What about Suez and Panama?

[Kramsib]

As you can see in the image, another difference between Civ II and Civ III is the inexistance of Canals. That is to say that you cannot move naval units between squares joined by one of their vertex.

If you remember, Civ II's world maps used this peculiarity to depict Suez and Panama Canals, but the problem was it was unrealistic because, they were built by man, in other words, they were not natural channels.

Ok, Civ III is more realistic now but it is a pitty that my modern boats cannot travel troughout these strategical points unless I own a city just in the middle.

So, I wonder if you consider a good idea the possibility of construct canals like airfields or fortresses are built, and if it should be worthwile including this new option in the new PTW.

Thank you.

[Gangerolf]

you could just build a city there you know

[Gangerolf]

but yes, it would be neat to be able to dig canals

[Kramsib]

The problem of using cities as canals is that they can be only used by the owner of the city, so even with a right of passage only the owner of the city can sail throughout it.

[Deathwalker]

I think this would be a jood idea. You sould either have a canal tytpoe improvemnt or allow other civs to pass though your city to get to the other side. But not stay in the city at a end of turn

[dunk]

Well, I think the problem with not having player-built canals is the AI. The AI may not place a city in the proper position to allow the canal effect. But, if they were buildable, maybe the AI would do so.

[statusperfect]

I don't think it's just the canals. As mentioned in other posts the whola naval system should be redone.

[JtheJackal]

I've been a huge supporter of canals ever since I played Civ 2.

[GhengisFarbâ„¢]

Originally posted by Deathwalker
I think this would be a jood idea. You sould either have a canal tytpoe improvemnt or allow other civs to pass though your city to get to the other side. But not stay in the city at a end of turn

Personally, I think it'd be cool if your allies COULD leave ships/units in your cities to heal up.

Then we wouldn't have to have the "Dig Canal" worker funtion.

[Carver]

I'm sure sailing is very enjoyable but sometimes you just wanna get to where you're going. Yes, yes for canals.

[jdd2007]

it would be abused way too much, unless there were huge limits on the size and number of them. they should be very expensive, and take a long time to build...

[Dinner]

No question about it. We need canals.

[The_Aussie_Lurker]

My opinion is that you should have to BUILD a "canal improvement" for EVERY land square you want your ships to move through, and there should be a maximum number of adjacent squares you can build the improvement in-say 3 squares for an average map! The improvement should be capturable by the enemy, and not be enterable by any other civ without an MPP! It should also not become available until the late industrial age! On a final note, though, ships which pass through a square containing a canal should also have to pay a higher movement cost than if it were moving through coastal waters (Say 2mp instead of 1mp). I think that, combined, these things should limit the extent to which they could be abused by players!

Yours,
The_Aussie_Lurker.

[Coracle]

Originally posted by Gangerolf
you could just build a city there you know

Wrong.

First of all, Canals, as Wonders, were asked for repeatedly after Civ 2 came out. Firaxis ignored those requests.

Second, both Suez, and especially the Panama Canal, were Great Woinders of the World that gave immediate benefits to the building civ - prestige, power, naval strength, and a real nice boost in trade and commerce, plus a continuing source of additional income through usage fees.

None of that can be reflected merely by building a town.

[Coracle]

Originally posted by statusperfect
I don't think it's just the canals. As mentioned in other posts the whola naval system should be redone.

I have said it for many months, pathetic and lame naval warfare is one of the three most disappointing parts of Civ 3. It is more simplistic than even Civ 2, and now we can't even deliver caravans and spies by sea - which was fun and dramatic.

Privateers and subs should be able to attack enemy merchant shipping on his trade routes. But Firaxis was too busy dreaming up crazy stuff such as disappearing garrisons when a city "flips" than to do something realistIc.