 |
| |
|
|
Kaptnwakky
|
|
Well, I Incorporated Solomyr's Changes to the Western US and Refined them Slightly - The Cascade and Sierra Nevada Ranges are now well defined - I readded a whole bunch of tundra to canada - there were just way to many plains - I also incorporated Alexandres changes to Yemen and various parts of the world - And I moved greenland 2 "squares" closer to Northamerica so Iceland is not nearly so close. I also fiddled with denmark and defined the Baltic Area much better.
Moscow is now where it should be as is mexico city - both locations were too far north
-The aztecs should have an easier time starting and also they should have reason to go south now into south america instead of into north america
-Instead of hurting china agriculturally, I took away its wheat but left grasslands - Japan just got more fish and wheat to helk out growth. Also, the area between korea and china Start is heavily forested now to discourage early cities their by china.
-The ukraine recieved wheat and the suggestion to place a few hills north of crimea with Iron and Coal was followed - this area is a major source of resources for Russia - historically and presently
-Instead of giving Russia and Germany hills where thier should be no hills, bonus grassland was added so that if it is mined they have a shot at wonder races.
-I left the Uranium in New mexico/South Utah for two reasons - #1The americas are already rather weak in quantity of early strategic resources like saltpeter and iron in my opinion and it gives them a late game trade item. ALso, there are large amounts of Uranium in those areas presently, and its where the US gets its Uranium. They should be in the desert but since you can;t place Uranium in desert, I had to put them in the mountain.
-India was weakened by adding more plains to represent the large plateau in central india and some of its wheat was taken away - however I do not think its starting location should be moved or hampered in by barbarians - India historically was not isolationist and was very much in league tradewise with Muslim countries to the west and chinese/Indochina to the east.
-With regards to North American Horses - I am just as anal as the next person with regards to historical specificity, however in the interests of gameplay and the fact that the Iroqious are supposed to represent as firaxes says in the civilopedia native peoples including the Sioux, Cheyanne etc., they should get horses. If we can believe that america starts out in the new world in 4000bc, I think the Iroquois can have a horse or two for gameplay.
Thats all, attached is map 5.2
 Attachment: satya's world map v5[1].1.zip
This has been downloaded 62 time(s).
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Tzar Alex III.
|
|
Please could someone answer ... because I already have downloaded 4 maps from this site and all crashed, because the computer always wanted to build his cities too close to the pole. I am tired of deleting the settlers from the save game so that I could continue the game.
AND BYE THE WAY WHICH IS NOW THE LAST VERSION ? AND WHERE IS IT ? Could you please delete the links with the old versions out of your answers. Would be nice, and keep the most actual version up at the top. Only edit your message THX
Have a nice day everyone
|
|
| |
|
|
|
ismail cem
|
|
Ankara
Nov 2001
time: 05:16
|
|
Changes made:
- Asia minor redefined, realistic
- euphyrates and tigris now separate through northern iraq, making its land less fertile than the south
-bosphorus is reshaped, dyes are added in the area, and saltpeter is relocated to that area.
-kizilirmak river added to the north, with wheat in the inner plains.
these changes were made onto the upgrade made to scandinavia by lindberg.
Thanks to all of the contributors.
Attachment: satya's world map v5.2.zip
This has been downloaded 35 time(s).
|
|
| |
|
|
|
satyajedi
|
|
I'm finding in my games that there are way too many resources on this map, so much so that it limits trading and discourages competition. Are other people finding this as well?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Pyrodrew
|
|
quote:
I'm finding in my games that there are way too many resources on this map, so much so that it limits trading and discourages competition. |
There are typically a lot of horses & iron in Huge Maps since that occurs at the beginning of the game while players are scrambling to find them... typically like 22. However, it seems that there are about 40 irons on these maps & too many of the others as well.
Where to cut back would be the places in which those places are *not* the leading producers or leading geographically with those resources. My earlier posts explained along those lines why India should have coal & iron, Greece aluminum, etc. Likewise someone mentioned Scandavia having the 3rd largest source of uranium - that's a good reason. Thus, if someone wouldn't mind reviewing the old posts & writing down these "largest sources" and "largest producers" rather than those posts which only say, "NewZealand has iron". Then everything would be more accurate. Once that is done I think anything could be adjusted from there for the more important gameplay balance.
