Ecology in Civ III

[André Alfenaar]

I was wondering whether there shouldn't be some kind of ecology aspect in Civ III other than the pollution as in Civ II. For instance forests as a means to prevent the greenhouse effect.

And maybe there should be some positive effect on a population's happiness as well.

What do you think?

[Adagio]

Sounds interesting...hey wait a minute, that means I can't turn all land into irrigation anymore

[Eagle one]

Ecology in Civ III would add realism. If you cut down the Rainforest, greenhouse effect will get serious.

The result would be, that you will have to save some forests to prefent global warming. Good idea André!

[Ribannah]

I'ld love that. It could be an element of culture.

This is what I have in my tech tree:

Biology + The Mill -> Ecology

Unit: Airship
Improvement: Greenhouse (extra food)
Wonder: Yellowstone National Park (no pollution from forests)

Ecology + Mass Production -> Recycling -> Environmentalism (with Space Flight)

Improvement: Solar Plant
Social Engineering: Green Economy

Environmentalism + Cargo Pipeline -> Arcologies (improvement: Arcology)
Environmentalism + Refrigeration -> Hydrogen Engine (wonder: Gaia Charter)

[Ecthy]

now we don't want to exaggerate it, Ribannah

I extremely dislike the ecology engine in Call To Power. when there is pollution, a whole field is destroyed, and via PW you have to transform it to any terrain field you want and then add the improvments.... that shouldn't be a big problem, but unfortunately special resources also disappeared... forever! it sucks... IF they want t oadd realism, they should make you able to control or at least watch WHERE the next polluted suare will be, to better prevent your economy from crashing due to destroyed specials... it just wasn't fair in CTP.

[Urban Ranger]

It's not unfair, you silly person. It's severe, but since it happens to everybody (theoretically speaking), it's fair.

I would like to have some new ways to provide energy (geothermal, etc.). Other cool things to do is to have forests reduce pollution (sucking in carbon dioxide) with improvements such as Tree Farms (from SMAC).

[jsw363]

It would be very cool if there were alternate energy sources available. I see them as something like mines (i.e. tile improvements). You could place hydroelectric plants along rivers in the mountains or hills and wind turbines or solar panels on plains and grassland. That would give you a tile improvement that could boost production as an alternative to irrigation in the flat spaces.

I've also been wodering about a tile based national park improvement. (Since there will be other physical wonders such as the Great Wall and Great Canal) I fyou could designate some area of your terrain as protected and pledge not to develop it with cities, roads, or tile imporvements, then this could provide some bonus to happiness as well as a pollution reduction. (Though since the forests would already be undeveloped, it doesn't really make sense to give added bonuses for pre-existing forest.)

Maybe a stupid idea, but something to consider.

[Urban Ranger]

Another way to do this is to add environmental consciousness after certain civ advance, so if you don't start building national parks and protecting forests there will be unhappiness in your cities. Deadly at the higher levels.

[krauter]

Originally posted by jsw363
It would be very cool if there were alternate energy sources available. I see them as something like mines (i.e. tile improvements). You could place hydroelectric plants along rivers in the mountains or hills and wind turbines or solar panels on plains and grassland. That would give you a tile improvement that could boost production as an alternative to irrigation in the flat spaces.

I've also been wodering about a tile based national park improvement. (Since there will be other physical wonders such as the Great Wall and Great Canal) I fyou could designate some area of your terrain as protected and pledge not to develop it with cities, roads, or tile imporvements, then this could provide some bonus to happiness as well as a pollution reduction. (Though since the forests would already be undeveloped, it doesn't really make sense to give added bonuses for pre-existing forest.)

Maybe a stupid idea, but something to consider.

I also would like to empathize the use of renewable energies in CIV3.
While other technologies are discussed quite deeply, the use of renewables in CIV2 (esp. solar and wind) was superficial. Power output of renewables is depending on much more external parameters than conventional power plants and should be considered in the game; as:
local ground surface, distance from coast, latitude (wind)
local climate, temperature, shadowing (solar; some basic ideas have been realized in SMAC, nice !)
water resource, height of mountains (hydro power)
The different properties of solar thermal (works good at high ambient temperatures) and photovoltiac systems (generates electricity directly, works best in cold, but sunny climates) should be considered.
Therefore renewables are of the biggest options of future energy supply (beside fusion I don`t know any other) some more attention should be paid for them.
Additionally renewables should also have some impact on politics and social structure:
less pollution (less angry people),
less dependence from import of fuels (trade need for coal gets satisfied)
Due to limits in resources, conventional energy should get more expensive within time, while costs of renewables should get cheaper due to technology advances.

I will give some details on a sperate posting,
please also take a look at
http://apolyton.net/forums/showthrea...&threadid=4435

Stefan

[krauter]

Here are some more detailed suggestions for the implementation renewable and conventional energy sources in CIV 3.

Coal mining: costs for maintenance are increasing by time (longer and deeper mines) from to 2 to 4 shields. After a 100 years of operation resource of coal mine is finished.
Use of energy generated by coal is generating 100 % pollution (25 % after the invention of air filters). Pollution is causing some amount of unhappiness. Earthquake kills some units of population (miners)
Building costs are 100 shields. Production is 25 per year. Lifetime of coalmine is 100 years. Lifetime of coal power plant 25 years. Recover from recycling: 7.

