28-06-2005 04:06									#91
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

lajzar: Let me assure you, you are not the first one to propose any of this. But if people don't read the List, they won't read a wiki either. What you make is just the List in another form you know.

	28-06-2005 06:02									#92
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

So, has anybody heard what sort of rail system is in Civ 4? I would be slightly disappointed if it hasn't been changed at all. (The same goes for ship movement.)

	28-06-2005 07:33									#93
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

quote: Originally posted by Inverse Icarus Units in a city should use a "GOTO" window, and select another city connected by rails. They should get there instantly, but lose all movement points.

I agree with that idea. Have it work more like the rebase command for aircraft in Civ 3. And railroads can only connect cities, not spread all over the landscape. For better movement in the Combustion era, we could have Roads improve to Highways which would increase the movement rate 25-50%. Land production improvements that Railroads now create could be pushed to Electricity with Workers building a hydro grid across your empire, shown with little hydro poles.

	28-06-2005 07:44									#94
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

quote: Originally posted by Guardian Only if you choose to look at it that way, I say. I prefer to think of the rail network as a key strategic asset and expanding it into new areas as a key strategic objective.

But there comes a point where the Railroad covers every square inch of your empire. Where's the strategy there? You don't have to concern yourself with placing your troops anywhere in particular, since they can travel instantly from everywhere. It would make the game much more interesting if you suddenly realized that the border next to a civ that just declared war on you was very lightly defended, and you'd better do something about it quickly. You'd be forced to make more strategic decisions along those lines, instead of just having a Stack of Death sitting around anywhere, just waiting for an attack.

	28-06-2005 07:50									#95
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

As long as rail movement was the ONLY thing a unit did in a turn, I would be satisfied, whether infinite movement or not. Makes it strategic movement, as opposed to tactical movement/combat.

BTW, a unit that uses its strategic movement (railroads) in a turn has a 50% defense penalty following its movement, so it does NOT want to rail all the way up to the front if at all avoidable!

	28-06-2005 08:16									#96
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

quote: Originally posted by Shigga keep the infinite movement. how far do you think some unit can move in the space of 2 years irl? One turn = 2 years so th movement should be infinite or very near to it imho

Why do people keep bringing up this issue? Realistic or not we're playing a game here, and sometimes gameplay issues have to supercede. And being able to have your forces anywhere in your empire and defend all of your territory at once is a lousy gameplay choice. It takes away any kind of strategic decision and makes waging modern war downright boring!

	28-06-2005 08:25									#97
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by Wai_Wai b) The rail station is a city improvement (which cost maintenance). It is available when a city is connected by rail

Or another option:

The railroads are automatically placed between cities as soon as they build the improvement. With a condition that the rails will only connect those cities that are adjacent to each other. No jumping across your empire, you have to build from city to city.

	28-06-2005 08:42									#98
	Support Apolyton

I like the rail city-improvement option only if you can build multiple city improvements simultaneously.

	28-06-2005 18:09									#99
	Full PM-box? Change here!

quote: Originally posted by Willem Why do people keep bringing up this issue? Realistic or not we're playing a game here, and sometimes gameplay issues have to supercede. And being able to have your forces anywhere in your empire and defend all of your territory at once is a lousy gameplay choice. It takes away any kind of strategic decision and makes waging modern war downright boring!

But some players would rather not have to think in a strategic game. That would ruin it

This is why the combination of the current single unit airlift feature allowed from city to city that have airports (and the forfeiture of all movement points after the unit has landed is a nice touch), and the use of rails as ONLY a 1/5 movement bonus is an ideal solution.

Simple and effective...(but please also boost movement points for naval units too)

quote: Originally posted by Willem The railroads are automatically placed between cities as soon as they build the improvement. With a condition that the rails will only connect those cities that are adjacent to each other. No jumping across your empire, you have to build from city to city.

