 |
|
danimal
|
|
quote: Originally posted by LordAzreal
Squares inside a city's radius, all mined, irrigated and railroaded.
Outside of that, on the grasslands/plains, I plant forests. Apart from that, I leave it all alone afterward. If there's still jungle left in those squares, I leave it alone too.
That's what I think looks the nicest, while remaining developed. |
That's what I think looks the nicest (he remarks with a lisp and limp wrist)
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Random Passerby
|
|
Bah! Bow down in deference to the famous beef mines and wheat quarries of mighty Babylon!
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
Captain
|
 |
by Divine Right
May 2001 time: 00:19
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Grrr
It is important. It is what the game looks like, and how I feel about treating the environment. |
agreed!
btw, I changed food consumed to 3, and made grasslands 3f, plains 2f, and floodplains 4f. +2 f on each for irrigation. other terrain tiles don't generate enough food to grow cities, you will need the above 3 to grow. Since food reqs are higher, your cities grow much slower so there is significant incentive to irrigate grassland, plains, and flood plains (even though irrig fp is weird, doens't it just get flooded?). I don't see anyone mining grasslands now. it's still possible, just not as useful as irrigating.
just an alternate solution.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Trip
|
 |
Hunt Valley
Apr 2002 time: 00:19
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Captain
btw, I changed food consumed to 3, and made grasslands 3f, plains 2f, and floodplains 4f. +2 f on each for irrigation. other terrain tiles don't generate enough food to grow cities, you will need the above 3 to grow. Since food reqs are higher, your cities grow much slower so there is significant incentive to irrigate grassland, plains, and flood plains (even though irrig fp is weird, doens't it just get flooded?). I don't see anyone mining grasslands now. it's still possible, just not as useful as irrigating.
just an alternate solution. |
And then... what if there are no rivers/fresh water? 
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
Carbon Copy
|
 |
Indiana, USA
Feb 2002 time: 00:19
|
|
Everyone else has weighed in on this, I might as well, too.
I personally have nothing against mining grasslands, either with the icon or with the practice in general. Irrigation and Mining are treated so abstractly by the game that you can basically reduce it down in your mind to developing the land for raising food (whether it be raising crops, raising livestock, fishing in local ponds/rivers, etc.), and developing the land for something other than food (manufacturing, refining, actual mining, etc.). Actually, I do have a beef with the mine icon: It almost completely obscures any rubber or coal that it shares a tile with. But that's it
In despotism, there is no point to irrigating a grassland tile without a cow or a wheat on it unless you're extending the irrigation through there to reach another square. If the city in question is thoroughly surrounded by hills and mountains, any grasslands or plains in the vicinity will need to be irrigated eventually so that the city can grow enough to use those high production tiles, but if it's a city surrounded completely by grasslands and plains, then you'll never get any worthwhile production from that town by just irrigating and you'll hamstring your growth if you plant forests on grasslands (it doesn't really matter on plains until rails). On regent or even Monarch, this might not matter, but in Emperor and Diety, if you're interested in winning the game you'd best endure the ugliness when it's to your advantage.
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
Akka
|
 |
In front of my computer.
Nov 2001 time: 06:19
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Deornwulf
I also deplore the idea of mining the grasslands and have set mining for grasslands to 0 in the BIC. Now no one can mine them.....bwuhahahahaha.
I also set irrigation for hills to +1. I missed that option from civ2. The AI actually irrigates them too.
I prefer a forest to a mine any day. |
Same here 
I added the irrigation for hills and removed mining for grasslands and plains in my mod 
(though I'm still wondering if the plains should be allowed to be mined)
The problem in the game about the irrigation is that, contrary to history, it's actually TOO EASY to feed your subjects. Until very recently, food has always been of the utmost importance, much more than production. There should be at least two or three "upgrade" in the irrigation technology, to reflect the progress between neolithic irrigaiton and modern farmland (which is actually barely existant...).
I will never understand why they had removed the Civ2 method of improving land to come back to the Civ1 one, rather than EXPANDING on it...
(oh, and for the "winwinwin" people wit the "who care about looks, let's just use what make you win !" : if it's just a victory that count, don't see the point of having a game that has any historical/cultural/anything settings. Play an Excel-style TBS game with list of numbers, that will probably fits better your tastes)
|
|
|  |
 |
|
wohmongarinf00l
|
|
in general, i think the governor is quite deficient.
workers on automation will mine a cow/wheat. even during the milking phase where i tell the gov to just produce growth and
happiness tiles that get global warming get to be mined.
in addition u will be in a race to complete smith trading and
ur workers are running around building useless roads, cutting jungle, etc...leaving the city building smith trading with no improvements. when u zoom in, the tile allocation really sucks...
they will leave mined hills to work on irrigated grassland or some such.
and u wonder why the AI beats u to a WoW by one turn.
they really need to improve the governor to conform with what u specify.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Random Passerby
|
|
Contrary to popular belief, grasslands do not, in fact, consist of nothing but pure vegetable matter from the surface all the way down to the earth's core. Painstaking laboratory analysis shows that there is, in fact, significant mineral material even within the first inch beneath a surface covering of grassy plants, and although the theories are not universally accepted, some scientists have hypothesized that there might in fact be some sort of "bed rock" not far below the surface in some areas.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Dominae
|
|
You don't mine bedrock just because it exists. You search for useful minerals, and build a mine or quarry close to those minerals. Useful minerals rarely appear in the bedrock under grasslands.
The fact that mines are the default improvement in Civ3 is a consquence of the game rules, which were created first and foremost for fun gameplay, not realism.
Dominae
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Ben Williams
|
|
Ithaca, NY
Apr 2002 time: 00:19
|
|
YES, I hate mines anywhere but hills and mountains. I really hate it when you gotta fine tune your population growth later in the game and play catch the resource square between overlapping cities. In my mind the utopian socity consists of expances of irrigation, and since I'm a perfectionist I hate not to do so. I say overhaul the whole resorce system so terrain squares work like the real thing.
-Ben
|
|
|  |
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
|
|
|
|
|
|