Two things I think are terrible design

JesseS

Warlord
Joined
Jun 11, 2020
Messages
144
A capped mechanic:
Once all ice on earth is melted, nothing can get worse. Why should anyone reduce their CO2 emission after the irreversible is done? The few ones who "reduce" it, did not do it for ecological reason but for the diplomatic one. My understanding of the evolution of global warming is rather limited, so I might say something non-sensical but... why this do not lead to a global game-over? If the Earth becomes uninhabitable, this should also lead to the end of all civilizations (and here: to the end of the game for everyone). Do not see it as a "hard" Game Over, but more like removing Food from tiles, leading to global rebellion and depopulation througth seething and starvation...
In the end, I think I am starting to figure out why I kind of disliked Apocalypse mode: the CO2 mechanic was already weird (and not realistic to some degree). Going wild on CO2 is leading to sudden random destruction instead to global waning of all civilizations was kind of a last straw for this mode. I understand why Apocalypse is more into "spectacular" and "RNG" approach (so: it was never made to please me), but this is highlighting me how the CO2 mechanic is quite weird to begin with outside of the Apocalypse mode.

Yeah, I was really disappointed by the implementation of Apocalypse mode for this reason. Like, random meteors tied to CO2 emissions? Why?

I would have been so much more interested in it if they'd stuck with a more scientifically-grounded worst case scenario for climate change. Imagine:
  • forests burn almost immediately after regrown (without adding extra yields)
  • jungles burn and turn into plains tiles that quickly loose their fertility
  • freshwater lakes next to farms and cities dry up
  • all non-forested plains tiles next to desert progressively turn into desert
  • every river starts to flood, and floodplains are inundated nearly every turn (again without any bonus yields)
  • tundra turns into "submerged" tiles as the permafrost melts
  • aqueducts stop providing regular fresh water from mountains
  • seas rise up to the ~70 meter rise that would actually happen if all land ice melted.
 

leif erikson

Game of the Month Fanatic
Administrator
GOTM Staff
Supporter
Joined
Feb 2, 2003
Messages
28,815
Location
Plymouth, MA
Moderator Action: Some posts edited and others deleted. Please stick to the effects of global warming in game play. Discussing real world events is beyond the scope of the game threads.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889
 

oSiyeza

Prince
Joined
Sep 27, 2013
Messages
588
Location
Spain
Yeah, I was really disappointed by the implementation of Apocalypse mode for this reason. Like, random meteors tied to CO2 emissions? Why?

I would have been so much more interested in it if they'd stuck with a more scientifically-grounded worst case scenario for climate change. Imagine:
  • forests burn almost immediately after regrown (without adding extra yields)
  • jungles burn and turn into plains tiles that quickly loose their fertility
  • freshwater lakes next to farms and cities dry up
  • all non-forested plains tiles next to desert progressively turn into desert
  • every river starts to flood, and floodplains are inundated nearly every turn (again without any bonus yields)
  • tundra turns into "submerged" tiles as the permafrost melts
  • aqueducts stop providing regular fresh water from mountains
  • seas rise up to the ~70 meter rise that would actually happen if all land ice melted.

I mean, comets are actually cool in the game but:
  • Disasters were so badly implemented, that volcanoes disappeared as the game. progressed to make room for other disasters, and were not balanced to map sizes.
  • They should add a separated countdown before they strike and not make them tied to global warming.
  • Climate disasters should not magically disappear in the final stage.
  • The self-disasters attack should be removed. I dont need to explain why the idea is just stupid.
  • Soothsayers should be changed so their abilities ca be used diplomatically or offensively.
  • The appeal the gods competition is terrible they should change it so the loser suffers a plague-like disaster.
  • The repair mechanics should be reworked and they should change mechanically the effects of the disasters, adding zombie or alien invasions for example.
  • There should be a progression of disasters towards the apocalypse.
  • They said they added bigger versions of current disasters, but it does not show at all.
  • Aid request are still broken
The mode was a wonderful idea IMHO, however it seems that they went with the implementation of the first draft of the ideas they came with, with no real afterthought. Also, It seems that they just did not took any of the time needed to implement any of the mechanics properly. Honestly, they dropped the ball hard on this one. As if they are not really concerned by quality, balance or integration of mechanics, because it is optional content.
 
Last edited:

agonistes

wants his subs under ice!
Joined
May 30, 2007
Messages
2,528
Location
Vermont
The global warming is actually one area where RP meets strategy successfully.

You choose to stay green, others don’t. You can do nothing about it, or you can dow and pillage industrial zones. I imagine a pillaged coal plant is not using coal?

You can keep the city and convert to green or leave pillaged.

Either way, the ‘unfair’ mechanic seems somewhat realistic.

They could even add in acid rain that is caused by one civ but hits another.
 
Top Bottom