You run into the potential problem of defining what 'adjacent' means in the game - that can be a very broad definition. If you simply define it as city radius that touch, what do you do regarding cities that do not touch but are next to each other?

	28-06-2005 19:21									#100
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

a good way to limit the amount of RR build a RR improvement in a city (like some other people already said) and then let a 'free' worker automaticly start building a railroad between the cities that have the RR improvements this takes away the RR-lands and lets moving of workers...this way you will only have RR§s between your cities...and maybe with some special station tile improvemnt near your borders...

	28-06-2005 19:34									#101
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

I see no reason against infinite movement on Rail. But only inside your civ's borders. And only on terrain that is inside your borders for at least a few (say 5) turns. The thing is, absolutely everything can be transported on rails in a year (hence infinite movement for peace-time transportation). But there is no way this should be possible durring a war, where the Civ time-scale gets skewed, and we are talking days, not years. Especially not if the other country has a different Rail system. More importantly, RR-rushes kill the joy late-game of PBEMs, so they must be prevented somehow.

	28-06-2005 20:54									#102
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

quote: Originally posted by Modo44 I see no reason against infinite movement on Rail.

So you are willing to accept the element of a lousy gameplay design choice that takes away from the player the need to make any kind of deep strategic decision for the sake of brainless fun?

Infinite rails means that a player simply 'blobs' his units, and then when threatenened, sends them instantaneously against any threat. No need to preplan a war, or preplan for the possible threat of being invaded...Just spit out units and react when it occurs.

You already defeat your own argument when you say

quote: Originally posted by Modo44 More importantly, RR-rushes kill the joy late-game of PBEMs, so they must be prevented somehow.

The advantage of having both unlimited AND infinite movement works both on the side of offense and defense. You may then say that since there is no advantage either way, then why change it? But the limitation makes for a more challenging gameplay choice because it forces a player to make tough choices in deployment. Players simply cannot blob to the extent that they can with unlimited movement, either on offense or defense, because they will have to hold some units in reserve if a secondary threat appears on the opposite side of the map.

I'll take the better gameplay over cheap tactics any day.

I'll go back to my post above...

quote: Originally posted by hexagonian This is why the combination of the current single unit airlift feature allowed from city to city that have airports (and the forfeiture of all movement points after the unit has landed is a nice touch), and the use of rails as ONLY a 1/5 movement bonus is an ideal solution.

This solution allows the means to have SOME instantaneous movement feature that many civ3 loyalists crave for their safety crutch, but it is limited in scope because of the forfeiture of movement when the unit is airlifted, as well as the limit of one unit per airport per turn.

A compromise, you can say...

	28-06-2005 21:10									#103
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

It would mighty disappoint me, if infinite RR movement would have survived in Civ4. Knowing Firaxis, I don't hold my breath, though.

	28-06-2005 21:12									#104
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

I believe it will be kept. Something that revolutionary compared to earlier releases would probably be among the first things to be presented of info of the game, partially to see the response before it is too late I guess.

	28-06-2005 21:49									#105
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

quote: Originally posted by hexagonian So you are willing to accept the element of a lousy gameplay design choice that takes away from the player the need to make any kind of deep strategic decision for the sake of brainless fun? Infinite rails means that a player simply 'blobs' his units, and then when threatenened, sends them instantaneously against any threat. No need to preplan a war, or preplan for the possible threat of being invaded...Just spit out units and react when it occurs.

You are wrong. If you "blob" all (or most) units, your border cities are empty, and can be taken. If the enemy has fast-enough units (no Rails, mind you), he can then even move farther into your territory. He can then fortify and show your blob the finger. There goes your argument.

What unlimited RR movement does, and what it should do, is let you react the turn after the invasion. Which is perfectly fine, as demontstrated by German defense during late WWII, where divisions and bigger units were shifted "instantly" (a month or less, I do not know exactly; far less that a Civ turn might be) between fronts. Without unlimited RR, this kind of scrambling would not be possible.

