How do I change the benefits of railroad??

[Samudragupt]

Hi
I dont think that I like the fact that railroads jack up production + food . Sounds a tad unreasonable. Anyone out there know how to take away thes benefits from the railroad and instead make them technology related ? Say once you discover railroad and if your city has iron+coal links it will have all the said benefits of having a railroad in every square. My main reason is that I hate cluttering uo my map with these eyesores.
Help anyone??

[Sevorak]

No, you can't.

But what's so unreasonable about having railroads increase production and food? If you look at the history of industrialization and the role railroads played in the development of national infrastructure, and the role in which railroads improved the national market, especially on mainland Britain, their effects in the game are justified.

-Sev

[Mizaq]

i suggest downloading a railroad graphics set that looks good to you, or making one yourself. you could even make one that has real thin white lines or something that barely takes up any space at all.

[Willem]

Blue o has an interesting approach here:

http://apolyton.net/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=40057

It's a bit much for my taste, but I really like the concept. He's considering toning it down some, and I'm hoping he gets around to it soon. Something along these lines could actually make railroads look good, though with a little less of the highrises IMO. Just like Zeb_Fisher's irrigation graphics makes that aspect look good. Frankly, I don't know how these people do it, the number of pixels that they have to work with is so limited, but yet the end result can look so good.

[Samudragupt]

Well thanks for all your replies. Too bad I cant change the effect of railroads. As to them enhancing growth - sure. But not by reaching every tile possible. Why not - if a city has a railroad connection it gets production/food bonuses. Populating each tile with railroads seems so childish. As to BlueO's graphics set - It is a very good idea - gone slightly wrong because of the necessity of building railroads everywhere.
Oh Well...

[Cossack]

I agree with the view that putting railroads in every square of a city seems a bit over the top, but I think that a possible solution would be that for a city of size 6 (town) or less then only connecting railroad (4 squares max is allowed) for a city size 6-12 only the closest squares to the town to should be allowed to have railroads plus two squares extra for in and outgoing connection to other cities. A metropolis size +12 should be allowed railroad in all squares.

Although its not the same topic there are too few units in civ III in my opinion. For example I would like to see a combination of SMAC combat bonuses and/or more civ units with different strengths for the same unit type.

For example on the discovery of gunpowder you get musketmen, but in history, the progress of firearms at this point went matchlock, flintlock and percussion cap muskets/rifles. The units in civ could be discovered at different points in time (tech related)or you may be forced to build specific terrain or buildings improvements to produce such units. The units could have the same strengths but different offensive/defensive and/or movement bonuses/penalties as in SMAC or they could just be slightly different strength units.

The same argument goes for ironclad/dreadnoughts/2nd world war destroyer and tanks (first world war/2nd world war and modern) as well as ancient units (the roman legionary went through several phases of development) as did the knight (Tenth century knight (norman) chainmail / middle ages knight a combination of plate armour/chainmail and late middle ages knight heavy plate armour). Similar development phases can be described for other units. I just think it would make the game more interesting.

My other point is that in the musketmen/cavalry/cannon period cavalry were used a threat weapon to force musket men into squares that could not be broken by cavalry. However, cannons would then destroy the musketmen squares or musketmen in line would then have a greater firepower advantage. I think this combined arms approach would make for a much more interesting game, then the power of cavalry could be reduced as they would get a massive offensive penalty if they attacked a unit where there was no allied musketmen or artillery on a square adjacent to the enemy. This combined arms approach could probably be applied to many other periods too.

Anyway, just some thoughts.

The English Cossack

[siredgar]

I agree. Railroads on every single square is very unattractive and unnecessary. They shouldn't provide any bonus besides faster movement. I don't even think roads should either.

[Admiral PJ]

In my Civ2:TOT mod I just removed railways, and made that technology allow railway depots which were like Coal Plants, and a unit that moved faster on roads..
Now with civ3 we could just have a Train unit that carried other units and moves at a speed of 3, moving fast over roads.
Maybe we should lobby for Firaxis to make railroad speeds adjustable as well as the other bits.

I think having roads increase shields and food is the only good thing about them, though for mods it would be nice to do this differently.

Its actualy easy to change the railroads colours, just do a colour replace on each component colour , should only take about 5 minutes.
Maybe the same graphics as the roads could be used for rails, just change their colour to a dark grey - an easy solution.

You could make all units count each square as road, then they shouldn't use roads or rails.. and they're just used for increasing trade/resource links..