Also luxury items should be more clumped together in 1 or 2 (3 at most) groups to force trading. Most 1 spot luxury items should be removed (the same luxury item on several nearby small islands would be a good clump). Whether everyone wants to do that with some the strategic resources as well is a big question.
I don't have the time to do this right now, but if someone else doesn't do in the next few weeks or months I will make a more balanced resource map later.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Alexandre Madeira
|
|
Viseu
Jan 1970
time: 05:16
|
|
Ok, I added ismail cem's changes to Kaptnwakky's and made further resource changes (most I did before but someone undoed them).
Kaptnwakky, I dont see your bonus grassland addition, or you didnt add many  , I added a bunch near player starting locations and a few in other places.
I changed the oil fields, again. My locations are based on another game's world map, and remember, oil is so important there can be wars because of it, dont add dozens of oil fields in the map so everyone has it. It will make the game more interesting.
I moved the English' starting location a bit south (still one square north of the coast). Ok, London is not a coastal city, but remember a single tile in the civ3 map represents a bunch of square miles , I'd rather have London as a coastal city in civ3 so it can build ships.
satyajedi, I agree with you, so I have again removed some resources from the map, or made them more seperate. Dont think a single city should have more than a single resource of one type.
I agree with all those wines in France beeing ridiculous, removed a bunch of them, added one in Portugal (you dont know Oporto Wine?).
Ok, here's 5.3, mostly resource balance. Updated from a combination of 5.1 and 5.2.
(Map updated)
Last edited by Alexandre Madeira on 30-11-2001 at 00:23
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Alexandre Madeira
|
|
Viseu
Jan 1970
time: 05:16
|
|
Updated 5.3 with some of Pyro's sugestions. More aluminium in Greece, Uranium in scandinavia, coal and iron in India.
I disagree with clumping luxury items together, a single city shouldnt be able to have more than one, if you want to be able to trade, expand your empire so you get more inside your borders. There may be exceptions of course.
Attachment: satya's world map v5.3.zip
This has been downloaded 71 time(s).
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Dreifels
|
 |
Alpha Centauri
Oct 1999
time: 06:16
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by kittenOFchaos
In terms of gameplay giving France THAT much wine is ridiculous...and this sort of problem replicates itself...
As for the horses in America...I'm certainly not playing with the Iroquois and Americans on -I will have the Inca civilisation and the Spanish
Horses are a daft resource except for the purpose of removing them from India (horsies don't breed well there), the New World and Australia and much of Africa where horse culture didn't exist... |
- If you make a map of today, lot of whine is right in Kalifornia, France, Germany, Spain, Italy
- If you make a map of 5000 BC, wine ONLY has to be in Egypt at the southwest oasis and in Italy, NO other place.
- In a 5000 BC map horses on the american continent are absolute wrong, same in Africa below aequator, but in Babylon + Egypt + Persia must be a lot then !!! Also some west of China at the beginning of tundra, but not so much. Elephantes in India + mid Africa only, but enough to trade with. (If you set only 1* the recource, the owner don't trade with it)
In Germany some hills have to be at Cologne (Today also there is good whine, and there also iron + coal is, as well as near Dresden (do you have a German map ;-))?) are hills and coal, salpeter + uran
Between Germany and France also is coal + iron + salpeter where the Rhine is.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
warlon
|
|
Copenhagen, Denmark
Nov 2001
time: 06:16
|
|
Nice changes from 4.3/4.8 to 5.3
Good overall modifying with the map.
I believe though that some things still have to be considered:
Ironworks
I believe that area near Tokyo /or Kyoto, Ruhr District in western Germany. Area near London, area near New York/Washington, area near Ural, Area near Milan and area near Beijing in China should all have opportunity to build Ironworks.
Geographical placement of Mountains so close to Beijing is not accurate, there is hills there not mountains. The mountain range is also not that large surrounding China in mountains. And the highland there is hardly mountains when comparing them to the Himalayas or even the Alpes. Take a look at civ2 map of the earth or "The Times Atlas of the World". The Sinkiang province have the largest population in China. Remove some hills creating the sort of vale that is there?
