I dunno, I've been through central and south-east China and it's actually relatively dry but that's probably anecdotal.
[Development] Map Suggestions
- Thread starter Leoreth
- Start date
I think the reason is that different regions of the map are the result of the suggestions of different people, so we shouldn't expect consistency. Generally I prefer if the map is more textured and not just a neat transition of terrain types that maps directly to climatic regions. That said, if it's just plain wrong in some places, we should revisit it.
Right. I generally agree, though in the case of China it looks... unattractive, at least to me. I don't have a more convincing argument than this, and have no idea how someone would go about verifying the correctness of plains vs. grasslands tiles. Maps of vegetation or climate seem to blanket the whole southern half to two thirds of China proper with "humid subtropical" and "broadleaf evergreen forest". Precipitation maps might be more promising but I can't find a clear pattern.
There is also an argument to increase the number of forest tiles in China, by the way. I've made a similar argument for Europe and North America in the past.
There is also an argument to increase the number of forest tiles in China, by the way. I've made a similar argument for Europe and North America in the past.
What do people think about more aggressive mechanics about automatic forest spread? For example, I could imagine changing the rules so that forest can only automatically spread to tiles that had forest at the beginning of the game, but so that it can also spread to tiles with and replace unworked improvements.
This could achieve two things:
- forest being removed not as quickly by pre-emptive tile improvements, when the cities around haven't grown enough to work them
- forests could slowly reclaim improved tiles after a civilisation collapses
This could achieve two things:
- forest being removed not as quickly by pre-emptive tile improvements, when the cities around haven't grown enough to work them
- forests could slowly reclaim improved tiles after a civilisation collapses
Temujin8k
Fluyts, Grand Vizier of Your Mind
That would mean having to allot computer resources to keep track of which tiles originally had forest at the start. It could slow down the game even further, especially during the late game. I think replacing unworked improvements would be okay, though.
Hickman888
Prince
What about the Nature Preserve improvement? I'm not exactly sure about the numbers involved, but it says it increases the probability of growth in surrounding tiles. Would this benefit then only apply to tiles that have already been chopped?
I'm fine with with a more aggressive forest regrowth though, more hammers for me! Maybe when a forest initially regrows, it could start off as a "young forest", and only provide half the usual
if chopped. Then after 30 turns, it would mature into a regular forest.Not sure myself, but my idea was mostly about earlier eras of the game where forests can regrow after a civilisation collapses, for example.
Hickman888
Prince
I think it's a good idea. By the end of my game as Rome, for example, I have chopped nearly all of the forests in southern Europe, leaving none for future civilizations. I'd be careful about upping the frequency of regrowth in major civilizations, however, as you don't want to upset the balance too much in the chopping vs lumbermill dichotomy.
It seems to me that the rate of regrowth should be proportional to the number of years per turn. So fast regrowth early on and slow in the late game, relative to turns — and same speed relative to years. Maybe this would be sufficient to make the mechanic less relevant in the late game.
I'm currently back to fixing some bugs, after that I will probably take a quick detour to the map branch to include some of the accumulated suggestions. So now's your chance to make suggestions to have them included in the near future.
stormogulen
Chieftain
- Joined
- Jul 6, 2019
- Messages
- 65
OK, a couple of small suggestions on Japan and northern India (and a few on forests inspired by the discussion above).
Finally, the suggestions on forests:
-Both Japan and the grasslands of northern India could probably have much more forests (according to a source I just found, nearly 80% of India was covered by forests in 3000 BC).
-From a historical point of view, there could be a lot more decidous forests in Western Europe. Prior to deforestation much of Denmark, Germany, The Low Countries, France and the British Isles used to be covered by oak- or beech dominated forests.
-There could be a lot more conifer forests on the grasslands/plains etc. around Lake Baikal.
-The conifer forests on Iceland are historically inaccurate. Spruces and pines were eradicated from its natural flora by ice ages a million years ago or so. The pre-viking woodlands were mostly made up by birch trees, with some rowan etc. mixed in.
Spoiler Japan :
Spoiler India :
Finally, the suggestions on forests:
-Both Japan and the grasslands of northern India could probably have much more forests (according to a source I just found, nearly 80% of India was covered by forests in 3000 BC).
-From a historical point of view, there could be a lot more decidous forests in Western Europe. Prior to deforestation much of Denmark, Germany, The Low Countries, France and the British Isles used to be covered by oak- or beech dominated forests.
-There could be a lot more conifer forests on the grasslands/plains etc. around Lake Baikal.
-The conifer forests on Iceland are historically inaccurate. Spruces and pines were eradicated from its natural flora by ice ages a million years ago or so. The pre-viking woodlands were mostly made up by birch trees, with some rowan etc. mixed in.
