've seen it.
But reading ur post (and I don't remember neither if this had been pointed out in the other thread, damn, no brain today ) I've thought that the reason u need coal to build RR might be coz u need coal to make steel for the rails from iron in these big coal factory oven.
That's the only reason I can think of...

 

[Commander Bello]

I'd think that Knacki hit the nail. Coal still is a vital ressource, even at our days.
Without coal, you will have almost no steel production, thus no rails, no locomotives and so on.
It would have been nice, though, if they would have provided us with a secondary ressource "steel" which would have been accessible with "steel works", a small wonder....

 

[Vizurok]

I'd think that Knacki hit the nail. Coal still is a vital ressource, even at our days.
Without coal, you will have almost no steel production, thus no rails, no locomotives and so on.
It would have been nice, though, if they would have provided us with a secondary ressource "steel" which would have been accessible with "steel works", a small wonder....

Absulutely good idea! The Steel tech is too empty...

 

[starrider]

Saying that coal is required for RR in the modern era because coal is used to manufacture steel is a bit spurious...

You can apply that same argument and say you have to have coal for battleships because they use steel. (The only requirement is oil for them currently.) Railroads require iron anyway, so requiring coal just to PRODUCE a purer form of iron is redundant. Coal is a requirement for railroads because of the steam locomotive, not for the production of steel.

I would love to see the coal requirement change to an oil requirement once you hit the modern era (it wasn't until the second half of the 20th century the internal combustion locomotive took over). Or even have it be either/or... if coal didn't disappear on you this wouldn't be nearly as big of a deal to me....

 

[knacki]

why is coal still required for RR in the modern era?

Coal is a requirement for railroads because of the steam locomotive, not for the production of steel.

Didn't know u already knew the answer, sorry I gave the wrong one, I was just trying to help just my 2 cents, like people say...
Guess u should ask Firaxis to take this out, then.

 

[starrider]

Didn't know u already knew the answer, sorry I gave the wrong one, I was just trying to help just my 2 cents, like people say...
Guess u should ask Firaxis to take this out, then.

errr didnt mean to sound snappy....I guess I was a bit harsh in my reply SORRY!

 

[Gengis Khan]

Aww, do I see a group hug coming up.

 

[Eyeoftiger]

Um, the steel resource sounded good at first, but remember that it is coal and iron (mainly) that are used to make steel. You don't go to the mountains and find Steel; you find iron.

Steel Works would be great though if you had both, and perhaps it could be a Major wonder, and the Civ that builds it no longer needs to have coal to build railroads...

 

[Pounder]

Um, the steel resource sounded good at first, but remember that it is coal and iron (mainly) that are used to make steel. You don't go to the mountains and find Steel; you find iron.

Steel Works would be great though if you had both, and perhaps it could be a Major wonder, and the Civ that builds it no longer needs to have coal to build railroads...

Steel is an alloy of usually carbon and iron, sometimes magnesium and iron, many other alloys as well.

Coal is required as it is used to produce coke, coal that is heated for at least 18 hours without the presence of oxygen to produce coke.

Coke is required to fire the blast furnances that are required to manufacture steel.

 

[knacki]

I guess I was a bit harsh in my reply SORRY!

No problem, don't worry

 

[starrider]

Steel is an alloy of usually carbon and iron, sometimes magnesium and iron, many other alloys as well.

Coal is required as it is used to produce coke, coal that is heated for at least 18 hours without the presence of oxygen to produce coke.

Coke is required to fire the blast furnances that are required to manufacture steel.

Once we start down a recursive path for resources, things get very complicated. For example, huge quantities of electricity is required to process Aluminum. Does that mean electricity should also be a requirement for Al? Furthermore, you can build RR in game long before the invention of steel (Which, by itself, is anachronistic. Stable steam engines required steel to keep from exploding.) For simplicity's sake, in-game resources do not depend on other resources to exist. The steel requirement for RR is met by the requirement for iron. How iron is transformed into steel is irrelevant to gameplay.

