Civ 4 ideas - Straits and Canals

[Straybow]

In Civ2, at the start with all units still in the original tile, F11 says 1000 sq mi. For each tile a unit moves into the F11 tally increments 1000 sq mi.

After founding a city the way Civ2 determines the number of tiles "belonging" to a civ changes and it tends to count the number of tiles revealed. It's just a way to compare the territories of the civs.

---

The St Lawrence Seaway isn't a canal. It is a system of enlarged natural waterways connecting lakes. The Rideau Canal likewise connects two enlarged natural waterways via natural and manmade lakes with perhaps a few short segments of entirely manmade canals.

The Panama canal is also substantially composed of manmade lakes and an enlarged natural waterway. It maintains passable depth for continuous traffic only due to the very high rainfall feeding Lake Gatun from a very small watershed.

The other site considered for a canal was through Nicaragua, utilizing Lago de Nicaragua and Rio San Juan. The route is much longer, crosses higher terrain, and would've required far more labor and materials.

Both the Kiel and Suez are sea level canals. Without powered excavation machinery neither was feasible, and perhaps not even possible. The Panama Canal required better excavation machinery and more advanced locks and control machinery. The best way to control this (if such things are allowed) is to have a prerequisite tech. It is analogous to Bridge Building.

In Civ terms all other canals are just like roads, and can be built with ancient techniques.

[dmd175]

In Civ terms all other canals are just like roads, and can be built with ancient techniques.

Maybe, but only if you happen to have a chain of lakes connecting your desired city / canal endpoint to the ocean. When canals should be available in the tech tree is a real question...with engineering or construction if there is a chain of lakes that you can extend just by carving out flat land, and then again real canals, like Suez, etc as you mention after maybe motorized transport?

[Max Sinister]

I didn't bother so far to calculate whether the "land area" value in Civ2 demographics and the number of occupied tiles correlate somehow... do they count the number of tiles in your city area, or the worked tiles, or different?

[MiketheYounger]

Straybow, I was under the impression the discussion was about canal systems such as Kiel, Suez, Panama, and St. Lawrence. Suez and Panama are across isthmuses (ismuthii? sounds silly either way) joining 2 togther heavily trafficked bodies of water (2 and 3 respectively) thereby cutting weeks off of the transit times of much of the worlds's freight. St Lawrence Seaway is a series of canals joining the Great Lakes with the Atlantic. This turned the Great Lakes into the largest concentration of ports on the planet, inland or otherwise. The Keil canal, having been constructed for military rather than commercial reasons, showed this kind of project was technically feasible. I'm thinking canals such as those in Venice and St Petersburg are to small to be modelled in a Civ type game. Natuarlly projects of this size would require a large investment in labour, capital, and time. IMHO, they are an option players should have to choose from or ignore if they so wish

[Shogun Gunner]

Straits already exist by the random world generation. Additional "features" of this geography may be interesting, such as impassible to certain types of crafts.

Regarding canals, I hope they keep this to the modder community only. So i voted , "neither".

[Grandpa Troll]

Interesting Shogun

i dun agree with ya..but do agree you have the rigfhts to youre opinion



Gramps

[Addled Platypus]

impassable terrain makes since for most vehicles even into the 20th century.

Once flight is achieved, it's moot.



My .02 and falling fast

[Grandpa Troll]

Originally posted by Platypus Rex
impassable terrain makes since for most vehicles even into the 20th century.

Once flight is achieved, it's moot.



My .02 and falling fast

MOOT if aircraft are a feasable or viable option..

like if you can resupply aircraft but could with watercraft..was kinda my mode of approach here

Gramps

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by Platypus Rex
Star mouse

Why not a canal that connects two lakes?

Or, for that matter, connecting two rivers?

So I should be able to construct a canal that connects two bodies of water.

[Grandpa Troll]

Originally posted by Urban Ranger


Or, for that matter, connecting two rivers?

So I should be able to construct a canal that connects two bodies of water.

UR

This is my whole point:
with a considerable difference in say resources and time to build, a canal should be available irreguardless of the terrain..

Suez-Panamabring to mind two



Cheers

Gramps

[Urban Ranger]

I agree, Gramps.

[Shogun Gunner]

Its not to say that I'm 100% against this idea but consider the issue of scale.

In Civ2 and Civ3, you can build a city on a location which effectively creates a "canal" between two seperate bodies of water. Think Panama City along side the Panama Canal - a city on an isthmus. This canal system is 80 kilometers long and it's one of the greatest engineering accomplishments in history.

80 kilometers. That's not a very long distance in civ terms -- especially when playing an "epic" game. If it's a scenario or some type of mod, then perhaps the difference in scale makes a bit more sense for the construction of canals, but the concentration of such enterprises would not be so localized. What I mean is that there is not likely to be two Suez style projects within 100 miles of each other.

The problem comes down to scale.

[Grandpa Troll]

Shogun, I agree..its scale..but the whole game is based on some imagination of sorts and give and takes

Like the combat..you would not do a full scale assault "1" unit (as depicted a company or platoon or battalion of men) you would commit a total onslaught of your resources.BUT you can in this game

or the issue of "Wonders"..for real, can we as real life Humans build a "WONDER"?..of course not but it is a game and we "Pretend" and I am not trying to be a Dream Smasher..but we all play this for what we want..to be rulers and dignitaries and sovereign leaders of our little worlds..

