Marsh, what is it good for? Absolutely nothing!

[Carwyn]

Ok, what IS marsh good for? Is there some way to easily turn down the amount of worthless marsh that spawns? Unlike jungle, it never does really turn into good useable land and there seems to be a LOT of it in the game. 2.502 right now, but still too much.

Is there some way to change it so that it will eventually become rich farm land? Or give a culture/happiness bonus as a wetland park or something? (Thinking bird sanctuary). I keep thinking peat bog is wonderful farmland when developed - better than grassland.

Just some random thoughts and do let me know if I missed something about marsh and peat bog that make it worthwhile later in the game! Right now I just hate the stuff...

 

[c0d5579]

Should also give a production bonus early on - peat as a fuel was perfectly acceptable in the absence of wood, and even preferable for some applications where low but persistent heat was needed.

 

[JosEPh_II]

Early production bonus would be good in my style of play.

JosEPh

 

[Complex]

Perhaps it's not meant to be useful?

Not all terrain needs to help you, nor should you expect to get a bonus from everything.

I actually quite like the marsh. It adds a new dimension to borders and geography in the game by inserting large tracts of undesirable land, thereby also increasing the requisite strategy needed to plan your expansion.

That said, I have seen a couple instances of maps with truly excessive marsh. In one case it really screwed me as I was pinned up against the ocean to the east, maybe 10 - 12 grid spaces of usable terrain in every other direction, and then beyond that a series of rivers all surrounded by marsh with almost no grassland or plains. Most of the time it seems to be fine though, maybe just tune down the ratio a hair.

On another note, peat as a fuel sounds interesting, it was often more abundant than lumber in some places.

 

[Agent327]

Ok, what IS marsh good for?

Mountain also is unusable (and impassable); it's still in there.

 

[Carwyn]

Mountains are not as prevalent as marsh. There is also jungle, which can eventually be removed and worked. I don't mind marsh, but think it should be cut back in quantity and have the occasional bonus to it. Real marsh becomes workable land, is often valuable and peat bogs are very valuable. Just some thoughts.

 

[Bastian-Bux]

Actually Marsh WAS very prevalent. Almost all rivers had either marshes or meadows at most of their lengths. And where there where none of both, there was rock beneath the river -> ravines.

Though Marsh was not useless. It was an area of plenty of food, plus it had significant defensive value (think Varus vs. Arminius and similar "barbarian victories"). Also peat as a resource could give a health bonus (while Marsh itself should be unhealthy), as it was a usefull source of winterly warmth.

 

[Freakwave]

There are more tiles like desert which become workable in the late games and is far less usefull. same as tundra which yields less food. Marsh is great for buffer zones, and not that bad food wise. If you can build watermills on them.

Which reminds me btw that you can only build a watermill on one side of the river unless you start building them simultanously or at least if one side hasnt completed yet.

 

[Meltemi]

Some ability to drain the fens and marshes to create grasslands would be appreciated, though, since such things did happen throughout history. I think the English Fens weren't drained in earnest until the 17th century, but none of the plans were successful for more than a couple years until the early industrial era with coal-driven engines, but they have been drained to a great extent. For that matter, half of the existing wetlands globally have been drained as of 1993. The marshlands themselves should give somewhat decent food and hammers, but shouldn't be improvable by workers, in my opinion. It also should be cut back a bit, because while marshes are common, they aren't necessarily common on the same scale as tiles in-game

Peat could be added as a resource if an icon can be found, I think, generating extra hammers, but since over half of the world's actual wetlands have significant peat resources, it may be easier simply to integrate it into the wetlands terrain rather than create a new resource. Other swamp resources could include coal (specifically lignite), if peat is added, though. These could probably both be gathered via mining (coal strip-mines) or milling (energy to dry/compress peat), though how to jibe that with untapped wetlands might be interesting.

 

[c0d5579]

Meh. From where I sit, peat's a designation for any organic-rich clay. As such, it'll be found anywhere there's a very low energy depositional environment - also known as swamps. Given long enough, it turns into coal, so putting coal in marshland makes sense. Creating peat as a separate resource, though, is kind of silly unless every single marshland tile has a peat resource stacked on it. Might also consider putting rice in marsh conditions, long as you're selecting resource types.

Personally, I'd say marshes should be treated like jungle - improvable without removing the marsh overlay for a resource, drainable with Civil Engineering, representing large-scale public works, and capable of sustaining a wildlife preserve.

 

[Grimz101]

drainable with civil engineering and cost 100g, that would balance it

 

[JosEPh_II]

But drainage needs to give a benefit. Similar to Farms on plains.

JosEPh

 

[JarlFrank]

But drainage needs to give a benefit. Similar to Farms on plains.

JosEPh

Hmm I think last time I checked it gives +1 food for that tile.

 

[c0d5579]

... Drainage removes the marsh. Like I said, same as Jungle.

 

[Carwyn]

Drainage works with peat bogs, but not marsh. It just turns peat bogs into marsh I think. I don't mind worthless tiles in the game, but don't want a LOT of them. Jungle is often vast expanses and it pretty problematic early on, but it can be cleared and used later. Marsh without fresh water is pretty much a dead end at this point. Realistically men do drain and use the land that marshes are on and also use them as wetland preserves that serve a purpose. I'd like to see either less marsh, a way to control the amount of marsh in your game, some way to eventually develop it, or some specific bonuses in it. That would make it a lot more interesting.

 

[Grimz101]

drainable with civil engineering and cost 100g, that would balance it

& turn the tile into a grassland.

 

[JosEPh_II]

Hmm I think last time I checked it gives +1 food for that tile.

Depends upon the type of tile the marsh is located on top of. Grasslands and plains marshes do give +1 food. But marsh on tundra is next to worthless. That particular tile should give a +1 hammer when drained.

I don't remember ever seeing a marsh on a flood plain tile though.

JosEPh

 

[Bastian-Bux]

Joseph, so tell me again, why the russians and canadians are not draining their vast tundra areas (which is mostly marsh once the permafrost is not so frosty anymore)? Marsh on tundra should not be drainable, though a climatic change might turn the whole area into swamp first, and THEN into huge areas of high quality agricultural land.

 

[c0d5579]

Joseph, so tell me again, why the russians and canadians are not draining their vast tundra areas (which is mostly marsh once the permafrost is not so frosty anymore)? Marsh on tundra should not be drainable, though a climatic change might turn the whole area into swamp first, and THEN into huge areas of high quality agricultural land.

I dunno, because effective marsh drainage is incredibly expensive? Turning the Netherlands into an inhabitable and thriving region took centuries. Same with the Pripet Marshes west of Kiev, or the marshes surrounding the city of Rome. Removing them isn't cheap. Canada doesn't have such a huge tax base that they can spend it on tundra-rehabilitation projects in poorly inhabited areas, and Russia - well, they've kind of passed on the Stalinist economic model where huge public works in remote locations just because they could were the norm.

 

[Carwyn]

You can't drain marsh on tundra, its mostly frozen land. It won't grow anything if you do due to climate. Some places are pretty worthless for development. Doesn't bother me to have areas like that in the game either, but thought that some marsh ought to have value, as it does at times have value in this world.