Railroad Questionnaire

[Oracle]

Alright everyone. Let's positively affect some change by voting railroads into the game. 

[Jack]

Good to see this poll. I have cast my votes for the questions.

[Oracle]

8 hours ago, Jack said:

Good to see this poll. I have cast my votes for the questions.

Thanks, Jack. 

[Maddog]

I really like this idea it would help out a lot but what would be aloud on the railways everything? or?

[Oracle]

My version is strictly a means to transport land troops around the Commander's territory. I have no insight as to how the Devs will fully adopt   it. 

[Oracle]

To save on space, the Devs could run the rail parasols to the roads, thus trains could run into villages and substations could be setup. This will allow for customized embarkation. 

[Boredomfalls]

I don't think that the tracks should be destructible between stations only because if you can destroy it in segments number 1 that's too many options and you might not see one that destroyed, instead just the stations and sub stations I feel should be destructible and 2 that's all your troops will be focused on attacking if you tell to attack to somewhere

Edited February 27, 2016 by Boredomfalls

[Oracle]

5 hours ago, Boredomfalls said:

I don't think that the tracks should be destructible between stations only because if you can destroy it in segments number 1 that's too many options and you might not see one that destroyed, instead just the stations and sub stations I feel should be destructible and 2 that's all your troops will be focused on attacking if you tell to attack to somewhere

I respect your viewpoint. I would like to highlight a couple sticking points in your reasoning so you can see the logic behind the request. 

This is a continuation of another post in which I detailed how the railroad should work. The reference fled post describe a randomly generated support station (think a water tower along the line) which is the sole target for railroads in each territory. Thus, your troops will attack this station once per area and not continually attack the rail itself.

Next, when attempting to send a troop to a location, it will tell you if a tower is down as it will not let you sent the train so you have a location where to search. Also, you could just check your messages to see when and where the line was damaged, thus easily repairing it. Conversely, we could give a repair railway option at the main stations which will save commanders the trouble of seeking the destroyed tower. 

does this yield better understanding behind the destructible railway logic? 

[Boredomfalls]

9 hours ago, Oracle said:

I respect your viewpoint. I would like to highlight a couple sticking points in your reasoning so you can see the logic behind the request. 

This is a continuation of another post in which I detailed how the railroad should work. The reference fled post describe a randomly generated support station (think a water tower along the line) which is the sole target for railroads in each territory. Thus, your troops will attack this station once per area and not continually attack the rail itself.

Next, when attempting to send a troop to a location, it will tell you if a tower is down as it will not let you sent the train so you have a location where to search. Also, you could just check your messages to see when and where the line was damaged, thus easily repairing it. Conversely, we could give a repair railway option at the main stations which will save commanders the trouble of seeking the destroyed tower. 

does this yield better understanding behind the destructible railway logic? 

It does but then it brings up another question, if the railways are preset, and coorespond with the roadways, what are you then to do if your train runs through an enemy city trying to get somewhere else?

[Oracle]

4 hours ago, Boredomfalls said:

It does but then it brings up another question, if the railways are preset, and coorespond with the roadways, what are you then to do if your train runs through an enemy city trying to get somewhere else?

My version of the the railways aren't generated until two stations are connected. If the railways run thru an enemy village, then take the village so you can maintain a visual. It should neve run through as enemy city. 

[Boulzac]

On February 27, 2016 at 3:03 PM, Oracle said:

My version of the the railways aren't generated until two stations are connected. If the railways run thru an enemy village, then take the village so you can maintain a visual. It should neve run through as enemy city. 

Why not!?! Someone could cap a village in middle of a train line and then a Sniper Tower could make damage to the train running through it. I think it's great.                                   Also it will give the infantry a reason to be valuable in advance game for repair on damage track or other way around to sabotage a track.  Pvt. Boulzac

[Jack]

15 hours ago, Boulzac said:

Also it will give the infantry a reason to be valuable in advance game for repair on damage track or other way around to sabotage a track

Yeah, the infantry finally can have some job to do expect capturing.

[Oracle]

On March 11, 2016 at 5:50 PM, Boulzac said:

Why not!?! Someone could cap a village in middle of a train line and then a Sniper Tower could make damage to the train running through it. I think it's great.                                   Also it will give the infantry a reason to be valuable in advance game for repair on damage track or other way around to sabotage a track.  Pvt. Boulzac

Villages and cities are different. I support capturing villages to damage/destroy trains. 

[RichieRightNow2]

Nearly a year later and still no railroad

[Ilickpie]

I think this is a genius idea, instead of risking planes to move troops just shove them on a train to move them closer to the battlefront @Jack @Oracle