Any good map scripts that work with VP?

[vyyt]

I use Hellblazer's NQ map script. In my experience, Communitas makes for maps that are *way* too big relative to the number of players. I don't like it at all.

If this is your only concern, then why don't you increase the number of civs? You can increase it even more with the Really Advanced Setup mod. When I was playing with Communitas, I often played with Huge, 18 civs and 16 CSs, which resulted in each civ having enough space for 3-8 cities, if I remember correctly.

 

[matlajs]

with 16cs? how many votes u need to win diplomatic? im playing communitas with 13+ me + 24(standard) cs and i found it ideal. there are wars, there are aliances and main, fun.

 

[vyyt]

Dunno, I am a bad person, I only leave domination and time VCs on

Anyway, the point is that it is possible to increase the number of civs in order to fill the map and you can do even more so with RAS.

 

[krazyhades]

If this is your only concern, then why don't you increase the number of civs? You can increase it even more with the Really Advanced Setup mod. When I was playing with Communitas, I often played with Huge, 18 civs and 16 CSs, which resulted in each civ having enough space for 3-8 cities, if I remember correctly.

I could just **** it up with more civs to grind through, but I prefer the standard map size much more.

 

[vyyt]

I could just **** it up with more civs to grind through, but I prefer the standard map size much more.

You mean standard number of civs on standard size, right? Well, then you can fiddle with the sea level. However, it might create too snaky / narrow land masses where land warfare won't be fun, so I am afraid Communitas and you are not meant for each other

 

[BiteInTheMark]

I have heard the communitas map is based on the old PerfectWorld3 script, but i cant really believe that. The communitas map always looks so weird like 2 rectangle are thrown over the world map.
In my opinion, PerfectWorld3 creates relative realistic continents and also creates more mountains and rivers. Its more enjoyable to play Inka or any jungle/wood based civilizations.
Unfortunatly you dont have many options to configurate the map, but this makes it also more surprising (and enjoyable).

 

[Magean]

I have heard the communitas map is based on the old PerfectWorld3 script, but i cant really believe that. The communitas map always looks so weird like 2 rectangle are thrown over the world map.
In my opinion, PerfectWorld3 creates relative realistic continents and also creates more mountains and rivers. Its more enjoyable to play Inka or any jungle/wood based civilizations.
Unfortunatly you dont have many options to configurate the map, but this makes it also more surprising (and enjoyable).

I haven't played Perfect World for a very long time (since G&K actually) but I remember that the AI, for some reason, was very inefficient on this map. It felt like playing one or two difficulty levels lower. Maybe due to the high amount of desert and jungles that the AI didn't know how to handle ?

 

[Strigvir]

I haven't played Perfect World for a very long time (since G&K actually) but I remember that the AI, for some reason, was very inefficient on this map. It felt like playing one or two difficulty levels lower. Maybe due to the high amount of desert and jungles that the AI didn't know how to handle ?

"Hard" terrain (rivers, hills, deserts and forests) favours defending side and vanilla AI isn't the brightest tactician, so it very well may be the case.

 

[joosegoose25]

I use Hellblazer's NQ map script. In my experience, Communitas makes for maps that are *way* too big relative to the number of players. I don't like it at all.

You mean standard number of civs on standard size, right? Well, then you can fiddle with the sea level. However, it might create too snaky / narrow land masses where land warfare won't be fun, so I am afraid Communitas and you are not meant for each other

This is precisely why I also use Hellblazer's NQ map script. The snaky continents of Communitas, fractal, Tectonic, etc. lends itself to inconsistent land warfare, which I don't like. Hellblazer's script can be a little too....predictable at times in terms of map layout but pick your poison I suppose.

 

[Magean]

"Hard" terrain (rivers, hills, deserts and forests) favours defending side and vanilla AI isn't the brightest tactician, so it very well may be the case.

Actually, it was not only about tactics but also sheer ability to "read the map" and develop. Even in a peaceful game, the AI would substantially underperform on Perfect World. Maybe this has changed since, though.

 

[Legedi]

I've read though this thread multiple time, and has some great info. The problem I'm running into with tectonic and perfect world is getting the right map size for the number of ai. I liked playing the standard size with 8 ai and 16 cs. I did see that tectonic sizes are one size bigger than normal maps. But I keep starting maps, not finding much ai around, and just fighting barbs.

So for different settings/sizes how many ai/cs do people use?

 

[zeta]

I've read though this thread multiple time, and has some great info. The problem I'm running into with tectonic and perfect world is getting the right map size for the number of ai. I liked playing the standard size with 8 ai and 16 cs. I did see that tectonic sizes are one size bigger than normal maps. But I keep starting maps, not finding much ai around, and just fighting barbs.

So for different settings/sizes how many ai/cs do people use?

Large Map
Standard/Epic Speed
+2 AI players
+4 City-States
No Time Victory
No Diplomacy Victory
Map: Either Planet Simulator or Communitas

So on large maps the default is 10, I assume? That makes it 12 AI players and 24 (I guess) CSs.

