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?