stop being so political

Ah yes, [civ4]'s magic-desert-tile-wand wielding global warming fairy is an epic troll. I frequently rage when a village finally becomes a town in my Wall Street city then 3 turns later BOOM!!! global warming hits that tile.

I understand they want to include pollution and climate change in the game, but there has got to be a better way than that. It wouldn't be so bad if deserts weren't completely useless. At least in other versions ([civ2] if I remember right), you could build improvements on desert tiles. Is farming a desert realistic? Probably not, but it made for better gameplay.

*cough*CALIFORNIA*cough*
 
I agree about nuke plants. I actually worked in nuclear plants when I was younger. American ones are very safe. So are French ones from my understanding. I think they get 90% of their electricity from nuclear power. They've been doing this for many, many years.

Nuke plants melting down is just plain silly. It's a leftover from civ2 that needs to go. Civ2 was a great game, but some of those concepts need to be retired.

The accurate way to model it is the increased cost, and the higher tech. That is how it should be balanced.

Yes it is about gameplay over realism. And the fact is, the gameplay sucks right now, so it needs to be changed. I almost never build these. I always go for 3 gorges (I save a great engineer if I think I can't get it). I only build these in island cities. Although it's tough there, because they suffer from lower production.

As for whales I can care less about whales. Nuke the whales :). Seeing as they are useless (I never specifically go for them), just eliminate them and make a more useful water resource. They could make a seal resource. And a canadian civ could club them for the happiness bonus. :)
 
I'm not sure how whales are political as such, what is the message that is being pushed here? You can't actually overhunt them in the game after all!
Perhaps if they disappeared after a while or a barbarian ship turned up every so often and destroyed a whaling ship then maybe...
I suspect they are in at least partly for a little diversity, a relatively late game resource, and in the oceans too!
 
Whales are modeled very well in my opinion.

It's pretty realistic.
 
or a barbarian ship turned up every so often and destroyed a whaling ship then maybe...
Could casting anti-whaling protesters as barbarians really be seen as an anti-whaling statement?
 
I always wondered where the hammer from whales came from?

They used whale products for a wide variety of things.

Oil from Whale’s Blubber

Oil was the main product sought from whales, and it was used to lubricate machinery and to provide illumination by burning it in lamps.

When a whale was killed, it was towed to the ship and its blubber, the thick insulating fat under its skin, would be peeled and cut from its carcass in a process known as “flensing.” The blubber was minced into chunks and boiled in large vats on board the whaling ship, producing oil.

The oil taken from whale blubber was packaged in casks and transported back to the whaling ship’s home port (such as New Bedford, Massachusetts, the busiest American whaling port in the mid-1800s). From the ports it would be sold and transported across the country and would find its way into a huge variety of products.

Whale oil, in addition to be used for lubrication and illumination, was also used to manufacture soaps, paint, and varnish. Whale oil was also utilized in some processes used to manufacture textiles and rope.
Spermaceti, a Highly Regarded Oil

A peculiar oil found in the head of the sperm whale, spermaceti, was highly prized. The oil was waxy, and was commonly used in making candles. In fact, candles made of spermaceti were considered the best in the world, producing a bright clear flame without an excess of smoke.

Spermaceti was also used, distilled in liquid form, as an oil to fuel lamps. The main American whaling port, New Bedford, Massachusetts, was thus known as "The City That Lit the World."

When John Adams was the ambassador to Great Britain before serving as president he recorded in his diary a conversation about spermaceti he had with the British Prime Minister William Pitt. Adams, keen to promote the New England whaling industry, was trying to convince the British to import spermaceti sold by American whalers, which the British could use to fuel street lamps.

The British were not interested. In his diary, Adams wrote that he told Pitt, “the fat of the spermaceti whale gives the clearest and most beautiful flame of any substance that is known in nature, and we are surprised you prefer darkness, and consequent robberies, burglaries, and murders in your streets to receiving as a remittance our spermaceti oil.”

Despite the failed sales pitch John Adams made in the late 1700s, the American whaling industry boomed in the early to mid-1800s. And spermaceti was a major component of that success.

Spermaceti could be refined into a lubricant that was ideal for precision machinery. The machine tools that made the growth of industry possible in the United States were lubricated, and essentially made possible, by oil derived from spermaceti.
Baleen, or "Whalebone"

The bones and teeth of various species of whales were used in a number of products, many of them common implements in a 19th century household. Whales are said to have produced “the plastic of the 1800s.”

