03-05-2002 02:01									#1
	You know, I hadn't noticed it till now but... Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

Civ3 has no swamps. This is kinda mind boggling here, what happened to all of them? Was scrolling through terrain looking for something and I noticed that. Wonder if they just thought it the same as another terrain, or if someone on the Civ3 team just had a thing against swamps.

	03-05-2002 02:23									#2
	Suffering from ads?

Jungle.

	03-05-2002 03:15									#3
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

That about says it all, I think NYE.

	03-05-2002 03:21									#4
	Increase the size of your Attachments

Can't say I miss them, they took FOREVER to drain.

-Jam

	03-05-2002 04:24									#5
	Jungle = Swamp? Got spare money?

Yes, the vast swamps of the Amazon are hard to cultivate.
More terrain = better game.

-FMK.

	03-05-2002 04:25									#6
	Suffering from ads?

For those deficient in geography, swamps are NOT in reality jungles. They are different in numerous ways. Go look it up in basic geo.

One of the terrain problems with Civ 3 is that there is only one kind of hill. What about hills in deserts? In jungles? But they are all treated as though they were hills in France - nice and green and producing some food. Unrealistic.

	03-05-2002 07:39									#7
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

quote: Originally posted by Coracle For those deficient in geography, swamps are NOT in reality jungles. They are different in numerous ways. Go look it up in basic geo. One of the terrain problems with Civ 3 is that there is only one kind of hill. What about hills in deserts? In jungles? But they are all treated as though they were hills in France - nice and green and producing some food. Unrealistic.

CTP had different hills, hills in desert, hills in tundra, But they all produced the same.

	03-05-2002 07:39									#8
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

What do you NEED a swamp for anyway?

	03-05-2002 08:14									#9
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

It isn't really needed, I just thought it was odd they didn't put it in. I mean adding swamps couldn't be that difficult. If theres anything that Civ3 is lacking its nerve stapling. Teach them rioters whos boss.

	03-05-2002 08:50									#10
	Remove this text

What's the point with swamps? They produced the same 1 measly food that jungle squares do.

What they shouldn't have ditched was the bananas you could find in the jungles.

	03-05-2002 14:46									#11
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

While swamps weren't absolutly needed, it's would not have been bad to have more variety.
And it would have made another terrain tile for modder and for ressources distribution.

	03-05-2002 15:02									#12
	Get a bigger avatar today!

quote: Originally posted by LordAzreal What they shouldn't have ditched was the bananas you could find in the jungles.

How true. That's an offense against Apolyton. Firaxis, we hate you for this

	03-05-2002 15:10									#13
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

quote: Originally posted by Coracle For those deficient in geography, swamps are NOT in reality jungles. They are different in numerous ways. Go look it up in basic geo.

For those who are unable to think abstract:

Jungle produces 1 food and gets terraformed in grassland.
Swamp produces 1 food and gets terraformed in grassland.

So what's the point to have both? Just for adding more graphics? This complaint is the same as if somebody would say "FIRAXIS, why are the dark squares on my chessboard brown and not black!"