35civAllLeaders Scenario

[Sureshot]

35civAllLeaders Scenario (for 0.31e)



33 civs preplaced, encompassing all leaders except Hyborem and Basium.
Each civ has 3 cities, split between their leaders. When theres one leader, they get all 3 cities; when theres two leaders, one gets 2 cities and the other gets 1; when theres three leaders each gets one city.
Map dimensions are 44 by 50 (about Standard size), toroidal world shape.

Exceptions:
Kuriotates start with 1 city.
Basium does not exist until summoned.
Hyborem does not exist until summoned and has a big spot open for him south of Sheaim lands.

Standard Options:
No Settlers
No City Razing
Require Complete Kills
These are what the map was designed around, though they can be changed

Screenshots of the map from ingame:

Spoiler :

Spoiler :

 

[Demus]

played an OCC game as the kurio's, looks nice sofar. 1 pointer though: the research bonus civs get from multiple palaces seems to greatly affect the score board, expecially during the early game. The Ljos started out leading, with the calabim close behind. Not a single 1-leader civ managed to get up the upper part of the score board, and most were picked off one at a time by the multiple-leader civs.

 

[Agent327]

You might have mentioned it's for FfH on the DL page. (Also there's no link to thread.)

 

[xienwolf]

Heh heh. That's a lot of Heart shaped Valleys


The point about Palace bonus cash is a valid one. Maybe for each Leader under 3 that a Civ possess they can have 2 Towns in their starting range? That way they can have the same gold income initially, when the difference is the most poignant.

 

[Sureshot]

I added a link and description to the DL page, i hadn't used that method before and it was late heh.

theres advantages and disadvantages to being teamed i find, in fact the first person i talked to was worried the 3 leader team would be the worst off because of the research penalty that teams get.

in my games i found that teams didn't do badly, and the single person teams would be lower in the list but not necessarily in the scores. that is because teams placement in the score list is based on their combined score which contains redundancies, notably their tech score. like ill notice malakim will have a score of 400 and still be low on the list, yet 400 being the highest any other individual leader of a team has.

as for multi-leader civs killing single-leader civs, which in particular? my test runs didn't show that as a trend, in fact malakim did amazing, it was usually a 2 leader civ like bannor or elohim getting taken out, usually by hippus horse rushes.

a list of disadvantages and advantages of teamed civs (please tell me more if you know any):

Advantages of Teams:
extra commerce per city from palaces
extra +1 happiness in city from palace
more free units maintenance wise
less city maintenance costs

Disadvantages of teams:
research penalty
less coordination
great person penalty

in general i was more worried that the teams would be disadvantaged but my list of pros and cons eased my mind so i think it might be based on the civs/starts, of the 1 leader teams i find the following do well/badly

Single Leader Civs doing well:
Malakim
Cassiel

Single Leader Civs doing badly:
Svartalfar
Illians

the ones doing badly i chalked up to bad starts, if you have any to add to this list let me know and ill try to rebalance them

 

[Rex rgis of Ter]

First of all, great map Sureshot!

I find the Sidar are also poor players. They, like the Svartalfar, suffer intense matinence penalties, destroying their research. The Svartalfar are probably the worst in the game. Have you considered making them a little less tundra infested, because the Frostling event happens every 4-5 turns.

 

[Sureshot]

hmm, i put the svartalfar in tundra so they wouldnt lose their forests to hell terrain when the infernal come in, tried to make up for the tundra starts by giving rivers and 3 extra deer resources; every other civ only has 3 resources per city excepting those with tundra starts who get an extra 3 deer resources, and kuriotates who get 9 resources since they only get 1 city.

svartalfar managed to do badly despite that in my games as well, so im not quite sure what to do to fix it without making them vulnerable to hell terrain.

sidar have a pretty decent long term spot, giving them anything that gives them a boost worries me in the hands of a human player.. though i could put a lake between the sidar cities to give them an early connection for trade routes to reduce their long term potential at the cost of better early trade.

 

[Demus]

maybe giving the svarts an additional happiness resource would solve the issue?

giving the way the AI utilizes the civ specific features, it's understandable the sidar do poor in the hands of an AI, but would do well in the hands of a player. Giving them a better early game could solve this, even though i wouldn't know if a lake would be the way to go.

by the way, any chance of you updating your other maps to the latest game version?

 

[Sureshot]

i tried to update them but encountered a CTD that puzzled me, which is part of why i made this map heh

the reason id use lakes is because it would help out the early game (connect their starter cities since lakes act like roads or rivers) in a way that diminishes its late game (lake tiles are practically useless later on). sidar can start slow but they do quite well as the game goes on, especially in human hands.

i wouldnt use a river to connect them or to give them extra commerce since other than that theyve got really ideal land (grasslands with some hills and forest) while others suffer unhealthiness or tundra when they have river access.

i'll consider adding an extra luxury resource for tundra civs to help them out, seems like it might be necessary, or maybe another deer? heh

 

[Demus]

just had another look at the map, and i recon lakes would help them out considerably. The reason: right now they're the only civ without any type of fresh water (besides the lanun, but they don't need it), meaning they can't build farms. No farms -> no specialists -> crappy sidar.

 

[Agent327]

35civAllLeaders Scenario[/URL] (for 0.31e)

The DL Page says it's for 0.31D. (Might explain the low DL count.)

 

[Sureshot]

ah ya, for some reason i keep thinkin most recent patch is D not E

 

[Sureshot]

i updated and uploaded the map with the following changes:
sidars 3 cities connected by a lake
all 3 tundra civs (illians, doviello and svartalfar) 3 cities each given an extra wheat resource to help boost their food early on

 

[Shub-Felty]

Great Map... finally pulled me away from creation.py for a few games

 

[Milaga]

Does this scenario work with 0.32? I'd be interested in trying it but I don't have a 0.31 installed anymore.

 

[Sureshot]

it should work, 0.31 maps work with 0.32, the only problem ive encountered is with one of the recent patches removing two units and a promotion, but they are uncommon units/promotions and none of them are in this map.

 

[mimic]

I'm playing this on 0.32 and it seems to work fine though I'm only up to the first hundred turns

Nice map btw

 

[Moos]

I get a CTD when trying this scenario under 0.32.
PythonDbg.log gives following as the last line: load_module CvGameInterfaceFile
PythonErr2.log gives following as the last line: load_module CvAppInterface

Anyone got any suggestions how to make it work?

hmm I did get it to work in Fall Further modmod though..

 

[abculatter2]

I get a CTD when trying this scenario under 0.32.
PythonDbg.log gives following as the last line: load_module CvGameInterfaceFile
PythonErr2.log gives following as the last line: load_module CvAppInterface

Anyone got any suggestions how to make it work?

hmm I did get it to work in Fall Further modmod though..

are you playing patch "L"?

it says right next to the link to download that it's for patch "e"

 

[Sureshot]

it should work with patch L, atleast i cant think of anything thats changed that would affect this map to make it crash