 |
| |
|
|
satyajedi
|
|
Version 6.0 now ready -- much lower on resources, other improvements
Here it is, after a lot of hard work, my response to the very unsatisfying World Map that came with Civilization III. It is, I hope, a dramatic improvement. Some of the things changed:
- Japan is now in East Asia, as opposed to South East Asia, and is now four islands rather than two.
- Hawaii and Alaska have been greatly reduced in size.
- New Zealand exists, as does Taiwan.
- The Arabian pennisula is now well defined.
- Europe is far larger, with room for several major powers, and is also much better defined. Italy is no longer the flaccid penis of Europe, but a well defined boot. Ireland is more than three forest squares criptically misplaced due North of England. France and Spain don't suck quite so much. Greece has it's own presence and is not connected to Asia Minor. The Mediteranean now has islands; Sicily, Corsica, Crete, Sardina.
- The Milddle East is completely reworked.
-South Africa, which before was a bizarrely sharpened edge to the contininent, is now appropriately round.
- Mexico and Central America have been redone; the Carribean is now more or less accurate.
- North America is larger and more, well, interesting. The Rockies no longer extend to the Pacific Coast, so that western cities such as LA, Seattle and the Bay area are possible. The Northeast is both large enough and resource-filled enough to allow for several major cities. Florida is no longer quite as hideously ugly, I even sort of have a Okechobe eye in Florida.
- South East Asia, likewise, is better defined, and the archipeligo of Indonesia is much better off.
- North Africa (above the Sahara) is now habitable land
- all the starting locations are accurate. That is not to say that the right civilization will be in the right place, but the sixteen starting places reflect the sixteen civilizations (this was not possible in the earlier map in which England, Italy and Japan barely existed). No Civilizations will start in Australia, for example, or South America. This creates a contrast between areas that will logically have major civilizations and areas that probably will go through most of the game without being controlled, simply because nobody is near them. As a result, a colonial period seems logical, if the game plays out the way I suspect it will, particularly in Indonesia, South America, and Australia.
- Many of the strategic resources have been rearranged to encourage colonialism (for example, most of the spice and rubber is away from any major civilization, so that overseas colonies are a necessity). Almost all the oil outside the middle east has been removed, to force the importance of that area. Also, many goods suchs as wheat or cattle have been arranged not in an attempt to make the map geographically accurate, but rather to encourage large historically accurate cities in major city areas such as New York, London, Tokyo, Shanghai, etc.
-Large numbers of barbarian villages have been placed in areas where famous or particularly devastating invading hordes came from, such as Mongolia and Central Asia. All worthwhile potential colonial possessions (such as Indonesia) now have a barbarian village to represent the indigenous population of those areas.
To do this, I had to do some somewhat geographically unrealistic things. The Atlantic and Pacific Oceans are both considerably smaller than they once were (although neither is big enough to cross without an oceanworthy vessel, except at the Bering Straight, which is all that matters gameplay-wise). Europe and North Africa has probably been elongated in order to allow civ games to be historically accurate (if not literally geographically accurate). Furthermore, Central Asia has been sort of squashed between the dramatically rebuilt continents of Europe and Asia.
Likewise, because of other elements of gameplay or just design flaws, there are a few other mistakes I know of. Japan is positioned correctly relative to Korea, but is now incorrect relative to the United States -- it's too far North, and the prospect of moving all of Eurasia south was just too much to bother with that mistake. Australia is now directly South of Papua New Guinea, as opposed to Southeast, and New Zealand is a tad confusing -- it's on the other side of the map from Australia. The Iriquois starting space is farther west than it should be, but their real starting space is too close to Washington DC in my mind.
But also, a lot of the issues beyond coastline, for example, where jungles, forests and grasslands should be on the map I was quite unsure of, especially in India, sub-Saharan Africa, East Asia, and Australia. So those of you who know more about those areas, your input would be greatly appreciated. Still, I hope you'll find this to be what I've designed it to be: the map most conducive to a historically accurate game of Civilization.
