How are we going to make the map?

Will we just get a random map or a specially created one which has equal luxuries, i assume if its a random map then GA or Regentman will take a look at world builder first to make sure everything is ok?

Just figured i'd start this so we can get a bit of discussion going and the game can progress along a bit faster.

We will decide this later once teams have formed and they decide it in the private forums...I guess you can discuss it here too.

First, decide on the map type, and then we'll decide on how it will be made.

Well that was what i inteded we could talk about here as well, though i appreciate from my post that it may not have been obvious. i think a continents game would be best on a standard sized map.

Standard randomly generated map. Terra. We should also not do the equal distribtuion thing because that would take a lot o suprise and fun out of the game. Also Terra would be amazing because the colonizing race, and then the colony wars would be fun!!!

Standard randomly generated map. Terra. We should do the equal distribtuion thing because that would take a lot o suprise and fun out of the game. Also Terra would be amazing because the colonizing race, and then the colony wars would be fun!!!

I asume you mean not do the equal distribution thing, if your goal is to keep the surprise factor?

yea, sorry about the typo! I think it is unrealistic to give all the teams say 2 horses, gems, gold, iron, ivory and all that jazz

I don't know what others think, but I feel that the uniformity of the civ3MTDG map somewhat nullifies the need to compete for resources, though there are clear benefits of playing on that sort of map.

The game will be more exciting if teams have to live and die by the luck of the terrain to a certain extent. Obviously, we can't have a situation where someone gets a tundra start, but there should be some variability.

*This in no way should be read as a criticism of Rik's work on the civ3 MTDG map. I may not go to his church, but respect him nonetheless ;)

At the moment 5 teams appears to be winning, so how does that affect the map?

If we go continents we could get 2 civs on 1 continent, 3 on another or 2 continents with 2 civs and 1 alone on a third.

If we want to try and keep things roughly equal, an archipelago map with each civ on an island would be one way to do it, but I think that Pangea would probably be the best bet.

As the demogame save is the first one I've ever managed to load above Tiny, I can't really comment on map size.

At the moment 5 teams appears to be winning, so how does that affect the map?

If we go continents we could get 2 civs on 1 continent, 3 on another or 2 continents with 2 civs and 1 alone on a third.

If we want to try and keep things roughly equal, an archipelago map with each civ on an island would be one way to do it, but I think that Pangea would probably be the best bet.

As the demogame save is the first one I've ever managed to load above Tiny, I can't really comment on map size.

Or we could go completely random, with a terra map. This would ensure that everyone is on the same contient, that there would be an exciting colonizing race, while also making the teams compete for prime real estate on the "old world".

@ Peter, we've been fighting among ourselves over at KISS for the wines.

I've always liked random maps. That being said. It would suck if a team was planted in the middle of a desert with no resources but sand and sun.

But I've never seen a non-playable start. maybe unwinnable but none unplayable. Personally I would take it as a challenge to see how far my team went if we were down a fairly critical resource. I think that this mimics the real world a little more and would make for an interesting game. Once Permanent alliances come about, a smaller state could win the game alongside a larger state. So both COULD taste victory.


Pangaea Standard has my vote regardless of how the # of teams poll turns out

I'd prefer lakes so each team can have a maximum amount of land.

Random Standard Terra has my vote.

Also, This is a newbish question, are there AI's or just the 5 teams? And how many AI's

no AI at all except barbs.

Isn't Terra where you have to find the other continent? Lakes wouldn't be bad but the team in the middle as opposed to the edges will be caught in the middle of everything since there is no world wrapping. Somthing that simulates a globe would be best IMO.

iirc, lakes does world wrap. It's the Great Plains that does not. At least, in gotm2, it did worldwrap.

Since this is just a discussion thread, not a vote thread, my reasons for Lakes as follows:
1. Starts can be northern or southern and still get good expansion room
2. with the dispersal of resources in CIV and the amount of land on this type of map, it should allow each team to develope a powerful civ
3. based on 2, it should be easier to balance without using the games "balanced start" algorithm when generating the map.
4. All teams will share a border with at least 2 or 3 teams (if I'm visualizing it right)

Drawbacks:
1. No navy's to speak of.
2. Large barb population to kill off (well, it's good training for teams with AA UU's)
3. long borders between civs (could be tense :evil: ). Possible to appease this by making the ocean level high, thus more lakes (and maybe making drawback 1 less so).

