1700AD Scenario Development Thread

[Leoreth]

You're right, using Quebec would probably be less of a stretch.

 

[BenZL43]

Both is equally annoying. I don't think I can keep the proportions of everything right while adding two new columns.

Sorry, I mean moving the Papua island 2 columns to the right
If adding 2 new columns, it'll hard to re-balance the China & Japan.

 

[Leoreth]

We'd have New Guinea too far in the east then.

 

[BenZL43]

right. the location of New Guinea now is perfect related to Australia.
I tried adjusting the Philippines to make room for Ambon but still useless ._.
Your location of Ambon is perfect in-game, just how to separate it or make it looks separated from New Guinea.

 

[Leoreth]

I think small archipelagos like the Malukkus can be regarded as part of the larger landmass on the map. There are a couple of other similar cases as well, Zanzibar for example. The spices that are "on" New Guinea are only there because of the Spice Islands anyway, so it's nothing new to place Ambon there.

 

[giant49er]

So I guess Munich isn't going to happen? That's okay, it's just a shame that we can't represent it Also, Taipei should be a Chinese city at the start, since they controlled Taiwan since the 1600s. About North America, Toronto should be removed since it wasn't founded until the late 18th century. Also it would probably be better to move Boston one east and either have Montreal stay where it is now but be Quebec, or move Montreal one southwest and keep the name

 

[Steb]

May I suggest a small map improvement for northeastern North America? Historically, the St. Lawrence river was one of the most important ways to enter the continent, but on the map right now it's just an inland river terminating in a weird lake that doesn't actually exist. Quebec City, I think, should be on the coast to represent its importance is the main port in the region.

So, two possibilities:

1) Turn the tile 1N of the lake into coast. That way the lake tile is connected to the sea and can be understood as the wider part of the St. Lawrence. Keep Quebec City 1W of the former lake.

2) Turn the lake tile into land, extend the river S and E of that tile, and put Quebec City there. That would also reduce the crowding and allow for both Montreal and Quebec City to be founded if the French so desire (I'm not sure where Montreal is in the city name map, but it should be 1E and 1SE of the copper.) Quebec City alone is sufficient for the scenario though.

Also another suggestion: give the French a settler in Quebec City so that they can found a (weak) outpost somewhere in the huge territory that was New France, without making it too deterministic.

 

[Wilhelm Meister]

I liked the map of central Europe, I think it's much better now (I can't describe how much excited I am to play when this scenario is ready), but I have a suggestion regarding the resources in the map, I think the caucasus should have oil in land (and not in the sea) and maybe more than one source to reflect the importance for the russians to defend it (as IRL happened in the second world war) and maybe deleting that source close to Samara to make it fair.

 

[Leoreth]

I think the weird lake is supposed to be the St. Lawrence estuary, it just isn't connected to the sea because of how the map works.

 

[Steb]

It makes sense to call it the St. Lawrence estuary, but not to have it unconnected to the Gulf of St. Lawrence (the cross-shaped water area north of Nova Scotia). Sure, it's inconvenient that water tiles cannot be diagonally linked, but if nothing is done that area of the map will remain extremely imperfect.

I think that just removing the land north of the lake would be simple, would help the local geography a lot, and wouldn't remove anything from the game. So let me insist once more, and then do whatever you want

 

[Leoreth]

I'll have a look at it.

 

[Wilhelm Meister]

Leoreth what do you think of the things I mentioned about Russian oil?

 

[Leoreth]

Oil in the Caucasus makes sense.

 

[Wilhelm Meister]

Yeah and not in Samara because that makes little sense. Thank you for the attention

 

[UnholyMudcrab]

I think that just removing the land north of the lake would be simple, would help the local geography a lot, and wouldn't remove anything from the game. So let me insist once more, and then do whatever you want

I vote to turn the lake into a land tile and extend the river. We could put Québec on that newly-reclaimed bit of land, which relieves a bit of crowding between it and the British colonies. Montréal is a no-go no matter what we do with the St. Lawrence, because having Montréal (I'm assuming it goes on the hill tile 1 SE of the copper) means not having Boston and having a really pinched off New York. A couple of tundra tiles to the north can be changed to grassland for Québec's benefit, and it wouldn't hurt to add a deer or something for food.

 

[Wilhelm Meister]

Does anybody have any idea about when will this scenario be playable?

 

[Lone Wolf]

Only Leoreth has

 

[iOnlySignIn]

Does anybody have any idea about when will this scenario be playable?

 

[WhatMeNo]

Could we possibly add Cardiff to England's cities, please?

 

[BenZL43]

I think small archipelagos like the Malukkus can be regarded as part of the larger landmass on the map. There are a couple of other similar cases as well, Zanzibar for example. The spices that are "on" New Guinea are only there because of the Spice Islands anyway, so it's nothing new to place Ambon there.

I know.. but it's just.. weird
Maybe it's weird only because I'm not familiar with that haha.
By the way, is it a good city location? Because I never settle there..