are mountains always impassable?

[vee4473]

I haven't played far enough into the game yet, but is there a point where you get a unit or ability to pass over mountains?

[LordShiva]

Yeah.. Airplanes?

[Nailfoot]

Air units can cross mountains. Gunships can cross all terrain except ocean/coast. Other than that Gunships behave exactly like land units, IE can be attacked by any other land unit even one without Air intercept.

[vee4473]

ahem...let me clarify....any ground units


Having mountains as land shields is interesting otherwise.

[Tventano]

Both mountains and ice are impassible

[Japher]

Mounties and Swiss Yoddelers should... in the future

[evizaer]

You should be able to build villas in mountains that yield 4 gold. (think Swiss alps and such)

[Bill3000]

I have to say that I love having mountains being impassable - a change I have been waiting for in years. Terrain shields

I believe that the ice that is not near the ice caps (Below the tundra and the like) are not impassable.

[Tventano]

The snow (on land) is passable, you can even build a city on it. The ice (on the water) is not passible (at least according to the manual, did not try).

[asleepathewheel]

The ice is passable in some respects

[ajbera]

I like the general impassibility of mountains, BUT I think you should be able to build roads through them.

First, only workers (maybe scouts and explorers) can get onto a mountain without a road. Make the movement cost huge, though - workers need 2 turns to get onto the mountain in the first place. Then it takes many, many, many turns to build the road, which enables other units to be able to cross, and then movement cost is still 3 (or 4, whatever it takes so that any unit crossing the mountain has to take at least one turn to cross it.)

Basically I want the option to move through them to be there, but make it difficult and slow, something that can only be done on a limited basis.

And absolutely no cities or forts in the mountains.

[vee4473]

I do like that option aj, then the player would have to decide what is better, the immense time required to build roads thru mountains or the time to go around them.

[Nailfoot]

Originally posted by ajbera
I like the general impassibility of mountains, BUT I think you should be able to build roads through them.

First, only workers (maybe scouts and explorers) can get onto a mountain without a road. Make the movement cost huge, though - workers need 2 turns to get onto the mountain in the first place. Then it takes many, many, many turns to build the road, which enables other units to be able to cross, and then movement cost is still 3 (or 4, whatever it takes so that any unit crossing the mountain has to take at least one turn to cross it.)

Basically I want the option to move through them to be there, but make it difficult and slow, something that can only be done on a limited basis.

And absolutely no cities or forts in the mountains.

This is opinion of course, so I am neither right or wrong. But, I like the system the way it is now. MAYBE there should be a special unit that can "hoof-it" through the mountain, but no roads should be able to be built on a mountain. If a certain unit should be modded to be able to cross mountains, I believe the unit should be explorer-like (IE no attack, defence only). Of course the defence rating could be HUGE, unless a second unit is modded that can attack any unit directly ON a mountain square with no penalties.

[Bill3000]

Using the editor, it's possible to add roads to mountains, although that's not much of a suprise.

Return of Alpine Troops would be awesome.

[MrFun]

This is a tad bit too unrealistic.

In history, mountains were not absolutely impassable. Hannibal's overland march to Italy, anyone?

[alva]

This is a tad bit too unrealistic.

In history, mountains were not absolutely impassable. Hannibal's overland march to Italy, anyone?

This really has to be one the most overused example in civ history and I bloody well know why: there is no other decent one!
Can't model everything that happened just once in history.
Anyway, gameplay should and does triumph reality, so...

But, I like the system the way it is now. MAYBE there should be a special unit that can "hoof-it" through the mountain,

Don't disagree with you here but!!
What if the AI enters my borders with such a unit and places it on a mountain and we're at war, how am I going to get rid of it?
If only one sort of unit gets to enter mountains, it means only the same type of unit could kill it, now that's a bit of a problem (and annoying cause I may have to build several of those units that are perhaps useless or outdated), isn't it.
In game the explorer can only defend (IIRC) so that's not going to even work.

[Nailfoot]

Interesting point. So, following my original logic and aplying yours, two units would be needed. One that can tromp through the mountains in Defence mode only, and one that can attack any unit located on a mountain square (Not meaning the attacking unit can occupy the square). So,.....

Nah, forget it. Mountains are NEVER passable, and it is easier that way. No need to put in 2 or 3 more rules for ONE terrain type is it?

[alva]

Nah, forget it. Mountains are NEVER passable, and it is easier that way. No need to put in 2 or 3 more rules for ONE terrain type is it?

Exatly!!!

[James]

Very intersting these two units. More thinking and using the old noggen'.

[MrFun]

Originally posted by alva

This is a tad bit too unrealistic.

In history, mountains were not absolutely impassable. Hannibal's overland march to Italy, anyone?

This really has to be one the most overused example in civ history and I bloody well know why: there is no other decent one!
Can't model everything that happened just once in history.
Anyway, gameplay should and does triumph reality, so...

So does this mean we need a Great Leader named Hannibal to overpass mountains in Civ 4?