Does terraforming with nuke allow in the HoF?

[Moonsinger]

I read that it's possible to set off a nuclear explosion to convert river glass/plain to flood land. Is this legal for the HoF game?

PS: I have included a poll to see how many of you think it should or should not be allowed.

 

[Bamspeedy]

I say if they want to deal with the global warming they should be able to do it. I don't see any major effect from doing this. Because of several factors:
1. You must be extremely careful of where you place the nuke, as any tile that is just 1 tile away from the river will turn to desert.
2. You must spend time cleaning up the pollution and may result in lost population before you clean it up and/or from the nuke explosion.
3. Global warming.

I never bother with it, and don't really see the benefit in doing so.

 

[JuicyCivNewbie]

Can't really see why it would be disallowed, it is risky and not overwhelmingly powerful anyway.

 

[RufRydyr]

Let it stand. The less rules the better.

 

[Moonsinger]

Originally posted by Bamspeedy
1. You must be extremely careful of where you place the nuke, as any tile that is just 1 tile away from the river will turn to desert.

That's no problem! The science of terraforming with nuke is fairly simple and reliable. Any grassland/plain 1 tile away from the river will turn into desert. Any forest will turn into grassland or plain. Therefore, by planting a forest on the tile that we wish to reserve will prevent it from turning into desert.

Turn 1: Plant forest on the tile we wish to reserve
Turn 2: Set off the nuclear explosion and move workers into position ready for cleaning up pollution.
Turn 3: Clean up all pollution around the center tile and ready workers for cleanning up ground zero (the center title where the nuke landed)
Turn 4: Clean up pollution in ground zero.

So basically, the terraforming with nuke will take exactly 4 turns to complete (if done correctly). In the mean time, each surrounding city may loose up to 3 population. However, in the end, those surrounding city may gain the benefit of the newly found flood land for the rest of the milking phase. On the other hand, a nuclear explosion does increase global warming which may turn some of our beautiful grasslands into desert. Therefore, I agree with Bamspeedy that there isn't any benefit in doing so.

 

[Chieftess]

At first, I thought 'disallowed'... then I figured, it can be risky, so it's an expert player strategy. BTW, won't the AI declare war on you even if you nuke your own land?

Turn 4: Clean up pollution in ground zero.

I know it's the correct term, but post 9/11, I don't think some will like that.

 

[Moonsinger]

Originally posted by Chieftess
At first, I thought 'disallowed'... then I figured, it can be risky, so it's an expert player strategy. BTW, won't the AI declare war on you even if you nuke your own land?

No, they won't! By the time we are ready to terraform our land with nuke, the AI is usually left with a single size 1 town in the middle of the desert.

 

[RufRydyr]

In my current game I'm terraforming as I nuke enemy cities. LMAO. Then I'm using her workers (from razing the city) to clean it up. Then I'll plant my own nice city there.

I'm about to post cool before and after 'first strike' pics on my site.

 

[Moonsinger]

Using nuke is really a BAD idea!!! In my current game, after I converted about 300 tiles to floodplain, the sun is getting really hot now. At each turn, at least 20 tiles are turning into plain or desert. Eventually I don't have any more grassland left. My people are dying becuase of global warming and there is nothing I could do to undo the mistake that I made. That's it! If I ever going to plain another civ3 game, I swear I will never build another nuke.

 

[ProPain]

Very interesting strategy. Never thought about this possibility and will certainly try it.

Originally posted by Moonsinger
Using nuke is really a BAD idea!!! In my current game, after I converted about 300 tiles to floodplain, the sun is getting really hot now. At each turn, at least 20 tiles are turning into plain or desert. Eventually I don't have any more grassland left. My people are dying becuase of global warming and there is nothing I could do to undo the mistake that I made. That's it! If I ever going to plain another civ3 game, I swear I will never build another nuke.

Converting 300 tiles, that's 300/9=34 dropped nukes right? Maybe you're overdoing it a bit!

ProPain

 

[Diminution]

I know it's the correct term, but post 9/11, I don't think some will like that. [/B][/QUOTE]


To me, the suggestion that we limit the use of the phrase "ground zero" because it has a connection to the events of 9/11 is just a little more than stretching it. After all, the association is really more the creation of sensationalistic reporters and slogan-happy politicians than something truly related to that tragedy. Applying rules like this can cause serious restrictions of vocabulary and expression.

 

[jblii]

Originally posted by Diminution
I know it's the correct term, but post 9/11, I don't think some will like that.

In truth, the term "ground zero" has a much longer history, going back to at least 1945 (Hiroshima & Nagasaki bombings). It simply indicates the center of a massive trauma on the land when used in a military context. Dictionary.com

 

[jblii]

Originally posted by Diminution
I know it's the correct term, but post 9/11, I don't think some will like that.

To me, the suggestion that we limit the use of the phrase "ground zero" because it has a connection to the events of 9/11 is just a little more than stretching it. After all, the association is really more the creation of sensationalistic reporters and slogan-happy politicians than something truly related to that tragedy. Applying rules like this can cause serious restrictions of vocabulary and expression. [/B][/QUOTE]

In truth, the term "ground zero" has a much longer history, going back to at least 1945 (Hiroshima & Nagasaki bombings). It simply indicates the center of a massive trauma on the land when used in a military context. URL=http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=ground%20zero]http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=ground%20zero[/URL]

 

[nihil8r]

what? 34 nukes will cause global warming? BAH! what about tacticals?

 

[Emp.Napoleon]

Hmmm but does this also convert ocean into land?

 

[Darkness]

Originally posted by Emp.Napoleon
Hmmm but does this also convert ocean into land?

Only coast IIRC, but Moonsinger is the one you should ask! She's the authority on this subject...

 

[Moonsinger]

Darkness is absolutely correct! Only coast and lake would dry up and turn into land. However, in theory (because I have never gone to that extreme), if you have enough nukes, you could turn ocean into sea, and sea into coast, then coast into dry land.

 

[DaveMcW]

Hmmm... does drying up land increase the domination limit?

 

[superslug]

Originally posted by DaveMcW
Hmmm... does drying up land increase the domination limit?

I know just how to test this. I'll let you know in a day or so.

 

[superslug]

Okay, I thought I knew how to test this relatively quickly. Sadly, I forgot the game won't let you trigger a Domination victory after 2050, when the Histographic condition is triggered. There is a game .sav where I could develop a rough nuke/tile ratio that would give a an idea of how many detonations would be required to activate land increase. However, without knowing whether the domination value the game checks against is static (set at map generation) or dynamic, there's no point in spending time launching missles on a "test" map. This may have to wait...