Re: RFE: terrain improvement: canal

> "attach"?
> what do you mean?

lol that was meant to read 'attack'. You knew what I
meant, of course, it's an old wish to be able to
attack river cities by moving ships down or up the
river.

Staying on the topic of canals, I like it better now
that I've thought of it a little longer. It should be
very expensive to build one, though, or else players
would 'canalise' every continent on the planet the
same way they do with irrigation. Maybe some rules
such as the ones you proposed or other ones (no
parallel canals, or no forks in canals?) could be
added.

> > But I do like the idea of Communism enabling quick
> building of 'grand
> > works' such as those canals, but also fortresses,
> artificial islands
> > (terraform while on a ship, currently very
> expensive), or even
> > wonders, and definitelty spaceship structurals,
> components and
> > modules.
> 
> why?  Communism is good at inefficiently mobilizing
> resources for
> extensive projects.  Communism is bad for anything
> that cannot be
> sped-up by doubling the manpower.

That's exactly what I had in mind - to be able to
build large projects quicker with Communism. Of
course, the implementation (needing less
resources/turns) would be incorrect but it's the
effect that counts. It would help raise the Communism
government to something useful - at the moment it's
something you don't ever use unless you are in real
dire straits.
Perhaps buildings/wonders should be classified by
their labour intensity so that you can quickly build
cathedrals or space structurals using communism but
not, for example, recycling centers or space modules?

I am getting off-topic here; I will think about this a
bit more and maybe post on another thread.




		
___________________________________________________________ 
To help you stay safe and secure online, we've developed the all new Yahoo! Security Centre. http://uk.security.yahoo.com