The "bone" of the whale which was most commonly used wasn’t technically a bone, it was baleen, a hard material arrayed in large plates, like gigantic combs, in the mouths of some species of whales. The purpose of the baleen is to act as a sieve, catching tiny organisms in sea water, which the whale consumes as food.

As baleen was tough yet flexible, it could be used in a number of practical applications. And it became commonly known as "whalebone."

Perhaps the most common use of whalebone was in the manufacture of corsets, which fashionable ladies in the 1800s wore to compress their waistlines. One typical corset advertisement from the 1800s proudly proclaims, “Real Whalebone Only Used.”

Whalebone was also used for collar stays, buggy whips, and toys. Its flexibility even caused it to be used as the springs in early typewriters.

The comparison to plastic is apt. Think of common items which today might be made of plastic, and it's likely that similar items in the 1800s would have been made of whalebone.

Baleen whales do not have teeth. But the teeth of other whales, such as the sperm whale, would be used as ivory in such products as chess pieces, piano keys, or the handles of walking sticks. And, while scrimshaw is probably the best remembered use of whale's teeth, the intricate carvings were generally done by sailors to pass the time on whaling voyages and were not a mass production industry.

http://history1800s.about.com/od/whaling/f/whaleproducts01.htm
 
Whales are modeled very well in my opinion.

Agreed. Sure, its a short-term bonus, but so what, it doesn't really cost you anything other than some cheap work-boats - its not like you had to devote a ton of extra resources to get the resource. I like the flavor of it.
 
Could casting anti-whaling protesters as barbarians really be seen as an anti-whaling statement?

Well no, it would be the reverse I guess (perhaps how the Japanese view anti-whaling protesters), I simply chose barbarians because I don't know how else it would be done. Seems a bit OTT creating a whole new faction just for anti-whaling ships. It would have to be a boat not associated with any civ, and so that really only leaves barbarians. Unless it was an update of the privateer...
 
Whaling stopped being economically significant long before there were any anti-whaling protesters.
 
For example, most of the Canadian shield has been geologically stable for 3+ billion years, and the water pressure a mile down is left over from the last ice age.

No thanks, we don't want anyone else's garbage. You can look after your own crap.
 
Not that I approve of this politically based post as agree with those who have already said its about balance, but as far as Nuclear Waste is concerned there is really no concern with dealing with it. The American media has misconstrued the issues as American domestic nuclear technology is significantly behind European technology since the last plant we built was a Generation 3 water based plant in 1996 that didn't use Thorium. Nuclear waste can be transmuted in nuclear plants built for that purpose to eliminate the dangerous isotopes. Also any water moderated plant is old and inefficient technology. Plants should be moderated and cooled by carbon 12/salt and He respectively and the 'fuel' should be mostly thorium based. But you dont hear this in the mainstream ultra liberal or conservative media. Watever.
 
I can build a nuclear plant anywhere, but I run the risk of it blowing up. Hmmmmm.....

Okay, Firaxis, you don't understand nuclear power.

This isn't a political statement at all - nuclear disasters have happened and they are much, much worse than oil spills or eating unhealthy. Chernobyl was wiped off the map and made uninhabitable.

It doesn't happen often; but it doesn't happen in civ very often, either. It only happens after the city has been in disorder a few rounds. The only time this is likely to happen is if there is war and that city is captured, or, if you're running slavery and you get the slave revolt - either situation certainly holds real-world potential for a nuclear disaster. Nuclear plants are very, very safe under normal conditions, but if there is any problem with the staff getting to and operating the plant, they are not very safe at all.

If they were attempting to make a political statement, they probably would've included things like oil spills, don't you think? It seems to me you're the one that's being political - political types tend to see everything in political shades and have an inability to just take things for what they are, sometimes.
 
Stuff in deep hole in geologically/hydrologically stable area.

For example, most of the Canadian shield has been geologically stable for 3+ billion years, and the water pressure a mile down is left over from the last ice age.

My wife did some work with the Nuclear Waste Management Organization here in Canada, and it's not quite as simple as stuffing it in a hole. The main problem is that no structure can be designed which will come close to outlasting the half-life. Once it cracks, there is a good potential for leeching into groundwater.

So, they have to decide whether to create an inaccesible structure and go find it again in a few thousand years, dig it all up and rebuild it. Or ... create an accesible structure, which is designed for the materials to be retrieved, but will have to be manned and have security. Either way is problematic with the time scales we're talking about here. The current plan seems to be to go with an accesible structure.

It isn't hard to deal with the ridiculously small amount of high end nuclear waste. It is in fact so easy to deal with the high end nuclear waste that we are storing it in pools at the nuclear reactors indefinitely, because it is both so compact and not that dangerous.

