Announcement

**Matthevv** · February 23, 2000, 11:52

Railways definitely need fixing. In Civ2 I can land my howitzers and immediately move an infinite distance on someone else's railways. How? Did I bring my own trains?

**ember** · February 24, 2000, 23:43

My fix idea was the deployment system, where any unmoved and undamged unit can be sent to your reserves (not placed on the board) At the end of your turn you can tell it where to deploy (only your cites, allied cities, bases and certain ships) It is defensless until your next turn (can't contribute to defense, but can be destroyed). On your next turn it has no movment, but can defend.

Railroads, etc have limitied movment (8 - 12x) seems the most that is reasonable.
Enemy rail roads count as regular roads until they are incorperated into your territory.

------------------
"Any technology, sufficiently advanced,
is indistinguishable from magic"
-Arthur C. Clark

**Zanzibar** · February 25, 2000, 02:13

I think the following model would be realistic:
- roads: 3x movement multiplier
- highways: 6x
- railroads: 12x

To prevent map-filled-only-with-railroads situations, like in Civ2, there must be an advantage for highways vs. rails, and that should be the trade multiplier. So, for faster movement we should build rails, but for more trade highways.

**Glostakarov** · February 25, 2000, 14:30

I can still picture each tile being industrialized over with roads though, a nice big cloverleaf of highways around each city, since they give the trade bonus. Sure the railroads would be cutting through this, but it'll still look a lot like the over-railed civ2 maps. Not sure what can be done about it, but on a side note, the limited movement for rails should prevent the infinite movement and still attack thing.

**lago** · February 25, 2000, 15:10

CtP uses 5x for railroads instead of the infinite movement of Civ2. In so doing they actually create a problem. Why should rail speed depend on unit speed? If you're on the train, you're all going the same speed, right? Does cavalry get to ride the express trains?

But IMO the Unlimited Mileage Plan of Civ2 also needs fixing. Maybe make rail travel a flat 10 tiles per turn (or 12 or 6 or 15 or whatever). ???

**korn469** · February 25, 2000, 16:17

lago,

nice idea

how about this

roads: 3x movement multiplier
highways: 5x movement multiplier
railroads: flat rate of 8 spaces

you build a road, then you can either build a highway or a railroad overtop of it, but not both

then like in Alpha Centauri, no trade bonuses for any type of road

korn469
[This message has been edited by korn469 (edited February 25, 2000).]

**Theben** · February 25, 2000, 20:00

I wouldn't give highways THAT much better of a move over basic roads. Maybe x4. Rails could have increasing flat rates as tech was accumulated.

Don't forget color-coding enemy rails!

**Zanzibar** · February 26, 2000, 07:36

Good thinking, Iago! But in this case, there must exist the possibility to upgrade your rails over the time, as new tehnologies are developed: diesel, electric, intercity, monorail (maybe 4x, 6x, 8x, 10x). And there is more: if we consider that units are transported by train, well, we must build that train, at least virtually. So, my proposal is that the rail construction must also cost money (or shields). This will prevent also the filling of map with rails only, because you won't build them if they are not necessary. There is another possibility too: instead of spending money building the rails, spend energy (money, shields) by moving the train (the units on train).
The highways could have something like 4x or 5x movement rate, and of course more trade.

**Mer'Zhul** · February 26, 2000, 09:23

More tech, faster trains with lower cost to move, energy icons addd, and finally, NO CHEATS!!!!!!!!!!

<center><table width=80%><tr><td>quote:
<img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1>
Originally posted by Zanzibar on 02-26-2000 06:36 AM
Good thinking, Iago! But in this case, there must exist the possibility to upgrade your rails over the time, as new tehnologies are developed: diesel, electric, intercity, monorail (maybe 4x, 6x, 8x, 10x). And there is more: if we consider that units are transported by train, well, we must build that train, at least virtually. So, my proposal is that the rail construction must also cost money (or shields). This will prevent also the filling of map with rails only, because you won't build them if they are not necessary. There is another possibility too: instead of spending money building the rails, spend energy (money, shields) by moving the train (the units on train).
The highways could have something like 4x or 5x movement rate, and of course more trade.
<img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1></td></tr></table></center>

**MadWoodster** · February 26, 2000, 09:54

Following on from lago's suggestion about a fixed amount for railways, would highways speed calvary up more than infrantry? I think not so maybe we should have fixed for highways, I can see that maybe motorized vehicles such as tanks would move faster than other units over land.
Also you could simulate the movements by having to build APC's (armoured personnal carriers) and trains to transport units, though this would increase the amount of work by the player and be annoying I admit.

