Any good map scripts that work with VP?

[code99]

I'm tired of the vanilla maps, any good scripts out there that work with VP?

As a note, i dont like archipelago, small islands and pangea type of maps so dont suggest any like that

 

[Txurce]

Communitas is my favorite, and is mentioned more often than any other map.

 

[Funak]

I mostly play Oval or Pangaea. If you haven't tried Oval, do it, it is a completely different experience.

 

[vyyt]

I moved from Communitas to Tectonic (singular, not "Tectonics", that's something else). This is my favorite now. I liked Communitas a lot, but for my setup (crowded, huge, epic) it was spawning too many resources and the continents were almost always separated only by long 1-tile wide straits. Tectonics seem to spread the land masses more evenly for me.

EDIT: Corrected the map script name - thanks Heinous Hat for pointing it out!

 

[heinous_hat]

Tectonic is my favorite as well, for similar reasons as vyyt . If you look for it, don't confuse it with the older Tectonics (plural) script by LDiCesare. Tectonic doesn't have a development thread here, but it's in the (temporarily borked) download section and on Steam workshop. The author is Haftetavenscrap, who's also done some nice work with EUIV random maps. Personally, I fiddle with the script a bit to make the more extreme settings slightly less extreme as far as mountain chains go. That way you get more interesting continent shapes, but with reasonably passable terrain.

Bobert13's Planet Simulator is also really well done and highly configurable. Continent shapes and features are a lot more conservative than Tectonic, but it's more reliable as a result. Run both of these scripts through WorldBuilder a few times and you'll see what I mean... Tectonic will occasionally throw you some curve balls at it's upper limits (where it's also the most interesting ).

Another new favorite is Small Continents Plus from the Scrambled Continents DLC. It's a vanilla script, but it's new to me. It's similar to Continents Plus, but I like the land distribution better.

As for Communitas, I'd suggest trying it with the compatibility flag (overrideAssignStartingPlots = false). Continent layout will be the same, but resource distribution will be as per the default (which is better balanced).

 

[Zares]

Oh, so I'm not alone! Tectonic lover here too Maps that this script generates are very unique and nice for exploring

What's your favorite settings of Tectonic and why? I'm asking, because I experiment with plates and land settings lastly. I wanna have more medium sized irregular plates to expand early enough (like 2-3 cities) and then sail/go to explore new lands (plates).
And what about sizes? It behaves strange - if I choose medium, it sets to 8 Civs and 12 (?) City-States. And when I'm starting a new game medium is set to less players (I don't remember how many). Anyway, I always set more CSs, like 16-18, because there are always land for them and they are usually spread well.

 

[vyyt]

If you look for it, don't confuse it with the older Tectonics (plural) script by LDiCesare.

Ohh! Did not know that, thanks for pointing it out. I just checked and I am using the "correct" Tectonic (singular). I corrected my post above.

 

[zeta]

Tectonic and Planet Simulator.

 

[grmagne]

I usually use Planet Simulator. I found that Communitas has too many resources, Tectonics and PerfectWorld have too many large mountain chains. I find that Planet Simulator creates maps with 2-4 large continents, a reasonable number of resources and varied terrain.

 

[Txurce]

As for Communitas, I'd suggest trying it with the compatibility flag (overrideAssignStartingPlots = false). Continent layout will be the same, but resource distribution will be as per the default (which is better balanced).

 

[Txurce]

As for Communitas, I'd suggest trying it with the compatibility flag (overrideAssignStartingPlots = false). Continent layout will be the same, but resource distribution will be as per the default (which is better balanced).

Thanks -- I am trying this out next.

 

[heinous_hat]

Oh, so I'm not alone! Tectonic lover here too Maps that this script generates are very unique and nice for exploring

What's your favorite settings of Tectonic and why? I'm asking, because I experiment with plates and land settings lastly. I wanna have more medium sized irregular plates to expand early enough (like 2-3 cities) and then sail/go to explore new lands (plates).
And what about sizes? It behaves strange - if I choose medium, it sets to 8 Civs and 12 (?) City-States. And when I'm starting a new game medium is set to less players (I don't remember how many). Anyway, I always set more CSs, like 16-18, because there are always land for them and they are usually spread well.

I'm currently playing it at the upper limits... more plates, more land, ramming speed. But I've also made some edits to the script to tone down mountain chains at those settings. And I've modified the 'clumpiness' factor to get sprawling forests. It's actually been a while since I've experimented... have to take a look and compare to the original script to see where it's at.

One thing I find is that it's difficult to get a predictable amount of land using the 'more land' setting, at least in conjunction with other maxed settings. Occasionally you'll get a huge, almost pangaea-like landmass that dominates the map. And sometimes not. For that reason, I generally pick a high sea level to compensate and that seems to work well. Otherwise it makes it difficult to determine the ideal # of civs, especially for huge maps.

WorldBuilder stopped functioning with VP a while back. It's fixed now, but that derailed my tuning effort... need to get back to it.

On that note, I think it might be a good idea to suggest opening a dedicated thread either in the balance or submods section, concerning various map scripts and how they affect game balance relative to VP. As a group, we're really all over the place as far as scripts go.

