New tech with a new CI

If you have a idea for a New tech with a New City Improvment, please explain it!!!

Geo-energy

About geo-energy! Now there are volcanos, but only in a negative way. Why not geo-energy and geo-plants???

If I'm not mistaken there in Iceland???

Comments.

parden my ignorance, but what tech do you mean by CI ?

cIV! No questions asked, Zenon C4 is dull and unimaginative, whereas cIV is funny and surprising - and can only be applied to Civ-games (and all other IV-ended games such as... such as... well you figure them out! )

If you start on this path, you would probably end up with wave-energy, wind-energy, bio-energy and all other minor energies. It's a nice idea, but what would you need geo-energy for?

EDIT: And yeah, what's CI?

CI = City Improvement!!!

C4 like explosives

Recovering the topic.

There all ready:
Hydro-plants
Coal-plants
Solar-plants
Nuclear-plants

Why not Geo-plants, Oil plants, or Wind energy-plants???

Re-burying the topic:

Because they are not needed. Coal-plants produce pollution, hydro-plants don't, but they need rivers, solar-plants are better than hydro-plants in that they don't need rivers (can be universally build). Nuclear-plants are there only because they are much more powerful than the others. Now if you want those other plants, what are the traits that make them needed in the game?

Geo-plants and Wind energy-plants are only two more non-polluting plants with terrain requirements (and they come after solar-plants, so what's the point?) and oil plants are just one more polluting plant.

Maybe they can be build in addition to the others instead of replacing them. But only if you have the right spot!

I agree the should be an addition for reducing pollution.

For the wind-energy-plant, I don't see any terrain requeriment.

Originally posted by Zenon_pt
I agree the should be an addition for reducing pollution.

For the wind-energy-plant, I don't see any terrain requeriment.

Click to expand...

Well, you can then by all means go and build wind-plants into valleys and behind mountains (like in Sweden or Finland), and you'll see your terrain requirements: they MUST be in open ground, preferably atop a hill or on a coast. If you build them just somewhere, you'll be just wondering why don't the rotors turn...

Why should there be an addition for reducing pollution? As it is, recycling center and mass-transit system combined drop your pollution to two units, which is very low. It is not realistic to get rid of all pollution. We already have plants that don't produce pollution and can be build anywhere. Why would we need additional ones? I simply don't understand why they are needed, if not for the simple fun of having them (which IMO is only a reason to mod them, not a reason to put them into the official game).

Maybe they can be build in addition to the others instead of replacing them. But only if you have the right spot!

Click to expand...

Yes, they could, but what is the use? They don't bring in anything new to the game. I think cities can already have ridiculous amounts of shield-output (200 is not an impossibility, 150 isn't even a rarity). You can easily have cities producing MA's once per turn as it is. Even the biggest wonders can be built under 10 turns. What would the new plants be for? This is not something I would outrightly dismiss, though, if there were good arguments for the new improvements (which I am trying to get out in the open). I don't like adding new improvements/units/wonders just for the sake of it. It will only bring more complexity into the game.

Let me repeat my argument: We already have these types of powerplants:
1. Polluting that can be built anywhere and requires a resource
2. Non-polluting that can't be built anywhere
3. Non-polluting that can be built anywhere
4. An additional, non polluting plant that can't be built anywhere and requires a resource.

Now what I am seeing here is that there are two kinds of powerplants we are missing: A polluting powerplant that can be built anywhere, but does NOT require resources and an additional powerplant that can be built anywhere.

Now the first one is something I am willing to think about, if someone came up with one. The second is also possible, but what would it be? And remember, that to replace a nuclear powerplant you would need a ridiculous amount of wind-power - and wind-power cannot be built anywhere because they do not produce electricity if there is not enough wind. Wave-plants are also a possibility, but they would only be effective in the coasts of great oceans, and they cost a lot. Any ideas?

@Shyrramar

OK wind-plants, you are right. You probable need a huge park of them, so way not Wind-plants Park as addition to the solar plant. Nuclear plants produce more energy then the solar type.

But if we go about a

polluting power plant that can be built anywhere, but does NOT require resources and an additional power plant that can be built anywhere

Click to expand...

.

The 1st type: Coal plants needs coal, so NO. Oil plants needs oil, NO. A nuclear plant needs uranium, so NO. I remember one but don’t know the name. It’s the one with you divide or separated the atom.

The 2nd type: Solar plants don’t need any recourse. Hydro plants need a specific terrain (rivers), so it isn’t this type. Geo-plants need Volcano activity, so NO. Wave-plant can also build near the mouth of a river and coasts of great oceans.

Why not introducing a tech to reduce pollution on Factories with out creating Eco-improvements? Did you ever heard about ISO 9000 and the concept of Quality?