[Development] Map Suggestions

[Crimean Lord]

Talking about British rivers, the one in England is supposed to represent the Thames, and the one in Scotland stands for the Forth, right? Are the Shannon and Severn rivers significant enough to be represented in the map?

The same ISSUE with American Eastern Coast
There are so many small rivers: but small for huge North American Continent - because for eхample for Europe there are not small
But is it possible to pepresent them in the future Map...

 

[TJDowling]

I decided to give the US rivers a shot using the map Crimean Lord provided. I agree I think there needs to be more rivers. If there's one thing the Americas are known for it's an abundance of fresh water and waterways but it could give America a crazy production/economic boost which could be a problem.

The Eastern coast is not very easy to accommodate. The Eastern coast has far more rivers than this but I think what I've done accomplishes representing the huge number of rivers without making it look too weird.

I've gone a bit overboard maybe. I kind of get how that previous American rivers map got so off the rails that Leoreth said [paraphrased] "WTH am I looking at?" but bear with me. Plus side... or Minus side... not sure about the optics of this but... basically every tile outside of the Rockies is river adjacent!

Eastern Coast; What I've added (pink), maybe added accidentally (yellow), deleted (black):

Spoiler :

How it looks:

Spoiler :

Western Coast; What I've added (pink), maybe added accidentally (yellow), deleted (black):

Spoiler :

What it looks like:

Spoiler :

'

 

[Leoreth]

Not sure, it's maybe a bit much. The aesthetic aspect is important and this may be visually confusing, especially because it kind of detracts from the shape of the most important river system (Mississippi/Missouri/Ohio). But I agree from a general perspective and don't even think it would be overpowered. The eastern seaboard at least should receive more river tiles.

 

[TJDowling]

Not sure, it's maybe a bit much. The aesthetic aspect is important and this may be visually confusing, especially because it kind of detracts from the shape of the most important river system (Mississippi/Missouri/Ohio). But I agree from a general perspective and don't even think it would be overpowered. The eastern seaboard at least should receive more river tiles.

Yeah, as far as the mid-West Ohio-Mississippi-Missouri goes probably most of the shorter tributaries and the ones that are just straight lines could be cut, so as not to obscure the main river system. I think the Platte and Cedar could stay without causing too much confusion though.

 

[ozqar]

I think those are too many rivers both in the Eastern and Western parts - it looks oversaturated! Some of those are too long going all the way to the inter-basin border, and in the Eastern board every tile has a river! I think aesthetically speaking, it would be better to prioritize. Having a river everywhere is as interesting as not having a river anywhere. Just my two cents!

 

[Crimean Lord]

I think those are too many rivers both in the Eastern and Western parts - it looks oversaturated! Some of those are too long going all the way to the inter-basin border, and in the Eastern board every tile has a river! I think aesthetically speaking, it would be better to prioritize. Having a river everywhere is as interesting as not having a river anywhere. Just my two cents!

AGREE!
Generally main idea was suggest some rivers to area between Florida and New York because currently it's really empty (espessialy if we look to FINBROS' project of European Russia which has so many fresh water)
Also it helps to improve U.S. territiries' balance and as result convert area of Caroline/Georgia/Virginia to more productive zone which historicaly accuratу

By the way there is an idea to replace 30-35 % of American plains and add new terrain - steppe;
My suggestion is to use it for pre-montains states like New-Meхico, Colorado, Montana etc

 

[Enyavar]

How it looks:
Spoiler :

Not sure, it's maybe a bit much. The aesthetic aspect is important

Yep.

My two cents: Make most if not all tiles in NA riverbound, save for rockies and deserts. Challenge is to do that in a way that there isn't a river everywhere. If rivers are two tiles apart, all the land between them is still adjacent to rivers. With that in mind, more than 40% of the rivers can be removed again without devaluing the US. Riverfication starts with the most famous rivers, of course. Rio Grande, Chesapeake, Colorado and Sacramento spring to my mind, aside from the entire Mississippi system. Better to exaggerate those famous rivers by making them too long, than introducing little rivers that nobody knows.

Also, Europe and China need to get the same river treatment. Any tile that isn't riverbound should be checked if it can't be included.

 

[TJDowling]

Yep.

My two cents: Make most if not all tiles in NA riverbound, save for rockies and deserts. Challenge is to do that in a way that there isn't a river everywhere. If rivers are two tiles apart, all the land between them is still adjacent to rivers. With that in mind, more than 40% of the rivers can be removed again without devaluing the US. Riverfication starts with the most famous rivers, of course. Rio Grande, Chesapeake, Colorado and Sacramento spring to my mind, aside from the entire Mississippi system. Better to exaggerate those famous rivers by making them too long, than introducing little rivers that nobody knows.

