1.184 Settler Maps

blizzrd

blizzrd

Micromanager
Joined
Dec 27, 2005
Messages
3,738
Location
Melbourne, Australia
Attached to this post are the settler maps for RFC version 1.184 (BTS).

Comparing these to the previous maps (1.181) there weren't really too many changes, a number of civs were unchanged. The biggest changes I noticed were to the Vikings, Mongolia and France.

The colours in order from least stable (White) to most stable (Yellow) are as follows:

White
Light Grey
Medium Grey
Dark Grey
Green
Teal
Magenta
Purple
Dark Red
Red
Yellow
 
China's stability is better in North America than South Korea. :crazyeye:
 
Well, historically the second (and last) Sui emperor lost a lot of soldiers trying to conquer Korea, and that was part of the reason of the fall of the Sui dynasty.
I would like the North American west coast to be a little more than gray though (seeing that there is so much Chinese there).
Thanks blizzrd.
 
True, but under the Qing Korea was basically controlled by China. And the fall of the Sui wouldn't be a collapse in RFC terms; the Tang Dynasty was established the very same year.
 
Why dose America have purple areas in Europe? Are they planning an invasion?:confused:
 
It's probably the US military in those areas.
 
Interesting. Some thoughts:

Cadiz is less stable for Arabia than the rest of southern Spain, according to the colours (green/purple).

It's nice to see that the Greeks have spots for Rhodes/Crete and Sardinia, while the Carthaginians have Corsica/Sardinia coloured (other than grey; Rome has both islands). Too bad I've never seen anything built...

Would love to see Portugal settling in Newfoundland (eastern Canada). Rhye knows his history... but why do the Romans have green in eastern Canada? I can guess about the colouring for Buenos Aires...

Vikings settling in India? I must review my knowledge of Swedish/Danish history in the Age of Exploration.
 
The Danish had some trading settlements there. (Tranquebar, Serampore). They sold them to Britain later.

Most of these interesting possibilities, like Danish India, are never seen in RFC anyway - the AI, while a bit better then in previous versions, is still rather shy to colonize, especially the English.
 
Maybe Rhye has mistaken Newfoundland for Long Island/New York. :crazyeye:
 
star15389 said:
China's stability is better in North America than South Korea. :crazyeye:
Click to expand...

Actually not.
I'm not familiar with the colours you're using for the different types of regions, but your "white" means that the region is forbidden to AI settlers, not that is more unstable than the rest of the world.
What makes a region more unstable is if belongs to a core area of another civ
 
So Rhye, am I correct in reading your last post that the settler maps actually do not affect a player's stability? That the only factor influencing stability that stems from city location is whether it is in another civ's core area or not?
 
can you, (or anyone else for that matter) give me an idea how big an impact the maps actually have on overall stability? For example, for a 20 city empire, how big a difference is there between an additional settled city in a white zone versus a teal zone or a yellow zone?
 
I'm pretty sure its different for each civ, so if it is, let's assume we're talking about... the Roman civ for Nerf's question.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

danjuno
Why is everything so flat?
2 3
Replies
52
Views
2K
thetrooper
thetrooper
Leoreth
DoC 1.18 Civilizations
2 3
Replies
45
Views
11K
Dracosolon
D
King Phaedron
The Best Map I've ever made - a dramatic Soulblazer!
Replies
3
Views
1K
SaboteurINT
SaboteurINT
AcaMetis
Nobles' Club 359: Genghis Khan of Mongolia
Replies
19
Views
2K
BornInCantaloup
BornInCantaloup
Leoreth
Large Map and New Civilizations are now playable
33 34 35
Replies
696
Views
70K
banzay13
banzay13
Top Bottom