I'm really hoping to get some feedback from others on this map, to see how well it plays and how accurate these things are. So send me a line to give me your thoughts to satyanotwar@aol.com. Thanks a lot, and enjoy the map.
-Satya
 Attachment: satya's world map v6[1].25.zip
This has been downloaded 4562 time(s).
Last edited by satyajedi on 12-12-2001 at 01:01
|
|
| |
|
|
|
narmox
|
|
Canada
Jan 1970
time: 05:16
|
|
good work (at least judging from your post)! Can't wait to try it out later this week... But I can't seem to download it. vBulleting tells me it can't find the file, yet it's been downloaded 21 times???
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Wolfshanze
|
|
Looks good, but I did spot some problems...
No Oil at all in Texas, hardly any in Alaska... what's up with that?
One horse for almost all of Europe??? Are you insane? No Spanish Horses, and France, Italy, Germany, England all have to fight over one stupid horse?
No game in England... what ever happened to "the King's Deer?".
England should have more coal, less iron... Germany should have more iron...
Somebody has bought into the "Baywatch/California" myth.... I've lived in California... I've driven though the entire southwest... most of which is one big irrigated desert... plains at best, and yes, that includes San Diego, L.A. and Beverly Hills... if you've ever been out west, IT AIN'T GRASSLAND OUT THERE!!!!
P.S. Where are the California Whales?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Hieraconphant
|
|
Sweden
Nov 2001
time: 06:16
|
|
OOoook, you've got a really weird picture of Scandinavia... Your map would probably describe Scandinavia about right after the iceage, when we still had tundra landscape. Sorry to say, but that was about 10000 years ago (NOT 6000)...
Despite that, your map of mainland Europe and England was a lot better than the original. I hope someone will take the time to improve upon the rest of the world map...
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Satyadg
|
|
Thanks guysm this is the kind of criticism I'm looking for, especially from natives, and I'll post a ner version that incorporates that soon.
In LA, I'll add the whales but should I go for plains instead of grassland? I don't want to go for desert and make the area uninhabitable. What do you think?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
ludwaffe
|
|
la, ca
Nov 2001
time: 21:16
|
|
If you're placing a higher emphasis on historical reality than geographical reality, then horses have to be eliminated from the New World. If horses are used to symbolize any large pack animals, then they could be moved to the Andes and just overlooked as being weird-looking llamas.
California IS way too green in this. Anything south of those fish (who seem to be roun San Fran) should be plains, with maybe a hill dropped in around the San Gabriels. And whale would be a neat touch just off Fran, but would also be good off Alaska.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
jimmyh
|
|
Sunny Old England
Sep 2001
time: 05:16
|
|
Does any one know how to actually start in the correct historic loacations, I would like to start as the English but, but my starting loaction is never correct.
James.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Pyrodrew
|
|
http://apolyton.net/forums/showthre...&threadid=31058
Above link goes into detail about the strategic resources for each region.
Sum up what each person has mentioned:
North America - no Horses
South America - no Horses
Texas - Oil
Alaska - Oil
California - Whales, Plains (-Grasslands)
Between GreatLakes & Rockies - Plains
Quebec - Aluminum & Iron
Germany - Iron & Horses
Italy - Horses
France - Horses
Spain - Horses
England - Coal, Game & Horses
Scandinavia - Grasslands, Hills, & Mountains (-Tundra)
Canada - too narrow?
Greenland - should be 90% tundra (perhaps some snow mountains); 10% hills & grasslands in the southern part)
MiddleEast - Move oil from northern MiddleEast to southern MiddleEast
Malaysia - Oil
I would like to add:
EasternAsia - I believe there were Horses there too.
Spain - +Iron & maybe +Saltpeter (Rock Salt & Sepiolitic Salts are there). From my information - Spain has "some of the most mineralized territory in Western Europe.")
Germany - +Iron... they definitely have Iron.
