clearing jungles

[dewback]

Since jungle tiles lower the health of cities... is it enough to clear all the tiles of jungle that are in the workable "fat cross"? or do the jungle tiles beyond the workable area have any effect on city health?

[Quillan]

Clearing just the fat cross is enough to remove the negative health from jungle. You lose out on any benefit you might get later from Environmentalism, but jungle is utterly worthless otherwise; I'd much rather clear cut it and put something else in its place.

[Urban Ranger]

I have no idea why Firaxis made jungles so bad. It seems rather absurd to me.

[johnmcd]

Originally posted by Urban Ranger
I have no idea why Firaxis made jungles so bad. It seems rather absurd to me.

It would be cool if with replaceable parts of whatever you could clear fell them for shields, like forest, it would certainly add interest to the whole 'chop 'em down' decision.

[couerdelion]

Why are they so bad?

Originally posted by Urban Ranger
I have no idea why Firaxis made jungles so bad. It seems rather absurd to me.

Surely this just adds variation to the game. Don't forget that the jungles have the same effect on the AI so it's still a fairly level playing field - ignoring difficulty levels.

Jungles seem to me to be better than Ice or Desert.

[axi]

Of course they are. Ice tundra and desert are permanent. Jungles have fine grassland beneath them.

Jungles should give half the shields of a forest when chopped, reveal the equivalent of shielded grassland when freshly chopped and then after a few turns revert to plains (lose 1 food). Also make jungles regrow twice as fast as forests. Some specials should be available only when there is enough jungle around and vanish when it is chopped (I had proposed such an idea for forests as well).

[couerdelion]

Originally posted by axi
Jungles should give half the shields of a forest when chopped, reveal the equivalent of shielded grassland when freshly chopped and then after a few turns revert to plains (lose 1 food). Also make jungles regrow twice as fast as forests. Some specials should be available only when there is enough jungle around and vanish when it is chopped (I had proposed such an idea for forests as well).

Seems a little too detailed for me and probably not a material change to the game. It very much doubt that it could be done with a game mod.

Why not suggest also that Lions are at least as dangerous as Bears and that they have at least the movement of a scout. Perhaps add early manufactures as a happy resource, make sulphur or similar resource a requirement for muskets, enable trade blockading, remove stone as a strategic resource or replace with the requirement that the civ must have a hill or mountain. Let Barbarians develop culture?

Sure there could be many changes but jungles don't really need any changes.

[tetley]

It's a weird feeling when my worker's clearing jungle right on top of elephants and I have to remind myself I don't need to station a warrior there to protect him from the elephants.

[snafuc4]

Originally posted by couerdelion
Why not suggest also that Lions are at least as dangerous as Bears and that they have at least the movement of a scout. Perhaps add early manufactures as a happy resource, make sulphur or similar resource a requirement for muskets, enable trade blockading, remove stone as a strategic resource or replace with the requirement that the civ must have a hill or mountain. Let Barbarians develop culture?

Seems reasonable to me. Anyway, if barbs can't develop culture how come their late game cities have a full fat cross development?

[Urban Ranger]

Re: Why are they so bad?

Originally posted by couerdelion
Surely this just adds variation to the game. Don't forget that the jungles have the same effect on the AI so it's still a fairly level playing field - ignoring difficulty levels.

-1 food and -0.4 health? That doesn't make any sense to me at all. Jungles are the most productive places on earth.

Originally posted by couerdelion
Jungles seem to me to be better than Ice or Desert.

Sure, they are the least productive places

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by couerdelion
Why not suggest also that Lions are at least as dangerous as Bears and that they have at least the movement of a scout.

Nah.

Bears are stronger than lions, and lions don't live in jungles.

[Martin the Dane]

Originally posted by couerdelion
make sulphur or similar resource a requirement for muskets, enable trade blockading, remove stone as a strategic resource or replace with the requirement that the civ must have a hill or mountain.

I like the idea of sulphur.
About stone, would it be possible to mod the quarry so that you could build one on a hill triggering a stone resource, but killing any food that might be there, (turning a grass hill into plains hill)

[Deity Dude]

I like the sulphur and the blockading ideas - I'm fine with stone with way it is maybe tone it and marble down a little (25% help for wonders as opposed to 50%).

[joncnunn]

A glance around 1000 AD of the new world in a game starting in 4000 BC via world builder will show that the barbs can build at least one culture building. Maybe it's the castle?

Originally posted by snafuc4

Seems reasonable to me. Anyway, if barbs can't develop culture how come their late game cities have a full fat cross development?

[Blake]

Barbs can build Monolith, Castle and (any?) wonders. I believe that monoliths and castles both go obsolete for the barbs fairly quick so there's only a short window of oppurtunity for a barb city to get culture going.