Atolls

timbuktu

Warlord
Joined
Aug 12, 2011
Messages
111
Location
Warszawa
It is natural for atolls to be placed near coastline? I may be wrong but the middle of oceans is where you can see atolls.
To improve coastal area just give more fishes or add new resources such as crabs.
Secondly, more fun will be if atolls are varied visually and functionally. Some provide more gold (even culture!), others help in production etc.
 
It is natural for atolls to be placed near coastline?
On earth? No.
But in-game, there is no point in having features way out in the middle of the ocean; the point of atolls is to increase the yields of coastal cities.

Ideally, rather than atolls, we would have "islands" or something.

Secondly, more fun will be if atolls are varied visually and functionally.
There already is some slight visual variation.
Functionally; there is no differentiation in any other resource or terrain type, so I don't see why these should.
 
I did actually think about this last night - that is, whether a name change to Atoll would be good - and I really couldn't think of anything that was even close to good.

"Island Chain", "Islands", etc., all describe the exact same thing as an "Atoll", and "Atoll" is shorter and sounds much nicer, in my opinion.
 
"Island Chain", "Islands", etc., all describe the exact same thing as an "Atoll"
No they don't. An atoll is made of coral.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atoll
Islands need not be made of coral. They can be volcanic, for example.
Archipelago could work better.

Atoll worked fine for the Polynesian scenario, which is what they were really introduced for, because in that scenario the larger volcanic islands were represented by normal land, and so the atolls really were atolls.
 
I like this suggestion. Thousands of "isles" scattered around the map makes more sense in general than "atolls," especially in tundra/icy regions where coral cannot grow.
 
Yes, it looks ridiculously when you see atolls next to tundra/iceland :lol: This actually beats me most.
 
Top Bottom