Global Warming Question

[Traelin]

Originally posted by WarpStorm
The risk of global warming is proportional to the little triangles in the cities of the world and the number of nukes dropped.

Well that's pretty annoying, since I can't control whether or not the AI uses nukes. Yet another reason why we MUST have a beefed-up AI. It (the AI) is simply too willing to use nukes.

EDIT: What I mean is a beefed-up UN, not AI.

[Wormwood]

Well, out goes my global pollution police. That'll save me fifty units a game. Still, at least I had good intentions. It's funny, what I was really doing was help other civs maintain productive, polluting cities with no national/global benefits smiles sheepishly.

[Wormwood]

So, then, even a beefed up UN or a new diplomatic agreement wouldn't work, because the only way to lower global warming would be to ask an AI to sell of some of it's factories, or reduce the population in it's larger cities, and there's not a chance in hell it will do that. "Say Bismark, this global warming thing is getting out of hand, could you kill off a few million of your citizens?" The option of a moratorium on use of nuclear weapons is an option, I suppose.

[Traelin]

Originally posted by Wormwood
The option of a moratorium on use of nuclear weapons is an option, I suppose.

Actually that's exactly what I meant Wormwood, I just didn't explain myself very well. A global "anti-nuke" treaty would be awesome, and I guarantee would help the global warming issue. The AI is just too darn willing ATM to use nukes.

[WarpStorm]

And how would you enforce it?

[metalhead]

Originally posted by Traelin


Actually that's exactly what I meant Wormwood, I just didn't explain myself very well. A global "anti-nuke" treaty would be awesome, and I guarantee would help the global warming issue. The AI is just too darn willing ATM to use nukes.

Yeah, I would end up being the rogue state stockpiling nukes and expelling weapons inspectors until I can unleash hell on earth

[vmxa1]

Disable the Mannhatten Project, would that not stop any nukes?

[Wormwood]

Perhaps more of a MAD (mutually assured destruction) pattern is the answer, making the AI not using it's nukes for fear of retribution by your own or other nation's nukes. The problem is, how concerned could you be if the AI decided to nuke a third party? Perhaps the solution to that is to rework how the nukes work. They can be launched on your turn, but don't impact until sometime between your turn and the AI's. That way, when an AI launches theres, you can get a message "So-and-So has launched nuclear missiles!" Since you can't be sure who they were launched against, you retaliate by firing off all of your own, thus assuring MAD.

[DRoseDARs]

Originally posted by Wormwood
The problem is, how concerned could you be if the AI decided to nuke a third party? Perhaps the solution to that is to rework how the nukes work.

The United States, during the Cold War with the former USSR, extended its "Nuclear Umbrella" to its allies here in the Western Hemisphere as well as those in Europe, all of whom could be considered "third parties" in the Civ3 context of this scenario.

Perhaps another treaty-type, named Nuclear-Umbrella or whatever, could be considered. (Note: Nuclear-Umbrella IS NOT the same as SDI. NU=Retaliation for an action taken; SDI=Prevention of action/intended action.)

[Wormwood]

Originally posted by DRoseDARs


The United States, during the Cold War with the former USSR, extended its "Nuclear Umbrella" to its allies here in the Western Hemisphere as well as those in Europe, all of whom could be considered "third parties" in the Civ3 context of this scenario.

NU seems redundant, as anyone who you would not want nuked, you would also not want attacked in any way, so you might as well sign an MPP (assuming that you're chummy enough with them to care about what happens to them).

[DRoseDARs]

Consider it this way: The Nuclear Umbrella Pact would cover ONLY the use of nuclear weapons, while the MPP would continue to cover all weapons. Considering the hideous nature of nuclear weapons, you could care less about what other countries do to each other with their conventional weapons, but nuclear weapons adversely effect ALL civilizations (I'm still not clear about the effects of nuclear weapons on global warming ingame, perhaps Civs get mad just because they're told to do so...no other reason). Kind of like in SMAC where, once you had contact with all of the other factions, you could vote to affect either global warming or global cooling...or in CPT you and a rival could cease hostilities long enough to reduce pollution "to a non-threatening level."

[Wormwood]

OK, you've convinced me

[DRoseDARs]

Originally posted by Wormwood
OK, you've convinced me

Ah, another convert to the Church of DRoseDARs of Yester Day Freaks.

