Building deletion?

[Michlo]

Greetings,

I see nothing on this in the guide and I've done a quick search on the forums to no avail.

Is it really impossible to delete unwanted buildings now?

Cheers.

[Solver]

It is, but there's no reason you'd want to delete them .

[Michlo]

Thank you for your reply but on the latter note you are wrong.

a) If you take over a city that has pollution producing buildings such as a coal plant you would want to replace it.

b) We've always had the option before and options in games are good.

:P

[Solver]

Hmm, I find that the buildings that give minus health are so useful as production boosters that I'd rather not delete them. But yeah, we've always had the option .

[Michlo]

Why would you keep a coal plant if you could replace it with a hydro plant or even nuclear in order to get the same production benefit without the penalty?

[Solver]

If you build a hydro plant, doesn't the coal plant go away automatically?

[Will9]

You can just build the replacement and the original will go away when it is done. BTW, I'd say the -2 from coal plants is not nearly as bad as the risk of Nuclear plants.

[Michlo]

Odd, because I have cities I took from Japan which have coal plants and now nuclear plants.

And surely the results of the occasional meltdown aren't as bad as sustained pollution?

Oh and speaking of automatic replacement, I find it odd that I'm still offered the opportunity of building hydro plants in cities powered by the Dam.

[patcon]

Originally posted by Michlo
Oh and speaking of automatic replacement, I find it odd that I'm still offered the opportunity of building hydro plants in cities powered by the Dam.

The reason for this is to protect against lost "power" if the city with the Dam is lost. I don't bother doing this because I don't figure on losing cities that important to my economy, but if my only option for the Dam city was a vulnerable location and my other cities had nothng better to build I might hedge my bets and build hydro plants.

[Jaybe]

A city with a coal plant gives a "-2 power plant" in the unhealth listing. If a hydro or nuclear plant is added that -2 disappears, even if the coal plant is still there in the buildings list.

[Will9]

Originally posted by Michlo
Odd, because I have cities I took from Japan which have coal plants and now nuclear plants.

And surely the results of the occasional meltdown aren't as bad as sustained pollution?

An occasional meltdown would be Civ's version of pollution. Meltdowns and nuclear explosions cause global warming. Not being able to get your population 2 higher is not nearly as bad as having to lose 5 people, lose much infustructure (which will cause more unhappiness and unhealthines that make even harder to recover), and the fact that you could temporarily lose a few squares.

[Michlo]

Thank you for all the replies.