Discussion in 'Rhye's and Fall - Dawn of Civilization' started by Bautos42, Jul 11, 2017.
This inane conversation has gone long enough.
Yes, I agree. You're refusing to understand my point.
EDIT: Wait, are you having a bad day?
I understand your point, it's just that it's stupid and talking about it is a waste of time. Please take my conversations with other people who make sensible contributions instead of dragging out minute questions over multiple pages into account before making ill informed assumptions about me as a person.
Ill informed assumptions?
Leoreth's refusing to give you an actual explanation. The best option is to accept that you're not getting one from him. I'll try my hand, though.
You are wondering why having units end their turns on island/bridge-type tiles is a bad thing.
As best I can figure, since Leoreth's not going to explain it, the issue is they're not meant to be full-on land tiles—rather, they're bridges. Links between places. The idea must be that units can exist on the adjacent points, but not on the line itself. It's like stopping on a bridge and trying to get off. Perhaps part of the reasoning is that it's somewhat like a crossing in shallow water. It's something you can use, but not something you can stop on.
I don't really see the use of a Lagoon, to be honest? It is a land tile, that looks like water, and has a +100% defence bonus, right? But it is only going to be used for Venice (though I appreciate the humour in that)? It also looks a bit odd and unfitting, to me, but that is subjective. What is the idea behind it, what is the need, what do you have in mind for it?
I still prefer them seperate, but they are positioned better relative to each other this way. No worries, personal preference in the end. However, both islands are much too close to Australia in your pic. Should be 7 water tiles between Tasmania and the top of the South Island, in your pic it looks like there's only 5. NZ is south of Fiji, not New Caledonia. Shifting NZ to that position will have the added effect of making some of the coast and island tiles look more appropriate, Stewart Island in particular.
HR's terrain is just Blue Marble with some small tweaks and additions. Biggest difference is the water effect.
Honestly it is mostly for the aesthetic, both for having the city be directly in water and for placing it 1S of its previous location (which reduces overlap and gives the city its historical hinterland) without turning the tile into a genuine land tile which would imply the city being located at an east facing coast instead of a south facing one.
Oh really? I thought I had copied the distance directly from your suggestion.
The lagoon tile could also be used to represent the Vistula Lagoon and the Curonian Lagoon
Some places where you could use the lagoon terrain:
the Maldives, Funafuti (Tuvalu), Tokelau, Bora Bora and others in French Polynesia, Ganvie (Cotonou), Indonesia and the Philippines (check out the Sama-Bajau), the Dutch islands on the North Sea; and some lakes have the same concept (they're not coastal lagoons, but cities were built on them): Tenochtitlan, the villages on Lake Inle (Myanmar).
Maybe New Orleans could be lagoon too
Excellent! Could we also have this terrain feature for Tenochtitlan and it switching to a normal land tile around the 1600's.
Also, what does that mountain north of Thebes represent?
Your plains terrain in particular looks much more vibrant in your screenshot, but apparently that's just the difference in our screen settings. The water looks really good though.
I'm going through the other terrain types that have been discussed in the past but I don't really see any reason for them at this point. Anything I am missing?
But most people can walk on islands. Also cities can't be built on water, except Venice and Tenochtitlan.
The way I'm understanding you is that this is a technical problem in the code that can't be overcome (ie, you'd have to make it so land units could end their turn on all water tiles) or that you just don't think it is at all a priority to create tiles that both land and sea units can traverse?
Sometimes a little elaboration is necessary if you don't want people spamming the thread. The people want to know. Could islands/lagoons/atolls be traversed by both land and sea units? Will they be? Do you care?
I should probably just leave it but I hate seeing two people in a stubborn argument. I have to make it three.
Venice is really not that special, even its increasing floods is very typical. There are many, many cities with lots of surface water from natural and artificial rivers, moats, rich people, etc. Waterways were always faster and cheaper than paved roads, and they were used in cities when possible, and it was widely possible.
Nanjing, Shanghai, and Hangzhou should be crowded and require a choice: Nanjing for defense and centrality, Hangzhou for production and food, or Shanghai for ocean tiles and spacing. Suzhou and Yangzhou are also right there.
In this map, Suzhou is on the lake tile and Yangzhou is north of Nanjing.
Am I the only one who thinks that the whole lagoon thing is just a joke?
The graphics remind me strongly of SpongeBob and his big blue eyes.
Venice was the long-lasting Italian city which survived several invasions, especially from the East. By settling it in a special lagoon tile, we could also grant a survival to Italian civ against foreign domination and provide a peculiar gameplay. For example, Germans could go for Rome without conquering Venice.
Separate names with a comma.