Hydropower:
Only possible near rivers and lakes: mountains 200 % energy production, but cost also 100 % more to built. Hills: 100% energy production, flat land: 50 % energy production, big rivers are doubling energy production. Due to climatic changes production of hydro power can vary (e.g. more rainfall: small rivers get to big rivers and double energy production, in dry periods big rivers get to small rivers, under extreme conditions desertification can make power production impossible, earthquakes can cause flooding within the surrounding, lower squares (1-2 squares for hydro power plants built in hilly regions, 2-4 squares for power plants build in mountain regions). Maintenance costs are 1 shield.
Building costs are 200 shields. Production is 25. Lifetime is 40 years. Recover from recycling: 25.

Wind:
Works best in coastal areas: 200% energy generation, deserts are generally calm (50%). Sole hills and single mountains give 200% power production. Valleys are bad (30 %). Regions a bit away from the poles produce 150% of power (“roaring forties”). Hills, wood, other wind turbines and close obstacles (next square) reduce power (70 %). Maintenance is 2, in stormy areas (e.g. mountains 3). Building costs are 50 shields, generation is 10. Earthquakes could lead to total destruction in 50% of the cases. Floods do not interfere. Wind generators bulked directly near town squares may cause some unhappiness (noise).
Lifetime is 15-20 years. Recover from recycling 7 shields.

SOLAR ENERGY: General:
Irradiated solar energy onto Earth is gradually increasing from 700 kWh/sqm per year in Polar Regions to 2200 kWh/sqm per year in regions close to the equator – this results in a triple energy production!

Solar thermal power plants:
Work best in sunny and warm places (deserts): Energy production is 70% from standard near the poles; near equator is 200%. Desert gives an additional increase of 20%. Humid areas produce 20% less.
Construction of plants in woods and valleys decreases power by 25 % due to shadowing. Building costs are 200 shields. Power generation is 25. Maintenance costs are 2 shields. Earthquake and flooding decrease power production by 50%. Lifetime is 25 years. Recover from recycling: 100.

Photovoltaics:
Energy production in Polar Regions is 70 % from standard; near equator is 200%. Deserts give a 10% minus (heat is decreasing the voltage of solar cells). Hills give a 10% plus (cooler, increases voltage). Mountains give a 20% in power production. Costs to build in mountain areas are double.
Construction of plants in woods and valleys decreases power by 25 % due to shadowing.
Maintenance costs are 1 shield. Building costs are 320 shields, after the invention of Thin Film Semiconductor Technology: 180 shields. Power generation is 25. Earthquakes and flooding do not harm (solar cells even work in space).
Lifetime is 30 years. Recover from recycling: 200, for Thin Film Technology: 100.

Nuclear:
Power generation is 25, works for 35 years, costs 180, maintenance is 3. Nuclear power causes unhappiness and may cause scandals, especially when a university town is close by. Possibility of accident. Vulnerable to military attack and earthquakes (radiation kills in 4 squares around). Nuclear waste has to be watched by a military unit for 12000 time units. One square is sufficient for 10 years of nuclear waste. The reactor itself has to be treated as a nuclear waste square after the end of its lifetime. Recover from recycling: -40 (reactor has to be sealed).

Geothermal power plant:
Power generation 8-20 (depending on location), building costs 80, maintenance 1-2,
Slow decrease of power generation due to limit of heat transfer and local cooling of the sediments (-1 every 5 years). While most often geothermal potential is close to earthquake regions, I suggest an increased risk of earthquakes(+300%)there.

Biomass:

Energy form biomass can be generated from three sources:
1. Agriculture:
1.1 A part of agriculture waste can be transformed into energy: having a biogas plant in a city is giving one energy unit for each two farming products.
1.2 Also farming could be directly used to produce energy: Instead of food, energy in the harvest: e.g. sugarcane can be distilled to alcohol which serves as fuel for cars (1990 60% of the cars in Brazil had been running on that) while also the waste could be used, I suggest an efficiency of 150% compared to food production.

2. Waste
Waste and pollution production in a city with a biomass plant is sinking by 50%,
25% of the original produced waste and pollution can be transformed into energy.

3. Woods
Waste directly form the woods (dead trees) and indirectly in the city (e.g. from carpenters etc. ) can be transformed into energy. For each two shields produced in a wood, one energy unit is generated.

I suggest a cost to erect a biomass plant of about 60 shields, a maintenance cost of 2, and an energy production as shown above.

I tried to model it as realistic as possible, but in order keep it playable, we also could use infinite lifetime
for the power plants.

(see http://apolyton.net/forums/showthrea...&threadid=4435 )

[Roman]

Too late for this now... Lets wait for the list for Civ 4!

[Sava]

It would add an interesting element to the game, but I would have to vote against it at this time. The logic for the ecology model would be extremely difficult to write, and it would require massive reorganization of the game.

Maybe it could be worked in gradually into Civ 4. One thing I do want to see changed is the whole "Irrigate the whole world" factor.

[Inverse Icarus]

this has always been one of my ideas

i REALLY would like to see ALMOST UNINHABITABLE lands holding excellent resources, like huge tundras holding oil, or rainforests holding, i dont know, jade or something.

you could eb FORCED to use colonies.