Well, I think the map-borders of the game are too small. You can't make a realistic world scenario in a 255*255 square map - even the maps of Europe which are posted are satisfying - btw Great work !! - or has anyone a 'trick' to create more sqaures ?
It doesn't have to be that precise. To be honest, some cities are far away from their actual location - you shouldn't learn your topography with my scenario - but I just wanted to use these cities because they are known. E.g.: Washington, New York and Boston are all in. Seattle and Vancouver too.
I need to mention this: I used the world map created by Zach Wilson (180x180). Marla Singer's world map is too large in my opinion -> no fun.
You need to artificially give Japan and Korea a bit more land mass even if it distorts the map a bit. Throw in a few more islands, and lost more fish and other resources. I would double or almost triple the number of land squares in the Korean Peninsula and Japanese islands by adding more plains and grassland tiles to simulate terraced agricultural locations. You can throw on some forest or jungle if you want to force them to work for it.
Also increase the size of the Polynesian islands and Siapan and Tinian to make sure that they are at least two or three tiles of something with some fish or whales available.
The game is too weak for geographically correct atoll type islands unless you make some terrain concessions to balance out the lack of functions in this area.
(I also see your snide little bit of blue that makes Isreal just an American vassal, you sneaky devil you.)
To the comment about wanting maps larger than 255x255, that's insane and bordering on a comment indicative of perhaps not playing the game. I have a 2.4 GHZ processor workstation and 2 gigs of ram and with the current CIV3 game engine (that will not be changing) a map of that size would just be terminal tedium.
Acknowledged. I'm off this weekend and after that...Japan will rise...
Nice about Jerusalem, eh? I was thinking about making Jerusalem one small nation, but I thought this would be more fun.
Also, a friend of mine said that Koreans would be very angry when they see they're included with the Japanese. But I thought it needed to be done because otherwise Japan would be even smaller.
...I just hope I can finish it before Firaxis' deadline.
If it is the present world you can't ignore Israel from the middle east.
One annoying small county making so much trouble for years, and now it has a very strong army and nukes - it just can't be cut out.
Make an America spot where Israel layes.
Also, to put the turks together with the Arabs is insulting to say the least.
They are muslims, not arabs, nor they were ever arabs.
Yeah, for a scenario this size you might as well use all 16 civ slots available.
My ideas would be: * Israel: A small but very well equipped and trained thorn in the side of Arabia. * South Africa: The Military Power of this one country could probably smash at least half of Africa by itself. Would be a good pick. * Turkey and the Balkans: Kind of like what IceBlaze and Azale said. * Not sure about the last....Cuba, to piss off the US? Or maybe something different like a Independent Alaska or Tibet for fun.
With 4 picks from above, that would be 16 for your scenario. Just a idea to think about.
Originally posted by Frog Propaganda * South Africa: The Military Power of this one country could probably smash at least half of Africa by itself. Would be a good pick.
Maybe pre 1990 (during the days leading up to the end of the Angolan Conflict), but nowadays? Somehow I don't think so. I mean we got our butts whipped by Lesotho of all countries when we ...ahem... attempted to keep the peace there in '99 (I think)
True enough, though it could be argued they used to hold most of the bodering nations of the north as protectorates. The modern military history of S. Africa has been pretty interesting stuff.
what about the British Commonwealth. ie; UK, Australia, NZ, PNG, Fiji, etc. but not all of the states, like South Africa, India and Pakistan not in it, etc.
The mighty world power of Lesotho is something to be feared, young man!
I agree with your other point though, The Commonwealth and some of the more minor client states would be a good power too. It's hard to lump the UK and the EU togheter a good portion of the time.
Originally posted by Mongoloid Cow what about the British Commonwealth. ie; UK, Australia, NZ, PNG, Fiji, etc. but not all of the states, like South Africa, India and Pakistan not in it, etc.
Lesotho aint so bad, a few shacks, the water undrinkable, the weather hot, um... can't really think of anything else to say about it really
Seriously though, what disturbed me was the fact that our once excellent army had deteriorated so badly. I mean we were the pre-eminent "bush war" army at one stage, with good battle tested equipment (as a side note, I can't wait for Womoks to release that G6 he's creating). Hell, during the Gulf War, the Iraqi's had better artillery than the coalition and that was the South African G5 (didn't have the right ammo though, no base bleed shells for you Mr Hussein ) It's just really sad.
Back on topic, though I reckon a full commonwealth prior to independences(?) would be a better way to go, else the UK only gets a weenie island on a world map.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
- but I just wanted to use these cities because they are known. E.g.: Washington, New York and Boston are all in. Seattle and Vancouver too. 
)
,the only thing is that I think Japan is a little unbalanced (too small).
