 |
|  |
 |
|
Hurricane
|
 |
Arctic Hill
May 2001 time: 07:12
|
|
First I want to say hi to everybody. Yesterday I got the brilliant idea of reinstalling Civ2, and I can tell I came rather tired to work this morning after playing all night 
Anyway, I found this great forum and read all about Civ 3, so after spending an hour searching without success, I decided to post my idea for Civ 3 as a new post instead. Sorry if this has already been discussed, but all I found were topics about *crossing* rivers and movement of *ships* along rivers.
What I want to point out is the massive importance rivers had for movement of people, during most part of history. Railroads were the first means of transportation that was faster than water. Now, in Civ 2, rivers count as roads when you move along them, but you have to spend a whole movement point to enter the river tile. This means you in most cases will build a road beside the river and walk along this instead. And because you can't build roads in river tiles before Bridge building, you will see rivers more like obstacles than fast ways of transpaortation for most of the time.
So I have some simple suggestions for Civ 3.
1) Make river movement for ground units faster than road movement. I suggest 1/6 movement point. Looking at history, rivers were *always* used whenever available.
2) Make it possible to build roads into river tiles before bridge building. However, before bridge building, crossing a river will always cost 1 movement point even if there is a road in the tile.
This would lead to rivers having an important strategic importance, just like they had in real life.
What do you think?
Hurricane
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Mokael
|
|
an interesting point. but I have a slightly different approach. Instead of building a "river boat", or doing all that complicated road/bridge-bidling thing, there should be a much simpler way. For example -- Settler unit (or is it now Laborer?) should have ability to construct a small port/station on a river tile, that would allow your units to enter that tile without losing a movement point.
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
Pingu:
|
 |
Exeter, England
Jan 2001 time: 05:12
|
|
I agree, you should be able to build raods running along side rivers before bridge building.
However I think it's importatnt to have different types of rivers... (this has been mentioned before, so thanks to whoever it was that thought it up...)
You have small rivers, that are crossable without bridges at fords where the river is relatively shallow (although with a big movement penalty). River transport down this is still good though, and probably better than roads. Bridges over these get rid of the movement penalty, and connect up roads on either side of the river.
There should be lots more small rivers than currentlty in Civ2, just look at any map and from just about every group of hills, in every plain, there's a small river.
These rivers flow until enough join up to become big rivers, these are uncrossable by conventional units (although spies should be able to swim them with a risk of dying?). Also Ships can sail up these rivers up until the point where they become small rivers (so acting as ferries if you want).
To build big bridges accross big rivers you need engineering, not just bridge building.
(canals woudl be a good idea too, effectively you should be able to turn small rivers into big rivers, and perhaps build big rivers from nothing (at great expense...., you'd need explosives for that???)
Pingu:
|
|
|  |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:12. Apolyton Time is 00:12. |
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
|
|
|
|
|
|