Alternative Map for DOC

Perhaps also adding a wetland region that allows food production and improvements (farms, using the paddies art?) and allows unit passage (as opposed to the swamps) but does not allow city construction?

And for water tiles, coral reefs, mangroves (along coasts), and seagrass beds could make the seas more interesting.

I made a long comment about things that could added to the terrain system long ago, but can't find it anymore. Don't think it's too relevant to find again, right?

Found it, I loved the idea when I first read it and later wanted to find it but couldn't remember the thread. One thing that stuck out was the use of malaria to control movement and settling instead of jungles, and so I searched malaria and found it.

After my previous, very disorganized post, here's a concrete proposal of what the terrain and yield system would look like in my ideal world :D

Soil cover types:
Grasslands

Representing humid grasslands
Uses current grasslands terrain, perhaps a more vibrant green color
Base 2 food
Farm can be built without access to water (rainfed agriculture), pastures can be built if there are animals

Prairies
Representing dry grasslands
Needs new terrain art, a yellower version of the current grasslands
Base 1 food
Farm can be built only with access to freshwater (rivers, lakes, or irrigation) or when there is a crop resource to improve, pastures can be built if there are animals
(note that there's no extra hammer from the prairies)

Steppes and Shrublands
Representing cold, subarctic, and alpine grasslands; and semideserts and shrublands.
Colors: Steppes a grayish green, shrublands a paler (sandier) version of the current plains terrain
Base 0 food
Farms can be built with access to freshwater or when there is a crop resource to improve, pastures if there are animals
They can differ in the resources they allow (for example, spices and incense should only exist in shrublands).

Desert and Tundra
Representing real deserts and sand dunes; and tundra
They both use current artwork
Base 0 food
Farms and pastures can't be built at all, no food resources should be allowed on these terrains (not even deer)

Forest cover types:
Forests
, Rainforests, and Taiga
Representing, respectively: deciduous, mixed and temperate forests; tropical humid and cold humid cloud and rain forests; alpine forests and boreal forests (taiga).
Uses current artwork
Adds 2 hammer indistinctly of forest type
These three forests types can grow only over grasslands, prairies and steppes
They differ in the resources they can have

Woodlands
Representing savannas and other sparsely forested ecosystems, including shrublands.
Needs artwork
Adds 1 hammer
These forests can grow only over prairies, steppe and shrublands (not grasslands)

- All forest coverings can be chopped down, and all are treated equally in terms of what technology is required for chopping. Forests, Taiga, and Rainforest all provide the same amount of hammers when chopped down, woodlands provide a lower amount of hammers.

Water covering:
Wetlands

Represents swamps, marshes, mangroves
Wetlands can occur over all soil cover types, except desert and tundra, and can happen even when there is a forest covering.
Adds +1 food
Wetlands can have any of these food resources on them: cattle, pigs, deer, rice, wheat, corn, fish, crabs, clam. They can all be improved (with farms, pastures, fishing nets, the latter built by workers, not working boats). Cities and towns can't be built here (except for the Egyptians, Aztecs, Khmer, Thai, Indonesians, and Dutch).
- Wetlands can be drained (at the expense of the extra food resource they provide, and making any seafood resources disappear), perhaps with the "machinery" technology.

Glacier
Represents ice covering
Can occur over any terrain type
Brings food down to zero
Makes all improvements impossible, it's impassable.

We completely do away with jungles as they are now, but a mosquito resource could be added in certain regions to represent malaria, dengue - the largest causes of human deaths in history, and the one reason why some rainforests are perceived to be inaccessible "jungles". This mosquito resource can't be cleared until some later tech is discovered (as biology does now with jungles). Mosquitos can only occur in rainforests (flooded or not) and in any flooded terrain in tropical and subtropical regions of the map. Mosquitos make the tile impossible to improve and cause high damage to any unit passing (perhaps so that in two or three turns the unit dies). These tiles can't have any animal resources.

Relief features
As existing: plains, hills, mountains.
Plains can have any of the soil cover types, any of the forest coverings, any of the water coverings.
Hills can have any of the soil cover types, any forest covering, and ice, but not flooding. Hills reduce one food and provide one extra hammer in comparison to plains.
* I'm thinking mountains could accept having metal and rock resources, and could then be mined/quarried. Forest covering should also be possible.

I would advocate for a new terrain improvement, forest gardens, that allows ancient civs to farm rainforests without chopping them down (after some technology is discovered), providing +1 food. So far as I know, this was not practiced in temperate or cold regions, but happened widely in Central and South America, and I'm pretty sure that also in Southeast Asia and Africa. So I would restrict it to rainforests. With environmentalism or similar civics, this improvement could be done on any forest covering type.
 