Anyways, just my USD$0.02 Maybe we should try a pitboss game later this week with 5 players on a lakes map to test it? :mischief:

no AI at all except barbs.

Isn't Terra where you have to find the other continent? Lakes wouldn't be bad but the team in the middle as opposed to the edges will be caught in the middle of everything since there is no world wrapping. Somthing that simulates a globe would be best IMO.

A Terra map is a map in which ALL the Civs start out on a continent on one side of the world, kind of like europe. THe map is generated to simlutae the globe, but not be exactly like it. This lack of space after the intial expanison can lead to border clashes, and wars for single cities. After the appropriate tech is discovered, there is a race to discover and colonize the "new world", which can sometime be full of native barbarian cities that needs to be taken care of. Terra maps offer an amazing experience, and in my opinion, they would make for an amzing MTDG experience!

Pro's:
All teams on the same continent to begin with
Share a border with at least 2-3 teams
Colony racing
Fun experience
Lots of warring

Cons
Lots of warring
Sometimes have to make war or wait to colonize the new world to get a certain resource
early border clashes

re: terra

But why even explore the new world? seems like the game could be finished before anyone steps foot on the other continent.

re: terra

But why even explore the new world? seems like the game could be finished before anyone steps foot on the other continent.

No because generally the teams are fairly even in talent and dont tend to be destroyed too easily.

Is there any way we could get Sirian to make a special map for this game?

RM or I can always ask him - what do you have in mind?

FYI: We'll ask TF for private forums soon, and post a sign up thread so each team can start discussing the map they want.

What are the teams going to be? Can i just post a sign up thread for team #1 or did i miss something?

You didn't miss anything; a sign up thread will go up soon (see the Civ3 MTDG Sign Up for an example). People can just 'sign up' and we'll place them on a random team (or a team that is lacking people), or if they request to be on a certain team (for example with a bunch of friends), we will accomadate that request as well. You'll see how it works when the signup takes place.

You didn't miss anything; a sign up thread will go up soon (see the Civ3 MTDG Sign Up for an example). People can just 'sign up' and we'll place them on a random team (or a team that is lacking people), or if they request to be on a certain team (for example with a bunch of friends), we will accomadate that request as well. You'll see how it works when the signup takes place.

We keeping the same names or are we making new ones, or shall we just decide in the private forums?

We keeping the same names or are we making new ones, or shall we just decide in the private forums?
I think each team should decide its name for itself.

Correct.

I was talking with RM about asking TF now for 5 private forums (simply named "Team 1", "Team 2", etc. for now) so we can start some more team-oriented discussion. After we get the forums, we can start signups for the teams so y'all can start talking in private. ;)

The teams will be completely different unless people want to stay together - although it would be fun to be with new people, if some groups want to remain one, that is fine too. Names will be different, hopefully...

Correct.

I was talking with RM about asking TF now for 5 private forums (simply named "Team 1", "Team 2", etc. for now) so we can start some more team-oriented discussion. After we get the forums, we can start signups for the teams so y'all can start talking in private. ;)

The teams will be completely different unless people want to stay together - although it would be fun to be with new people, if some groups want to remain one, that is fine too. Names will be different, hopefully...


awww but i liked TNT we even had an anthem 'TNT-AC/DC' well at least i think thats our anthem. before we get the private forums i think we should finish key areas such as map discussion and rules just so participation in these dont lag, also would help the teams decide which civ they want to be.

Establishing teams before agreeing on game details is preferable. Each team will certainly go through a stage of 'identification' while debating game details, and this will serve to formulate the team as a unit.

The disparate voices coming together in private, then voiced in 5 flavors on each detail, will be more efficient than all of us chattering away here in public.

I don't think participation will lag; it will actually increase as people see that this MTDG is moving forward and becoming established.

Petros has a great idea!! Let the teams decide among themselves then have 5 voices however distinct

That is exactly what we did - this is just a placeholder really until we get private forums so teams can decide for themselves (with their own series of discussions/poll).

PS: You can probably expect a sign up thread/private forums by Wednesday, maybe Thursday at the latest, I hope. Depends on RM replying to a PM and TF's speed.

Or a few hours :) http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=158025

Don't forget to sign up for the user group that you request.

