Coast is preferable. By a lot. Specially if any water tiles will end up in the city radius. Prime city spots get first target treatment.The AI seems to really hate settling inland, even if there's plenty of good terrain, resources and rivers available.
This is also Very dependent upon the stage/how far the game is in it's progression. If you are just talking about Prehistoric Era actions then yes they will stick to coasts. It's not until Ancient era and beyond that metals become revealed. Then the AI will become more interested in inland city building.The AI seems to really hate settling inland, even if there's plenty of good terrain, resources and rivers available.
Yup. Which is also probably very real world applicable. We can see from our webbed fingers and how our skin wrinkles when wet for a long time (to give us improved surface grip underwater) and a number of other things like how our systems seem to have an abnormal need for Omega fats (which is pretty much mostly found in seafood) that as a species we spent a lot of time evolving to a coastal lifestyle.This is also Very dependent upon the stage/how far the game is in it's progression. If you are just talking about Prehistoric Era actions then yes they will stick to coasts. It's not until Ancient era and beyond that metals become revealed. Then the AI will become more interested in inland city building.
Sometimes fairly large continent may get tribal villages but no player/AIs on it though.Perhaps we should rename the goody huts (official name: tribal villages) to something that is more related to intelligent pre-modern human species like Homo Erectus Tribal Village. For greater immersion into the early prehistory.
Good idea. While "goody hut" is explanatory, it does take away from immersion. Maybe Homo Sapien Dwelling?Perhaps we should rename the goody huts (official name: tribal villages) to something that is more related to intelligent pre-modern human species like Homo Erectus Tribal Village. For greater immersion into the early prehistory.
Yup. Which is also probably very real world applicable. We can see from our webbed fingers and how our skin wrinkles when wet for a long time (to give us improved surface grip underwater) and a number of other things like how our systems seem to have an abnormal need for Omega fats (which is pretty much mostly found in seafood) that as a species we spent a lot of time evolving to a coastal lifestyle.
Fish can be found in both rivers and seas.But humans are specifically reliant on abundant fresh water, shouldn't it's sources be preferred even more than sea for most of history? The game doesn't really have terrain to represent abundant smaller lakes which are a major one, though.
Well game places settlers close to coast at beginning of game.My point is, completely ignoring good locations with fresh water because they aren't seacoast isn't realistic.
No but being willing to place a city just a step back from the coast is terrible strategy and without as strong a weight for coastal placement as we have, they'll gladly do this to maximize resource access, even if that access overlaps with other cities workable zones. They don't completely ignore inland spots.. they just need very compelling reasons to go there over a coastal one if a coastal one is available.My point is, completely ignoring good locations with fresh water because they aren't seacoast isn't realistic.
That or split off families that grew into tribes that simply don't care to establish a government or the trappings of organized civilization.Criminals, that were exiled and founded new city?
Not always and not if you are playing on a pangaea map.Well game places settlers close to coast at beginning of game.
Placing cities along the coast first and then moving inland later is my usual approach, unless there is a much needed resource inland that is eg stone. The first city on the coast increases the likelihood of you being the first to circumnavigate the globeNo but being willing to place a city just a step back from the coast is terrible strategy and without as strong a weight for coastal placement as we have, they'll gladly do this to maximize resource access, even if that access overlaps with other cities workable zones. They don't completely ignore inland spots.. they just need very compelling reasons to go there over a coastal one if a coastal one is available.
Once we've sorted out art for all the neanderthall stuff, I'd be interested in next trying to add in the hobbits.Hello everyone, normally I am more active in the Subdued Animals thread, but just an quick post to metion this new about human origin: https://news.nationalgeographic.com/2017/06/morocco-early-human-fossils-anthropology-science/
That could technically, mean that this NPC could be added too: http://humanorigins.si.edu/evidence/human-fossils/species/homo-heidelbergensis , since it could have time to appear and spread.
Talking about NPC: I have found somes interesting papers (PDF), regarding Floriensis and Naledi, notably their body proportions. So, where I can post them for been useful for the mod?
When I started World map script and Pangea, then all civs got placed near coast.Not always and not if you are playing on a pangaea map.
I don't use the World map script. It does not adjust the plant and animal resources to match the spawn regions. Not that the others do it completely either.When I started World map script and Pangea, then all civs got placed near coast.
Maybe you meant Dryland?