France - +Uranium & +Coal (1 Aluminum tile could go there too). The French are far more known for their wine then Italy or Spain.
Greece - +Aluminum ("Aluminum was produced from domestic sources of bauxite and alumina and was important in the domestically integrated metal's sector.")
Egypt - SaltPeter you have, need to add +Iron.
Russia - A few more +Aluminum & +Oil couldn't hurt
China - +Aluminum
India - Most of it's resources are in the South part (these primarily include: +Aluminum, +Coal & +Iron ("India is a major minerals producer, ranking among the world's leading producers of bauxite, bituminous coal, iron ore, and zinc.")
Ukraine - +Iron
Turkey - +Aluminum
Poland - maybe +Saltpeter (Poland "was among the leading European and Central Eurasian producers of lime, nitrogen (in ammonia) and salt.")
Australia - +Aluminum, +Uranium, +Iron ("Australia was the world's leading producer of alumina, bauxite, diamond, ilmenite, lead, monazite, opal, rutile, sapphire, and zircon"..."the fourth largest producer of cobalt, iron ore, and uranium")
Footnote: Remember placing Iron & Coal next to each other will allow a player to create the highly desired "Ironworks" building.
Last edited by Pyrodrew on 13-11-2001 at 01:54
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
satyajedi
|
|
Those of you who downlaoded 2.0; I accidentally uploaded not 2.0, but an incomplete earlier version that was without a few last second adjustments. So, I just fixed the mistake with version 2.01. So... that's the one you want. Sorry about the confusion.
I have now uploaded Version 2.0. It contains many of the changes that people have suggested, as well as much of the changes of Alexandre's version 1.1.
Changes from 1.0:
- Coastline: Canada, including Newfoundland and such Canadian islands, is muh improved. Siberia is much more well defined. Scandanavia has warmed up quite a bit, while Greenland has become colder. Iceland is more substantial. Iberia is accurately done (by a native :-)) (thanks to Alexandre for all these improvements). Also, the agriculture in Russia and Easturn Europe has gotten poorer, to be both more historically accurate and to counterbalance Russia's resource strength. Perhaps the most important change, though, is to correct the mistake in which it was possible for a galley or caravel to travel from the west coast of Africa to the Carribean, allowing for horribly easy connection betwen the Americas and Europe. In order to fix this mistake, unfortunately, both the West African and Brazilian coast had to be scaled back, however, both look solid still and this should no longer be a factor.
[Changes from version 1.1: call it bias (being a Southern Italian), but I restored Sicily to it's size from 1.0 and it's connection to Italy. Also, I restored the desert in Egypt, Babylon and Mesoamerica: Alexandre, you need to try playing there, deserts with rivers flowing through them provide *very* good places to create cities (flood plains)].
- Resoures have been entirely and systematically redistributed. In addition to incorporating the comments above, I felt in gameplay that too many resources were availible to too many civilizations, making individual resources of little importance, and not getting into the really interesting things that happen in a world of limited resources. There are now less than 16 of each resource, with some luxery resources numbering as few as 8.
The resources are distributed as follows, with major producers in caps;
Wine: FRANCE, Crete, Spain, Austrailia, Chile, United States (California), Italy (with all respect to Gewertztraimier, Germany was left off  )
Aluminum: AUSTRALIA, UNITED STATES, Russia, South America, Asia Minor, Greece, North Africa
Iron: UNITED STATES (industrial belt region), GERMANY, England, Ukraine, Egypt, India, Italy, Spain, Quebec, Japan
Horses: SPAIN, ASIA MINOR, Scandenavia, Poland, Germany, China, North Africa (Greece was left off b/c my understanding is they imported Persian horses from Asia Minor)
Coal: ENGLAND, UNITED STATES (industrial belt region), Poland, Quebec, India
Ivory: SUB-SAHARAN AFRICA, SRI LANKA / INDIA, Iceland, Siberia
Fur: RUSSIA, UNITED STATES (northeast / New England), Quebec, Siberia / East Russia
Uranium: SUB-SAHARAN AFRICA, SOUTH AMERICA, Russia, Austrailia (this is very limited, and unless you are Russia or Zulu, it will require an aggressive colonial power)
Silk: CHINA, SOUTHEAST ASIA, Japan
Insence: INDIA, China, Central Asia, Japan
Rubber; AUSTRAILIA, SOUTEAST ASIA, SOUTH AMERICA, Siberia, China (like uranium, this will be a very important inclination in the modern period for European nations to colonize!)