That's only a short-term solution; and it is a very dangerous one. Floods, earthquakes, or terrorist attack could cause decades of stored waste to spill out; possibly directly into lakes and rivers. Quite a few reactors are built in areas that are prone to earthquakes or flooding - some are even built downstream of aging dams and could be washed away in the event of failure.
 
This isn't a political statement at all - nuclear disasters have happened and they are much, much worse than oil spills or eating unhealthy. Chernobyl was wiped off the map and made uninhabitable.

It doesn't happen often; but it doesn't happen in civ very often, either. It only happens after the city has been in disorder a few rounds. The only time this is likely to happen is if there is war and that city is captured, or, if you're running slavery and you get the slave revolt - either situation certainly holds real-world potential for a nuclear disaster. Nuclear plants are very, very safe under normal conditions, but if there is any problem with the staff getting to and operating the plant, they are not very safe at all.

If they were attempting to make a political statement, they probably would've included things like oil spills, don't you think? It seems to me you're the one that's being political - political types tend to see everything in political shades and have an inability to just take things for what they are, sometimes.

I think the nuclear meltdown mechanics you are describing are for an earlier version of civ, not of civ4 which I assume is what you were talking about. Nuclear meltdowns occur in cities that aren't necessarily under revolt and I don't think a revolt even affects the chance of meltdown.
 
This isn't a political statement at all - nuclear disasters have happened and they are much, much worse than oil spills or eating unhealthy. Chernobyl was wiped off the map and made uninhabitable.

You're wrong simply by pluralising nuclear disasters. There was one, it was Chernobyl, and it can be directly correlated to waiving safety in order to run tests, and by 'waiving safety' I mean 'turned off the automatic shutdown'.

There have been no other 'nuclear disasters'. There have been incidents, but despite their negative, newspaper selling publicity, all events like Three Mile Island proved was the robust effectiveness of western reactor design and safety culture. They never got close to anything like Chernobyl.

It doesn't happen often; but it doesn't happen in civ very often, either. It only happens after the city has been in disorder a few rounds. The only time this is likely to happen is if there is war and that city is captured, or, if you're running slavery and you get the slave revolt - either situation certainly holds real-world potential for a nuclear disaster. Nuclear plants are very, very safe under normal conditions, but if there is any problem with the staff getting to and operating the plant, they are not very safe at all.

That was a mechanic not present in Civ 4, which just had a percentage chance of a meltdown every turn.

Which is seperate from the fact that no-one turning up to any modern nuclear reactor would eventually cause it to simply stop. Even in the case of something actually going wrong passive safety designs still work to terminate the reaction without needing any input.

If they were attempting to make a political statement, they probably would've included things like oil spills, don't you think? It seems to me you're the one that's being political - political types tend to see everything in political shades and have an inability to just take things for what they are, sometimes.

It's political in that the supposed meltdown risk of a nuclear reactor is basically a vast falsehood fabricated to pander to anti-nuclear paranoia, and built on a single incident in the entire history of nuclear power generation (since all others, which are hilariously rare, were resolved and contained safely, as intended).

It is just plain annoying that a politically crafted lie is an inherent drawback to nuclear reactors in the game, especially considering, like you said, there's no oil spills in there. With the wide focus of a Civ game, it can't help but come across as incredibly specific to have nuclear reactors just randomly blowing up, with all that implies in the 'nuclear power debate'.
 
out of curiosity, what is the effect of nuclear meltdown in civ4? I don't think I've ever had one meltdwon. Is it like a tactical nuke or ICBM attack? I remember in civ3 they used to melt down all the time :lol:. Annoyed the hell out of me, so I never built them in civ3.
 
out of curiosity, what is the effect of nuclear meltdown in civ4? I don't think I've ever had one meltdwon. Is it like a tactical nuke or ICBM attack? I remember in civ3 they used to melt down all the time :lol:. Annoyed the hell out of me, so I never built them in civ3.

A nuclear meltdown in civ4 is functionally identical to a nuclear bomb explosion (tac nukes and ICBMs also have equal effect). The only difference perhaps being that for the nuclear meltdown the nuclear plant must be destroyed regardless of RNG roll.

That is, unless you use PIG Mod ;) where nuclear meltdowns are much less severe and nuclear plants more balanced.
 
Never did use nuclear power in cIV, I would like to, but I do not like the random - and uncontrolable, inaccurate - meltdowns. It needs to go. It is no good game mechanic. Just up the cost of them and give it an unhappy face as penalty (Anti-nuclear people).
 
Top Bottom