**Theben** · February 27, 2000, 01:32

<center><table width=80%><tr><td>quote:
<img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1>
Originally posted by MadWoodster on 02-26-2000 08:54 AM
Following on from lago's suggestion about a fixed amount for railways, would highways speed calvary up more than infrantry? I think not so maybe we should have fixed for highways, I can see that maybe motorized vehicles such as tanks would move faster than other units over land.
<img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1></td></tr></table></center>

But does the highway bonus come from the availability of automobiles, or from having better roads than the previous type? That's why I said it should only be x4 move bonus. Having autos could be considered abstracted into the system with redeployment.

**Zanzibar** · February 28, 2000, 03:20

How do you like this?

Improved road & rail rules:
- Roads: Just like in Civ2 (3x move bonus, trade bonus)
- Highways: Only after the discovery of automobile. Trade bonus. Move bonus: 4x, but only for motorized units! For the rest of the units, 3x.
- Railroads: Flat movement rate, the same for all units, which can gradually increase over the time, as new technologies are developed (for example: diesel 4x, electric 6x, intercity 8x, monorail 10x). The building of rails should also cost money (or shields), because we are building not only the railway but also the train, but only virtually!
- The movement on railroads for all units and the movement on roads and highways for motorized units should cost money (or energy or shields or whatever).
- The cost for moving outside our borders should depend on the type of the diplomatic relations we have with the other nation:
1. Ally: the cost will be the same as on our territory
2. Friend (peace treaty): double cost.
3. Enemy: triple cost and slower movement (they are sabotaging you!).

**korn469** · February 28, 2000, 04:03

Improved road & rail rules:
- Roads: Just like in Civ2 (3x move bonus, trade bonus)

i like this idea, except in SMAC, roads don't increase trade, there are other tile improvements that increase trade, which i think is a better system

- Highways: Only after the discovery of automobile. Trade bonus. Move bonus: 4x, but only for motorized units! For the rest of the units, 3x.

I love the idea that high ways only increase motorized vehicles movement! that's genius! same comment about the trade issue, but on movement i agree 100% with you

- Railroads: Flat movement rate, the same for all units, which can gradually increase over the time, as new technologies are developed (for example: diesel 4x, electric 6x, intercity 8x, monorail 10x). The building of rails should also cost money (or shields), because we are building not only the railway but also the train, but only virtually!

when you say flat rate but type in 6x ect, you do mean an infantry unit and an armored unit would both move the same correct? also one other clarification, after moving on a railroad the unit would still have all of it's movement left right? i completely agree with that, and i love that idea. put in one stipulation though, a unit can only use railroads once per turn

i agree that all tile improvements (TI) should cost one shield to build basic TIs (farms, roads) and two shields to build advanced TIs (railroads, airbases)

additionally all TIs should cost maintenance, counting each TI seperately, (a farm, a road, and a highway on one square would be three TIs) each citizen would give you two TIs free, and every five TIs after that should cost one mineral to support.

- The movement on railroads for all units and the movement on roads and highways for motorized units should cost money (or energy or shields or whatever).

if they implement the energy barrels system then i ardently agree that movement should use energy barrels but i disagree that movement should ever ost money or shields

- The cost for moving outside our borders should depend on the type of the diplomatic relations we have with the other nation:
1. Ally: the cost will be the same as on our territory
2. Friend (peace treaty): double cost.
3. Enemy: triple cost and slower movement (they are sabotaging you!).

i disagree with the idea that movement should cost more energy barrels outside of your territory, maybe more supply but certainly not more energy barrels that should be a fixed cost. also your units should not move slower outside of your territory...however i would be in favor of a +1 movement bonus while units are inside of your territory, that would make fighting a defensive war easier on the defender

korn469

[This message has been edited by korn469 (edited February 28, 2000).]

**korn469** · February 28, 2000, 05:43

Zanzibar

first can you define what the problem is? is it a significant problem? how does your ideas fix that problem specifically? does your fix effect any other areas of the game? if it does effect another area does it upset game balance in those other areas? is there a simpler way to fix the problem? does your idea hurt gameplay? why out of all of the ideas does your fix belong on this list?

by the way this is one of my favorite threads, the cooperation in this thread is good, the ideas are great and i think if it makes the list, many of the changes in this list could make it into civ3

Announcement

EC3 Fix #15 - ROAD & RAIL

EC3 Fix #15 - ROAD & RAIL

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment