global warming

bellisaurius · April 27, 2002, 22:19

I've always wanted to know, but I've never gotten around to testing it (i'm actually afraid to); What exactly happen when you have global warming?
Does all grassland turn to jungle? What kind of effects happen to your cities? Are we talking about a food deficit of 20+ a turn?

What kind of warnings do you get? How long do you have after?Does the computer's pollution count? I understand how to minimize it and calculate it for a city, but how does a solar plant reduce your overall levels? I usually build about 5-6 and it gets rid of a bright sun in deity (eventually).

Does it affect the computer as much? Or do they seem to adapt? I thought about using it as a tactic before, has anyone fought this way?

debeest · April 27, 2002, 23:52

I've tested it too often.

AI civs create no pollution except via nuking. That pollution counts toward risk of global warming, and it's hard to clean up.

The entire world, you and the AIs, are equally affected when it happens. Since the AI doesn't know how to use terrain and you do, I think it's to your disadvantage to have the terrain damaged.

The only warning is the brightening of that little icon over to the right, and it's so vague as to be almost useless.

The effect, as best I remember it (I've learned to avoid it), is that grasslands turn to (plains?), plains turn to desert, forests turn to jungles, etc. I'm not sure about the exact changes, but that pretty well describes what you get. I think only coastal squares are affected, for some reason, but hey, there aren't all that many squares in most games that aren't coastal.

MrWhereItsAt · April 28, 2002, 07:00

It isn't completely devastating - it seems that maybe three or four squares within each city radius are changed. If you (like me) have spent centuries micromanaging your engineers to create beautiful and perfectly balanced landscapes around your cities, though, it just plain sucks.

atawa · April 28, 2002, 07:16

But with a couple of engeneers at hand and a foodsurplus in every city its a nice way to destroy the AI

I used this tactic where right after i got refrigeration I started cranking out engeneers, improving all grass to farmland and at the same time created a HUGE polution problem.

shade · April 28, 2002, 17:57

Quote:

Originally posted by bellisaurius
I've always wanted to know, but I've never gotten around to testing it (i'm actually afraid to); What exactly happen when you have global warming?
Does all grassland turn to jungle? What kind of effects happen to your cities? Are we talking about a food deficit of 20+ a turn?

personnaly...it's a nightmare...but it teaches you to build an army of over 50 engineers in les then 4 turns

Quote:

What kind of warnings do you get? How long do you have after?Does the computer's pollution count? I understand how to minimize it and calculate it for a city, but how does a solar plant reduce your overall levels? I usually build about 5-6 and it gets rid of a bright sun in deity (eventually).

how many warnings? I thought 1...but you kinda notice it quite quickly afterward when more then half your terrain becomes useless...

AI has no pollution( and that's a good thing,beeing totally ignorant for polution)

Quote:

Does it affect the computer as much? Or do they seem to adapt? I thought about using it as a tactic before, has anyone fought this way?

jep they "suffer" equally, there cities just aren't as evolved=> less real consequences...
This as tactic...*shiver*...

Shade

Thoddy · April 29, 2002, 05:07

See Thread Invasion Planet Earth
civ2 General Help
http://apolyton.net/forums/showthrea...&goto=lastpost

Look at the posted saves.

its a civ2-Tot game. you can see some probs, badly polluted Earth (by our warfare tactics) also causes global warming on AC :eek.

Global warming changes some Terrains
-grassland-plain
-plain-desert
-forest-plain
-some irrigations are lost
-Rivers disappear
-coast tiles changes to jungle or swamp
(grassland plain desert forest are affected if I remember right )
There is a pattern of stripes you can see after gw.

atawa · April 29, 2002, 12:10

Quote:

[SIZE=1]
This as tactic...*shiver*...

Shade

I usualy play on an arch map, warm, wet, 5bil.
With off shore platforms, harbours and some extra food before you start it can be done quite easy, then send out ships with dips to destroy AI improvements and the game is over.....

Six Thousand Year Old Man · April 29, 2002, 14:39

Quote:

Originally posted by shade

This as tactic...*shiver*...

Shade

Well, it seemed like a good idea at the time!

STYOM

MrWhereItsAt · April 30, 2002, 00:58

Global Warming only counts the polluted tiles in your cities' radii, doesn't it? So you can nuke away, but as long as you don't take any cities you're sweet.

Thoddy · April 30, 2002, 02:49

Quote:

Originally posted by MrWhereItsAt
Global Warming only counts the polluted tiles in your cities' radii, doesn't it? So you can nuke away, but as long as you don't take any cities you're sweet.

Definately false. If there are 9 polluted tiles somewhere on the map gw occurs.
But the problem is:
AI nukes AI city affects no pollution.
AI cities dont cause pollution.

AI nukes human affects pollution
human nukes->pollution
human cities cause pollution
Chernobyl only human players affected

So only if the human is included in actions that causes pollution, a polluted tile appears.

Effects of pollution: production of ressources is halved.

AI's are less affected, because they get food, money and production as a gift by the executable.

Straybow · May 1, 2002, 13:33

I really hate political correctness intruding into my game of bloodthirsty conquest and ransacking of global resources.

debeest · May 1, 2002, 17:27

Did anyone say anything about politics here? Or are you implying that global warming is purely a political issue and not real? If so, you're ignoring the bulk of modern scientific opinion.

[edited-in warning: from this point on we go completely off-topic]

bellisaurius · May 1, 2002, 20:59

Continuing the off topic; Science recognizes global warming, but the results of it (as interpeted by economists and politicians) are still highly hypothetical, possibly noneventful, and conceivably beneficial depending on the latitude in question.

Straybow · May 2, 2002, 18:16

[rant]

Indeed, sensational claims of a global warming crisis comprise the bulk of heaviliy publicized pseudo-scientific opinion. The assumptions of 1) vast and devastating climactic effects and 2) firm ties to man-made pollution are indeed politically correct. The opinions and assumptions are also ignorant of the bulk of scientific data… most of which is inconvenient to the prevailing politically correct opinion.

When global warming became a hot-button topic in the late '80s my younger brother said, "Hey, do you remember back in the '70s when scientists were saying that global cooling was the big threat?" The more things change, the more they stay the same.

As implemented in Civ2 (and SMAC, btw) it is ridiculous. If there were a way to turn it off entirely in Civ2, SMAC, and anywhere else I encounter it in games, I'd do so.

[/rant]

La Fayette · May 3, 2002, 04:55

Straybow
Cool...cool...chill...relax...
May I suggest that you start a thread in the OT forum if you wish to discuss global warming in the real world?
When playing the game, I find it an interesting feature since it compels you to take into account long term effects of pollution (exactly what should be done in the real world IMO

).

Scouse Gits · May 3, 2002, 05:14

Well said, La Fayette

But what can one expect from a citizen of the nation that sank the Kyoto Agreement and whose President recently asked a visiting British singer (Charlotte Church) "Which state is Wales in, dear?"

Sorry - I guess I too should go OT

SG[1]

La Fayette · May 3, 2002, 05:30

Quote:

Originally posted by Scouse Gits
"Which state is Wales in, dear?"

Sorry - I guess I too should go OT

SG[1]

Isn't Wales one of the 6 nations that play rugby together once in a while?

(Guess which one wins

)

OT! OT!

(could playing too much rugby be an explanation for global warming?)

definitely OT

Scouse Gits · May 3, 2002, 05:34

Hey, La Fayette!
How did I guess you only have 58 posts to go before your Republican ideals will force you to execute yourself!

SG[1] - the boatless ( <- sad in-joke)

La Fayette · May 3, 2002, 12:23

I had better post those 58 posts before sunday...
because if Le Pen comes to power one won't even need to be king to get executed...
(OT: anyway I bet my forthcoming crown that this is not going to happen)

(La Fayette's face, waiting for something to come on top of it)

rah · May 3, 2002, 14:15

Quote:

Originally posted by La Fayette
(La Fayette's face, waiting for something to come on top of it)

That's disgusting, and properly belongs in the OT.

RAH

Six Thousand Year Old Man · May 3, 2002, 15:19

Quote:

Originally posted by rah

That's disgusting, and properly belongs in the OT.

