Quick Answers / 'Newbie' Questions

Takhisis

¡Patria y vida!
Joined
Jul 11, 2005
Messages
57,256
Location
up yours.
Thanks, I'll check it out and let her know.
I'll also let y'all know if/when I'm able to convince her to take the leap into "real" computer gaming, haha.
Sorry, what would be ‘real’ computer gaming? ;)
Okay, change of subject.

In regard to "global warming", the way it is depicted in the game, is there any benefit to foresting as much of the map as possible?

I pretty much always plant forests in all of my tundra areas. It's really the only thing you can do with tundra, and besides, it looks most realistic, imo.

I almost never plant forests in grasslands or plains, unless the former contains game, in which case it produces a good mix of food and shield if the square is a forest. In fact, I almost always chop existing forests in grasslands and plains and replace them mostly with mines, and in some cases irrigation if more food is needed. I find that grassland with mines give a good mix of food and shields, but I'm wondering whether it would be better to plant forests in some and irrigate others to get the same food/shield mix for a city while also helping against global warming.

In short, does the number of forests on the map affect global warming?
For the statistics regarding global warming I'll refer you to the abovementioned post. Planting forests, in any case, helps with increasing shield production e.g. on tundra but also to slow down possible invaders in places where you haven't managed to establish a mountain or ocean as your natural border.
 

jarred!

King
Joined
Jun 26, 2017
Messages
611
Location
Antrim, MI
Okay, change of subject.

In regard to "global warming", the way it is depicted in the game, is there any benefit to foresting as much of the map as possible?

I pretty much always plant forests in all of my tundra areas. It's really the only thing you can do with tundra, and besides, it looks most realistic, imo.

I almost never plant forests in grasslands or plains, unless the former contains game, in which case it produces a good mix of food and shield if the square is a forest. In fact, I almost always chop existing forests in grasslands/plains and replace them mostly with mines, and in some cases irrigation if more food is needed. I find that grassland with mines give a good mix of food and shields, but I'm wondering whether it would be better to plant forests in some and irrigate others to get the same food/shield mix for a city while also helping against global warming.

In short, does the number of forests on the map affect global warming?
Forested tiles (and I assume jungle as well) are affected first by global warming, and they get removed to show the underlying terrain. When they're all gone then the base tiles will degrade, too. So more forests help to preserve tiles from irreparable damage by global warming, but don't directly lower it (use Mass Transit and Recycling for this).
 

Samson

Deity
Joined
Oct 24, 2003
Messages
15,692
Location
Cambridge
Forested tiles (and I assume jungle as well) are affected first by global warming, and they get removed to show the underlying terrain. When they're all gone then the base tiles will degrade, too. So more forests help to preserve tiles from irreparable damage by global warming, but don't directly lower it (use Mass Transit and Recycling for this).
If you have loads of spare workers, can you prevent the irreparable damage buy reforesting tiles as they are cleared?
 

EMan

HOFer: Milk-Cow?
Supporter
Joined
Jan 25, 2002
Messages
1,943
Location
Denver/Phoenix Born:Hampton Court
Posted at about the same time as jarred! (I.e. Basically the same answer).

I think that the answer is Yes. In my experience of extreme Global Warming (i.e. Prior to discovering Mass Transit Centers), Global Warming has only deforested tiles, as many as 3 tiles per turn, on tiles outside the borders of my cities. :)
 
Last edited:

Takhisis

¡Patria y vida!
Joined
Jul 11, 2005
Messages
57,256
Location
up yours.
How do you manage to cause such global warming *before* you discover pollution-reducing wonders?
 

EMan

HOFer: Milk-Cow?
Supporter
Joined
Jan 25, 2002
Messages
1,943
Location
Denver/Phoenix Born:Hampton Court
How do you manage to cause such global warming *before* you discover pollution-reducing wonders?
Large Cities!.........I was getting up to 30 Pollution tiles per round. Remember, I'm a Huge Map Milking Specialist, so getting to the Domination Point quickly and having all the tiles populated is a priority. (Admittedly, I should have researched Ecology and thus Mass Transit Centers earlier but I was busy building hundreds of workers and city improvements). The only improvement I build that increases pollution due to Production is the Commercial Dock. (Sometimes needed for city happiness on very small islands). :)
 

justanick

Emperor
Joined
Oct 6, 2010
Messages
1,417
Location
Germany
Okay, change of subject.

In regard to "global warming", the way it is depicted in the game, is there any benefit to foresting as much of the map as possible?

I pretty much always plant forests in all of my tundra areas. It's really the only thing you can do with tundra, and besides, it looks most realistic, imo.
With railroads mined tundra is as good as forested tundra. But with global warming tundra can become grassland, which is a step up. So if you want to exploit global warming to your advantage this is the way to go. Please donnot try in real life. :crazyeye:
I almost never plant forests in grasslands or plains, unless the former contains game, in which case it produces a good mix of food and shield if the square is a forest. In fact, I almost always chop existing forests in grasslands/plains and replace them mostly with mines, and in some cases irrigation if more food is needed. I find that grassland with mines give a good mix of food and shields, but I'm wondering whether it would be better to plant forests in some and irrigate others to get the same food/shield mix for a city while also helping against global warming.
Global warming should only become relevant after you have railroads and hospitals. This should also mean that you use a citizen on every tile you could in theory put forest on. But for anything but tundra said forest is a downgrade. Therefore you should only use forest on tundra or possible for strategic reasons, but the later can be done with barricades as well.

