Civ5 & Earth maps

[Thor Macklin]

Actually the 1upt is barely an issue, I know this for a fact, if anyone
here has played my 120 AD scenario they would know that units
can still fully operate in europe. But none-the-less if a dumbed
down Legion mod idea were implimented (such as only 3 units per
tile.) Then the entire issue would be resolved.

Yours is surely not the most elegant of solutions

.....I am offended by that. Which idea though? The city tiles? Or
the extended map? The city tile idea IS abit......complicated, and
would no doubt be a headache sooner or later. Which is why
I give forth my idea of adding rows and tiles in the appropriate
places.

And you know, all one would need to do to take care of the
quantity based limitations would be to increase the number of
resources that specific resource gives out. (For instance, making
it so that Japan's iron tile will give out enough iron for several samuria)
Though the lack of Pig and rice are no doubt a sufficient concern.

 

[Elenhil]

.....I am offended by that.

Oh, please, don't.

 

[SalmonSoil]

I don't know where you people get the impression that ciV requires more space than cIV. Im pretty sure that ciV maps are the same size as cIV maps. They look bigger because of the hexes.
I would also like to point out that infinite city sprawl is a valid strategy in ciV. In the base game it is a valid strategy to place cities 2 tiles apart.
If you ask on the strategy forums you will no where find anyone who suggests founding cities 5 or more tiles apart. A Europe like the one in cIV RFC could easily work (more resources). Do you people base your expansion requests on theory or actual gameplay experience?

 

[Elenhil]

Vanilla gameplay <> RFC gameplay. I don't believe there will be ICS in RFC V. Stability will take care of that, believe me. So artificial (I'd say poor Vanilla mechanics exploiting) strategies 'valid' for cities 2 tiles apart will cease to be relevant, as will '4 horsemen of the Apocalypse', and so on. Your whole claim of validity rests on exploiting a single flawed aspect of Vanilla CiV - overpowered Maritime CSs that make ICS not only possible, but preferable. I'll eat my hat if Rhye keeps the thing unchanged!

 

[Úmarth]

Okay, as I said, the latest patch has solved the problem with huge map crashes (for me anyway), so here's some saves from the 150sc map.

I think it's too big. There weren't any noticeable lag issues, but still, it was the 18th century before Europe filled out and there certainly wasn't any colonisation. As a result all the wars in the game seemed to be triggered by the AI's "balance of power" mechanic and involved a lot more unit spam and a lot less fun tactics than in the smaller version. On the other hand, there is something to be said for more recognisable geography in Europe, but I'm sure that can be achieved in the smaller map when Rhye puts his mind to it.

I made sure to disable all mods this time around.

 

[Elenhil]

Given the increased price of units and buildings in CiV it is quite understandable. I wonder if Rhye thinks of changing it. After all, for all I know, these prices (along with higher survival rate) serve to keep unit numbers down. Which, in turn, was due to map size constraints. As the engine gets more and more optimized, and CPUs get faster and faster, these constraints will cease to be relevant. Moreover, abstract map scale is one thing, historical map scale is quite another. If Rhye decides to stick to a larger scale for geography's sake, I suppose he may at least consider proportionally lowering building times.

 

[deanej]

ICS speaks more to the flaws of civ5 than anything else. I doubt Rhye would keep it as a valid strategy, especially since RFC needs a small 1-2 city Greece to be just as competitive as a Mongolia that's taken over all of Asia. Besides, non-strategic, non-happiness resources are practically worthless in civ5, so they couldn't boost Europe, and adding strategic resources would be a game-breaking balance problem.

 

[Leoreth]

Currently everyone here neglects that map design isn't the only angle from which we can control civ effectivity in science, production etc. RFC uses coefficients as well, and they could be adjusted to the changed situation in Civ5 just as easily.

 

[KMRblue1027]

Can you make it so different sources of the same resource provide different amounts? If you can then using Oil as an example their could be an Oil in Pennsylvania but it only provides 1 versus an oil in Arabia provides 10. With this you could place strategic resources galore but they could still be balanced. Japan wouldn't be the iron capital of the world for example.

 

[deanej]

Only by making duplicate resources, and only then if units can be made to require one of a set of resources.

@Leoreth: How much of civ4 RFC have you played? I'm not sure how to balance Europe without the map methods, at least not without making the change affect European cities outside of Europe and not affect other cities in Europe.

