I see many huge countries, and I question how some of these people move massive amounts of troops over large distances.

Maybe you can have the new construction availably to construction trucks. They have an move/attack of 4 hexes, so they should be able to build 4 hexes of rail at like, $500 a rail hex.

After that, each rail could move 1 to 5 units 50 hexes.

Also, on a side note. I would vote for three cycles a day instead of one. As it is right now, I think that a lot of possible gamers are repulsed by how slow the game is.

Railroads is a cool idea.

The second part is a purposeful tactic by the creator. He wants a slow moving game, so us that work and such can still have lives while playing for a lil. ;)

Thats true, but thats still 1 cycle every 8 hours. The money still build up if you dont spend it, and Frankly, I would probaly miss one of the cycles every day. I have a job and work between 8 and 10 hours in a day, but I wouldn't mind it speeding up a little.

Maybe just two cycles a day instead of three, but one still seems too slow.

Maybe you can set up multy servers, like Travian. I do relise this is an alpha test, but it would be nice :D.


Thanks for the positive feedback.

Railroad is nothing but pure win. Great idea - a la Civ III. Love it. Civ II without all the micromanagement.

I'm afraid that rail, roads, other infrastructure, will make this game a bit more complicated and cause people to lose site of the big picture, GLOBAL CONQUEST.

I though about it after lets say, you kill an enemy on a peninsula and you want to send most of the troops to your other side of the country. It would take forever to get them there, and when they finally do get to their destination, the reason for them going their might have been changed or eliminated.

What if you get surprised by someone, and you need fast reinforcements. It might be a quick back up.

Railroads, transport planes, highways, and other transportation systems were and still are extremely important in all wars. Without a good transportation system, most wars would be doomed to become more like WWI.

One point to prove this is to point out how the front line military needs support from supplies, transportation, manufacture of the supplies, ... etc. An efficient military has a 1 : 7 ratio. For every one military man there are seven people supporting them. Frankly, the America military is inefficient at about 1 : 15.

Anyway, thanks for your point of view and I understand that you want to keep this a military game and less like civilization.


Also, to Boogra.

Thanks for the positive feed back, and I actually got the idea right after playing Civilization three. EVERYONE SHOULD BUY CIVILIZATION 2 and 3!!! 4 in my option is a disappointment, but that is my option.

I fully understand the importance of infrastructure. But, unless you have a treaty with someone and the choose to ignore it one day, you shouldn't be surprised in this game. You can see everything. It is possible to need the troops on the other side of the map, but you also might need to station these troops along your border to secure it for the future.

Think of the line against the iron curtain. We had troops and tanks stationed apposed to the Soviet "threat". I think that once the land grab is over, we will see this stockpile of troops, and maybe a bit of blitz krieg. (sp)

But I digress. Everything added to this game makes it bigger (and slower). I think one thing that might make it more strategic, would be smaller continents and like has been posted before, making the "spawn" points closer and next to 2 countries.

Civ IV was failure in a box.

I think the more likely change I'll make will be to make your land units move further across your own land.

It's a fairly significant change, though, structurally, so it may be a while before I can get to it. It's on my list, though!