The usefulness of forests for yields is therefore regular grassland prior to railroads.
 

Takhisis

¡Patria y vida!
Joined
Jul 11, 2005
Messages
57,256
Location
up yours.
Large Cities!.........I was getting up to 30 Pollution tiles per round. Remember, I'm a Huge Map Milking Specialist, so getting to the Domination Point quickly and having all the tiles populated is a priority. (Admittedly, I should have researched Ecology and thus Mass Transit Centers earlier but I was busy building hundreds of workers and city improvements). The only improvement I build that increases pollution due to Production is the Commercial Dock. (Sometimes needed for city happiness on very small islands). :)
Interesting. In my games usually some AIs gobble each other up so by the time I hit Industrialization so planting forests is useful not just for shields on tundra, as I said earlier, but also to provide a barrier to movement that the AI cannot, unlike barricades, destroy with bombardments or pillaging.
 

tjs282

Stone \ Cold / Fish
Joined
May 19, 2009
Messages
4,815
Location
Inside my skull
Thanks, I'll check it out and let her know.
This one might be a good place to start (though it's only Warlord difficulty):

 

RobS

Warlord
Joined
Jun 12, 2013
Messages
163
Location
USA
Does lava destroy a city entirely every time, or perhaps just some city improvements and/or units therein?
I thought I saw a computer opponent's city destroyed by lava the other day, but I'm not sure. It happens so infrequently I'm not sure.
 

justanick

Emperor
Joined
Oct 6, 2010
Messages
1,417
Location
Germany
Either you get hit or you donnot. I have not seen a partial destruction by vulcanos in Civ3. But i have barely seen applicable eruptions either, so please donnot take my word for it.
 

vorlon_mi

Emperor
Joined
Oct 21, 2004
Messages
1,317
Location
Chelsea, MI
In Civ3, I have had a city destroyed. Not very recently, since I learned my lesson and stopped settling so close to volcanos.
I think that I've lost an exploring unit or worker. If I see the warning before it erupts, I try to move my units away.

Interestingly, in Civ6, the lava from eruptions only partially destroys units or improvements. Eruptions have different strength / intensity, so the bigger ones do more damage.
 

tjs282

Stone \ Cold / Fish
Joined
May 19, 2009
Messages
4,815
Location
Inside my skull
The lava from an eruption lands randomly on 1-2 tiles of the 3x3 block centered on the Volcano. If it hits a town-tile, the town is instantly destroyed.

I actually saw this happen to a Maghreb town last night, in my current CCM game: that was the second time that particular volcano erupted.
 

Civinator

Blue Lion
Supporter
Joined
May 5, 2005
Messages
8,280
The lava from an eruption lands randomly on 1-2 tiles of the 3x3 block centered on the Volcano. If it hits a town-tile, the town is instantly destroyed.
I actually saw this happen to a Maghreb town last night, in my current CCM game: that was the second time that particular volcano erupted.

:yup:. In the editor´s Disaster Page the maximum eruption period can be set in years. This means, there is a random calculation in the game and that eruption periods of volcanoes in the game can be much shorter than the number set in the editor. 5000 years is the standard setting in the epic game (and in the CCM mod, too). It seems to be possible to set the maximum eruption period to even much longer and also much shorter eruption periods, too.

Disasters page.jpg


In my eyes, when the smolder animation above a volcano appears, it is the best to move all units out of the 3x3 block of destruction around the volcano.

Volcano smoke.gif
 

Vuldacon

Dedicated to Excellence
Supporter
Joined
Nov 14, 2001
Messages
7,187
Location
USA
In my eyes, when the smolder animation above a volcano appears, it is the best to move all units out of the 3x3 block of destruction around the volcano.
Yes and I have found that if I run Many Workers/Enginerers on top of the Erupting Volcano after the first Eruption, the Eruption stops quicker.
 

tjs282

Stone \ Cold / Fish
Joined
May 19, 2009
Messages
4,815
Location
Inside my skull
Sacrifices to the Almighty PRNGods...? :lol:
 

RobS

Warlord
Joined
Jun 12, 2013
Messages
163
Location
USA
The lava from an eruption lands randomly on 1-2 tiles of the 3x3 block centered on the Volcano. If it hits a town-tile, the town is instantly destroyed.

I actually saw this happen to a Maghreb town last night, in my current CCM game: that was the second time that particular volcano erupted.
Thanks, so I wasn't seeing things the other day. Do you happen to know whether the graphic after it happens is a rubbled square or a lava square? I should've looked closer at that opponent's city the other day, or rather their volcano.
As an aside, the volcanoes are one of the coolest things about this game.

I've often thought that perhaps a rare earthquake would've been cool to have in the game. Earthquakes could disrupt roads/railroads and destroy random city improvements, including Wonders.
 
Last edited:

Civinator

Blue Lion
Supporter
Joined
May 5, 2005
Messages
8,280
The graphics are the pollution graphics and the fallout can be cleaned like pollution in the game. Many years ago I modded the volcano eruption to a big thunderstorm in the mountains:
 
Top Bottom