 |
|
TickeBoy
|
|
Sweden
Nov 2001 time: 06:16
|
|
I hope people realise that there should be at least one Uranium source in north Scandinavia to simulate real-world conditions. Although you will not find any source of the Scandinavians being mayor exporters of Uranium, this is because the Swedes are not especially fond of mining fuel to powerplants they do not even approve of!
But nevertheless we are still sitting on the world's third largest source of Uranium here in Scandinavia! So it should be an option for the Civ player to exploit...
|
|
|  |
 |
|
PMLF
|
|
Rio de Janeiro,Brazil
Jul 2000 time: 05:16
|
|
Brazil exports a lot of iron (I think that it's the country that most exports it). Also, There are many oil pltaforms in Brazilian sea, as it is impossible to be added, I guess that the best is to add some oil in Brazilian coast.
So, add oil in Brazilian coast and in the north of Brazil and iron in Brazilian north and northeast.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
nicbeam
|
|
California
Nov 2001 time: 05:16
|
|
While i hate to be the one with negative criticism, here it goes: The maps have been very Euro-centric or more accurately very Western-centric. Europe has an unrealistic abundence of resources. Clearly this is because many people on this thread are European and say "my country has this resource", and so it is added in. While they may have that resource, do they really have enough to supply an entire civilization? Same with oil in Texas. Texas does not have enough oil to supply the entire U.S. and certainly not enough to allow the U.S. to trade oil to other nations. Therefore Texas should not have 2 oil resources.
On a similar note, no one here is from Africa, and so the African continent has been underrepresented. Some things i've noticed: Kalahari Desert should be smaller and more to the west. The massive mountain range in South Africa does not exist. The lower three mountains (Drakenbergs) should stay but the land north of that is high land (between 1,000 and 2,000 m, but not really mountainous. The rain forest is much to large. There is a good 2,000 km between the Kalahari and the forests. Somalia is desert, not fertile grassland. There are two small pockets of mtns in the Sahara, and the Sahara is much too large.
Finally the people of west Africa used iron tools/weapons and had cavalry. Currently they have no access to these resources. In reality, they traded gold and salt to the muslim berbers of north Africa, but the people of the middle east and north Africa don't have 2 iron deposits on this map. Therefore this historically significant trade is impossible. Not knowing a thing about geology, i don't know where iron is, but i do know it got to this areas. Perhaps more deposits in Egypt or the Arabian pennisula.
I can make these changes but will not have time until tuesday, and i imagine the map will look very different by then.
P.S. Docken's last map is the best version so far (in my not so very humble opinion)
P.P.S. The Kongo/Zaire River should be included
|
|
|  |
 |
|
nicbeam
|
|
California
Nov 2001 time: 05:16
|
|
Kaptnwakky, i like the changes in attempt to make the Western U.S. look more realistic; however, i don't think the Great Salt Lake should be included because it will be used for irrigation, and because it is a great salt lake , it shouldn't be able to be used for irrigation.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Alexandre Madeira
|
|
Viseu
Jan 1970 time: 05:16
|
|
Whoa, lots of posts!
Ok, I took Kaptnwakky's version and did a few changes:
PMLF: Replaced the Coal in Brazil and added a bunch of Iron. If Brazil also has good ammounts of coal, let me know so I or someone else can add it back.
Docken: your changes in 2.08 look good, but Kaptnwakky's 3.0 made different changes to Australia, perhaps you could check it out and comment or do further changes to Australia in the version I'll post here.
Evgeny: My knowledge of Russia is not that great , I just fixed the older version a bit, the Ural mountains were way off. Kaptnwakky's version has lots of changes to Russia, how is it now? (Oh, I forgot to add the russian starting location in 2.07)
nicbeam: That post was mean, think the cold war ended some years ago 
Kaptnwakky: Ok, you did lots of changes, most of it looks good to me. I removed some oils, I think we should not represent offshore oil in nearby land because we would end up adding a bunch of them all over the world.
Minor modifications to Italy, and, the Iberic Peninsula... God! It now looks just like the real thing (coast wise)! I had to keep some of the plains in northern iberic pen. because the coast looks better with them, but as far as Portugal goes, only southern portugal is arid, the rest is green Hmm, fixed the Istambul area so you can cross it without needing a boat Eastern Asia looks good, I think, so does Africa.
SPWhite, added some more Iron to India. I disagree with having more than one oil field in a specific location, unless its a hot spot like the middle east. Remember, one oil field is enough to build as many oil requiring units as you want, extra are for trade. Added one in central russia.