Oil: MIDEAST, Siberia, Alaska, Venezuela, United States (Texas), Malaysia (about half is in the MidEast)
Spice; INDIA, SOUTHEAST ASIA, South America
Gems; SUB SAHARAN AFRICA, SOUTH AMERICA, United States (West Coast), India, Austrailia
Dye: SOUTH AMERICA, Austrailia, Mideast
Saltpeter; CHINA, ASIA MINOR, Greece, Spain, Japan, Poland, United States (Southwest). (I really wasn't sure how to evaluate Saltpeter, so in part I gave a lot to Asia minor on two justifications; one, it was a Turkish Sultan who first used gunpowder for military purposes so there must be saltpeter there, and two, because Persia really needs the help)
After this process was complete, I then tried to update the gameplay further by trying to give a boost towards civilizations that got the shaft in starting space. India and had several of it's cattle and wheat taken away, and both will face a world with many barbarians and few goody huts. Europe has become quite a haven for fishing and whaling, as civilizations vy for space to exist. Other than Persia still probably having a big shaft, I'm not entirely sure at this point who is best off, which I think is good, but we definately need further playtesting.
Again, thank you all *very* much for your comments and keep the criticism coming!
-Satya
Last edited by satyajedi on 13-11-2001 at 10:03
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Gods Pet Monkey
|
 |
Melting away on the East Coast of Australia
Nov 2001
time: 15:16
|
|
First of all, I have to say its an impressive map, and it looks quite good, but I haven’t had much time to play it yet.
It seems that you are aiming for a geographically (for both features and resources) correct world, which is something that should be achieved, with out ruining game play.
Anyway, I’m from Australia, and, really, the map that you used (if any) must be by a blind man who lives in Greenland. Your representation of Australia is terrible (mind you, the fraxian version wasn’t much better.
If i may draw your attention to several things, and hopefully you will fix up the Australasian region with your next release.
Firstly, there is no, NO, jungle in Tasmania (that island of the south-eastern tip for those who don’t know). In fact, its a temperate region, much like northern Europe, and can get quite cold. Some forest (not pine) would be a good idea.
On the subject of forests, I see you put plains in Cape York (I sure as hell hope you know something about the geographic structure of Australia) which is the north-western peninsula. Plains? the area is (well, was mostly before colonisation) covered with Rain Forest, consider it less dense jungle, and should thus be covered by the jungle tile. I have never seen a plain in that part of Australia.
Moving right along, that mountain range (mountains for us, really, there are very few mountains, just really tall hills by European standards) near the east coast is named the Great Dividing Range, and really, it separates the east coast from the interior of the continent. The real surprise is that you put JUNGLE west of the Great Dividing Range, when actually its plains that slowly transforms into Desert. This area is where a lot of our non-mined resources come from (I don’t know a better way to put that). Items like wool and some live stock come from there, and I’m sure most nations have products made from Australian wool (although I believe our Beef is more popular).
Heading further west, we find mountains... WTH? that should be desert! Sure, Ayres Rock is in the middle somewhere there, but it isn't THAT big! What’s more, I notice you places uranium in the mountains, and yes, Australia has a lot of that wondrous glowing metal, but its actually mined from forests/rainforests in the northern regions (and has upset a lot of native Aboriginals). Its most definitely NOT found in our desert interior, which have sprung mountains  .
Heading further west, in to the region called Western Australia (they really thought about that name didn’t they?) you seem to get more accurate.
