No more IFE!

Kuciwalker · December 5, 2001, 19:48

According to Firaxis, in the patch you can no longer use IFE because you can only get the production benefit once per game.

wunder · December 5, 2001, 20:07

I don't think IFE is really needed for this game. I've won all my games without using IFE. I must admit that actualy used it in the current game and kind of liked it. I do feel like it's not realistic or fair (AI). Thus I favour the patch

Skanky Burns · December 5, 2001, 20:42

I only have used it to get new cities up to par with my core cities, rather than rushing. Killing IFE wont upset me too much

Easy Rhino · December 6, 2001, 07:56

while it will save me mouse-clicking, I'm gonna miss being able to sing the "i'm a lumberjack and that's OK" song.

ER

Barchan · December 6, 2001, 08:13

Quote:

Originally posted by Easy Rhino
while it will save me mouse-clicking, I'm gonna miss being able to sing the "i'm a lumberjack and that's OK" song.

ER

Hopefully not because you'll miss singing the line "I put on women's clothing, and hang around in bars"!

Nero Would · December 6, 2001, 08:54

I agree that lumberjacking is too powerful at the moment, but I wonder if this is the best way to fix it. Perhaps it would have been better to increase the turns required to plant and clear forest, or cap the number of workers that can be assigned to lumberjack the same tile. The reasons why I'm dubious are:

Sustained forestry is a realistic concept as long as the benefits are not out of proportion to the costs.
I'm afraid we will have no way to tell which tiles will give a bonus when cleared without moving a worker there (and perhaps not until he's finished clearing).

No big deal, but I wonder if anyone else agrees.

Illyrien · December 6, 2001, 09:10

I cant find any news on Civ3.com, from where did your hear such news?

Tilemacho · December 6, 2001, 09:23

It's better this way...
anyway corraption is supposed to be less now so you won't need it that much

Expatriate · December 6, 2001, 09:30

Quote:

Originally posted by Illyrien
I cant find any news on Civ3.com, from where did your hear such news?

Its in the patch notes that were posted on these boards by a developer. Check them out in the general forum.

Padmewan · December 6, 2001, 11:29

This is really too bad. It would have been better to prevent multiple workers from speeding up the tree planting process. IFE makes "real world" sense. On the other hand, perhaps Firaxis is sending a political message that cutting down old-growth forests is a bad idea...?

I, probably in the minority, appreciated resource crawlers in SMAC, and lumberjacking was the closest thing to it. Now the incentive is going to be even stronger to crowd cities together to optimize resource exploitation.

Blaupanzer · December 6, 2001, 18:09

I've cut down forests where that made sense and planted them where that made sense. But I haven't IFE'd. So no sweat if it's gone. My question is why clearing jungle wouldn't give a similar benefit. That's where ebony and several other woods come from. More workers planting a square wouldn't result in faster growth IRL, so why include it here. (It's like the old joke that 9 women can't make a baby in one month. I would note that they could make 9 babies in 9 months, so I'm not sure that the more elegant solution would have been to make tree planting a task that could not be speeded up with more workers.) I can live with the solution suggested.

solo · December 6, 2001, 18:24

Probably best that it is gone, but I think it would have been better to considerably lengthen the time to plant a forest, say by 10 times the time it takes now.

dainbramaged13 · December 6, 2001, 19:56

HELL NO solo

some people actually plant forest for a good reason, with ONE worker, in the *early* parts of the game, like to get 2 prod out of a tundra tile thatr would otherwise produce none, one with a mine until RR