Alternative Map for DOC

[TJDowling]

Here's my remake of Aotearoa. A bit wider than in reality, but necessary to preserve some accuracy of shape. Position of the North and South Island aren't quite right relative to each other, but I feel this is the best possible arrangement. Everything else either links the islands (yuck) or messes with latitude too much.

View attachment 496014

EDIT: Just noticed the Shellfish/Clam resource isn't showing. It's on the same tile as the island feature at the bottom of the South Island.

Looks good, but to my admittedly uneducated eye the South Island seems a bit thick along the upper half and maybe a bit short compared to the North island. I'd suggest maybe shaving the top one or two mountains on the South Island and moving the whole South Island 1SW adding two more on the NE coast. Might be too long though.

EDIT: Connecting would solve the latitudinal discrepancy

 

[Bautos42]

Here's my remake of Aotearoa. A bit wider than in reality, but necessary to preserve some accuracy of shape. Position of the North and South Island aren't quite right relative to each other, but I feel this is the best possible arrangement. Everything else either links the islands (yuck) or messes with latitude too much.

While I like your design in theory, I am not convinced that it should be increased in size at all. Your new design has New Zealand just a lot larger in comparison to Australia and Tasmania than it is in real life. As you said before:

3-tile Tasmania is definitely more realistic than a 4-tile Tasmania. It's too big on the old map.

But now considering that New Zealand is about 4 Times as big as Tasmania, the current 12-tiles version is just far better scaled. My point is, why would New Zealand actually deserve this kind of special treatment (from an ingame perspective, this is not meant to offend New Zealand in any way, it's a beautiful country)? I'd personally refrain from enlarging areas if there is no gameplay reason for doing so. Of course some islands like Great Britain or Java are oversized, but they are the cores of civs represented in the game. A larger New Zealand would, if at all, help Polynesia (where the area is certainly not the main focus) or a hypothetical Australian Civ, a proper New Zealander being highly unlikely. Thus, while there is in theory no reason not to implement it (There is enough space down there), in practice it adds nearly nothing to the game and I thus would prefer keeping the scale. But I'd certainly love to add some appropriate resources and terrain changes, and if you have suggestions of improving the shape of New Zealand without exploding it in size, like separating the two islands, I would be great.


@Leoreth Could you upload your current version of the map? I wanted to do some experimentation with Africa and having your changes to Egypt would be great. (The new resources should be inconsequential as i do not use the worldbuilder)

 

[Xyth]

Looks good. Judging from a map both islands are really close to each other though, what do you think about a diagonal land connection? I.e. either moving South Island east or North Island west?

I much prefer them separate, not just because I have familiarity bias (I live right next to the Cook Strait), but because I've tried all sorts of configurations and just cannot get any to look good. One idea I had was to replace the NE tile of the South Island with an Island feature, as that is the location of the Marlborough Sounds:

Looked stupid though.

I guess the canonical locations are Auckland 1S of the fish, Wellington 1S of the peak, Christchurch 1S of the coal, is that correct? All these are reasonably good locations that provide accurate relative populations. You could even leave out Wellington which only misses the oil.

That's correct.

Where is the map wraparound border relative to this?

It cuts through the South Island immediately west of the coal tile and immediately east of the Island/Clam tile.

Looks good, but to my admittedly uneducated eye the South Island seems a bit thick along the upper half and maybe a bit short compared to the North island. I'd suggest maybe shaving the top one or two mountains on the South Island and moving the whole South Island 1SW adding two more on the NE coast. Might be too long though.

While I like your design in theory, I am not convinced that it should be increased in size at all. Your new design has New Zealand just a lot larger in comparison to Australia and Tasmania than it is in real life.

A larger New Zealand would, if at all, help Polynesia (where the area is certainly not the main focus) or a hypothetical Australian Civ, a proper New Zealander being highly unlikely. Thus, while there is in theory no reason not to implement it (There is enough space down there), in practice it adds nearly nothing to the game and I thus would prefer keeping the scale. But I'd certainly love to add some appropriate resources and terrain changes, and if you have suggestions of improving the shape of New Zealand without exploding it in size, like separating the two islands, I would be great.

I anticipated this feedback, as my design deliberately favoured shape over size. But I've also been working on one with that balance weighted more in the other direction:

Actually came out much better than I expected, though the North Island looks a bit anaemic. Joining the islands looks even worse at this size than it does with the larger version though, so I urge against trying that. Resources are in the same places except for the Coal which is now in the NW corner of the South Island. The wraparound line is immediately east of the Jade resource. This shift actually made Stewart Island look more realistic too, which was a nice bonus.