The issue isn't the requirement of coal for the manufacture of steel. The question we should be asking is why coal is a requirement for RR in game. My assumption (which may be incorrect) is that coal is necessary for the steam engine. This makes sense, and I have no qualms about it. What seems odd, however, is that by the modern era everything is running off oil, EXCEPT your railroads. A change that I would like to see is the requirement changing from coal to oil. Diesil powered locomotives have dominated railroads since the second half of the 20th centry. (There are a few exceptions, most noteably China. Its vast coal reserves make steam locomotives cheaper to operate.) This would better reflect life in the modern era, where wars are fought over oil. (Please note, this is NOT a political comment, merely a statement that wars throughout history, including those in the 20th century, are fought over natural resources. Japan attacked the United States in 1941 due in large part to the oil embargo.)

Coal should work like saltpeter: after dominating history for an era, coal would grow less and less significant. After all, once tanks, mechInf, and MA show up, who cares if they lack saltpeter? Oil, rubber, aluminum, and uranium are the resources that should matter.

What do you think?

 

[Squikel]

why not make the train nuclear powered, just take 2 icbm's strap them on to the sides of the train, fire the icbm's at the target destination, oh and just remember to jump of the train some 100 km befor the entire thing explodes.

just think of the modern era trains as being driven by electricity from coal power plant's

 

[starrider]

why not make the train nuclear powered, just take 2 icbm's strap them on to the sides of the train, fire the icbm's at the target destination, oh and just remember to jump of the train some 100 km befor the entire thing explodes.

just think of the modern era trains as being driven by electricity from coal power plant's

Erm, I'm thinking this is a troll, but as I am bored, I'll feed you. Modern trains don't run on electricity, they run on diesel, a refined form of oil. Electric motors dont move people and goods cross continent.

I know you were trying to sound ridiculous, but train mounted ICBMs did exist in the Soviet Union. They were kept on rails, enabling them to move around so American bombers and missiles could not target them.

 

[Commander Bello]

[...] Electric motors dont move people and goods cross continent.
[...]

In fact, they do... And the fastest trains are electrically powered, as well....

 

[starrider]

In fact, they do... And the fastest trains are electrically powered, as well....

I'm aware of that, and I should have been clearer in my post. Electric trains exist and do their jobs well. What I meant was, by and large, the heavy lifting is done by diesel locomotives. Not to mention, electric trains are very inefficient in countries with huge open spaces. Can you imagine electric power running to every part of rail in the United States? The further you transmit electricity the more inefficient it is.

In places like Japan, where most of the country is urban, local power is readily available for railways.

 

[SewerStarFish]

I've got two theories why you still need coal for rails in the Modern era.

1) Even today most electricity is from coal fired plants [and no, I'm not going to hunt for links to "prove" my point ]. And while there are a great many diesel engines, there are also quite a few electric systems throughout the major cities of the world. So as an abstraction you need iron [aka steel] and coal [though maybe a modern era switch to oil -- say at combustion even -- would be fun].

2) It's a simple overall game abstraction so as to compel the player to either obtain another resource or compete against AI opponents in a superior postion.

 

[Squikel]

Erm, I'm thinking this is a troll, but as I am bored, I'll feed you. Modern trains don't run on electricity, they run on diesel, a refined form of oil. Electric motors dont move people and goods cross continent.

I know you were trying to sound ridiculous, but train mounted ICBMs did exist in the Soviet Union. They were kept on rails, enabling them to move around so American bombers and missiles could not target them.

I know that the soviet union used trains for their ICBMs, but i dubt that they were designed to take the trains whit into the skies when they were lunched.

electricity is used in a lot of the trains used for transportation of humans.
while trains for heavy cargo or long distances uses more powerfull engines, like a diesel engine.

 

[randallman]

Erm, I'm thinking this is a troll, but as I am bored, I'll feed you. Modern trains don't run on electricity, they run on diesel, a refined form of oil. Electric motors dont move people and goods cross continent.

I know you were trying to sound ridiculous, but train mounted ICBMs did exist in the Soviet Union. They were kept on rails, enabling them to move around so American bombers and missiles could not target them.

To be even more annoying and pedantic The diesel engines in modern locomotives are just big generators. They provide power to electric motors. Those electric motors are what powers the train In other words, there is no direct mechanical connection between the diesel engines and the wheels. Think of it like a submarine. Diesel -> Electricity -> Motors -> Driveline.

 

[TerraHero]

Well the problem is basicly to take out recources at a curtain poin due to tech development, it would be great to do that in the editor.