Ill leave Australia there, and head onto New Zealand. Now, I don’t live in New Zealand (and for you Americans out there, we treat NZ like you treat Canada, and vice versa) but I do know that the southern island is covered in mountains, not hills, some very tall mountains in NZ.
Finally, I would like to talk about resources in Australia. We provide a lot of resources to the world out there, and have copious amounts of pretty much everything. We have a lot of coal (mainly used for domestic purposes though), we provide a huge amount of Uranium, are quite abundant in Gold (which doesn’t seem to feature on your map at all! In fact our gold rush was nearly as big as the USAs, and nearly triggered a minor revolution!) We also have a lot of Aluminum (as I can see you represented), iron (as well as other metals), some saltpeter, rubber, and a lot of oil. On the note of Oil, I have to say most of it is actually off shore, in our territorial waters (which our government likes to defend against leaky fishing boats with naval ships), but I believe this Oil should be represented somewhere inland.
The second part of resources is more justification then anything else. Why should Australia have a lot more in such a small area.
1) Because its geographically correct
2) If it hasn’t got anything, your not going to colonise it are you?
The second one is particularly correct. You made the made with no one starting in Australia to encourage colonisation (as it was colonised in the late 1700s, and early 1800s). If you cant get that precious resource from Europe/America, go out and colonise Australia. This is even more important as the AI is expansion-happy, and by the time you can reach the Americas, they probably have South America fully under their belt, so its either conquest, or go home. I noticed (on another Real World map) that the AI doesn’t reach Australia until late Feudal, early Industrial ages, and by then, they have slowed down in their expansion, and you can keep pace with them, thus making Australia a essential part of ones empire if you wish to be self sufficient enough to wage war with who ever you wish (which is a nice thing).
Bah, enough on my home country. I notice that you kept Europe (more specifically Greece was mentioned) disconnected from Asia Minor. Just a sec! wasn’t Constantinople (now know as Istanbul) built in the NARROW join between the European and the Arabic world? Thus putting it in an excellent position for trade, seeing a lot of the items that drifted to Asia Minor from East Asia by trade routes passed across that narrow section of land (and a small channel). Just think that should be added, as it is geographically correct.
Lastly, if you want, I can edit a copy of your map so Australia is as it should be, you can of course, edit it afterwards to balance it out if so needed, just I think it might be best if it at least looks correct
If you’re interested in that, drop me an e-mail, roehr@bigpond.net.au
Gods Pet Monkey
"Where evolution fails, creation takes over"
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Alexandre Madeira
|
|
Viseu
Jan 1970
time: 05:16
|
|
satyajedi, I see you kept most of my terrain changes and improved on them, cool. A few comments:
Didnt know about the desert and river thing , but notice the river in egypt doesnt reach the ocean, it just loops or whatever, hehe, you have to delete part of it next to the coast so it looks like a river
Good work on Sicily.
North africa, are you sure its grasslands? I changed it to plains along with southern italy and sicily to reflect the mediterranean climate, but im not sure thats accurate. Still, north africa? If the south of the iberic peninsula is mostly arid, is north africa better?
About oil, you got the right island for Malasia? Asking, not sure myself, hehe.
I got this old Microprose game, Command HQ, it has some oil fields around the world, think they wouldnt put them there if they werent real, there are 2 in russia, one in north africa near that horse, another more to the south near that elephant and barbarian camp, one in venesuela, one in canada and another in mexico. The one in australasia is definitly not in that island
I'll just make my changes and post em here, leave Australia to you 
Attachment: satya's world map v2.02.zip
This has been downloaded 277 time(s).
Last edited by Alexandre Madeira on 13-11-2001 at 23:38
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Pyrodrew
|
|
GodsPetMonkey - Make the changes to Australia then post it here. Australia desperately needs it.
