|
Author
|
|
Topic: Productivity improvements |  |
|
NeilFaiman
b.02-15-99
|
 |
posted February 09, 2000 10:14
   | 
 |
 |  |
Do I understand all this right?(1) All power plants - power plant, hydro plant, nuclear plant, and solar plant - have the same effect on productivity, and they're non-cumulative, so there's no reason to build more than one. Moreover, Hoover Dam is a hydro plant in every city, so if you have HD, there's no reason to build *any* kind of power plant in any city? (2) Manufacturing plant is not a power plant, so what you want in a city for maximum production is a factory, a power plant of some sort (unless you have HD), and a manufacturing plant. (And offshore platforms, where possible.) (3) A solar plant amounts to a power plant plus a recycling center. But if you have HD, then you have the power plant, so then a recycling center is just as good as a solar plant for handling productivity pollution, and it's a lot cheaper (and you can get it earlier). Is that all right? Thanks, Neil |
BlackJack
b.02-15-99
|
|
posted February 09, 2000 12:18
|
|
| |
(1)and (2) match up with my understanding. As for (3), I build a Mfg Plant and it's pretty certain I'm going to need a solar plant; if I also have offshore platform, it's guaranteed. Hoover and recycling just don't cut it in high production cities.Reminds me how much I hate the ai's cheat in this regard, I mean, just think how much it takes to build a solar plant … grrrrrr …!!!! And I never build power plants, I mean, you've got to dedicate 2-3 engineers to keep up with the pollution.
|
Carolus Rex
b.02-15-99
|
|
posted February 09, 2000 12:58
|
|
| |
I haven't built a solar plant for a while, but I think it eliminates all pollution whereas a recycling centre eliminates two thirds.Carolus |
Paul
b.02-15-99
|
|
posted February 09, 2000 14:22
|
|
| |
To be more precise, a solar plant eliminates all production-related pollution, and a mass transit eliminates all population-related pollution. This means that a city with mass transit and solar plant will never have any pollution. Of course, the late availability of the solar plant means that you will hardly ever actually build one unless you are playing for highest possible score. |
NeilFaiman
b.02-15-99
|
|
posted February 09, 2000 14:59
|
|
| |
If a hydro plant eliminates half of production-caused pollution, and a recycling center eliminates half or two thirds, then a recycling center should be as good as a solar plant if you have the Hoover Dam, shouldn't it? (I understand that the solar plant also reduces global warming; but if you've managed to eliminate all your pollution triangles in all your cities' status boxes, then you shouldn't have a global warming problem, should you?) |
Sten Sture
b.02-15-99
|
|
posted February 09, 2000 15:18
|
|
| |
The pollution calculation is not cumulative, so 50% hydro and 50% recycle reduces shield pollution 75%, not 100%. |
jimm
b.02-15-99
|
|
posted February 10, 2000 16:35
|
|
| |
I think that having a solar plant also
reduces the chance for global warming
in addition to eliminating the production
pollution. (It says this somewhere in the
manual).
jm
|
geofelt
b.02-15-99
|
|
posted February 10, 2000 23:21
|
|
| |
Assuming you have mass transit to control population pollution, hoover/hydro lets you have 40 pollution free shields at deity. Recycling gets you 60 shields. Solar gives you unlimited shields.
If you have a high production Island of one square, don't worry about pollution; ocean squares don't get them. |
BlackJack
b.02-15-99
|
|
posted February 11, 2000 13:35
|
|
| |
And that global warming reduction applies to fallout from nuclear war. After an exchange of 2-3 nukes, that sun just gets brighter and brighter 'til the swamps start to set in. But with 2-3 solar plants, limited nuking is no problem. W/4-6, the sky's the limit.
| |
Apolyton Civilization Site Forums-archives