Docken: Sure, I'll try 
Barnacle Bill: Yea, we could use a hacking program to move units 
TickeBoy: Added some uraniun to scandinavia
Nicbeam: No time right now to check out Africa, not gona be home this weekend, maybe someone can do it during the weekend, or I may try when I get back.
Huh, can we irrigate from sea? I think in civ3 we can only irrigate when next to a river or other irrigated square.
Well, here's 3.1, I havent had that much time to work on it, so I may have missed some stuff that needs changing.
Attachment: satya's world map v3.1.zip
This has been downloaded 68 time(s).
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
Pyrodrew
|
|
1.Placed forests in the Northeastern US. Much of these forests were cut down for timber during the expansion of America.
2.Made Scandavia better alligned with Greenland. Re-added the small tundra islands north of Scandavia & Russia. I made these islands smaller than they should be.
3.Realistically, Iceland is actually very green & beautiful with nice hills. I don't think they even have a "snow-capped mountain", but I left 1 in there anyways.
4.Slightly adjusted some start positions by 1 tile for game balance so all the Civs are not crammed together in small area.
5.India is the 4th largest producer of coal & thus received a coal.
6.Replaced a lot of unnecessary 'sea' & 'coast' in the North Pole area with ocean. This will help the AI not waste as much time in that area early on & settle in better areas.
7.Some Barbarian Villages were far too close to starting positions, these were moved a few squares further away.
8.I started to modify some of nicbeam's suggestions (desert Somalia, change east african mountains to hills, etc.)... then I stopped once I read he when he said he would do it on Tuesday. He can improve upon what I did.
GameBalance Adjustments for the Greeks & Romans:
1.The Roman starting position has the French to the northwest, the Germans to the north, and the Greeks to the east. To the south is sea also limiting their expansion, by the time they get ships Egypt will have colonized much of Northern Africa. Rome is by far the hardest starting position.
2.The Greek starting position is also surrounded by other civilizations, but atleast they have a somewhat larger area they can colonize.
So for better game balance:
1.Gave Roman start position spices since cooking is a strong part of the Italian culture.
2.Gave Roman start position 1 goody hut.
3.Placed additional fish for Roman & Greek start positions, and gave each a cow.
Future Projects:
1. Australia could be refixed (Missing GreatBarrier Reef, Gems, etc.).
2.Someone could work on the tundra islands north of Canada. The ones there don't look exactly right.
Attachment: satya's world map v3[1].3.zip
This has been downloaded 91 time(s).
|
|
|  |
 |
|
jimmyh
|
|
Sunny Old England
Sep 2001 time: 05:16
|
|
Ok, I've found out where unit positions are stored in the SAV file, I'm sure there is also some thing that tells what Civ they belong to, I've got to go out right now, but if you want I can write a program to change unit positions.
Let me know what you think.
James.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
PMLF
|
|
Rio de Janeiro,Brazil
Jul 2000 time: 05:16
|
|
Yes, Brazil produces coal too, in Santa Catarina (Southern Brazil). Also, we "produce" horses in the center and in the south of the country.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Chillion
|
|
Phoenix AZ
Nov 2001 time: 22:16
|
|
hey im just a quiet observer... but damn guys, wow.
my future includes much lost sleep if theres this many dedicated people working on good maps for this awesome game. I would like to personally thank you all, and my hard drive thanks you as well for the 50 million versions of satyas map =D
I'm sure theres alot of folks just watchin on the sidelines and enjoying the great gameplay you guys are all working to get us. I would just like to say thank you.
And just to make note of the too many resources comment - that is good. It makes the map more about your strategy than your starting loc, which is something at least I prefer.
Anyway enough out of me. Thanks again!
Chillion
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Pyrodrew
|
|
quote: Originally posted by PMLF
Yes, Brazil produces coal too, in Santa Catarina (Southern Brazil). Also, we "produce" horses in the center and in the south of the country. |
We have to focus on what each region excels at, not just what they produce. Realistically, many of the resources can be found in many many places, but than the strategic resources lose their strategic value.
What Brazil excels at...
"Brazil produces bauxite, columbium, gemstones, gold, iron ore, kaolin, manganese, tantalum, and tin from world-class deposits and exports them to the global marketplace. In Latin America, particularly within the Southern Cone Common Market (Mercosur), Brazil continued to be the leading producer of aluminum, cement, ferroalloys, gold, iron ore, manganese, steel, and tin."
Top 3:
Bauxite, Alumina & Aluminum = Aluminum
Gold = Gold
Iron Ore = Iron
What else:
Gemstones = Gems (a few)
Regarding India - I would agree with India having a few less spices and/or incense. Where I positioned the coal requires the player to put a city on Incense (thus losing that incense) to get both the coal & iron within the same city radius. The iron & coal are understated if anything...
