Potential Colonial Development Defect

[Feltan]

I say potential, because it may simply be a matter of how one defines things.

The situation is this: U.S. CG in about 1859 or so; I have heavily used colonial development on the continent -- essentially using every development card that may be available between Misourri and California every turn.

The result that concerns me has to do with road and telegraph usage. I have some areas (Osage Prarrie, Denver, Tucson, the entire state of Minn., the entire Pacific Northwest) that have developed "double railroad" development status although I have never built a railroad there, and they are (or were) colonial areas that are releatively sparsely populated.

So, the question is whether "double railroad" is merely a synonym for "highly developed" or whether that term actually requires the building of railroads.

In any case, I had the situation where I was able to connect to Osage Prairre with a railroad in the adjacent section of Missouri. Once the adjacent area built a railroad the "railroad" in Osage Prarrie came to life although I had never built a railroad there.

Regards,
Feltan

[yellow ribbon]

nay, not a bug.

i understood the gameplay makes it possible that every time you build a road by colonial cards you are accumulating the development points in this area.

thus, do the card a couple of times and you will not have many roads parallel side by side, but a road and a railroad and then a double railroad...

in other words, YOU CANNOT PILE UP ROADS what makes the utmost sense!

i remember, sometimes railroad / double railroad is in the pop up, but the provinces dont connect the railroads with each other before, only a wild guess, population is high enough and / or connection to "real" railroad exist.

[StephenT]

Are you sure it's not a bug? Provinces with "colonial railroads" seem to perform for all purposes as if they did, indeed, have railroads. Development level (0-100%) is different to transport level (nothing-track-road-rail-double rail).

I've got no problem with being able to use the Roads decision multiple times to boost the development level and loyalty - as you say, you can build multiple roads in a region. But I also think it should be capped that transport level cannot go higher than Roads via this decision. It's an exploit otherwise, because building a railroad through the Construction options is much, much more expensive than playing the colonial Roads decision. It also lets you build double railroads before you've researched that tech, which can't be right.

[yellow ribbon]

I STAND CORRECTED, SEE POCUS BELOW

cant share your opinion.

option in 1.01h / 1.02 for streets in national provinces can used only once per province

option for colonies needs to have high colonial status and declaring formal colony before, high investment

also needed to be used numerous times: track to road, couple of times road, then road to railroad and then railroad to double railroad

thus far, needs a lot of time and regarding used goods and money it will be far more inexpensive to build railroad by F2

F3 Railroad need at least {4x (24M + 25Pr + 5MfG)} in 4x180 days
plus all costs to develop a colonial status

F2 Railroad needs (450PR + 27Steel + 22MFG) in 135 days
plus up to 33% higher costs in mountains ???


cost by building a railroad by F2 is far lower and its faster, not considering the unknown variable and cost of development of population in future.


transport capacity / efficiency is capped and can expended by a number of research objectives. (i.e. steel rails implementation)

you might even improve it by collecting centers

i would see to it like a completely other variable than development points.

you increase population and development same time, therefor need for infrastructure. having a road / railroad is a surplus, population and loyalty more important

for instance, city of Vicksburg: railroad, city, transport efficiency 100%, but merely 68% Development

have played US myself and i am certain, there are regions you even cannot build an orchard in, for population is too low, but double railroad is already there.

also the capacity for moving troops is bound to higher level of research you would have about 1870s, had been a thread about it.

if i am mistaken, no problem i will shutup and the fellows patch it

EDIT:

http://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/showthread.php?541058-What-is-quot-Tranport-level-quot-and-other-transport-related-questions&

[Pocus]

This is a bug, the decision should not give railroads at all.