Giant Earth Map - Version 4

[Genghis_Kai]

WW I tanks most definitely would be no match for even the slowest horse, WW II no. The Soviet 26.5 ton T-34, in service from 1940, of which more than 84,000 were built, had a top speed of 53 km/h. The somewhat lighter M-4 Sherman of 1940 was a bit slower at 36.5 km/h. Mind you, off-road these speeds might be halved. Also, Panzers (like the Mk. III, IV and VI, also known as Panther) tended to be slower, but these were also produced in much smaller numbers (under 10,000). Now a race might do 50 km/h or run a marathon of 26 miles under an hour, but it's ofcourse endurance that counts. So, assuming a tank doesn't need to refuel every hour, the horse will be the underdog.

Otherwise, still looking fine.

Thats my understanding too. WW1 tanks are slower than horses while WW2 tanks are faster than horses. SInce we don't have two different tanks in the game to represent WW1 tanks and WW2 tanks, I will need to choose the average speed of both.

Endurance is of course important in real life, but like you said, tank also needs refuel so we should not count that factor.

 

[Genghis_Kai]

Is there anyway to play just the map itself? Without all the unit changes and set spawns?

I know that someone will going to say this

I will give an instruction on how to take away the unit changes. At the moment, all the changes are within one XML file and all you need to do is delete that file.

 

[Agent327]

Thats my understanding too. WW1 tanks are slower than horses while WW2 tanks are faster than horses. SInce we don't have two different tanks in the game to represent WW1 tanks and WW2 tanks, I will need to choose the average speed of both.

That's not as reasonable as it seems. Tanks played only a minor part in WW I (from September 1916); after WW I tanks were developed further, to play a major part in WW II, which revolutionized warfare at large. It's like comparing a pony to a workhorse and saying: let's take the average of both; if some work needs to be done, you go for the workhorse - being the WW II tank, in this case. (This is why I included numbers produced for the most used tanks - dwarfing those used in WW I. Most used tanks should set the tone - IMO.)

 

[Genghis_Kai]

That's not as reasonable as it seems. Tanks played only a minor part in WW I (from September 1916); after WW I tanks were developed further, to play a major part in WW II, which revolutionized warfare at large. It's like comparing a pony to a workhorse and saying: let's take the average of both; if some work needs to be done, you go for the workhorse - being the WW II tank, in this case. (This is why I included numbers produced for the most used tanks - dwarfing those used in WW I. Most used tanks should set the tone - IMO.)

OK then, how about this:

Unit Name / Movement
Horse Archer 3
Knight 2
Cuirassier 3
Cavalry 3
Tank 4
Mech. Infantry 5
Mobile Artillery 4
Mobile SAM 4
Modern Armor 5
Gunship 8

I will need to increase the cost of these units since they are way faster than melee/gunpowder units.

 

[Agent327]

Looks perfect to me! Also, since these are the first armoured units, cost increase is certainly fair. The only comparison would be with knights, whose armour tended to slow them down. (When opposed by faster horse archers who, with powerful enough bows, could even render their armour useless...)

 

[Agent327]

You can alter the startdate, ofcourse, but city placement is according to the startdate of Week 1, January 1942. As Easy Upload appears disabled, I'm attaching it here (test 1 is the last I could load, test 2 has the last additions made):

 

[hammypants]

I have tried nearly everything to make this map work with Dale's Combat Mod. Can't do it. "You have been defeated."

 

[hammypants]

I apologize, I got it to work. Bad eyes miss things in massive lines of text.

Thanks for forcing me to figure it out. :]

 

[Genghis_Kai]

Progress of the 200BC scenario - still placing cities of each civilization.

It is actually quite interesting to check up the history of each civ. But it is also a very time consuming task. I am hoping to complete the city placement in this week.

Updated list of civs in 200 BC scenario:

Draft list of civs:

Europe:
Rome
Macedon
Greece (Aetolia + Pergamon)
Gaul (Celt)
Briton (Celt)
Teuton (Germanic)
Veneti (Slavs)
Scythia

Middle East / North Africa:
Carthage
Ptolemic
Meroe
Armenia
Sheba
Selucid
Parthia

Central / South Asia:
Bactria
Yue Zhi
Da Yuan
Wu Sun
Mauryan
Satavahana
Cholas

East Asia:
Xiong Nu
Han
Chu
Nan Yue
Suwannaphum (Burma/Thai)
Gojoseon (Korea)
Yamato (Japan)

Sub-sahara:
Nok
Bantu

Americas / Oceania:
Maya
Cuicuilco
Chavin
Lapita (Polynesia)

Minor States (represented by 1 non-playable civ):
Celtiberia
Dacia
Numedia
Pontus
Pandyas
Kangju
Sa Huynh
Min-Yue
Jin (South Korea)

Barbarian States (represented by barbarians):
Finn
Berber
Khoisan
Chiang
Dian
Donghu
Ainu

 

[Agent327]

Cool list of civs!

