 |
|
bellisaurius
|
|
chicago
Apr 2002
time: 23:19
|
|
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
|
|
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.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Thoddy
|
|
Hannover, Germany
Jan 2001
time: 06:19
|
|
See Thread Invasion Planet Earth
civ2 General Help
http://apolyton.net/forums/showthre...5&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.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
debeest
|
|
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]
Last edited by debeest on 04-05-2002 at 10:07
|
|
| |
|
|
|
bellisaurius
|
|
chicago
Apr 2002
time: 23:19
|
|
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.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
debeest
|
|
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....
|
|
| |
|
|
|
debeest
|
|
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
|
 |
SG(2)… gone but not forgotten
Jan 1970
time: 23:19
|
|
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
|
|
| |
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:19.
Apolyton Time is 00:19. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
28-04-2002 07:19
.
|