damn pollution

The Andy-Man · February 21, 2002, 17:34

is it me, or is pollution exagertated in civ3. no way it is that bad in RL, or ever was....

ACooper · February 21, 2002, 17:37

Polution has been the same in every game of the Civ series. It is handled differently from real life due to game play issues.

Zouave · February 21, 2002, 17:40

If you have enough workers, you can clean it up very quickly. So that it is hardly more than an annoyance. It is much more than an annoyance in real life.

The Andy-Man · February 21, 2002, 17:49

well, i have the workes etc.

the point i ment was, that pollution is t the problem the environmentalists say it is.... the higher the cardbon dioxide in the air, the more fungus that 'eats' it grows, canceling it out.

sulphur in the air maybe a prob, but it is still not as bad as is said

Arrian · February 21, 2002, 17:56

"Anti-Encomium"

*climbs back off the floor*

Andy-Man,

My job relates to environmental problems (though I do not work for Greenpeace or the EPA or anything like that) and I see tons of environmental reports from contaminated sites around the USA. Prior to getting this job, I thought the same way you did - "ah, the environmentalists are exaggerating." Well, let me tell you, it's pretty damn bad. I don't know about global warming (or cooling, depending on who you listen to), but nasty chemicals in our groundwater is not a good thing.

As for Civ III, pollution is my pet peeve. I hate it. So I'd be fine w/o it, except that there should be some sort of downside to building factories and coal plants everywhere. Civ I, II and III have all implemented that downside this way. There probably is a better way to do it, but this way is fairly simple.

-Arrian

The Andy-Man · February 21, 2002, 18:38

my complaint is that there is just to much of it.......
and no real way to stop it from occuring.

perhaps it should effect pop growth or production instead...

Willem · February 21, 2002, 20:12

Quote:

Originally posted by The Andy-Man
well, i have the workes etc.

the point i ment was, that pollution is t the problem the environmentalists say it is.... the higher the cardbon dioxide in the air, the more fungus that 'eats' it grows, canceling it out.

sulphur in the air maybe a prob, but it is still not as bad as is said

And on which environmental report do you base your observations? Do you know something that scientists the all around the world don't? The vast majority of them are saying the same thing. The only ones that aren't are no doubt on the payroll of the industrialists.

And I'm afraid that fungus will not eat carbon dioxide. There's even debate whether large tracts of forests have any long term benefits. No one knows for sure at this point.

Dis · February 21, 2002, 20:24

cleaning up pollution is easy.

the annoying part is it kicks your worker off the polluted square. And you have to reassign them.

Skanky Burns · February 21, 2002, 20:55

Pollution is annoying for me too. The problem is there is no realistic way to get rid of it, and after you get half-way through the industrial era, polluting is unaviodable.
Then you have to wait until the modern era to even begin to combat pollution.

ACooper · February 21, 2002, 21:58

Quote:

Originally posted by Skanky Burns
Pollution is annoying for me too. The problem is there is no realistic way to get rid of it, and after you get half-way through the industrial era, polluting is unaviodable.
Then you have to wait until the modern era to even begin to combat pollution.

Sounds like realism to me.

Dis · February 21, 2002, 22:30

realism? come on.

Pollution does not affect hundreds of square miles. At the worst it only affects certain parts of military bases or industrial areas. Usually less than 1 acre.

And if you include nuclear pollution the other Chernobyl reactor kept operating after the other one melted down. The same can be said for 3 mile island.

I look around my city and I see no pollution. Our air quality sucks, but it doesn't prevent me from going to work and doing my job.

ACooper · February 21, 2002, 22:53

Quote:

Originally posted by Dissident
realism? come on.

Pollution does not affect hundreds of square miles. At the worst it only affects certain parts of military bases or industrial areas. Usually less than 1 acre.

And if you include nuclear pollution the other Chernobyl reactor kept operating after the other one melted down. The same can be said for 3 mile island.

I look around my city and I see no pollution. Our air quality sucks, but it doesn't prevent me from going to work and doing my job.

Living in a farming community in Illinois not far from Chicago I can tell you 1 fact for sure. Pollution is all around us. It affects the soil, the water (we have to drink bottled water), the river is so polluted is is not recommended for boating, much less swimming.

The affects of the Chernobyl are still coming out. Check out . ]http://www.chernobyl.com/

If your air quality sucks then you have pollution. You will have a part of your work force affected every day.

You are seriously mistaken my friend. To help you out I'll provide you with some links:

http://www.great-lakes.net/envt/

http://www.doh.gov.uk/comeap/

http://niem.med.nyu.edu/outreach/childreneffects.html

http://wbln0018.worldbank.org/essd/e...e/12_healt.pdf
and
http://www.worldbank.org/nipr/polmod.htm

Please get your "facts" straight.