Trolldom..I love Trolldom..my little escape from the harsh realities of the Ready Mix Concrete World..

My boses wouldnt understand the love I have of building a world from scratch..

NOR would they understand the importance of building a canal or a strait..

But we do..now come on....Play and let your imagination run wild

Grandpa "Not close to ever being on scale" Troll

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by Shogun Gunner
In Civ2 and Civ3, you can build a city on a location which effectively creates a "canal" between two seperate bodies of water. Think Panama City along side the Panama Canal - a city on an isthmus. This canal system is 80 kilometers long and it's one of the greatest engineering accomplishments in history.

Right, we can already build canals by building cities at the appropiate sites. So it's just a small step to isolate this process to be used anywhere on the map.

Okay, almost anywhere.

[patcon]

Here's a possible solution:
1. Create a new type of terrain called "strait" which is both water and land.
a. Movement cost for all types of units is the max movement rate for any unit, requiring any unit to effectively stop when entering a strait.
b. Attack/defense halved for units in straits.
c. Cities cannot be built on straits.
d. Straits produce 3 food, 4 gold, and 0 shields.
e. Straits can be chained together to form navigable rivers (going inland) or fjords (along the coast).
f. For irrigation purposes: straits connecting saltwater to saltwater are saltwater; straits connecting freshwater to freshwater are freshwater; and straits connecting freshwater to saltwater are mixed with the N strait tiles closest to the lake being freshwater
where N = (# of connected straits)*(# of freshwater source tiles)/(# of freshwater source tiles +1) rounded down
and # of freshwater source tiles = # of lake tiles + # of rivers entering the strait.
So a 6-tile navigable river starting from a 4-tile lake and ending at saltwater with at least 1 smaller river feeding into it would be considered freshwater for 5 tiles.
There would always be a saltwater strait at the outlet to the ocean.

2. Create a new type of terrain improvement (worker action or PW, I don't want to go there) called "canal" which transforms flat terrain to strait.
a. Requires a combination of sea-related and engineering techs (say mapmaking/construction for the early game, navigation/engineering for the middle game, and ?/? for the late game).
b. Requires a long time to complete, different times for different tech combos. Say a base time of 40 turns with mapmaking and construction, then each relevant added tech reduces that time by 4 turns, so that adding engineering reduces the time to 36 turns, and the fastest you get is 24 turns in the late game. Possibly a wonder (small or great) such as "Suez Canal" could give a time decrease of 25% for that civ.
c. Can only be done on a tile adjacent to a water tile. No plopping down straits in the middle of nowhere. Long canals would have to be completed one tile at a time, or two if you work from both ends towards the middle.

[Grandpa Troll]

sounds good and reasonable

Gramps

[petermarkab]

My take on canals

The use of canals came to prominance with the Industrial Revolution, mid 18th Century, to transport heavy materials from source (mines etc) to factories, finished goods (linen, flax) to distribution points (ports) etc.
I think rail travel superceded canals around 1830s, Stevenson's Rocket was invented 1829

I'm leaning slightly against canals for the following reasons:

• Historically, the canal 's useful lifespan is around 80 years. This gives around 40 turns of gameplay to build up the canal network and build a fleet of barges before rail takes over.
  
  Is it really worth the micromanagement effort to do this, then to have to do it all again when something better comes along?


• Some people like the idea of allowing their industrial core cities to build naval units. We all know how frustratingly underpowered coastal cities feel.
  
  But if the method of allocating resources to cities is changed from a fixed 'fat X' to a flexible system, our port cities will become more productive.


• The St Lawrence seaway is an example of a series of connected natural waterways and lakes passable to ocean going craft.
  
  I'm all for this, where workers go to a tile with a river at its edge and can "dredge river" thus making it passable to some naval vessels.
  
  Perhaps the river graphic would widen, and the tiles at either side be prone to flooding cf. Mississippi, and extra bridge engineering would be required to cross such a "dredged river"

I am in favour of canals crossing an isthmus like Suez and Panama. This is a positive gameplay element, allowing ships to move quickly between two hitherto separated oceans or seas

• A worker would move to the relevent square and after a number of turns, the canal would be created along the edge of the tile. Therefore canals of this sort could only be created where two land squares and two sea squares are arranged diagonally, like the setup of a Reversi board.

Straits

A strait is an isthmus isn't it? Not sure i understand the added functionality of a strait

ps. Earth circumference = 40000 km.
at map size 160 by 160 tiles, equals 250 km per tile side,
which is 62500 square km per tile.

[Grandpa Troll]

Originally posted by petermarkab
My take on canals

The use of canals came to prominance with the Industrial Revolution, mid 18th Century, to transport heavy materials from source (mines etc) to factories, finished goods (linen, flax) to distribution points (ports) etc.
I think rail travel superceded canals around 1830s, Stevenson's Rocket was invented 1829

I'm leaning slightly against canals for the following reasons:

• Historically, the canal 's useful lifespan is around 80 years. This gives around 40 turns of gameplay to build up the canal network and build a fleet of barges before rail takes over.
  