"Historically, mining and metallurgical activities in India can be traced back for about 6,000 years. Mineral resources are an extensive wide variety, ranging from bauxite, copper, bituminous coal, diamond, gold, iron ore, manganese and zinc, to a host of industrial minerals. Most of the mineral deposits are in the south and central highlands of the country. India is a major minerals producer, ranking among the world's leading producers of bauxite, bituminous coal, iron ore, and zinc. The main mining industry is the production of steaming coal for power generation. Coal provides about 60% of the country's energy requirements. Including peat and lignite, it accounts for an estimated 40% of the value of all mineral production. Iron ore, primarily from surface operations, accounts for an estimated 40% of the value of all metallic mineral production. Approximately 50% is used domestically for steel production, with the balance exported. Aluminum is the only nonferrous metal for which an adequate domestic ore (bauxite) resource is available.
quote: you may have already been told this, but u could throw the aztecs into south america. u said you left australia and s.america alone but s.america would be ideal. |
I'm indifferent to where the Aztecs start, but either way for gameplay reasons the path between North & South America should not be blocked with 100% jungle. I believe I opened up a space or 2 with grasslands so the AI would more likely gradually build cities down that way (a wall of jungle prevents that).
Last edited by Pyrodrew on 18-11-2001 at 05:46
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Albatou
|
|
Ahh, more corrections! heh.
The oil spot in the south of Alaska shouldn't be there. There is some offshore oil in southern Alaska, but not enough to matter in a strategic sense, like the north slope production.
Hmm, more about Alaska.....
The Aleutian peninsula should go further (that peninsula that goes of to the southwest of the state) The island arc that goes off of that goes all the way to Kamchatka (the peninsula that points at Japan)
There is a second chain of mountains in the north of alaska. Mostly qualify as hills.
If I get around to it I'll rework Alaska and post it here. (Aaron is REALLY wishing they had glacier terrain)
The southern shore of the Caspian sea should be forest or tropical forest. I've read it's the most fertile area of Iran. (ie, grassland should underlie it)
Georgia, that is, the former soviet republic of georgia, should be forested. As should Chechnya, immediately to it's north. (The western half of the northern slope of the Caucausus mountains)
The eastern half of that northern slope should fade into desert as it approaches the Caspian sea (I forget what you did, not looking at map at moment)
The area between the Himalayas and Mongolia needs reworking. There's a continuous band of mountains that pretty much abuts the border of the old Soviet Union all the way to Mongolia. You have it as open desert.
I don't see the Yangtse river in China. Should snake up all the way to Tibet through the Sichuan basin. I don't remember if you included the yellow river.
The highest mountain in Cameroon is right on the coast, fading off into hills further inland.
The arctic sea is NOT NAVIGABLE. Sure, nuclear submarines and icebreakers can do it, but this did quite a bit to isolate Russia. Archangelsk and Murmansk are at least seasonal ports, and I know in the middle of the summer they can get barges past point Barrow.....BUT
to simulate this eastern Siberia and the Canadian islands should abut the top of the map. (I'm really wishing for glacier terrain again)(simulate sea ice)
All for now, byebye!
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Albatou
|
|
Ohyeah, I remember now! There's something very screwy about the rivers. Not the placement, but...
before I get engineering, there seem to be many spots where I can cross rivers without a movement penalty. Those same spots can't be directly irrigated, and don't get the river trade bonus. I started in the Roman spot, and found this common in the European rivers.
I think the graphical representation of rivers does not directly correspond to the information in the squares; ie it'll paint a river next to squares that have "river adjacent" toggled. A road from one "river adjacent" square to another does not enhance movement before engineering. (finally, "river adjacent" squares can be irrigated directly, and get the river trade bonus)
So just to be safe, you might want to try clicking on each side of all the rivers while having "river" selected in the pallate.
all for now
|
|
|  |
 |
|
jimmyh
|
|
Sunny Old England
Sep 2001 time: 05:16
|
|
Ok, I have a very basic save game editor if any one wants it.
So far you can edit the year and unit positions.
At the moment i've no idea which unit belongs to which Civilization so change positions could be a nightmare.
The best way to edit the positions is to start an earth map and then save it at the very start and then load the map up in the editor and load up the save game with my editor and change your positions using the positions in the map editor.
I shall continue to look for which unit belongs to which Civ.
And one thing I can't find is where the money value is stored!!!
Cheers.
James.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Albatou
|
|
Modified Alaska and a bit of the Yukon Territory.