My plans for a Cultural Victory proceedeth forward...

Excellent...

[candybo]

Back on pollution/global warming. If possible, I try to be the first to Ecology/Recycling. The Ai's will pay big bucks for 'em. I never bothered to follow up tho. Do they actually then build the improvements, and are they factored in? If so, would bumping those improvements up the priority list help?

... I've just noticed that my posts seems to have a lot of question at once. Anyone know why? Can this be explained? Can Someone PLEASE help me? AARGH!! Questions everywhere I look! Stop the madness!!!!

[HazieDaVampire]

hehe, in my current game i'm planning on nuking so much that i end up with a desert planet! arrr, good ol Kharak!

[Zachriel]

Originally posted by Zachriel
I would be more than willing to admit error in my previous post, but I would need more proof.

Originally posted by WarpStorm
Global warming in Civ3 is caused by all civs not just yours.

Is Global Warming truly global? To test this hypothesis, I took a game at 2049 AD, a game entering the Age of Future Techs. The Sun was yellow indicating some Global Warming. I abandoned every metropolis (population over 12). I deleted every pollution-causing improvement in my sole remaining city. Still Global Warming. I hit end-turn to make sure. Still Global Warming!



So yes, Global Warming is global. I stand corrected.

[Jaybe]

Zach, while I do believe that global warming is caused by all civs,* I doubt very much that your test as described would be valid. The affects of your sacrifice would not be seen for a few (or several) turns.

*Having AI civs also being effected by pollution is SUCH an improvement over civ2. I basically stopped playing civ2 because the AI would never get a polluted square.

[Zachriel]

Originally posted by Jaybe
Zach, while I do believe that global warming is caused by all civs,* I doubt very much that your test as described would be valid. The affects of your sacrifice would not be seen for a few (or several) turns.

You are indicating a "flywheel effect." I ran the experiment for 2-3 turns. I might try running the experiment again when I have time.

[Traelin]

Originally posted by Jaybe
Zach, while I do believe that global warming is caused by all civs,* I doubt very much that your test as described would be valid. The affects of your sacrifice would not be seen for a few (or several) turns.

Well I'm not sure about Zach's test, but I can assure you that using nukes affects the Global Warming Indicator the VERY next turn. My current game is proof of that.

[planetfall]

Originally posted by vmxa1

My experience is that players can not avoid warming regardless of what they do, unless they keep the pop below thresholds.

Two methods to deal with the socialistic "politically correct" concept of "Global Warming". {Scientists agree desertification is occuring at a higher rate, but convincing scientific data for hypothesis of 'Global Warming' is still missing as our data pools are too small and time frames are too large. Unless you use the Ice Age as the baseline norm, then we are definitely warming.}

Ok, ok, back to the game:

A- default rules

• Never build coal plants.
  
• Keep city population below 20.
  
• Don't cover every tile in your empire with a city tile.
  
• Plant some forests.
  
• Don't mine every tile.
  
• Conquer bad civs who use coal plants, etc.
  
• When you conquer a civ leave open space in new land. It is messed up with corruption anyway, so if no resources you are not really losing anything except score points based on land under control.
  
• Conquer other civs before nukes are available.
  

B- edited rules
Go into the editor and change the effect of each terrain type for warming to none.

--PF

[vmxa1]

I think you just proved my case. Anyway the civs have those nasty little yellow dots on the advisor screen soooo early.

[planetfall]

Guess I did, but only for Option A, not option B.

Here's an interesting thought-- will Manhattan as a SW tend to increase or decrease use of nukes and resultant desertificadtion?

-- PF

[vmxa1]

In single player, I would think reduce it at levels below emp/deity. I say that as the closer you are to Chief the less likely they will ever get it built. If MOnarch or higher and conquest or even dominate only then maybe they can get it. Just a guess.

[Jaybe]

Originally posted by vmxa1
I think you just proved my case. Anyway the civs have those nasty little yellow dots on the advisor screen soooo early.

Oh, that was a good one!
Referring to the F4 embassy indicators ...

[Wormwood]

Originally posted by planetfall



Plant some forests.

--PF

I think it's been established that planting forests has no effect.