Also, Europe and China need to get the same river treatment. Any tile that isn't riverbound should be checked if it can't be included.

Yeah, the functional as well as aesthetic aspect can be achieved with far fewer tributaries.

 

[merijn_v1]

I agree that more rivers in Eastern US makes it more valuable. I think that is good for the American civ, but I think it is too much during the colonial period. It will make colonies to strong compared to the home cities of the colonizers.

I also agree with ozqar that having rivers everywhere is as interesting as having no rivers at all. (Although having rivers is ofcourse much stronger). I really think that not all tiles should be riversided. It would be much more interesting for gameplay and it is easier to make it more aesthetically pleasing.

 

[Leoreth]

I don't even know if say English colonisers get that much out of the American east coast until the American spawn.

 

[TJDowling]

I don't even know if say English colonisers get that much out of the American east coast until the American spawn.

Considering they only ever found New York and Boston and rarely improve the land much it would just be a modest commerce boost.

Here's my adjusted version. Maybe still a bit busy but I only kept the more major tributaries and it's definitely better than my first suggestion. I cut out some of the superfluous rivers on the East coast and shortened a few of the minor rivers. I think every tile east of the rockies is still river-bound.

Spoiler :

Spoiler :

West:

Spoiler :

Spoiler :

 

[merijn_v1]

That looks quite good. But I don't know if I like the St. John's river in Florida this way.

 

[Crimean Lord]

Considering they only ever found New York and Boston and rarely improve the land much it would just be a modest commerce boost.

Here's my adjusted version. Maybe still a bit busy but I only kept the more major tributaries and it's definitely better than my first suggestion. I cut out some of the superfluous rivers on the East coast and shortened a few of the minor rivers. I think every tile east of the rockies is still river-bound.

Spoiler :

View attachment 506130

Spoiler :

View attachment 506131

West:

Spoiler :

View attachment 506132

Spoiler :

View attachment 506133

Really nice
Do you have save with new river changes?

 

[TJDowling]

Really nice
Do you have save with new river changes?

This should be everything. As far as I can tell there are two American tiles East of the Rockies not riverbound. One right below the tip of Lake Superior and one where Miami would be.

 

[IIHAAETTEAAHII]

Considering they only ever found New York and Boston and rarely improve the land much it would just be a modest commerce boost.

Considering the maintenance cost and the (hidden!) extra cost to civic maintenance, I contend this and say they probably don't even pay themselves back, unless founded in 1600 or earlier.

 

[Crimean Lord]

Some suggestions to PERSIA and IRAN

The main idea was add new terrains + keep historical balance between advanced and rich North-West provinces and very poor South-Estern ones
REFERENCE - https://www.quora.com/What-are-the-differences-between-southern-and-northern-Tehran

* Add semideserts tiles to Kavir Desert;
* More grasslands hills in populated Western Iran (Elam) and also North Iran (Chorosan) - REFERENCE
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regions_of_Iran
*Two eхtra rocks in Easern Iran which represent East part of Zagros Mountains
In General my Geografical Suggetions based on this MAP
http://www.freeworldmaps.net/asia/iran/map.html

* Two eхtra OIL: + 1 in the North Iran + 1 in Persian Gulf (current version give IRAN only one OIL)
* One eхtra OLIVES in the North part;

 

[Crimean Lord]

Perhaps there is sence to add Nicaragua's Lake in Central America
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lake_Nicaragua

Also I suggest to add banana here;

 

[hnrysml]

I think for Iran the area south of Caspian Sea should have more food yield, the most appropriate would be for rice one east or south east of the deer.
I also think there should be another food resource within reach of the Isfahan tile (the best tile for which is 1 SW of the oasis).
Furthermore, I'd love to see tea resources spawn in both Iran (near the Caspian Sea) and Turkey (Rize province, near Trabzon) in 1850-1900, as the two countries are some of the biggest tea producers, and drinkers, today. I have researched this and the locations and spawn time are accurate.

 

[Vectors]

On the US River map, I would much rather see the Maumee River between Ohio and Michigan, as it would give Detroit and Toledo access to Levees, v. the St. Joseph River which enables Kalamazoo and Grand Rapids which are on the same tile.

 

[TJDowling]

On the US River map, I would much rather see the Maumee River between Ohio and Michigan, as it would give Detroit and Toledo access to Levees, v. the St. Joseph River which enables Kalamazoo and Grand Rapids which are on the same tile.

Yeah, I wondered about that afterward. Detroit is probably the canonical city placement so it's probably better to put the river off of Erie and not Michigan.