DelilahFlowers
Chieftain
- Joined
- Oct 14, 2019
- Messages
- 14
Idk if its been covered yet, but in the old map as russia I couldn't found some of the known cities in siberia during the expansion. Tobolsk is the only one that can be settled. Cities like Mangazeya and and Surgut are unsettleable currently, the former because of the rule that tundra can only be settled on the coast and the latter because the rule that marsh cannot be settled. The Ob river was highly important to Russia's siberian expansion, not being able to found some of the earliest settlements is a bit of a bummer. If there is some way to allow russia to found these cities that would be great.
And for Mangazeya specifically, there should be a fur resource nearby as it was the premiere fur and ivory trading post in siberia at the time.
And for Mangazeya specifically, there should be a fur resource nearby as it was the premiere fur and ivory trading post in siberia at the time.
I don't know where those cities are exactly, maybe @LacsiraxAriscal would know? Or you can check yourself, there's a "New Map Overview" thread that shows the current state of the new map.
DelilahFlowers
Chieftain
- Joined
- Oct 14, 2019
- Messages
- 14
Mangazeya would be on the course of the Taz river, which is represented by the map. The river is entirely flanked by marsh and tundra tiles, making settling the city not possible. Surgut is along the river ob, near its junction with the irtysh river. It is settleable south of the river in the new map, no marshes blocking it. @LacsiraxAriscal definitely has a better idea where to place the cities. At least making one patch of the taz river, probably the one directly north one tile of the oil, shift to plains or grassland to allow a settle by 1600 AD
Spoiler :
I was looking up the historical range of the Asian Elephant to see if the Persian ivory makes sense (it does) and while we shouldn't pay too much mind to all historical locations it made me aware that elephants are still very widespread in Indonesia so we should maybe add ivory instances on Sumatra and maybe even Kalimantan. And I should not forget about letting the Persian elephant expire.
stormogulen
Chieftain
- Joined
- Jul 6, 2019
- Messages
- 65
Some rethinkings of the Afghanistan area:
Spoiler :
Tab911
Chieftain
- Joined
- Jun 20, 2019
- Messages
- 58
Not sure if this is the right place to post this as it is only tangentially related to the topic...
I was reading this article: https://getpocket.com/explore/item/...he-world-s-tech-lust?utm_source=pocket-newtab
My first thought was "rare earths, iron and coal for Baotou!"
But it also opens an interesting discussion on the importance of rare earths and the tech economy.
"In 1950, before rare earth mining started in earnest, the city had a population of 97,000. Today, the population is more than two-and-a-half million. There is only one reason for this huge influx of people - minerals."
Should we re-think the impact that the tech-boom should have on economies in civ? One of the issues I've had when conceptualizing which cities are importation at various points in history is that we don't really have a way of reflecting a city's role in the information economy. Just as iron is a prerequisite of being a contending military player in the classical era, shouldn't rare-earths be a prerequisite to be a late-game economic power? Perhaps REs + certain techs allows for the spread of tech companies? hardware companies + further techs are a prerequisite for building the internet? Internet + prerequisite buildings allows for software companies? The internet should be a much more significant build, it is probably the most transformational thing we have had in history since writing.
Anyway, the article is an interesting read and supports adding REs in Baotou's vicinity. If someone has some more concrete ideas on how to reflect the information economy, please post in suggestions or a new thread.
I was reading this article: https://getpocket.com/explore/item/...he-world-s-tech-lust?utm_source=pocket-newtab
My first thought was "rare earths, iron and coal for Baotou!"
But it also opens an interesting discussion on the importance of rare earths and the tech economy.
"In 1950, before rare earth mining started in earnest, the city had a population of 97,000. Today, the population is more than two-and-a-half million. There is only one reason for this huge influx of people - minerals."
Should we re-think the impact that the tech-boom should have on economies in civ? One of the issues I've had when conceptualizing which cities are importation at various points in history is that we don't really have a way of reflecting a city's role in the information economy. Just as iron is a prerequisite of being a contending military player in the classical era, shouldn't rare-earths be a prerequisite to be a late-game economic power? Perhaps REs + certain techs allows for the spread of tech companies? hardware companies + further techs are a prerequisite for building the internet? Internet + prerequisite buildings allows for software companies? The internet should be a much more significant build, it is probably the most transformational thing we have had in history since writing.
Anyway, the article is an interesting read and supports adding REs in Baotou's vicinity. If someone has some more concrete ideas on how to reflect the information economy, please post in suggestions or a new thread.
We do have coal and rare earths within reach of Baotou. The idea that economic growth rather than surrounding food should determine a city's size has been brought up multiple times but that's just not how Civ4 works. I have some ideas on how to reflect this somewhat better by having a better trade/corporations system, but there's a lot of stuff that's higher on the priority list even though I'd love to do it.
Similar threads