 

[heinous_hat]

Oh, another thing with Tectonic... it has an option (yes/no/random) for Coastal Start Locations. I don't use this as it breaks start bias (e.g. your coastal start will take precedent over a river bias). I think he has this as the default, so be aware of it.

 

[Freaky Freddy]

One thing i don't like about tectonic is that it creates a lot of land near the poles which becomes basically useless for any Civ that starts close to it due to all the snow.

 

[Magean]

I usually use Planet Simulator. I found that Communitas has too many resources, Tectonics and PerfectWorld have too many large mountain chains. I find that Planet Simulator creates maps with 2-4 large continents, a reasonable number of resources and varied terrain.

Same here. Planet Simulator is excellent. It's better balanced than the competing maps, and landmasses are better-looking too.
You can download it here:
http://forums.civfanatics.com/threads/planet-simulator.526882/
Be sure to use the version someone (not the OP) updated further in the topic.

 

[heinous_hat]

One thing i don't like about tectonic is that it creates a lot of land near the poles which becomes basically useless for any Civ that starts close to it due to all the snow.

This can be true, depending on temperature setting. Both Tectonic and Planet Simulator actually compress the ice bands at the map edges to make more space for land... Tectonic more so. Vanilla scripts have roughly twice the amount of ice. If you play @ temperate setting (or cool, obviously) the additional land that shows up in the extreme latitudes will of course be snow/tundra. Snow is still out of bounds as far as start locations go, but a certain amount of resources will show up in those regions. This is much more compelling with VP where you can afford a frozen colony if it grabs something valuable.

Conversely, vanilla scripts (like Continents plus) tend to have less snow and more ice. Ice is truly worthless, but at least you aren't tempted to settle on it .

 

[matlajs]

so im trying one game with planet simulator and i am now in early industrial. if i should compare this one with vanillas and comunnitas i would say this: Communitas doesnt rly make so cool maps like im playing now with planet s.(5 nice placed continents) but it does distribute strategic resources much more better, than vanila or planet simulator. TBH on huge map Vanilla/ Planet create rly low amount of coal and even that amount is distributed mostly between few civs (in current game it is splitted between 3 smallest continents, it does mean between 5 civs from 14). While i like more sparse bonus resources, i absolutely dont like this. Coal is such important resource for many yields, that even i lead score ladder, im tempted abort that game for absolutely 0 chance claim any coal without war and nearest reasonable deposit of that is tens of tilles away.

 

[code99]

Thank you all for your replies!

In the last few days i've been playing with both planet simulator and communitas (have yet to try tectonic) and ... planet simulator seems ok, ill definitely play this more and as as for communitas ... idk what is everyone saying that has too many resources but in my games with resources set to sparse (lowest setting), resources seem to be pretty well balanced. Infact monopolies are harder to get and strategic resources are pretty well balanced.


So far, i think im enjoying communitas map the most. The mountains it generates are sometimes really great from a strategic point of view, no more endless plains and the like where you can fit tons of troops.

Ill have to try tectonic as well, see whats what

 

[heinous_hat]

Here's the local link to Tectonic . The new forum setup bedazzled me .

The main difference between Planet Simulator and Tectonic maps lies in the setup options. Tectonic is more unpredictable, especially if you select things like "more plates", "more land" and "ramming speed"... the latter creating some really rough terrain in spots. I would strongly suggest using WorlBuilder (in the SDK) to fire off some quick maps and get a feel for it.

so im trying one game with planet simulator and i am now in early industrial. if i should compare this one with vanillas and comunnitas i would say this: Communitas doesnt rly make so cool maps like im playing now with planet s.(5 nice placed continents) but it does distribute strategic resources much more better, than vanila or planet simulator. TBH on huge map Vanilla/ Planet create rly low amount of coal and even that amount is distributed mostly between few civs (in current game it is splitted between 3 smallest continents, it does mean between 5 civs from 14). While i like more sparse bonus resources, i absolutely dont like this. Coal is such important resource for many yields, that even i lead score ladder, im tempted abort that game for absolutely 0 chance claim any coal without war and nearest reasonable deposit of that is tens of tilles away.

Coal being scarce is a direct result of the original game design, no? It's supposed to drive trade and warfare from the Modern era onward. I think Communitas features more coal due to it generating more land than most scripts. It may also alter the weighting, in line with the original CEP project. In the default ASP (from More Luxuries) coal is the 3rd least common resource, behind uranium and aluminum.

Unfortunately, selecting scarce (or abundant) resource amounts also affects bonus resources. It would be nice if these were separate. The only way to adjust coal occurrences directly is by editing AssignStartingPlots.lua.

 

[matlajs]

im not sure communitas is creating more land than this do, but there is 120 coal on map and on 2 largest continents is just about 20 of it( 6 on ours = that is 6 for me, Sweden,Venice and Siam) I dont remember if i ever had a problem with coal with communitas. sure, i couldnt afford build whatever requiring coal everywhere, but in most important cities i could. Now in this game + in my mp game with cousin( but there we play small continents +) there is absolutely same problem= not total amount of any resource, but its distribution between some chosen ones.