What I would like to see is some kind of delay, before RRs in conquered or liberated territory become functional, so that nobody could rush you that way in one turn. Units have limited movement, so even if someone takes 2 layers of cities on turn 1, he would get bogged down, having to watch the counter-attack. With unlimited RR movement they would just roll over everything.

	28-06-2005 22:33									#107
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

quote: Originally posted by Modo44 You are wrong. If you "blob" all (or most) units, your border cities are empty, and can be taken.

No they are not - it is perfectly reasonable in a 'blob' mindset to maintain strong defensive garrisons in border cities. What you 'blob' are your offensive units, which can instantaneously react and counter an invading blob on your turn that you are attacked - and can also be joined by inner defensive units on an as-needed basis.

quote: Originally posted by Modo44 If the enemy has fast-enough units (no Rails, mind you), he can then even move farther into your territory. He can then fortify and show your blob the finger. There goes your argument.

My argument remains - since your entire argument rests on the fact that a blobber would leave his border cities unprotected. This is not the case though, for any player with any sense. See my point above...

quote: Originally posted by Modo44 What unlimited RR movement does, and what it should do, is let you react the turn after the invasion. Which is perfectly fine, as demontstrated by German defense during late WWII, where divisions and bigger units were shifted "instantly" (a month or less, I do not know exactly; far less that a Civ turn might be) between fronts.

Civ games always have a level of abstraction, and do not truly reflect the realities of time. In that regard, the designers need to strike a balance between realism and the presentation of good gameplay concepts.

Limited movement bonuses allows the player the same ability to react quickly, but in a more limited fashion, as it would take several turns to deploy your troops. As I said before, having this limit presents a more challenging gameplay element than simply blob-stacking units and then instantaneously having the ability to send those units anywhere.

The importance of how quickly you can strike/counter is a very important gameplay element, and is a hallmake of TBS games - and having units in position or out of position can make or break you. This facet of gameplay adds depth...if your troops are out of position, you sweat...if you can simply bring units to any front instantaneously, you laugh and pat yourself on the back with the illusion of being clever .

In fact, with instantaneous movement, all you need to worry about is quantity - with limited movement, you worry about quantity AND positioning.

Unlimited movement is a cheap crutch - plain and simple!

quote: Originally posted by Modo44 Without unlimited RR, this kind of scrambling would not be possible.

...A scrambling that would occur on the turn after the invasion is launched, and rewards a player with the ability to put all of his troops on a threatened front instantaneously does not really force the player to preplan troop deployment and dumbs down that aspect of the game.

Any monkey can thus counter the threat.

quote: Originally posted by Modo44 What I would like to see is some kind of delay, before RRs in conquered or liberated territory become functional, so that nobody could rush you that way in one turn. Units have limited movement, so even if someone takes 2 layers of cities on turn 1, he would get bogged down, having to watch the counter-attack. With unlimited RR movement they would just roll over everything.

I'm in agreement here, but this is consistent with eliminating all infinite RR movement anyhow...

	28-06-2005 22:44									#108
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

What is all the fuss about?

Just mod the game once you buy Civ IV, to change the movement cost for railroad to whatever you would like it to be.

	28-06-2005 23:17									#109
	Get a bigger avatar today!

...as long as Firaxis does not follow the format of civ3. which hardcoded movement on rails so it could not be changed. But based on what I have seen, the modding capabilities that are in civ4 sound like you can do anything

	28-06-2005 23:46									#110
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

quote: Originally posted by MrFun What is all the fuss about? Just mod the game once you buy Civ IV, to change the movement cost for railroad to whatever you would like it to be.

Modding also involves screwing/scewing the game up to a point where it can be unbalanced.
I for one, prefer to play with stock rules, where I know that I'm playing how the designers errr designed it and how most people play it.

