Don't you think the maps HAVE to be larger?

Kruelgor

Emperor
Joined
May 12, 2010
Messages
1,165
Location
The United States
Since military units are limited to 1 per tile, don't you think it's a MUST for maps to be larger? The game devs are obviously encouraging players to form a kind of grand strategic frontline to simulate the way real warfare is fought. Well, a vast frontline is only possible if the maps are relatively large, otherwise I don't think combat will be exactly what the game devs envisioned.
 
Depends on personal pref, IMO. Large maps with a lot of combat will take a LONG time to play - kinda has to be your style.

I like having a sprawling empire but you don't necessarily need 100 cities for that or a huge map.
 
large maps with tons of units will most likely make me change my usual style of playing on huge, then again might not.
 
Has anybody thought about how global happiness and limited types of resources will affect gameplay due to map size yet? Because of the dearth of per city boni, this game is balanced for a specific number of cities regardless of map type. Changing map size now does a lot more than just meaning you can get more cities and it takes longer before borders are touching.
 
Now that I think about it, the Panzer General maps were quite small. I suppose if it worked on PG then small maps should work fine on CiV5 too.

Wow, you realized that you were completely wrong on your own in only 7 minutes.

I'm impressed.

I also think the whole "will maps be bigger" is weird.

If you want a bigger map, play the next map size up. Unless you're playing on a the largest maps available or the smallest maps available already then you can do this.

So it doesn't really matter how a "standard" size map in Civ4 compares to a "standard" map in Civ5.

Besides, at the really high end, system reqs are more likely to be the issue than anything else.
 
Top Bottom