I did some investigating into continents by skipping to random parts of the Polygon vid and checking the tooltip. If one were to spend a bit more time going through it you could probably map out the continents exactly, but I have to say I can see this being very unclear and confusing in-game
Spoiler:
Imagine getting a combat bonus on one tile but not the text tile over? The 'borders' seem fairly arbitrary.
Pretty sure we'll also be getting a Continents Lenses, which will color code the tiles on the map according to their continent. Using that it will be easy to identify where continents' borders are.
I'm guessing this was on a tiny pangaea map for the playtest and maybe there's always 7 continents on the map regardless of size, or something like that. But I would hope that on a large terra map the continents would make a bit more sense, being separated by seas and mountain ranges, like in the real world!
I'm guessing this was on a tiny pangaea map for the playtest and maybe there's always 7 continents on the map regardless of size, or something like that. But I would hope that on a large terra map the continents would make a bit more sense, being separated by seas and mountain ranges, like in the real world!
As noted before, the Ural Mountains are an arbitrary boundary between Europe and Asia. And India is demonstrably on its own continent and has the world's biggest mountains as a barrier, but is still considered part of Asia. Let's not get hung up on this. It's a game, not a plate tectonics simulator.
As noted before, the Ural Mountains are an arbitrary boundary between Europe and Asia. And India is demonstrably on its own continent and has the world's biggest mountains as a barrier, but is still considered part of Asia. Let's not get hung up on this. It's a game, not a plate tectonics simulator.
However, mountains and seas are good to have as the borders between continents, because those are barriers to movement, and easily recognizable on the map.
As noted before, the Ural Mountains are an arbitrary boundary between Europe and Asia. And India is demonstrably on its own continent and has the world's biggest mountains as a barrier, but is still considered part of Asia. Let's not get hung up on this. It's a game, not a plate tectonics simulator.
I think you guys are using "arbitrary" a little differently.
From a historical perspective, those are somewhat arbitrary borders (although I think there is some debate there).
The complaint is that the current borders are arbitrary from a design perspective. It would have been nice for them to simulate the historical continental divides using rivers and mountains. But it could be that such a technological feat was too much given the production constraints for Civ VI.
Edit: My complaint so far is that it seems like it could be tedious to keep track of; and I don't want to leave a lens on constantly. Fortunately it's usually only 2 things we'll have to keep track of (hopefully), our starting continent and "everything else".
That's why I use the PerfectWorld map script, it's exactly that
But as Big J Money says, I'm talking about arbitrary from a game design perspective. I was imagining that things like Elizabeth's bonus for settling a city on a new continent meant either travelling across the sea, or crossing a mountain range. I didn't imagine it would be the choice between settling the city on a grassland tile 6 hexes from your capital, or the desert tile next to it.
I think you guys are using "arbitrary" a little differently.
From a historical perspective, those are somewhat arbitrary borders (although I think there is some debate there).
The complaint is that the current borders are arbitrary from a design perspective. It would have been nice for them to simulate the historical continental divides using rivers and mountains. But it could be that such a technological feat was too much given the production constraints for Civ VI.
Edit: My complaint so far is that it seems like it could be tedious to keep track of; and I don't want to leave a lens on constantly. Fortunately it's usually only 2 things we'll have to keep track of (hopefully), our starting continent and "everything else".
Its of course one more UI element on a already full UI, but it would be nice if there was some sort of border designation even with the lens. Even if it was just a thicker black line on the hexes.
Ok something is definitely up with the continents, this can't be the final code.
Spoiler:
Laurentia is both north and south of another continent, Antarctica. At this point I'll just accept that the continent code isn't finished yet and they have some haphazard placeholder system
I'm guessing this was on a tiny pangaea map for the playtest and maybe there's always 7 continents on the map regardless of size, or something like that. But I would hope that on a large terra map the continents would make a bit more sense, being separated by seas and mountain ranges, like in the real world!
Laurentia is both north and south of another continent, Antarctica. At this point I'll just accept that the continent code isn't finished yet and they have some haphazard placeholder system
Thanks Mr. Smart Man for enlightening me and then rolling your eyes at me but if you watch the video you'll see there's an ocean in the way. In the spirit of Civ6's cartography theme I made a hand drawn map
Same issue in the Firaxis livestream today. Pangaea to the northwest, Mu in the middle, and few tiles south is Pangaea again. In the Firaxis stream, they might be connected but it still seemed really weird to me. I really want to see this continent lens at this point to see what these continents actually look like. I'm also curious if this is a Pangaea issue or on a continents map, will we have one landmass be A and B, another C, and another B, C, and D. If there are 3 continents, one should be A, one should be B, and the third should be C and D. The same continent shouldn't exist on separate landmasses. But we'll see.
Thanks Mr. Smart Man for enlightening me and then rolling your eyes at me but if you watch the video you'll see there's an ocean in the way. In the spirit of Civ6's cartography theme I made a hand drawn map
Those 4 circles are all tiles that are confirmed Laurentia. The arrows represent other areas that have been seen to be Laurentia. With the location of those four circles there's virtually nothing to suggest that Laurentia doesn't extend north to south along the western portion of the supercontinent. In fact, if anyone is making an assumption, it's the OP that just assumes Antarctica extends to the coast, bisecting Laurentia for no apparent reason.
To put it in simplers terms, Rio is literally founded on the border of Laurentia and Antarctica.
Edit:
For a more cluttered example; Blue = Laurentia. Orange = Antarctica. Yellow = Zealandia. Purple = Pannotia
Spoiler:
Rio was founded in Antarctica, but many of it's western/southwestern tiles are in Laurentia; while the city center is in Antarctica, the campus and The Pyramids end up in Laurentia. So, to Address the OP's initial concern; Yes, it seems entirely possible that if this civ were instead, say, America, then it's continental combat bonus would not apply to the defense of Rio's western territory, as it lies on a different continent.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