 

[Leoreth]

What's the point in making a difference between cities owned by European civs, whether they're in Europe or overseas? I thought balancing civilizations was the issue here ...?

 

[deanej]

You don't think it would be unbalanching if European cities in America were awesome and Aztec cities were only average? And what if someone else conquered cities in Europe?

 

[civ_king]

Okay, as I said, the latest patch has solved the problem with huge map crashes (for me anyway), so here's some saves from the 150sc map.

I think it's too big. There weren't any noticeable lag issues, but still, it was the 18th century before Europe filled out and there certainly wasn't any colonisation. As a result all the wars in the game seemed to be triggered by the AI's "balance of power" mechanic and involved a lot more unit spam and a lot less fun tactics than in the smaller version. On the other hand, there is something to be said for more recognisable geography in Europe, but I'm sure that can be achieved in the smaller map when Rhye puts his mind to it.

I made sure to disable all mods this time around.

In normal Civ V AI has severe difficulty with settling overseas so it isn't a map problem, also you could have a Civ V version of settler maps to make the AI settle more.

 

[Mxzs]

Can you make it so different sources of the same resource provide different amounts? If you can then using Oil as an example their could be an Oil in Pennsylvania but it only provides 1 versus an oil in Arabia provides 10. With this you could place strategic resources galore but they could still be balanced. Japan wouldn't be the iron capital of the world for example.

I'm 99.99% certain the answer is Yes, though it has to be done on the map rather than with the XML or Lua files. WorldBuilder lets you not only plop down resources but change how many each source provides. Just now I tested it, and changed one of the RFC-adapted maps so that an iron source in Italy put out 8 Irons instead of 4.

I think that's what you were asking about. If not, sorry for misunderstanding you.

 

[KMRblue1027]

I'm 99.99% certain the answer is Yes, though it has to be done on the map rather than with the XML or Lua files. WorldBuilder lets you not only plop down resources but change how many each source provides. Just now I tested it, and changed one of the RFC-adapted maps so that an iron source in Italy put out 8 Irons instead of 4.

I think that's what you were asking about. If not, sorry for misunderstanding you.

Ya that's what I meant. So now you could plant lots of resources and just make their strategic yields low.

 

[SalmonSoil]

ICS speaks more to the flaws of civ5 than anything else. I doubt Rhye would keep it as a valid strategy, especially since RFC needs a small 1-2 city Greece to be just as competitive as a Mongolia that's taken over all of Asia. Besides, non-strategic, non-happiness resources are practically worthless in civ5, so they couldn't boost Europe, and adding strategic resources would be a game-breaking balance problem.

You misunderstand me, what I am saying is that placing cities close together does not destroy your chances of victory in ciV like it did in cIV. So if you were to make a balanced Earth map for cIV and ciV Europe wouldn't need to be as large to balance in a ciV version. Therefore why does Europe in ciV need to be larger than Europe in cIV? Especially given the fact that the social policy system heavily favors small civs, which I feel compensates for other mechanic changes.

 

[civ_king]

You misunderstand me, what I am saying is that placing cities close together does not destroy your chances of victory in ciV like it did in cIV. So if you were to make a balanced Earth map for cIV and ciV Europe wouldn't need to be as large to balance in a ciV version. Therefore why does Europe in ciV need to be larger than Europe in cIV? Especially given the fact that the social policy system heavily favors small civs, which I feel compensates for other mechanic changes.

Because it will be impossible to move units for all tiles will be covered. Plus enlarged Europe ends in West Germany

 

[Mxzs]

Because it will be impossible to move units for all tiles will be covered. Plus enlarged Europe ends in West Germany

I know this kind of thing has happened in regular play, but since we are talking about RFC's Europe: Has this actually happened to anyone playing on an RFC-style Earth map? On the ecv-made map, for instance?

 

[civ_king]

I know this kind of thing has happened in regular play, but since we are talking about RFC's Europe: Has this actually happened to anyone playing on an RFC-style Earth map? On the ecv-made map, for instance?

three different games! on the smaller one (Rhye's)

 

[Thor Macklin]

Anyway, I see no point in making western europe larger, now eastern europe
should be given the same expanse that western europe was given.

But may I ask, I have combined the Africa of the cIV standard earth map and
combined it with the africa of the Rfc map, and converted it to a ciV map.
With that in mind, do any of you believe that using that as an africa for a map
would be of proper proportion to help balance out western europe's size?
As well as giving african civs breathing space.