 

[Magean]

I've read though this thread multiple time, and has some great info. The problem I'm running into with tectonic and perfect world is getting the right map size for the number of ai. I liked playing the standard size with 8 ai and 16 cs. I did see that tectonic sizes are one size bigger than normal maps. But I keep starting maps, not finding much ai around, and just fighting barbs.

So for different settings/sizes how many ai/cs do people use?

Well if you play on a normal-sized Tectonic map with 8/16 civs/CS, you'll effectively be playing on a large map with as many players as on a normal one, so it's logical for you to feel isolated. I had the same problem and had to generate a couple of maps with different parameters, using the Debug mode to reveal the map on turn 1, until I was satisfied with AI density.

To answer you question : I typically increase the number of AI and CS by 25% of the canonical number. For example, when playing on a Vanilla normal map (or any map with similar proportions), I add 2 AIs and 4 CS. On a large map, I add 2 or 3 AIs, and 4 to 6 CS, depending on the average proportion of land tiles on the map (some scripts generate vast oceans, as a consequence a lower number of player may work out).

My favorite scripts are:
-Continents Plus tweaked as explained here : http://forums.civfanatics.com/threa...acement-in-pangaea-and-continentsplus.453587/
to prevent CS from being forcefully placed on islands
-Planet Simulator
-Communitas (tweaked to generate more deserts as there virtually isn't any on a non-arid map, I explained earlier in this topic how to do it)
-Tectonic (with the settings I detailed in the previous couple pages)

 

[heinous_hat]

I think it's best to risk being a little crowded with AI players rather than having too much free space. On a huge map, I presently go with 16 players (+33%) and 24-28 city states. I view city states as a point of competition rather than space fillers, so I go with 24-28 (1.5 - 1.75 per civ). The new barbarian behavior has stirred the pot somewhat, so I've been reevaluating things... may go higher on # of players. Crowding is as much a result of start position luck as anything... you can still find yourself isolated with +50% players.

Tectonic's author claims that his script works best at larger map sizes. I assume that means large or huge, but I generally play huge and can't comment reliably on smaller sizes. The most important thing is to get land coverage to be consistent so you can set #of players to your liking. I think Magean was on the right track with his posts a while back and made some good observations. Keeping the islands setting at few or none (while holding other settings high) does give you more usable land in a consistent manner (quite important).

Can't comment on PerfectWorld as I've not played it in quite a while... probably since Thal morphed it into Communitas. Might have to go back and try sometime. It sort of needs an update to fix certain tile art choices that no longer match with Firaxis updates.

So in summary... go with a higher number of players and tune down as needed. And go out of your way tuning settings to get consistent land presence.

 

[Magean]

Yup, you really should use the World Builder to experiment with various settings. Keep in mind, though, that it is hard to picture whether players are correctly spaced (not too close, not too far away) on the WB; so once you have a setting of your liking, launch a real game and immediately reveal the map (wait a couple turns for every AI to settle down). If it clearly doesn't you, adjust the number of players/CS, tune up or down the sea level...

 

[PapaRockett]

This thread is really old but I think this is a good discussion for everyone to see. I've played Planet Sim, I found there's waaaaayyy too much desert. Communitas: Resource distribution is odd. Vanilla Continents: Not enough land.

Tectonic looks coolest imo but the map generation is so random. Sometimes there's not enough hills, sometimes it's a huge pangea, sometimes it's a few tiny islands.

If anyone here uses Tectonic still, frequently, what settings do you use for it?

 

[DarkZero]

Communitas gives way to many resources,so to me the best is fractal, it allows for both land and naval combat, but most important, no 2 maps are the same...heck they are not even close one game you have 2 continents other game you have 3 and the other you have a weird pangea, it makes the game fresh wen not a single map is the same, at least for me it does.

 

[PapaRockett]

Communitas gives way to many resources,so to me the best is fractal, it allows for both land and naval combat, but most important, no 2 maps are the same...heck they are not even close one game you have 2 continents other game you have 3 and the other you have a weird pangea, it makes the game fresh wen not a single map is the same, at least for me it does.

I completely forgot about Fractal. Are the continents big enough? I found vanilla continents to be too snaky for me. I think a good chunk of land is important as it allows the AI to utilize it for combat better

 

[DarkZero]

I completely forgot about Fractal. Are the continents big enough? I found vanilla continents to be too snaky for me. I think a good chunk of land is important as it allows the AI to utilize it for combat better

That the hook, its random! If you dont like snaky this is not for you because snaky is in the descripition of the map script.

 

[vyyt]

If I am not mistaken, Tectonic is somehow derived from Fractal - that's why the randomness. Some people complain Tectonic creates too much snow / tundra with Barbs. But for me, it is the map I enjoy the most. I also quite like the Planet Simulator.