Back on topic, i'd prefer a continents map now we have 5 teams, as this could end up with a continent vs continent warfare increasing the need for a navy etc.

Continents with a random number of continents. That way some could get stuck alone or with another Civ or 2.

Whomp has secured Sirian's help to make a custom map if we choose. I have and still say that either this or a pangaea would be the best option.

Continents have burned a lot of people by sticking them out on their own. If it was a custom continents by Sirian then I feel quite comfortable with him knowing how to balance the starts out.

There is a different way to approach the map: Archipelago.

One of the benefits is that there will be a race to explore, which is always very exciting. The likelyhood of being isolated or crowded is reduced. However, I can imagine that there may be reasons to avoid this type of world. Slow research in the early game due to lack of foreign contacts comes to mind.

If this has already been debated and resolved for other games I'm sure you will excuse my ignorance: I have no history or familiarity with the previous Demogames or ISDG's.

Pangea is the best. W00t

I think a Sirian generated pangea would be most incredible.

Yeah, I could see that working well. The one thing I don't think that will work would be a continents map because you would have 3 on one and 2 on another (easy for one continent to gang up 2v1 on the other, as was done with the C3C InterSite Demogame (not the MTDG))...either a pangea or archipelago. An archi takes some fun out of the early game, as well as warfare. I suppose it is good if you want a more peaceful, trader/builder type game.

Don't forget we have the other custom map types as well (maze, battleground, whatever). RM or I will put up a formal instruction to discuss it in the private forums (like the other 2 up: take note of those) soon...

It wouldn't have to be a three team continent and a two team continent. Perhaps a two/two/one, three/one/one, two/one/one/one. Many possiblities.

How bout islands? Give everyone 1 island and make lots of small islands, this makes for fun naval wars

I think a Sirian terra would be amazing. Thin of the possiblities!!!


Mapgasm!!:lol:

I like the idea of Pangea or Inland Sea.

Here's a PM from Sirian. I really think we should consider letting him develop the map at his discretion. Maybe have the team's state what they don't want like continents.

Inland Sea would probably offer the "fairest" start from a random map, but since I will be customizing the map, it really doesn't matter.

Of course, the more you leave to my discretion, the more compelling things might become. Imagine if nobody knows what type of map it is, or what to expect. Scouting would be more urgent, and debates about what to do next would be more significant.

I'll make a map to certain specs if that is what is called for, though

I think that Sirian should have full control of the map. Since he was in charge of all of the map making scripts he knows what works and what doesn't. I have yet to see a bad map, maybe a less than perfect but not un-playable, from the scripts.

Imagine what it could be like if Sirian placed each tile in it's correct place since he knows the impact of most if not all of the combinations of land. Come on people.... don't restrict him if we go this route.

Let Sirian do one, and other than fair to all teams leave it up to him to come up with something to give a good competition. The more surprises the better.

So, what do we want to do, if we are going to use a Sirian-made map? Choose the settings, then have Sirian make a map with those settings? Or trust Sirian to create a 'surprise' map for us? Either way, it'll work - you can also object if you don't want a custom made Sirian map.

Speaking for myself, I'd like a nice February Surprise. This way, choices in tech path early in the game may have exciting consequences down the road.

I would even say that we shouldn't know any more than "The map provides roughly equal opportunities."

No Land/Water ratios, no map size, no continent parameters, nothing. The very act of discovery will be of essential importance.

I agree with Peter Grimes. If anyone knows Sirian's reputation it will make for a very exciting game by giving him carte blanche.

I like the idea of Sirians random map :)

A Super Sirian Suprise Scape, thats what i want

Just as long as we all have a roughly equal starting position i happy for Sirian to do as he pleases with the map.

I agree with Robi_D about all teams have an approximately equal starting position ... and I really like the idea of having a big unknown surrounding us :clap:

Speaking for myself, not as a Beta representative...

Still we need to give Sirian some parameters, like size, sealevel, and temperature.

I'd go for standard, medium, temperate. Generally balanced for resource allocations relative to the number of different resources each team gets, but unbalanced is ok for specific resources, for example one gets 2 iron and the other gets 2 bronze so they can have something to trade, or not. Likewise marble and stone. Food and luxury can tend towards monopolies if he thinks it will result in a better play experience, assuming no team is significantly short of resources compared to another. This can be exceptionally powerful, ensuring that if you cooperate with the team that has what you need you both get an advantage -- or you take them out.