Sorry if this strayed of topic, but I believe it goes to the heart of the argument

Dis · February 21, 2002, 23:01

my facts are straight. I realize there is pollution everywhere. But it is small amounts.

It does not shut down farming or production. At worst you can say it has economical impact.

And I can show you a story from a reputable source that says the long term effects from chernobyl weren't that bad. Aside from the exposure from the workers cleaning it up, the surrounding towns weren't in that much danger. Yes I'm sure you can provide me with stats showing higher lukemia rates. But I have seen stats that show those lukemia rates aren't significantly higher than lukemia rates in the rest of the world.

So I can't say for sure what you midwesterners have done with the water. but our drinking water is just fine. Disgusting, yet perfectly safe. We have very little pollution here. Aside from asthma poor air quality does not have any other significant threats. and asthma does not shut down production in large regions of my city or surrounding land.

ACooper · February 21, 2002, 23:05

Quote:

Originally posted by Dissident
my facts are straight. I realize there is pollution everywhere. But it is small amounts.

It does not shut down farming or production. At worst you can say it has economical impact.

And I can show you a story from a reputable source that says the long term effects from chernobyl weren't that bad. Aside from the exposure from the workers cleaning it up, the surrounding towns weren't in that much danger. Yes I'm sure you can provide me with stats showing higher lukemia rates. But I have seen stats that show those lukemia rates aren't significantly higher than lukemia rates in the rest of the world.

Talk to the farmers around here. Talk to the people with sick kids. Talk to business that pump a lot of money into cleaning up the effects on their equipment. Get the real facts. Not this Rush Limbaugh crap.

Dis · February 21, 2002, 23:08

I don't listen to Rush.

What sick kids? give me a break.

Show me proof there are more sick kids today than 100 years ago. If there is a reason for that it is living in cities. There is evidence that living on farms is more healthier for humans. but that isn't because of pollution. It is because it is healthier to be exposed to other animal species such as cattle, chickens etc. The more exposure a child gets, the healthier he/she will be. But then you have people in cities that use disinfectants to try to shield their child from germs. That is doing more harm than good.

MonsterMan · February 21, 2002, 23:38

My mod takes some aggressive steps to reduce the pollution aspect of the game. Download that if you're in need of a break.

Flight · February 21, 2002, 23:47

did no one see Erin Brockovich!?

pollution is everywhere!

all sources are questionable and this is waaaaaay off topic with no solution likely to evolve.

Dis · February 21, 2002, 23:50

I haven't seen it. But I don't think squares that represent thousands of acres should be completely shut down.

I was happy in civ2 with their reduction in production and food capacity. I can't remember the numbers but I believe it was either 50% or 75% reduction in capacity.

This was good because it didn't throw your worker off the square. You could still work polluted squares, but at a reduced capacity. This was perfectly fine, but they had to screw it up like they did the rest of the game. A$$holes.

ACooper · February 22, 2002, 00:08

Quote:

Originally posted by Dissident
they had to screw it up like they did the rest of the game. A$$holes.

Then why are you still here?

ChrisShaffer · February 22, 2002, 00:13

Perhaps he's still here because, like me, he hopes they will fix it.

From a game play perspective, the pollution interface is broken. There's too much, and it requires too much of the player's attention (and mouse clicks) to clean up. I want to play a game, not manage an environmental disaster simulation.

star mouse · February 22, 2002, 00:30

I have no problem with the implementation of pollution in CIV3. It is an annoyance, but so are desert squares and AI's that declare war on you for no good reason. If the game lacked such challenges, it would be no fun to play.

The only real annoyance are labourers that don't go back to work once the pollution is gone.

Dis · February 22, 2002, 00:43

that's exactly my complaint.

It couldn't be that hard to fix. In fact this is one major reason I hate the industrial age, and even the modern age because even then I can't get rid of it.

They could fix it like in civ2. That is all I want. A 75% reduction in square capacity is plenty strong enough to urge the player to fix the pollution in a hurry.

Skanky Burns · February 22, 2002, 02:05

Quote:

Originally posted by ACooper
Sounds like realism to me.

Realism?!?

I play a game to have fun, not to do more work after a day of work.
If adding realism increases the amount of fun that I have, then I'm all for it. If realism is at best an annoyance, at worst something that will cause me to stop playing the game, then somehow I dont think that feature was well-thought-out.

With the latest patch, pollution occuring has been moved to the "annoying" catagory as my workers on pollution duty clean it automatically, and my mood managers in the city automatically re-assign population to the unused tile. Unless a small city near my super-city steals the production rights of a tile, forcing me to fix both cities.

