Colony location and placement

winddbourne

Prince
Joined
Aug 21, 2005
Messages
501
Location
michigan
I'm not sure if I should consider this a bug or a design flaw, since I'm pretty sure it's acting the way it was designed but the way potential colonies are set up seems very buggy to me.

England can be a colony, or make a colony out of all of europe, but Portugual can't set up a colony in africa or asia, and on archipelagos maps you wind up being eaten up by "overseas" maintainence costs every time you have more than one city on a single tiny island.

My proposed fix for this is a couple of simple rules:

If only coastal squares seperate the land from the shore, and it is within 3 tiles from the borders of one of your cities you get no "overseas costs" but can decide to form a colony if you want to.

If a group of 2 or more cities are seperated from the capital by more than 40 squares (nine city radius') then you can form a colony on the same landmass. (perhaps this should scale for larger/smaller maps?)

Any landmass seperated from the homeland by ocean squares gets overseas maintainence costs, and you can form colonies there.

These rules should be able to be turned into an algorithm fairly easily, and they would also solve most of the problems I see on the world map. Problems that prevent me from placing colonies in historically accurate locations such as Africa, India, the Middle East, and asia.
 
It sure isn't a bug. Play a random map, and there are no "historical" placements.

Feel free to repost this as a request for enhancement, but I seriously do not think it is a priority.
 
Top Bottom