  Is it really worth the micromanagement effort to do this, then to have to do it all again when something better comes along?


• Some people like the idea of allowing their industrial core cities to build naval units. We all know how frustratingly underpowered coastal cities feel.
  
  But if the method of allocating resources to cities is changed from a fixed 'fat X' to a flexible system, our port cities will become more productive.


• The St Lawrence seaway is an example of a series of connected natural waterways and lakes passable to ocean going craft.
  
  I'm all for this, where workers go to a tile with a river at its edge and can "dredge river" thus making it passable to some naval vessels.
  
  Perhaps the river graphic would widen, and the tiles at either side be prone to flooding cf. Mississippi, and extra bridge engineering would be required to cross such a "dredged river"

I am in favour of canals crossing an isthmus like Suez and Panama. This is a positive gameplay element, allowing ships to move quickly between two hitherto separated oceans or seas

• A worker would move to the relevent square and after a number of turns, the canal would be created along the edge of the tile. Therefore canals of this sort could only be created where two land squares and two sea squares are arranged diagonally, like the setup of a Reversi board.

Straits

A strait is an isthmus isn't it? Not sure i understand the added functionality of a strait

ps. Earth circumference = 40000 km.
at map size 160 by 160 tiles, equals 250 km per tile side,
which is 62500 square km per tile.

It is worth it to change a few tiles to move from one side of a continent to another..whereas Rail Roads you have to connect one to another all the way through from start top finish

Thats my reasoning

Gramps

[Shogun Gunner]

Originally posted by petermarkab
A strait is an isthmus isn't it? Not sure i understand the added functionality of a strait

Actually, no. A strait is where a narrow passageway of water which is constrained by two bodies of land.

Straits are actually the opposite of an isthmus - as the strait is water - and the isthmus is a narrow land passageway constrained by two bodies of water.

Same concept, just a photo negative of each other.

[Grandpa Troll]

keeping us straight

now..to convert you to Canals

[Shogun Gunner]

Not to say the ideas aren't interesting, but in my mind Civ seems bigger in time scale and geographical scale.

I would love a Civ game that was so complex that it could be viewed from a very high macro level in terms of geography, strategy, city management, etc. -- but it would also allow the player to drill down to very smallest data elements -- canals could be one of these small geographic elements. Other geographical features like mountain passes, deltas, glaciers, oasis, etc could also be available at that level of granularity.

Along the same lines of micro detail granularity...the player could also direct tactical operations of a battle (ah, the dreaded mini-game dispute), intercede in local economic/social planning, and other assorted micro-micro management features.

I'm not holding my breath for a game like - nor do I think it would be widely popular just because that's what I would like. I can dream can't it?

As I indicated earlier, I think the canals and straits ideas are perfect for a mod - a scenario with the proper geographical and time scale.

[petermarkab]

Originally posted by Shogun Gunner
Actually, no. A strait is where a narrow passageway of water which is constrained by two bodies of land.

Alright, its crystal clear to me know

So is the proposal that straits should be allowed, while still allowing passage over by land units?

For diagonally placed water tiles, i agree, but not bridging over a complete water tile.

The width of one tile on a huge map is around 250 km. Where in real life is it more economically viable to build a 250 km long bridge or for that matter tunnel, than have ferry services? For smaller map sizes, the scale gets more ridiculous!!

As for canals, I think i've explained why i don't like the idea, but i'm all ears, so convince me!

night night!!

[Grandpa Troll]

HEY!..HEY!

Go to sleep..and whence you awake..

C

A

N

A

L

S

is what you crave

[petermarkab]

Originally posted by Shogun Gunner

As I indicated earlier, I think the canals and straits ideas are perfect for a mod - a scenario with the proper geographical and time scale.

Yep, I agree with that, and by the noises coming from Firaxis, this should be pretty straightforward to do.

[Grandpa Troll]

Originally posted by petermarkab


Yep, I agree with that, and by the noises coming from Firaxis, this should be pretty straightforward to do.

I am kewl with it because what I learned to do with CTP was to make scenarios whenever I wanted a game my way and no one else did

Gramps

[Straybow]

Historically, the canal 's useful lifespan is around 80 years. This gives around 40 turns of gameplay to build up the canal network and build a fleet of barges before rail takes over.

Yes, historically... but we are playing Civ, not History. In an alternate history Europe might have built upon the civic and economic foundation laid by Rome and become canal builders many centuries before rail.

[Max Sinister]

Imperial China also had many great canals, and they used them for centuries.

[Grandpa Troll]

Originally posted by Straybow

Quote:

Historically, the canal 's useful lifespan is around 80 years. This gives around 40 turns of gameplay to build up the canal network and build a fleet of barges before rail takes over.

Yes, historically... but we are playing Civ, not History. In an alternate history Europe might have built upon the civic and economic foundation laid by Rome and become canal builders many centuries before rail.

Thank you Straybow..another here that understands the generality of the CIV Series..what is,could and may have been concept

Gramps