It is still disheartening to see that the cattle are absent in China, Japan, England and Russia, while America have alot of them.
I think that the strait of Sicily is again uncrossable.
The Hindu Kush (mountains in Pakistan and right now also in Iran)shouldn't be so vast. I believe on line of mountains is quite sufficient, even modifying it into some hills.
IndoChina isn't all covered in jungle. There should also be plains and grassland with some hills. And the Malay Peninsuala is simply too large compared to Indochina.
Also there is no Uranium in either Yugoslavia nor Scandinavia. The "heavy water" in Norway doesn't justify two uranium resources there. Australia and Japan should have 1 more uranium each.
Etiopia is still covered in desert.
Also Western Russia should have some hills to represent the central Russian Uplands. Also the forests in Western France should be replaced by forests.
Whales should be added near Norway and so should oil in a land Square around Norway (Norway is around the top exporters in the world of Oil). More wheat in Ukraine, Japan, India and China.
THERE IS ABSOULUTELY NO GOLD IN HIMALAYAS (Not worth 3 fields of gold that is )
I shall soon start working on the latest version implenting some of these stuff if they haven't already been implented by the time I start.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
lindberg-johan
|
 |
Molkom, Sweden
Aug 2001
time: 06:16
|
|
Hi!
When I uploaded 5.1 I added Uranium in the north of Sweden. Now someone has added Uranium in the mountains between Sweden and Norway. That is wrong! First, Sweden may have Uranium, but not that much. We DO NOT have the world's third largest resource, as some people remain to say. Second, the newly found resource is completely malplaced. There is quite much Uranium where I put it, and also some in southern Sweden (though not much enough to make a resource out of it). Some people here seems to think that Sweden is a big Uranium producer, too, which is not true. The Uranium in Sweden is not mined. There are two reasons for this: First, we don't approve that much of nuclear power as other countries do (we do have some reactors, though), and second: there is much Uranium in Scandinavia, but it is so low rate (300g/ton), so it is not worth mining it. Therefore, I suggest: Remove the resource in the mountains, and perhaps the one in Lappland (northern Sweden), too.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
protista
|
|
Awesome map!
I have a few questions.
I tried to modify some of the parameters of the map scenario, and was able to change the number of starting civilizations, but attempting to set barbarians to villages only repeatedly fails. Minor problem, I just don't like barbarian distractions! How can I set the barbarian paramater with this map?
Secondly, can I load the map (5.0) into the CIV editor and change the rules? I would like to be able to set the difficulty level to warlord. When I loaded it, the rules changes were greyed out.
Thirdly, at the very beginning screen, after I select the mod (5.0), it offers the option of modifying the map. I tried this selection, but it appeared to revert back to the computer generated random map?
I really appreciate the efforts you put into this world map! I just wanted to be able to "tweak" it a tad.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
satyajedi
|
|
Solomyr: I'm starting to suspect that if there were CivIII players on this board from Africa, South America and the Middle East, we would have every resource in every region of the world by now :-)
Last edited by satyajedi on 30-11-2001 at 14:33
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Llama
|
|
London
Nov 2001
time: 05:16
|
|
Protista:
First off, I can't remember if you can change the amount of barbarians in a pre-made map (I'm at work, so I can't check it out).
Secondly, if you want to change the rules then you'll have to load up the rules file in the editor & edit them directly (I think I might have seen some maps made by fans that have the rules included, but I might just be imagining it). The rules file is called Civ3mod.bic and it's in the Civ3 root directory (along with the civ3 exe & editor exe, if you start the editor I think that the File/Open defaults to this directory).
Thirdly, when you select the map from the load scenario screen, it always comes up with that screen asking if you want to modify the map & if you select yes, it will re-generate the map for you. If you select no then you get taken to the choose civ/difficulty screen. I think that you might be able to select the barbarian difficulty if you load the map with the editor, then one of the menu's (options ?) gives you the ability to change the level of barbarian aggressiveness, although I can't remember which menu it is (I think it's at the right-hand end of the menu bar).
Hope this helps.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Alexandre Madeira
|
|
Viseu
Jan 1970
time: 05:16
|
|
Ok, here's 5.5, updated from subheat's, with most sugestions by Warlon and Don Homer.