But now considering that New Zealand is about 4 Times as big as Tasmania, the current 12-tiles version is just far better scaled.

My objection to 4-tile Tasmania was more that it messed up the shape of the island, rather than it just being too big. 3-tile Tasmania looks much more like the real thing. I didn't communicate that very clearly.

My point is, why would New Zealand actually deserve this kind of special treatment (from an ingame perspective, this is not meant to offend New Zealand in any way, it's a beautiful country)? I'd personally refrain from enlarging areas if there is no gameplay reason for doing so. Of course some islands like Great Britain or Java are oversized, but they are the cores of civs represented in the game..

Java is the 13th largest island in the world – North Island is the 14th and South Island is the 12th. As you rightly say, Java is a massive population/political centre and needs to be large for gameplay purposes. NZ does not. Useful point of reference though. Java on the version of the map I have is 10 tiles, my original North Island is 9 tiles and South Island is 10 tiles. In the smaller configuration they are 7 and 8, respectively

 

[Xyth]

Here's a shot in context:

 

[TJDowling]

Here's a shot in context:

View attachment 496079

Your second design looks better. The South island has a pinch in the middle which seems geographically correct and the proportions are a bit better. Still not sold on having two islands but it could make for an interesting scenario in which Polynesia colonizes one island and then an independent other pops up shortly after which you have to launch a naval assault.

 

[Leoreth]

So for comparison I tried your proposal while keeping the islands connected:

Spoiler :

I think it approximates the recognisable shape of the two islands better.

By the way, comparing your and my screenshot illustrates how much more vibrant HR's terrain is. I am considering to switch to it.

I also added Millet and Amber as discussed:

Spoiler :

Spoiler :

I have also been thinking about making Tundra and Desert more of a natural obstacle, i.e. removing most the ability to enter them from most units except the usual exceptions (like Scouts or units with the Desert Adaptation promotion), as well as building roads and improvements. Rivers could be an exception to this rule (at least for improvements) and of course features like Oases. Also, while I did not try this yet, cultural coverage should allow all units access like it does with Oceans. Also, we can deliberately break up these limitations where necessary when the new Semidesert or Moorland terrains are included.

 

[soul-breathing]

Amber could both exist on land and in the sea.

And how about add shrimp as an seafood resourse? Since Millet and potato have been added as food resourses on land, we need a new seafood resourse.

Also I suggest to add fish in the Caspian Sea, to represent the caviar. And actually it should produce commerce and a few food, since caviar is not a very important resourse, it's not necessary to add a caviar resourse.

And why the tile of Sankt-Petersburg is marsh?

 

[Leoreth]

Culture should spread diagonally across water. Just look at Sardinia and Crete, it's ugly and the sheep & wine cannot be connected to trade routes.

I don't really understand what you mean. What does culture spread have to do with trade routes, what is diagonal spread and how would it solve the problem?

 

[Leoreth]

What do you think about having a true Venice in the water?

Spoiler :

Lagoon is a new terrain type that uses Coast art but is treated as land, so land units can move there and build a city. It looks rather fitting. The terrain also has +100% defense so Venice is historically hard to conquer. It's kind of a gimmick because this is the only place on the map I could think of where this would be actually used, but it represents the unique nature of the city better than anything else we've had.

In other news, I quickly revisited Polynesia to make sure it behaves the same in its UHV. In some cases this meant that I reverted the configuration of the islands to be closer to the old map.

Spoiler :

 

[DC123456789]

Would it be possible to have some islands on the lagoon as well? Currently it does look too much like a normal coast tile, IMO.

 

[1SDANi]

What do you think about having a true Venice in the water?

Spoiler :

View attachment 496129 View attachment 496130

Lagoon is a new terrain type that uses Coast art but is treated as land, so land units can move there and build a city. It looks rather fitting. The terrain also has +100% defense so Venice is historically hard to conquer. It's kind of a gimmick because this is the only place on the map I could think of where this would be actually used, but it represents the unique nature of the city better than anything else we've had.

In other news, I quickly revisited Polynesia to make sure it behaves the same in its UHV. In some cases this meant that I reverted the configuration of the islands to be closer to the old map.

Spoiler :

View attachment 496132

Are naval units able to move through lagoons? If so, that could be used to fix Crete, Sardinia and Corsica, and Ireland, albeit through a rename such as short-boat ride. Come to think of, that could also be used for Japan and Constantinople.

