ISDG ~ Custom Map? or Randon Generated?

Cyc

Looking for the door...
Joined
Mar 18, 2002
Messages
14,736
Location
Behind you
The topic has arisen in the CivForums that deals with whether the map should be Custom Made by the Refs or generated by CivEdit.

I think a combination of the two can be used. Using the parameters we can all (or most) can accept, a generated map is done. In fact, each Ref can generate 5 maps and pass screenshots until they can both decide on a good map for a great game.

Also, I wouldn't mind if the Refs edited the chosen map to change any undesirable condition. If a team chooses a seafaring Tribe (if these are allowed), perhaps the Refs could edit in a river for the seafaring capital. Or move starting locations of Tribes that are 1, 2, or 3 tiles from the coast. Something of this nature.

Thoughts? :cool:
 
I think it should be custom made. "starting location" may be randomly generated, and than can be a base for combination of 4 approximately equal starting location. All will have Iron Horses Saltpeter,
Lux may be substituted on equivalent, land deformed with tiles conservation.
 
I think a combination of the two can be used.

Yeah, that would probably serve best. The question is how far schould the map be fair/equal or unfair/unequal. The opinions postet at civforum seem not to like a handmade map, unequalness is wished to some extent.
 
Personally, I don't think any Tribe should be stuck without Iron and Horses. Coal and Rubber are also big. As far as Luxs go, maybe three with in reach of each tribe before a war develops over the fourth. (Although I don't really know. I don't play on tiny maps with all this water. Not sure what a game like this will entail.)

I also like all Capitals on a river. Don't care for any lakes unless they are more like an inland sea to be shared by all.

What did you think about generating up to 5 maps a Ref and swapping screenshots between the two in order to decide on a good map, justanick? Then edit that where necessary.
 
What did you think about generating up to 5 maps a Ref and swapping screenshots between the two in order to decide on a good map, justanick? Then edit that where necessary.

I don't think we will use this exact procedure, but there will be something like this. But this will be kept secret in ref subforum.
 
Yeah, that would probably serve best. The question is how far schould the map be fair/equal or unfair/unequal. The opinions postet at civforum seem not to like a handmade map, unequalness is wished to some extent.
I think referees should take care about equal value of starting position. To avoid missinterpretation: Ring 1 and Ring 2 should contain the same set of tiles, though relative configuration may be different. 2 Lux is a max for civ on tini map. Each civ may have monopoly on 1 Lux and second may distributed over 2 or 4. Note, that Lux have different value, it may be compensated by Gold and BGs.
 
As you can see from the post below, translated with the Microsoft Translator, CivForum is finishing up the details about the time clock we will be playing with:

The causes of stress are obvious: good half of the assets has actually no time for the DG and makes it anyway. Then comes the feeling of obligation, and it ends either with a permanently bad conscience, that there are not enough time or it squats too much before the box because just the clock is almost empty. Such downtime would at least like me. For the other teams the trains are annoying yes also, where a break is made, but if the game depends on the full 96 hours at a party.
It all looks pretty good. Everything will be pretty equal and workable, it seems. They are also determining the settings for the random map that may be customized to fit the criteria set beforehand. Did anyone wish to make suggestions?
 
"Such downtime would at least like me." :crazyeye: :lol:
(But I don't like downtime...)

"the game depends on the full 96 hours at a party" :eek:
This game may not be for me then... I don't think at my age I can handle 96 hour parties any more... [party]

Anyway: I just posted our suggestions for the map in the conference thread. (Mainly yours and Larkin's suggestions. Let me know if I missed anything.)
 
Here is a hopefully better translation, courtesy of the Lanzelot Translator... ;)

The causes for stress are clear: about half of the active players here does in fact not have time for the ISDG and plays it anyway. This leads to a feeling of responsibility (towards your team), and it ends in you either having a permanent bad conscience that you don't have enough time, or you sitting too much in front of the box (=slang for monitor) because the clock is almost empty right now. I would like these "timeouts" very much. For the other teams not those turns are annoying, where someone takes his timeout, but those turns where the save "hangs" at some team for the full 96 hours.
 
Justanick comment was :
I fear this game will be too balenced, it may end in a "Patt". Game may take forever.
.
I think better "Patt" then frustration due to unbalanced start.
 
Top Bottom