RAH

ROFLMAO...

Glad I didn't start all this...

STYOM

Scouse Gits · May 3, 2002, 17:16

Rah - La Fayette's English is (I hope) not quite that good - but - come to think of it ....

SG[1]

debeest · May 4, 2002, 01:16

SG1: Be nice, now. Many of us Amurricans are smarter than the oil man appointed by the Supreme Court justices appointed by his daddy. Smart enough to wonder how it is that "politically correct" is only used to refer to left-wingers, when the dominant politics of this country and most governments is thoroughly right-wing. And smart enough to see that that's exactly why the right wing got to define the term.

Then again, maybe I only know about Wales because that's where my grandaddy was born....

Scouse Gits · May 4, 2002, 04:42

My humble apologies, debeest. Generalisation is extremely dangerous and to tar an entire nation by the actions or comments of a few - even if they appear to be a majority - is unfair and unjustifiable.
But sometimes one just gets wound up too far - here in Britain we live under the most repressive police state in the Western worlld if not in the Northern hemisphere - but will people appreciate this? Not on your life (or their own for that matter). And to hear people from what are perceived to be the more free parts of the world parrotting media hype when at least they have access to the real material is a terrible thing to endure ...........

SG[1]

La Fayette · May 4, 2002, 13:56

Quote:

Originally posted by Scouse Gits
Rah - La Fayette's English is (I hope) not quite that good - but - come to think of it ....

SG[1]

...certainly not that good.
Could someone send me a private message to explain?

debeest · May 4, 2002, 19:23

I'll try to explain Monsieur La Fayette (obviously, by his name, a friend to America

).

Not to worry, SG1, I was just joshin' with ya. (I tried to put a smiley into my last message, but in "quick response" mode I didn't see a way to do it.) I'm not really the sensitive type. The sad truth is that your generalization is justified. If a significant majority of Americans cared enough about avoiding war, protecting our environment, providing health care and housing and education public transport, making sure that all jobs paid enough to live decently on, and caring for the weak and helpless, then we'd elect people who would do those things. Instead we consistently elect people who think the U.S. should throw its weight around in order to make sure that nothing interferes with corporate profit-making. We Americans are in no position to object to criticism.

You're still invited to my house for a big cuppa if you ever want to visit the West Coast.

Straybow · May 4, 2002, 21:34

debeest: :) is always a smilie unless you disable smilies. Figure this one out.

"oil man appointed by the Supreme Court justices appointed by his daddy"

You crack me up with that one! But that's enough OT for this thread…

La Fayette · May 5, 2002, 02:52

Quote:

Originally posted by Straybow

You crack me up with that one! But that's enough OT for this thread…

...just one more post (since I started this and debeest explained):

Rah,
I don't think I would have written that, even in the OT, if my level in English had been high enough.
Let us hope I provided interesting night dreams to some of those who read me

.

Straybow · May 6, 2002, 02:26

Back on topic…

The way global warming is implemented is stupid. No effect (except the little dot changing color) for a long time, then suddenly dozens of tiles change all at once. C'mon, each tile represents thousands of square miles, and changing even one tile should be hard. It takes five turns (a century or more through most of the game) to make an impact by human effort.

LaFayette: We don't need global warming to account for pollution. That's what "pollution" does, which is game feature in itself. You can have gobs of pollution without global warming, and global warming without gobs of pollution.

I'm sure somebody will correct me if I'm wrong, but gw is tied to shield production, reduced by hydro and solar. Pollution is tied to population and production, modified by Automobile advance, Superhighways, Mass Transit and maybe a couple other things.

SG[1]: It distresses me, too, to read otherwise intelligent folk parroting the media when they could be thinking for themselves and looking at the data. Don't confuse pollution (a genuine problem, esp. in northern Europe) with gw IRL.

BTW, glad to hear at least somebody appreciates all that Big Brother does for you there in Britain. Whoops, looks like I'm back off topic

Scouse Gits · May 6, 2002, 06:17

@ Straybow - thanks Big Bro'

SG[1]