 

[Leoreth]

Would it be possible to have some islands on the lagoon as well? Currently it does look too much like a normal coast tile, IMO.

It's pretty clear from the elevation I think. It's not that noticeable in the screenshot but the waves from the surrounding coast tiles break against the lagoon tile emphasising its special status. Having islands on the tile would be weird because they would need to be removed when the city is founded so they do not interfere with the city art.

Are naval units able to move through lagoons? If so, that could be used to fix Crete, Sardinia and Corsica, and Ireland, albeit through a rename such as short-boat ride. Come to think of, that could also be used for Japan and Constantinople.

No (unless you build a city on them of course). They are land tiles and follow all the rules for land tiles.

 

[soul-breathing]

When city built on lagoon, does its population also counts as Core Area Population?

 

[Publicola]

I agree the lagoon tile should have different art somehow (maybe just sandbars?) but I really like the idea.

So for comparison I tried your proposal while keeping the islands connected:

Would it be possible to change the rules for 'island' features so that both land and sea units are able to traverse them? That would allow you to connect the two islands of New Zealand (and, for that matter, connect Denmark to Scandanavia) while still allowing naval units to pass through.

 

[1SDANi]

I agree the lagoon tile should have different art somehow (maybe just sandbars?) but I really like the idea.


Would it be possible to change the rules for 'island' features so that both land and sea units are able to traverse them? That would allow you to connect the two islands of New Zealand (and, for that matter, connect Denmark to Scandanavia) while still allowing naval units to pass through.

Even better idea!

Yes, it's possible.

 

[Leoreth]

When city built on lagoon, does its population also counts as Core Area Population?

As land tiles, lagoon tiles would have a stability type and be part of a core if applicable. For example, the Venetian lagoon would be in the Italian core, so its population would count as core area population.

I agree the lagoon tile should have different art somehow (maybe just sandbars?) but I really like the idea.

Well, this is the easiest way to graphically represent this because it is basically only applying the coast texture to a land tile. I certainly cannot create anything else.

Would it be possible to change the rules for 'island' features so that both land and sea units are able to traverse them? That would allow you to connect the two islands of New Zealand (and, for that matter, connect Denmark to Scandanavia) while still allowing naval units to pass through.

I don't know if islands are the right way to do this because it could have unintentional consequences. But I have for a while considered sea tiles that can be traversed by land units. However, the problem is that the game only has the notion of whether a unit can exist on a tile, and uses this to determine if a unit can traverse a certain path. However, this would require allowing land unit to pass through a sea tile but not ending their turn in it. I have no idea if it is possible to implement that into the game considering that parts of the pathfinding logic are baked into the exe.

 

[soul-breathing]

As land tiles, lagoon tiles would have a stability type and be part of a core if applicable. For example, the Venetian lagoon would be in the Italian core, so its population would count as core area population.

Maybe the tile of Sankt-Petersburg could also be lagoon?

By the way, what do you think about my suggestions on #1032?

 

[1SDANi]

As land tiles, lagoon tiles would have a stability type and be part of a core if applicable. For example, the Venetian lagoon would be in the Italian core, so its population would count as core area population.


Well, this is the easiest way to graphically represent this because it is basically only applying the coast texture to a land tile. I certainly cannot create anything else.


I don't know if islands are the right way to do this because it could have unintentional consequences. But I have for a while considered sea tiles that can be traversed by land units. However, the problem is that the game only has the notion of whether a unit can exist on a tile, and uses this to determine if a unit can traverse a certain path. However, this would require allowing land unit to pass through a sea tile but not ending their turn in it. I have no idea if it is possible to implement that into the game considering that parts of the pathfinding logic are baked into the exe.

Why can't we just allow units to end their turns on these special sea tiles?

 

[Leoreth]

Maybe the tile of Sankt-Petersburg could also be lagoon?

By the way, what do you think about my suggestions on #1032?

I don't think we need another seafood resource. I will look into the food situation at the Caspian Sea.

St. Petersburg is a marsh initially because that's what Ingria has mostly been like. Historically, the area wasn't settled until Peter the Great decided to move his capital there, and the swamps were drained using intensive labour. In the game, the marshes will disappear at an appropriate date around 1700 AD so the city can be settled.

Why can't we just allow units to end their turns on these special sea tiles?

Because that would be stupid.

 

[1SDANi]

Because that would be stupid.

Like naval units ending turns in a city?