While other things may be considered annoyances, such as deserts or enemy civs, these at least you can deal with. Deserts involve strategic tradeoffs - do I risk having a fairly pathetic city until railroads, in the hope of getting oil later, or do I place my cities only in good positions and risk not getting oil??
AIs declaring war - at least this you can control. Again, a strategic trade-off. Do I concentrate on building infrastructure and risk being another civs b****, or do I build an army larger than my neighbours at the cost of my infrastructure?? We know that a big army = enemy not declaring war on you.

But do the same thinking with pollution:
Do I avoid building factories and hospitals in the hope of reducing pollution until I have discovered recycling, many many techs away, and still get pollution, or do I build factories and hospitals, get the benefits from these buildings, and still get pollution??
Because like it or not, as soon as you get some industrial techs, pollution will occur no matter what you do. There is no choice, no challenge, no fun.

Willem · February 22, 2002, 02:32

Quote:

Originally posted by Skanky Burns

But do the same thinking with pollution:
Do I avoid building factories and hospitals in the hope of reducing pollution until I have discovered recycling, many many techs away, and still get pollution, or do I build factories and hospitals, get the benefits from these buildings, and still get pollution??
Because like it or not, as soon as you get some industrial techs, pollution will occur no matter what you do. There is no choice, no challenge, no fun.

Well if it bothers you that much, then spend a little time and create new ways of dealing with it, with the editor and/or with MultiTool. You can either lower the pollution levels of various buildings, add pollution control to others, or even create brand new structures. If that's the main thing that's bothering you about the game, it's easy enough to customize it to your liking, or even eliminate it completely.

Dis · February 22, 2002, 02:35

Can you eliminate it completely with the editor?

I wouldn't want to do that though.

I just want it to be like civ2. Yes I know I should play civ2 then. But it's not on my hard drive anymore.

Willem · February 22, 2002, 02:57

Quote:

Originally posted by Dissident
Can you eliminate it completely with the editor?

I wouldn't want to do that though.

I just want it to be like civ2. Yes I know I should play civ2 then. But it's not on my hard drive anymore.

You can do what ever you want with it in the editor. Or like I said, you can even create a new building using MultiTool that shows up earlier. I've created a Sewer System that I can build shortly after my first Factory. I don't want to be fighting pollution either, and I certainly don't want to deal with global warming. But I don't want to eliminate it completely either. So I'll just make up my own rules until I find a comfortable balance.

The game is almost completely customizable. If there's something you don't like, chances are you can change it. And it's a lot more fun than getting frustrated about some aspect of it, like pollution.

Skanky Burns · February 22, 2002, 06:13

Quote:

Originally posted by Willem
Well if it bothers you that much, then spend a little time and create new ways of dealing with it, with the editor and/or with MultiTool. You can either lower the pollution levels of various buildings, add pollution control to others, or even create brand new structures. If that's the main thing that's bothering you about the game, it's easy enough to customize it to your liking, or even eliminate it completely.

Yeah, I probably will end up doing that, because I just don't find pollution fun.

Maybe give temples the properties of the mass-transit and the recycling center.

At least with 1.17 they gave us back the ability to automate workers properly so they cleaned pollution in 1 turn and go back to sleep again.

Now all we need is to kill the domestic nag, and I won't have anything to complain about.

Pyrodrew · February 22, 2002, 06:43

I never have a problem with pollution in Civ3 & I am a big fan of factories in most/all cities. Factories also help with waste in a sense since if your quantity of total shields go up your good shields go up too.

Could be due to...

1.I often play an Industrious Civ. American & other Industrious Civs can clean that up VERY quick. Industrious rules.

2.The prior wars always provide me lots of slave workers, again making pollution even easier to clean up. One of the many many advantages of war. In Civ2 you at least got points at the end for being peaceful, in Civ3 you get nothing.

3.The Hoover Dam... I always get that baby. Racing for the Hoover Dam means I go down a different path than the AI which is good for tech-trading & saves me tons of $$ and TIME from building coal plants. After reading these posts I'll make sure never to forget her.

4.There are bigger things to complain about in Civ3, if you want to complain.

Willem · February 22, 2002, 10:32

Quote:

Originally posted by Skanky Burns

Yeah, I probably will end up doing that, because I just don't find pollution fun.

Maybe give temples the properties of the mass-transit and the recycling center.

At least with 1.17 they gave us back the ability to automate workers properly so they cleaned pollution in 1 turn and go back to sleep again.

Now all we need is to kill the domestic nag, and I won't have anything to complain about.

May I suggest? Make a copy of the Aqueduct, then call it Sewer System, available in Sanitation. Set it to eliminate pop pollution, or both, then convert the Mass Transit to reduces building pollution. It would put some realism into it anyway, and give you an extra thing to build in the late game.