Attachment: satya's world map v5.5.zip
This has been downloaded 67 time(s).
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
satyajedi
|
|
It is unfortunate that with games taking as long as they do, our ability to playtest lags behind these updated maps. I am just now finishing up a game on 5.0 in which I started in Babylon. A couple interesting/odd things about that game:
-Again, the civs starting in China, India, Egypt and America were the early leaders. However, America lagged technologically because of the lack of communication with Eurasia and had a major gap to fill after the discovery of the new world. The two island nations, in Britain and Japan, were easily the most irrelevant in the game; neither has managed to do anything interesting outside of building a few decent cities on their home island. This is a concern. The crowded European civs did somewhat better. France, Germany and Russia were all competitive, although Greece and Rome were not.
-Persia, who I thought was by far the worst off, had a pretty good civilization going in the plains of central asia, until they were attacked by every civilization around them simeultaneously, and went from the largest civilization in the game to non-existent in less than 100 years.
-Babylon is a fun civ to play. The flood plains provide food but no shields, which means you're constantly in a race against your own civilization's growth. You blink and your capital city has become a 12 before you've even produced a temple.
-By the late middle ages, I had acquired just about every strategic and luxery resource there was. It didn't exactly inspire colonial ambition. There was very little by way of trading resources, either, because the AI seemed to have most things as well. There's really no doubt that resources are way to high, and need to be toned down. Also, although at no point did I have a resource dry up, 2 new resources were found during the game, which makes me suspect this happens just as much as a resource drying up.
I'm thinking that it is time to limit all the luxery resources to 16 or less total, and to bring down the strategic resources in the range of 16-20.
Obviously, the next step is to determine what are the 16-20 most significant cites for these resources. I somehow doubt Romania is going to be on the list for any particular resource.
-Satya
|
|
| |
|
|
|
warlon
|
|
Copenhagen, Denmark
Nov 2001
time: 06:16
|
|
most unsettling news Sayed.
What level are you playing on though? If it is chieftain I am sure that would be possible, but if it is on regent or king I think it might be a bit of too many resources (not that there comes more resources as chieftain, but because you have easier time securing them).
|
|
| |
|
|
|
satyajedi
|
|
The move to Nanking was a change I made in an earlier version of the map for that precise reason, however, I think it got lost along the way so that is something to look into. Part of the problem, I think, is that the AI doesn't realize that Japan needs to move into Korea and Manchuria as soon as they possibly can. As a player opponent, I suspect that I could beat China to Korea / Manchuria. Perhaps the Iron will make the AI understand, or perhaps we can encourage seafaring in the editor.
As for England, I think one effective strategy to help them out would be to make them the only place that can build Ironworks. That will help them in the early industrial period, which should be their golden age. Also, anything that helps Scandenavia helps England, as by far the easiest way to get to Sweeden or Norway is by the sea.
-Satya
|
|
| |
|
|
|
warlon
|
|
Copenhagen, Denmark
Nov 2001
time: 06:16
|
|
Island cultures are mostly the strongest throughout the game.
I have thought about the whole imbalance sitution and I feel that there is nothing to do about it. Some countries will be weaker than others when controlled by the AI. Countries starting in Japan will have difficulty catching up in tech since their only trade partner in the start will be China. But Japan have alot of resources compared to others, so that will weigh up in the end.
China is dominating in the far east, but they will also be having difficulties with technology and later on Uranium since the nearest is in Japan or in Central Asia, where the persians or russians should have gotten it.
The Zulu will get easy play in southern Africa and Russians will get easy play to cover the east of their lands.
The European countries should have no trouble being those mostly advanced in technology.
The computer also gangs up on those that are too big, so China, Russia and Zululand might see some heavy gangupping later on if they are too good in the start.
There will always be countries that have a dominant role. The A.I is simply not good enough to randomnize the playing of the different cultures.
Last edited by warlon on 02-12-2001 at 17:50
|
|
| |
|
| |
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
29-11-2001 02:19
) that Britain has no where to go! The problem being for the British then a source of saltpeter without which they can't seriously compete with other nations later on or build her navy.
|