Desertifcation

[CodenameB]

Perhaps someone has thought of this before but I didn't see any other posts. After I made my post about deforestation in the congress forum, I was wondering if the game code couldn't be changed to make it so rather than the world changing into grasslands->moors->heaths following deforestation, it instead would change from grassland to mudflats. (Or perhaps grassland->moor->mudflat).

This way, there would be a serious consequences to leaving huge areas of the world deforested. No animal spawns of any kind, no roots or nettles. All one would need to do is make it so that no clay can be found on these spawned mudflats and it would motivate an interesting environmental movement. "Progress is progress, and progress must grow!" vs "Progress progresses to fast!"

Besides, I can't be the only one who wants to see more aspects of the effect of industrialization on the world. I personally love the idea of being given this nice, lush world, and being able to completely ruin and despoil it if we are not careful. It adds more realism, and possible conflict over resources.

(While we're at it, perhaps water pollution from kilns, smelters, and tanning beds being put too close to water sources? Makes it unpotable and stops fish and mussel spawns.)

[BWithey]

Perhaps someone has thought of this before but I didn't see any other posts. After I made my post about deforestation in the congress forum, I was wondering if the game code couldn't be changed to make it so rather than the world changing into grasslands->moors->heaths following deforestation, it instead would change from grassland to mudflats. (Or perhaps grassland->moor->mudflat).

This way, there would be a serious consequences to leaving huge areas of the world deforested. No animal spawns of any kind, no roots or nettles. All one would need to do is make it so that no clay can be found on these spawned mudflats and it would motivate an interesting environmental movement. "Progress is progress, and progress must grow!" vs "Progress progresses to fast!"

Besides, I can't be the only one who wants to see more aspects of the effect of industrialization on the world. I personally love the idea of being given this nice, lush world, and being able to completely ruin and despoil it if we are not careful. It adds more realism, and possible conflict over resources.

(While we're at it, perhaps water pollution from kilns, smelters, and tanning beds being put too close to water sources? Makes it unpotable and stops fish and mussel spawns.)

In the current environment, as presented, it's far more likely it would turn to grasslands, moors, or heaths.. The area is very wet, and unless the ground is constantly being pounded flat, the grass will return. It'd have to be much drier to desertify.

[Alistair]

Add more realism.

In before Realism vs. Gameplay argument.

But in regards to your suggestion; that would make it too easy to grief. -1

[CodenameB]

Perhaps someone has thought of this before but I didn't see any other posts. After I made my post about deforestation in the congress forum, I was wondering if the game code couldn't be changed to make it so rather than the world changing into grasslands->moors->heaths following deforestation, it instead would change from grassland to mudflats. (Or perhaps grassland->moor->mudflat).

This way, there would be a serious consequences to leaving huge areas of the world deforested. No animal spawns of any kind, no roots or nettles. All one would need to do is make it so that no clay can be found on these spawned mudflats and it would motivate an interesting environmental movement. "Progress is progress, and progress must grow!" vs "Progress progresses to fast!"

Besides, I can't be the only one who wants to see more aspects of the effect of industrialization on the world. I personally love the idea of being given this nice, lush world, and being able to completely ruin and despoil it if we are not careful. It adds more realism, and possible conflict over resources.

(While we're at it, perhaps water pollution from kilns, smelters, and tanning beds being put too close to water sources? Makes it unpotable and stops fish and mussel spawns.)

In the current environment, as presented, it's far more likely it would turn to grasslands, moors, or heaths.. The area is very wet, and unless the ground is constantly being pounded flat, the grass will return. It'd have to be much drier to desertify.

Perhaps swamps then. The idea being more about the effect of industry than creating an accurate climate simulator.

Add more realism.

In before Realism vs. Gameplay argument.

But in regards to your suggestion; that would make it too easy to grief. -1

Ah, but that's the whole point you see. Perhaps you mean that people will attack others soil spots and the like buy wiping out the trees. Easy to fix by building a wall. And if the point is denying hunting, you can't honestly tell me that purposefully cutting down hundreds of trees makes easy greifing. That's dedicated griefing, like build a million straw baskets. Hell, if someone really wanted they could still do it with the way the current system works.

[spectacle]

Desertification isn't realistic at all in the northern europeish setting of this game, where it rains so much that plants will grow pretty much everywhere except on bare rock, trees or not. The acre clay that makes up the mudflats in the game must be toxic to plant life to explain why the mudflats aren't overgrown already.

[serpentyngallery]

Desertification isn't realistic at all in the northern europeish setting of this game, where it rains so much that plants will grow pretty much everywhere except on bare rock, trees or not. The acre clay that makes up the mudflats in the game must be toxic to plant life to explain why the mudflats aren't overgrown already.

but on the same token, it can't be that hostile as it allows one to direcly plant grass ontop of it that will outlast any attempts to change it back.

[Jackard]

It adds more realism

the irony here is that it wouldnt

[Wolfang]

It adds more realism

the irony here is that it wouldnt

lol

[AnnaC]

Isn't this gameplay mechanic already in the game?

The Hearthland's geography does already get ridiculously changed as a result of Hearthling activity, and for the most part, it is irreversible change.

[Jackard]

yes it is he just wants more mudflats for whatever reason