What if he made the map, but the starting locations were random? I think that is a good Idea!

Sorry, I don't think it is. I have some experience with multiplayer games...in MP, you have to ensure the humans have fair starts - this doesn't mean exactly the same, just fair. If one team has tons of room to expand and no near AIs, but another 3 are cramped together, that isn't fun, is it?

Still we need to give Sirian some parameters, like size, sealevel, and temperature.

I'd go for standard, medium, temperate. Generally balanced for resource allocations relative to the number of different resources each team gets, but unbalanced is ok for specific resources, for example one gets 2 iron and the other gets 2 bronze so they can have something to trade, or not. Likewise marble and stone. Food and luxury can tend towards monopolies if he thinks it will result in a better play experience, assuming no team is significantly short of resources compared to another. This can be exceptionally powerful, ensuring that if you cooperate with the team that has what you need you both get an advantage -- or you take them out.

I totally agree with this. I wouldn't mind a larger map - but certainly no smaller.
(Speaking only for myself)

I think that just letting him give us whatever he feels like is a cool idea. The thrill of discovery and all. :)

Its okay if you disagree, i'm fine wiht that. I just don't like the idea of him giving some people 2 bronze, so they can trade wiht the nation that has 2 iron. I think relations should be built and not pre-engineered. I think he should maybe place all the resources, and then place 5 staring spots he condieres fair, not place 5 starting spots and then make them all fair.

I think continents is probably the best map because, in all likelihood, there will only be one continent with two teams on it. That way all the other civs can focus on expansion and developing into cultured civs, and the other two could (possibly) become allies and become the dominant military force in the world. This would keep the play diverse and each civ would be able to do what they would like, except, of course, the two on the same continent.

Sirian isn't a dummy... Just let him create a great world. I REALLY don't care how he does it. If you tie his hands you might get a good game, but what would it be like if he created it on his own without stipulations other than 5 civs on the same world?

Yer he isnt going to make one civ unplayable, just let him work his magic.

Whatever Sirian wants to do would be great.

I would prefer to leave as much up to Sirian as possible, the less we know the better. I see no reason to specifiy temperature, sea level, world type etc, all we need to specify are the number of civs and perhaps the world size if we want to specify if we want a cramped or spacious world.

Map size is about the only things we need to give Sirian. He has proven that he gets the program. I'm not worried that he would have a balanced and fair map.

Could we just put a team poll up and let the teams decide. It seems as though the same stuff is being posted every so often while people argue their point. It would be nice to give Sirian a little time if we decide to go with him/

Could we just put a team poll up and let the teams decide. It seems as though the same stuff is being posted every so often while people argue their point. It would be nice to give Sirian a little time if we decide to go with him/

have to wait until every team has a UN rep.

have to wait until every team has a UN rep.well get on it. There's already team polls for admin approval and pitboss/pbem. So why couldn't this discussion cease and be relegated to the team forums and post a Team Poll?

Tubby, I've contacted RM about how to proceed with the map discussion. Sorry for the slow pace - some times aren't as active as Team Piffle. You should see a thread hopefully within a day or two or so.

As for teams w/o Reps, they can just have anyone from their team post until they get one.

well im temporary rep until we finalise it so if need be we can vote on anything.

Sirian isn't a dummy...

That's debatable in some quarters. :lol:

I recently proved that I can't remember the difference between Hub and Ring. ;)


- Sirian

how bout 1 big map of the world

A map of the world is predictable and the Fog of War has no meaning as most of us know what the land masses look like.

good point

That and it is fairly likely only certain starting locations will only have certain resources.

i dun want to see iron n copper at every starting position (or none). the starting position should force teams to search for unique approaches fitting there unique circumstances. therefor i thing the best way is: get a random map (if sirian thinks a specific random Map isnt interesting nuff just let him make another) and sirian works his magic to balance it just as much as he thinks is nuff to get roughly fair starts.

all together my point is, that its an incredible complex problem u are faced with makeing an heterogeneous map from soup to nuts, while considering balance issues. allthough sirian is a mapmakeing genius, i think its more presumable that a map (with the claim beeing heterogeneous) out of a human hand, has more balance issues than a random map balanced by a human.

sounds odd but its my opinion.

i dun want to see iron n copper at every starting position

Do you see that from my map scripts?