Placed gold close to actual historical positions (Fairbanks, Nome, and Yukon)
Added the Brooks Range, the Tannana hills, changed the Alaska peninsula and the Aleutians. Added one fur resource, a whale for the Point Barrow Eskimos, and a game next to the oil
(I've worked at Prudhoe Bay. You wouldn't believe how many caribou there are)
As a lark I added a whale near the tip of Baja California (I know there are lots of gray whales that migrate by there)
Northern British Columbia, the rest of the Yukon Territory, and the adjacent part of the NW Territories also need work, but I don't have maps of them with me to use. (unlike Alaska, I did have a map to look from)
Rant:
OMFG!!! What in God's name were they thinking when they decided you can't have plains squares adjacent to tundra squares!!! Really, there are parts of Alaska that are "moderately fertile" that would qualify as plains, but NOoooo.
Detail: Every time I would attempt to place a plains square adjacent to a tundra square, all the adjacent tundra would turn into grassland. Every time I tried to put tundra adjacent to a plains square, all the adjacent plains squares turned to grassland. GRRRR!!
And ignore my previous postulation about how rivers work. I don't understand and truly dislike how they implemented them. I gave up and just put the Yukon River so it'll appear where it oughta be.
All for now.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
AlmightyBob
|
|
WOW! you guys are doing a great job! I first downloaded the file when it came out. It wasn't very good at all a 2 out of 5 tops, so I put it off and decided that I would play the CIV 2 map until a better one came out, well I'm certian that this map is much better a 5 out of 5 and getting better everyday. there were somethings I would like to point out for you to consider
1. For the stratigic and luxurie resources the max of anyone you should have is 16, since this is the max number ov civs you can have. If anything you should have a few less to make things interesting, from 12 to 15.
2. Babylon's starting position is to low, the city of babylon historicaly was located near modern day Bagdad in Iraq, your map has it to far south.
3. No horses in North America. There were no horses in north america untill the spainiard imported them in the 1500's.
4. No oil in texas. There may be oil there but its not enough to be significant.
5. More oil in N Africa I know that Libia's major export is oil, much more than Texas could ever produce.
6. Germany needs coal, the 2nd largest machine ever built was a huge strip mining machine built in germany in order to expliot their huge coal deposites.
7 either the black sea is too large or the caspian is too small I can't tell which, im leanning towards the caspian being to small
8. I don't think that there is anything that we can do about this but what was firaxis thinking when they dicided you couldnt move diagnally on water between two land masses this makes it impossable to get into the black sea, this sucks, hopefully they will patch it.
Keep up the good work, you've done a great job
|
|
|  |
 |
|
jimmyh
|
|
Sunny Old England
Sep 2001 time: 05:16
|
|
I posted a Save Game Editor over in Creation, since I couldn't start a thread here.
The Editor can change start positions of units and it tells you which civ they belong to.
You can even change barbarian positions!!!
You can also change the year of the save game.
If you want to post any comments then please do so where I've posted the editor.
Cheers.
James.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Mongoloid Cow
|
|
I haven't got the game, nor have any idea what you've been putting on the map in terms of resources, but hopefully these help:
Attachment: otherres.gif
This has been downloaded 810 time(s).
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Mongoloid Cow
|
|
And this. I know the resources aren't in the exact spots but hopefully the labels will help.
Attachment: stratres.gif
This has been downloaded 809 time(s).
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Pyrodrew
|
|
quote: Originally posted by AlmightyBob
1. For the stratigic and luxurie resources the max of anyone you should have is 16, since this is the max number ov civs you can have. If anything you should have a few less to make things interesting, from 12 to 15.
|
I agree with this for luxury resources, but I disagree with this for strategic resources particularly because this is a huge map. No player will have access to all areas of the map (thus all 8-25 resources) or all 16 Civs until near the end of the game where oil & uranium (which are about 8-12) are important. Early on strategic resources (Iron & Horses) should be VERY plentiful in Europe because of all those Civs packed in together so close there, otherwise Europe will turn into an early bloodbath killing off too many too early. Let the tension build & alliances form... then when newer resources become more rare let the fights break out. If you notice there isn't much saltpeter in Europe & thus it will make the discovery of gunpowder as critical & climatic as it should be. And when resources are clumped together it limits the "every Civ gets 1" potential as well. Why give you iron & saltpeter when I can kill you & take your cities instead?! And BOTH Australia & SouthAmerica don't even have Civs starting in them thus the resources of the other continents will be fought over 1st instead.
Last edited by Pyrodrew on 19-11-2001 at 15:07
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
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
|
|
|
|
|
|