Does it have its own thread? I remember liking the post but not much about the specific content, so I think you should.

Edit: I'd like a 2:food: terrain that does not allow improvements, seems like wetland is exactly right for that. Improvements could be enabled with a later tech (Hydraulics?) to bring them up to par with grassland.
 
Wetlands would fit really nicely for places where there are a lot of swamps, but not so many you can't pass. Maybe a lake feature that could work like oases would be good, representing many small lakes like in sweden and finland, give it +1:food:.
 
I propose moving France and Iberia 1 tile north to enable the expansion of Iberia by 1 tile on the NS axis - the original Iberia in the larger map is wider than it is tall, which is inaccurate.

It also has the benefit of creating a more accurate coastline for Northern France.

Here's my proposal (city placements might be somewhat off)
Screen Shot 2017-12-10 at 3.38.41 PM.png
 
Seems a bit too large.
 
Seems a bit too large.
My proposal has Iberia at 49 tiles and mainland France at 45, IRL Iberia is 225,000 square miles and mainland France is 210,000.
210/225=93%
45/49=92%

Seems pretty good to me

Am I reading the minimal right? Is Iberia about 80% the size of the Arabian peninsula? That seems excessive…

Europe is enlarged on this map. My proposed Iberia is the right size vis-a-vis the rest of Europe
 
If you snipped off the corners, in particular the top left, it would look less square, while becoming more reasonably sized. I also think a row needs to be slapped off the bottom, as it kind of juts out into Africa.
 
Can you post a screenshot showing more of North Africa and Western Europe? That would make it easier to see the proportions
 
I also think a row needs to be slapped off the bottom, as it kind of juts out into Africa.
Gibraltar is at 36 degrees 8' North latitude, which actually a bit south of Algiers (Algeria) and Tunis (Tunisia). Representing the southernmost bit of the Iberian peninsula as the same row as the northernmost part of Africa is actually pretty accurate.
 
Europe is enlarged on this map. My proposed Iberia is the right size vis-a-vis the rest of Europe

I'm gonna quote an earlier post:
At the rate things are going, by 2020 Europe will be the largest of all continents on earth.

I not sure how I feel about an expanding Europe is needed to justify or make realistic an expanded Europe.
 
Am I reading the minimal right? Is Iberia about 80% the size of the Arabian peninsula?
I not sure how I feel about an expanding Europe is needed to justify or make realistic an expanded Europe.
To be fair, Europe is the most heavily populated continent in terms of how many civs are forced to fit there. The Arabian peninsula has at most a single civ, and even then the two major Arab cities (Mecca and Sana'a) hug the coast and leave the interior empty. Plus, the Arab core pretty quickly shifts up to Mesopotamia anyway.

The Iberian peninsula contains the cores of three civs -- Cordoba, Spain, and Portugal -- plus it's a playground for both Rome and Carthage earlier in its history.

The Rhye's world map was never intended to be absolutely representative of physical geography. Europe has always been larger than most other regions because of its geopolitical significance, and the number of civs that need space. From what I've seen, the larger map proposed here keeps the same sort of ratio as the current map.
 
I think the issue with making Spain itself larger/better than it already is is that their whole THING is trying to manage a global empire despite their relatively meager core. A 5 city core is probably ok, but once you get to the point of having 6 (which that layout accommodates pretty easily; why wouldn't you found something in the Bilbao area?) I think you start to run into problems.

Also the Arabia distraction reminds me: Muscat could use being a better city site.
 
I think the issue with making Spain itself larger/better than it already is is that their whole THING is trying to manage a global empire despite their relatively meager core. A 5 city core is probably ok, but once you get to the point of having 6 (which that layout accommodates pretty easily; why wouldn't you found something in the Bilbao area?) I think you start to run into problems.

Also the Arabia distraction reminds me: Muscat could use being a better city site.

They'll have 40% more colonial cities with this bigger map. On the original version of this bigger map, Spain is compressed vertically whereas the north coast of France is elongated. Shifting Iberia and most of France 1N and using that space to make Iberia taller makes a more accurate Europe, and also doesn't make Europe any larger - it just makes the proportions more accurate.
 
I think the issue with making Spain itself larger/better than it already is is that their whole THING is trying to manage a global empire despite their relatively meager core. A 5 city core is probably ok, but once you get to the point of having 6 (which that layout accommodates pretty easily; why wouldn't you found something in the Bilbao area?) I think you start to run into problems.

They'll have 40% more colonial cities with this bigger map.

I feel like the civics should help with colonialism. Or England would need to be half the size of India just to capture their historical territory.
 
I think it makes far more sense to adjust the stability rules to the map rather than the other way around.
 
Top Bottom