2
$\begingroup$

I'm in the process of making a strategy game. I am using the FAO soil classification system for handling soils; the soil in a given tile has four characteristics:

  • production limit (how much food you can grow if you meet all the other requirements)
  • management requirement (how much active work is needed; this can be irrigation, drainage, difficulty working the soil, etc - it's a bit of an abstraction)
  • fertilizer requirement (how much fertilizer is needed in a particular soil; note here that I am not distinguishing between different kinds of fertilizer ie phosphorous vs nitrogen; fertilizer is a single product)
  • liming requirement (how much lime is required to manage acidity)

The exact values (0 to 100%) are not listed here, just a broad low/moderate/high/etc. I will fine tune the exact values later, but they'll always be estimates as I am by no means an expert on soil. What I'm looking for is a quick once-over to see if I've grossly mislabelled any of these. Where there is a question mark this means either the resources I was looking at (mainly the pdf collection on isric.org) didn't specify a given category (Solonetz/Solonchaks don't have acidity / amount of liming specified, for example; the chemical properties section just focused on the saltiness, so I had to guess) or because a category was too vague (Regosols are the "misc" category so I left them all on Moderate).

In cases where a soil varies widely in certain characteristics (i.e. Gypsisols can vary a lot in terms of how useful they are depending on how much gypsum they have) rather than trying to represent both ends of the spectrum I'm just going with an average.

Climate is handled separately, as is terrain. The focus here is strictly on agriculture, not livestock grazing (which will be governed mainly by terrain) or on forestry (also terrain). I will not be distinguishing between types of crops, or between say, staple grains vs orchards.

I don't need them to be perfect; at the end of the day, they're just for gameplay, not scientific simulation. But I would like to avoid putting in anything that turns out to be blatantly and jarringly wrong.

Soil Type Production Limit Management Req Fertilizer Req Lime Req
Acrisols Low High High High
Albeluvisols Very Low Fairly High High High
Alisols Very Low Fairly High High High
Andosols High Fairly Low Moderate Moderate
Anthrosols Very High Low Low Low
Arenosols Low Very High High Very Low
Calcisols Fairly High Very High High None
Cambisols High Fairly Low Fairly Low Fairly Low
Chernozems Very High Low Low Low
Cryosols Low Moderate High Moderate
Durisols Very Low Extremely High High Fairly High?
Ferralsols Moderate Fairly Low Extremely High Moderate
Fluvisols Very High High Low Low
Gleysols High High Low Moderate
Gypsisols Low? Very High Fairly High Moderate?
Histosols Low Very High High High
Kastanozems High Fairly Low Low Low
Leptosols Very Low Moderate? Moderate? Moderate?
Lixisols Moderate High High High
Luvisols High Fairly Low Low Low
Nitisols Fairly High Low High Moderate?
Phaeozems High Low Low Low
Planosols Low Low High High
Plinthosols Low Very High High Fairly High?
Podzols Very Low High Very High Very High
Regosols Moderate? Moderate? Moderate? Moderate?
Solonchaks Fairly Low High Moderate Moderate
Solonetz Moderate High Moderate Moderate
Umbrisols Fairly High Fairly High Moderate Moderate
Vertisols Moderate? Very High Moderate Fairly Low?
$\endgroup$
10
  • $\begingroup$ Interesting project. I'd ask chatpgt to characterize the soil types you're interested in and see what it says. It probably has FAO etc docunents in its training corpus $\endgroup$
    – N Brouwer
    Commented Apr 23 at 23:19
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ If you can't tell whether the answer is correct or completely made up but plausible sounding to a non-expert, don't ask an LLM. $\endgroup$ Commented Apr 24 at 8:14
  • $\begingroup$ That aside, lime and fertilizer requirements sound like they are a function of the crop type being grown, no? $\endgroup$ Commented Apr 24 at 8:15
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ your biggest problem is those classification are not for agriculture. Thing with the exact same classification can have drasticlly diffrent agricultural potential. vertiol in a one location may be completely useless while in another it may be one of the best. you can easly simplfy this to the 12 major classifications or you may want to look at the US Land Capabilty Classification which is geared towards agricultural usage instead of structure. efotg.sc.egov.usda.gov/references/Delete/2015-11-14/… $\endgroup$
    – John
    Commented Aug 21 at 1:03
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ Soil properties, especially productivity but also chemistry and even physical structure are completely climate and topography dependent, the same volcanic ash that creates the insanely productive allophanic soils of NZ's central plateau where the ground is well drained also creates a dense permanently waterlogged mess of swelling clay where the ash weathers in damp conditions. Light loess derived loams turn to glay podsols under tree cover. You simply can't look at soil in isolation from climate and vegetation cover. $\endgroup$
    – Ash
    Commented Aug 21 at 7:37

0

You must log in to answer this question.

Browse other questions tagged .