 |
|  |
 |
|
loleod
|
|
Boston
Apr 2002 time: 00:19
|
|
When you build a city on a thin strip of land all of YOUR sea units can pss through it. I think a new worker action would be cool. Build Canal. If the strip of land is less then 3 squares you can build a canal. To make life more difficult/more realistic you might have to wait for one of two things. Enginering ( hey it lets you build forests and bridges why not canals) or for a small wonder called Panama Canal ( Which would be avaiable after you learned enginering. Just like roads the AI wouldnt be able to use the canal unless they had a ROP with me. Right now I just gain control of all the 1 square blocks I can find , and I build cities on them ( Like in Marlas World Map I always take control of Panama). Thats unfair to the rest of the civs. Also I think if I have a ROP I should be able to go through the AI cities instead of around. You would never be in it , your unit would gain a speed bonus in the city and always end up outside it after the turn is over.
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
Jethro83
|
|
Newcastle, Australia
Mar 2002 time: 15:19
|
|
Lets just hope Firaxis add the canal option to their XP.
You should also be able to build a bridge over coast and sea squares (kinda like a bridge between tightly packed islands on an archipelago only 1-3 spaces apart). Your workers stand on a square of land next to the coast, you hit the "Build Bridge" key (or click its button) and select the direction you want your bridge to go. Within a number of turns, the first part of a suspension bridge is done. It will go one space onto a coast tile. You could then move your worker onto it, and then build the next square, then the next, until you reach the opposite side of the water body. You'd need to discover Steel to allow it, and ships could travel underneath it.
I may be drifting, but the option to build suspension bridges like this would sort of be an equivalent to the canals option. You'd use a lot of canals to get your navy through a small space of land on continents or Pangaea, and your suspension bridges to get ground forces (and workers) from island to island on an archipelago map.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
kimmygibler
|
|
I would say a two tile maximum for the entire game would be good. Without this, you could cover the whole map in canals and just use ships.
Another problem would be, what if you build a canal 1 square inland in order attach a coast to your city? What if the canal is destroyed while you are building boats, coastal fortress, etc? Also, what about attaching a canal to build a wonder that requires sea access and then destroying the canal?
Also, you could build mutiple canals on adjacent squares? If so, then can you cross from canal to canal? And how would land units cross canals? Could bombardment destroy a canal? If so then what if a unit is in the canal? How would the ai use canals? Could a land unit fight a sea unit in a canal? What if your borders changed as a result of expansion or city takeover while your unit was in a canal that is now controlled by the enemy?
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Coracle
|
|
The canal idea has been discussed since Civ 2 came out!!
Firaxis ignored all the discussions lasting over five years.
I don't think discussiing it any more will get Firaxis to add this needed task, and there should have also been a Panama (or GREAT) Canal Wonder.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Lucilla
|
 |
The Netherlands
Apr 2002 time: 06:19
|
|
Two answers:
quote: Originally posted by kimmygibler
Another problem would be, what if you build a canal 1 square inland in order attach a coast to your city? What if the canal is destroyed while you are building boats, coastal fortress, etc? Also, what about attaching a canal to build a wonder that requires sea access and then destroying the canal? |
You could solve that problem, if you don't allow destroying a canal. I would also limit the building of a canal to a coastal square and only to connect a city to the sea or to cross a 1-tile land bridge. However you would need a bridge (see next quote) to cross the canal with a land unit.
quote: Originally posted by Dom Pedro II
I think rivers are the great unappreciated terrain element... One, I think there should be bridge tile improvements that are roads constructed on rivers, and these improvements can be destroyed. Now, the trick will be as said before that there should be two varieties of rivers. "Fordable" rivers, inaccessable to ships, and big rivers uncrossable by troops but allowing ships. Bombing a "big" river bridge can bring troop movements to a hault.
Secondly, I think rivers should be another medium for trading, so two cities without roads between them can use rivers to connect them. Good for the early game for the expansionist civilizations who don't have time to lay down the infrastructure. |
I totally agree. Rivers should have much more influence on strategy than they have now. The bridge building and the "trading-along-rivers" idea reflects that perfectly. 
|
|
|  |
 |
|
asleepathewheel
|
|
listening too long to one song
Mar 2002 time: 00:19
|
|
quote: Originally posted by cyclotron7
But I'm even more amazed at your apparent psychic abilities to know that Firaxis ignored the fans when it's equally possible that they decided against the feature with a conscious choice. |
What I find amusing about Coracle is that he claims that firaxis completely ignored the gaming community while at the same time constantly whines about Culture, which was one of the suggestions by the community, IIRC.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
asleepathewheel
|
|
listening too long to one song
Mar 2002 time: 00:19
|
|
Oh, I agree that canal building would be a cool feature, I'm just not sure how it would be implemented. I like star mouse's worker suggestion, which would probably indicate more of a move towards SMAX's 3d terrain/ terraform options, which woudln't be that bad of a thing for me.
'Like in Marlas World Map I always take control of Panama). Thats unfair to the rest of the civs."
I think that is great, a race to control a key spot of land. If there was a way for allies to move through your city (there isn't, is there?) it would be even better.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
loleod
|
|
Boston
Apr 2002 time: 00:19
|
|
I would like to see the abilty to cross three tiles with a canal more then two , but I could live with two, heck I would be delighted with the abilty to do it to a one square piece of land.
I would say the canal could be rendered useless , but would not be destroyed. In real life it would take longer to fill a canal then to make one so this would make sense. You would in essence fill in enough to stop it from working. Ships already in the tile would be allowed to finish their route unharmed.
I would say that land units could not fight sea units in the canal. I like the bridge idea , so if bridges and canals were implemented then you would have to build a small bridge over the canal to get over it.
The canal would be just like roads , people with whom you have ROP with can use them , but people who you dont have ROPs with cant. If that land was taken from me it would be the property of the AI who took it. If they destroyed my city near it , then it would be available to all units ( Water units of course).
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Capt Dizle
|
|
Thats right lets not focus on the fact that you could terraform in SMAC. We must not make the choir boys uncomfortable. We must pretend that Civ3 is something other than "one small step for Soren, one giant leap backward for civilization"
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Coracle
|
|
Canals would be especially useful in Civ 3 as there are often thin strips of land that would really be useful if a canal could be built there.
|
|
|  |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:19. Apolyton Time is 00:19. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|