One comment: (I may have mentioned this elsewhere, but) the Veneti of 200 BC cannot be identified as the post 500 AD Slav people with the same name.

 

[Skaithak]

I had a weird bug two games ago (I tend to get part way through a game and then get distracted by a desire to play a different nation, so this wasn't long ago).

Islam was the first religion founded. Don't ask me how or why, but for some reason Saladin founded Islam the turn before Buddhism was founded. I played as the Dutch, and by 1000AD everyone I had contact with, bar the East Asian civs, had converted to it. Which was mildly frustrating for me, as I had built the Shedwagon Paya and wanted to take full advantage of Free Religion. Any idea why this might have occured? It hasn't happened in any other game for me.

One other bug that was less influential on the game. I was playing as David and one of my cities in which I had built a barracks produced a spearman as per my order. However, said spearman had unlimited experience upgrades. It was as though Achilles had just been born in my lands, with +30% strength, all the healing upgrades, everything you can get a spearman without a Great General attached. I was experimenting at the time so didn't save that game and loaded a previous save, whereabouts the bug did not reoccur and said spearman only had access to the one upgrade from the barracks.

Has anyone else encountered either of these?

 

[ijnavy]

East Asia:
Yamato (Japan)

Wasn't Yamato was founded in the third century AD?

 

[Genghis_Kai]

Wasn't Yamato was founded in the third century AD?

Yamato has two meaning in Japanese. The Yamato you referring to is the 300AD Kofun period. The Kanji (chinese character) of it is 和.

Yamato however has a different meaning. 倭, is the name of Japanese referred by Chinese historians in the Han dynasty. It is a generic name and it may not be how the Japanese would call themselve at that time. But just like Birtons and Gauls used in the Roman world, since Japanese culture are not really developed in 200BC, I think using Yamato is appropriate. I also don't want to use names such as Yayoi Culture, which is definitely only a modern terminology.

 

[Agent327]

Well, I didn't know that. However, a term like "Yayoi Culture" - named after a site find - is standard practice in archeology for cultures with no written records; it also avoids confusion (unlike the term "Yamato", which, as you pointed out, has several meanings).

 

[Genghis_Kai]

Well, I didn't know that. However, a term like "Yayoi Culture" - named after a site find - is standard practice in archeology for cultures with no written records; it also avoids confusion (unlike the term "Yamato", which, as you pointed out, has several meanings).

That's what I don't like. It is accurate in archeology, but not good at all for a game like civ.

 

[Genghis_Kai]

Last change of civ list:

Added: Thrace in Romania area (there is some empty space in there)
Removed: Da Yuan in Central asia (was too crowded)

 

[Marmoteo]

Hi Genghis!

I'm really looking forward for the changes on units movement, especially on the naval ones . I always found it weird that it took me ages to get from one point to another, even on modern times.

Hope you're doing well

 

[Kazimierz Wielk]

Is there a way to include the option of choosing how many opponents there are during the game. I ask only because even with a dual processor and 4 gigs of RAM, the game is agonizingly slow at later stages, especially since many nations have released their colonies.

I think it is awesome as is, but the ability to select the number of opponents (if technically possible) would expand the playability of the mod while maintaining its integrity.

 

[cubeboy]

very good job! the only thing that i don't lke is that it takes up to about 10 seconds for the computer to make the AI moves. (3 GHz dual core, 3.25 GB available RAM (4GB physical))

I am fully enjoying this map!!! =D

1) - i hate montezuma for expanding a bit to much into the midwest where all the copper and stone resources are.

2) - Inca will rule the world eventually in my game

3) - where is the barbarian settlement?! grr!

 

[hammypants]

Is there a way to include the option of choosing how many opponents there are during the game. I ask only because even with a dual processor and 4 gigs of RAM, the game is agonizingly slow at later stages, especially since many nations have released their colonies.

I think it is awesome as is, but the ability to select the number of opponents (if technically possible) would expand the playability of the mod while maintaining its integrity.

You have to manually edit the map. It's not hard to do, you may use any text-based editing programs. Just remove what civs you do not want.