[GS] Which disaster intensity are you using?

2 except for Eygpt where I put it at 4. Doesn't seem to make much difference though.

 

I've seen it a few times, and it does seem to get more dust storms than other deserts.

 

I finally had Mt. Everest in a game now, never seen it before. I've only had Zhangye Danxia once, while Cliffs of Dover, Uluru and Pantanal is in almost every damn game.

 

At first I thought it was because I was at level 3, but I'm also at 3 in this game and there is nothing like that. If I see it again I'm tempted to get the governor promotion that makes the stuff in your city indestructible, settle there and watch the yields pile up again.

 

I've played 2 games each at 2 and 3. I might experiment with 4 soon.

The first 3 I tried was on an island map - bar a couple of volcanoes I was mostly just getting hurricanes that skirted past my cities. However in my current game on pangaea it feels like there's a bit too much going on. One city state almost got wiped out by a megacolossal eruption early on which was quite startling.

I have seen Vesuvius twice but only settled near it once - and have never seen it erupt. In the first game I was told it had erupted but I didn't have a unit in LOS so didn't get to watch

 

The amount of bonus yields from most disasters more than makes up for the destruction caused. And if you have everything clustered in disaster-prone areas...well...what do you expect? GS requires some adjustments in playstyles.

I settled near Eyjakdhekwjrrekeksbbbbwhatver as Mali in the snow and tundra for those sweet yields and dropped the governor who eliminates damage from disasters in and now have an incredibly thriving city with no ill-effects.

 

My first game was at 2. I have moved up to 4 ever since. I have been careful about not chopping so much (to try to hold off droughts), and I avoiding settling/putting districts on stage 1 coastal flood zones. I also leave a few 1 charge builders around my Civ as pseudo-FEMA agents. I haven't tried the dessert or tundra based Civs yet, so I may drop back down to level 3 for one of those.

I like the extra chaos, since the mid-game and later AI itself isn't much of a challenge for me. One of my favorite GS moments was a late game Tornado that tore up 14 tiles worth of improvements, when I was already a full era ahead of everyone else. Mother Nature doesn't care!

 

zero. this is too much for my imagination to get over, that same volcano wakes up in major eruption and calms down in span of 3k years. same with global warming nonsense. all that ocean flooding, no... can not get over this crap. zero.

 

Same. I don't understand the point of it. Do people think it makes the game harder? It doesn't...it effects the AI more than it does you. Does it add more "depth" to the game? Not really. Seems to be mo rhyme or reason to anything besides flooding. I even want to play Russia, who more or less benefits from blizzards, and still don't care. (Russia didn't need a buff...) It's just a nuisance. Damaging my horses so I have to repair, then telling me I can't repair during a drought. Why does a drought even last more than a turn? Or ANY disaster? Hurricanes don't last 15 years...is this supposed to be realistic?

More than anything, the worst part about them, is that there seems to be one just about every turn SOMEWHERE, which rarely matters, and it's one more thing to pop up and annoy you from worrying about the actual game. And you have to make builders just to repair crap even if you don't really need them. Just dumb.

 

I always play at either 3 or 4. More fun that way.

 

I once started next to Zhangye Danxia with Kongo. It was the most glorious game ever - I had three GMs out before anyone else had built a CH... And I've yet to see it again. Mt Everest I see quite a lot, though.

 

4 ... way more fun. Disasters have farther reach too (a volcanic eruption can reach 3 tiles away)

 

As a counterpoint, I settled it very early on in my Phoenicia game. That was a great Petra city and trade hub, but it never got hit by a single dust storm all game.

So in conclusion, I think it's RNG and confirmation bias (Sahara el Beyda being more memorable than a generic desert). The volcano wonders specifically state that they affect the severity (if not the frequency) of the disasters.

On a related note I also had Vesuvius in my empire, but its only eruption occurred before I colonised it.

 

I played a few games at 2, but I've since changed to 4 and will almost certainly leave it there.

 

4 and it needs to be a little more active.

 

I think I've had Zhangye Danxia twice which irks me. I like GPP.

 

4 all the way. Giant map, marathon game, level 4 disasters, and I'm really beginning to hate floods.

 

3 seems pretty fun.

The stacking fertility seems almost like an exploit though. I would have expected they could have capped the bonus to +2 food. Or maybe let it go higher, but have a decay factor, the higher the more 'bonused' the tile is. It would still make settling close to volcanoes something you would want to do. I hope they change this, I don't like mechanics that just feel a little bit unimmersively overpowered.