Satyajedi - On a random Huge map I just pulled up it had 22 irons. Why there is still fights & battles from 22 irons is because many of these irons are placed in clumps and 2nd most AIs & people don't want to give their competition iron (3,2,1Swordsmen). Thus, the earlier resources (iron & horses) could be raised & still have chaos in the beginning... then as time goes on the later resources could become harder to find (20 iron, 16 saltpeter, 14 aluminum, 12 coal, 10 rubber, etc.). Very few resources in the beginning could lead to 1 civ getting a huge drastic lead over the others early on.
Oh, and Hawaii should have atleast 1 jungle tile - pineapples & coconuts don't grow in grasslands.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Alexandre Madeira
|
|
Viseu
Jan 1970
time: 05:16
|
|
Huh, wait a minute, I just noticed we can have Oil in coastal terrain, is this true in the original version or was it a change in the mod i downloaded the other day?
Anyway, I think its cool, since there are many oil platforms at sea around the world.
Now, who knows their locations, at least the big ones?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
satyajedi
|
|
God's pet monkey -
lol, yep, I had no knowledge at all of Austrailian topography, so that was indeed more or less random. Sorry for the travesty to your continent . A redone Austrailia by a native would be much appreciated!
[On the subject of resources, I had considered Austrailia a hot colonial commodity as is -- it is the largest producer of aluminum, and a significant producers of two of the most important late game and extremely rare commodities, rubber and uranium (to get either, you essentially have to colonize or trade with someone who colonized), not to mention wine, dye and gems. Still, if you think it needs more, go for it, keeping in mind issues of resource balance]
Alexandre-
thanks for your continued help . Yep, that is Malaysia (home of the world's talest building!)
Re: North Africa, To be honest, decision between grassland and plains often in my mind come down to gameplay, and I think I made North Africa grassland because I wanted to make it an attactive area for Egypt & European powers to battle over. However, you are probably right that it isn't *that* hot agriculturally, and it is probably attractive enough anyway.
Pyrodew-
that's a good point, I'll look into bringing that into the map.
-Satya
|
|
| |
|
|
|
satyajedi
|
|
What would be neat, is if they thought to make oil resources on coastal squares availible if a nearby city builds an offshore platform. But I suspect that isn't what is happening.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
alph0ns3
|
|
I think i fixed up Quebec...
Added gold and aluminium, moved iron to Labrador and added more grasslands around the St Lawrence and forest to the north.
Attachment: satya's world map v2.03.zip
This has been downloaded 380 time(s).
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
RobRoy
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Gods Pet Monkey
2 new versions already, and by different people
|
I'd volunteer to help, but it looks like there are an awful lot of cooks preparing this broth, already.
Looks pretty nice, so far (whichever version I downloaded). The Med is especially nice, but the mid-east does look a bit short-changed (I doubt anything can really be done about that at this point). Europe as a whole looks good, except for some of the rivers....the Danube is a must, and I'd seriously shorten the Rhone (probably the Rhine too). Some of the other Russian rivers would be nice (Don, Volga), but maybe you left those out intentionally? The Crimea also needs some tidying up.
I read in a stray post that the random map generator ensures that there are enough strategic and luxury resources on the map for each civ in play (16 civs = 16 aluminum, uranium, etc). It just clumps many of them together to encourage trade. Can anyone confirm if this is true. If so, are you planning to follow that rule? Including the clumping?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Gods Pet Monkey
|
|
Melting away on the East Coast of Australia
Nov 2001
time: 15:16
|
|
If I remember correctly, a resource frequency value of 120 means 2 per civ, and seeing most of the valuable resources have a value around this mark, generally there are at least 2 of every resource per civ on the map.
so 16 civs means at least 32 irons.
Hopefully you can hold a monopoly and only sell it to your allies, crippling your enemies. Mind you, this isn't so fun when the AI does it to you.
God's Pet Monkey
"When evolution fails, creation takes over"
Last edited by Gods Pet Monkey on 14-11-2001 at 08:55
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:16.
Apolyton Time is 00:16. |
top of page
|
|
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
12-11-2001 11:28
|