	28-06-2005 23:53									#111
	Get a bigger avatar today!

as long as the graphics designers make pretty little choo-choo's going along the tracks, i'll be happy.

Long Live the Caboose!

	28-06-2005 23:58									#112
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

Looks like this thread´s got a second wind

	29-06-2005 00:20									#113
	Increase the size of your Attachments

The fact is railroads ARE that fast. The only form of human transportation that beats it is air travel. I actually think that the unfairness comes from the 1-unit limit on airlifting, not from the unlimited rail travel. The game should recognize the fact that mankind can travel hundreds of times faster than it could in the ancient era, or even the early 1800s.

	29-06-2005 00:34									#114
	Support Apolyton

quote: Originally posted by alva Modding also involves screwing/scewing the game up to a point where it can be unbalanced. I for one, prefer to play with stock rules, where I know that I'm playing how the designers errr designed it and how most people play it.

Couldnt agree more... its a real headache organising a MP game where everyone has the same modifications, especially to new MP players who arent even aware of the mods.

The easier it is to go online and start up a quick game of civ with a stranger, the more popular it will become.

	29-06-2005 01:14									#115
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

quote: Originally posted by TomVeil The fact is railroads ARE that fast. The only form of human transportation that beats it is air travel. I actually think that the unfairness comes from the 1-unit limit on airlifting, not from the unlimited rail travel. The game should recognize the fact that mankind can travel hundreds of times faster than it could in the ancient era, or even the early 1800s.

Individuals can, yes. Large military units with lots of heavy equipment and even greater supply needs are another matter.

And before anyone starts on the C-5A Galaxy transport, remember that just because a thing CAN be done, does not mean it is feasible to do it in large quantities. No, flying even a single battalion of tanks halfway across the globe just isn't done. Perhaps a company of tanks were airlifted to Saudi Arabia prior to Saddam's invasion of Kuwait. The rest were shipped over from the US or from pre-positioned stockpiles.

	29-06-2005 02:09									#116
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

quote: Originally posted by Jaybe Individuals can, yes. Large military units with lots of heavy equipment and even greater supply needs are another matter. And before anyone starts on the C-5A Galaxy transport, remember that just because a thing CAN be done, does not mean it is feasible to do it in large quantities. No, flying even a single battalion of tanks halfway across the globe just isn't done. Perhaps a company of tanks were airlifted to Saudi Arabia prior to Saddam's invasion of Kuwait. The rest were shipped over from the US or from pre-positioned stockpiles.

If you have a year (which is the shortest Civ turn), you can do it with ease. This has been demonstrated many times in many wars, especially (as numbers at a time go) during WWII.

	29-06-2005 04:21									#117
	Support Apolyton

quote: Originally posted by Nikolai I believe it will be kept. Something that revolutionary compared to earlier releases would probably be among the first things to be presented of info of the game, partially to see the response before it is too late I guess.

I'm not so sure about that. I think there's been enough complaints about infinite movement that they already know what the response would be. I'm guessing a small majority would be in favour of eliminating it. At the very least, they will have railroad movement moddable for those of us who are hoping for more strategic decisions.

	29-06-2005 04:28									#118
	Got spare money?

Yeah, I know it's a majority who wants it gone, I was after all thread master for the List thread for this discussion. But I also know there was many different views on how to do this, I would think Firaxis would like to get responses on such an important issue if they would choose to alter such a well known feature.

	29-06-2005 04:47									#119
	Support Apolyton

quote: Originally posted by Nikolai But I also know there was many different views on how to do this, I would think Firaxis would like to get responses on such an important issue if they would choose to alter such a well known feature.

There's been lots of discussion on this issue, with lots of ideas on how to change it. I doubt they really need to get more input on the matter. They do watch these forums, so they already have a fairly good idea of how we would like it to be implemented.

	29-06-2005 05:51									#120
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

This is only one forum, what is the feeling about this issue on others? Surely Firaxis checks more then just 'Poly?