Earth map, good and bad, and a couple other things

[Kelmort83]

Having to restart until my Civilization spawn on the right continent is something I found weird.

No bonus / strategics or luxury ressources even If I put Legendary in the setting make me wonder if the map is fully operational. Right now, there is no replay value to me because I mostly know where the Iron will spawn, where I should build cities, etc. Having random ressources spawn will often change my layout, I also think that some civilization have far weaker land to settle. Brazil come to mind, whom don't even have a stone to "Eurêka" Massonry on the whole south america continent. There might be one very far to the south and very few hill near mountain that are sub-part.

Something I liked about the Greatest Earth Map for South America was the 4-5 breach in the moutain chain, allowing for great choke, but also better units movements.

 

[Mustakrakish]

I really don't understand what Firaxis have against true starting locations. Why do they hate them so much?

 

[BloodySunday]

Then get the the Yet Another Mappack, it's much more convinence since modders are more likely to keep it up to date than Firaxis.

Just did. Wow this is so much better, thanks!

 

[need my speed]

That map looks utterly horrible. But, wasn't a promise made by Firaxis that the world map would be better than ever, even better at accommodating for true starting locations, and size, and whatnot? That, as such, it wasn't included in the base game at release? This... Well, this is honestly the worst world map I have seen (a dozen or so, a bit more, so my sample size isn't that large, but still), and I spend most of my Civilization (IV) games playing on a variety of world maps.

 

[TheMarshmallowBear]

That map looks utterly horrible. But, wasn't a promise made by Firaxis that the world map would be better than ever, even better at accommodating for true starting locations, and size, and whatnot? That, as such, it wasn't included in the base game at release? This... Well, this is honestly the worst world map I have seen (a dozen or so, a bit more, so my sample size isn't that large, but still), and I spend most of my Civilization (IV) games playing on a variety of world maps.

Don't think they ever made that claim, they just said that when adding civs they'd take into consideration True Start Locations.

 

[P-Dubya]

As for TSLs, having TSLs on a Standard Size Earth Map is impossible with the way they scaled Europe. For instance, if their Standard Earth Map had TSL and players put Germany, Greece, France, Britain, Spain, Rome, Poland, and Norway on the map, then they couldn't settle their cities due to distance-from-city requirements. In my Standard Earth Map, I had to make Europe bigger so that each European Civ would at least be able to settle in their TSLs guaranteed and have decent capitals.

As for the design of the game's Earth Map, it's not horrible but its not good either. I feel like they could have done a whole lot better, and come out with various Earth Map sizes. That way people with weaker computers could play the smaller maps, and people with good or newer computers could play the bigger worlds that can sustain TSLs without radical rescaling of Europe. Thankfully there are options for people who use mods.

 

[HeliosDisciple]

I really don't understand what Firaxis have against true starting locations. Why do they hate them so much?

Too many Euro civs at the moment, they can't fit.

 

[c4c6]

That map looks utterly horrible.

When I made a map for civ2, I found out, that the max size available was just "ok" looking (my taste) for an Europe map and gave up on a World map ...

Now with the 'unstacked cities' (which can add a lot depth through the possibilities of tactical combat, provided AI learns to achieve kind of 'challenge') World maps may become, uhhmmm, say "difficult" in order to avoid "impossible", because many don't like that to hear.

On the old maps I would expect at least 1 tile between Berlin and Paris (or between Berlin and Moscow) for an only remotely natural looking map. Regardless any real distances adjacent city tiles for Berlin and Moscow are useless for MOST 'Europe' scenarios.

On the new maps I perceive the tiles in ring 3 as the suburbs of a city - so for cities you are used to know as NOT grown together, say Bruxelles & Cologne or Warsaw & Vienna a map needs (at least) 7 tiles between their city centers.
So roughly cities are 50 times bigger (7x7). Want say: just to get about the same granularity / proportions of geographical items as on old civ1-civ5 maps the new maps ought to have 50 x as much tiles ...

I would be VERY, VERY interested in game experiences on such maps from players, who now always want to play the HUGE maps. Really. If there still is the itch "bigger is better".

 

[MooFreaky]

Well that's just dumb. Why wouldn't you have it as an on/off option like every other map?

I guess because it is a set map it would make Goodie Huts overpowered? You would know their spawn locations and beeline them? Not sure though.

 

[need my speed]

I would expect at least 1 tile between Berlin and Paris (or between Berlin and Moscow)

Way, way too tiny for my tastes. Beyond the Sword's standard Earth map is way larger than this.

But, yes, this is a complaint I have with both Civilization V and (much moreso) VI; nice Earth maps are basically impossible.

 

[c4c6]

Way, way too tiny for my tastes.

I just wanted to be sure, I take the bare minimum; equivalent civ6 map "should" still be factor x50

nice Earth maps are basically impossible.

Aesthetic aspects are one thing. Computer resources (pathfinding!) another.

But what interests me most is the playability. Do you think, based on the biggest maps you played (which I avoided, because of real time) in CIV, that significant larger maps (e.g. NumberOfTiles x25) could still be fun?

 

[need my speed]

Well, there is the Giant Earth Map mod, which is fun to some people. Ideally, I'd play that one, but it becomes a chore around the Renaissance / Industrial era for me. RFC's (Rhye's and Fall of Civilization, another mod) Earth map, specifically Dawn of Mankind's (a modmod), is very nice though. An enlarged Europe is a prerequisite for me, by the by.

However, Civilization IV doesn't make full use of x64, whereas VI does. That would make a huge difference, I'd imagine. Still, VI's districts and one unit per tile basically ruin any feasible Earth maps to me. I cannot see five cities in France, five in Spain / Portugal, and so on, under VI's rules. Which isn't at all an unrealistic expectation; this is a normal Earth map, pictures I took a bit more than half a year ago:

 

[Zaarin]

Wow, I've been clamoring for a real Earth map since the game released, but this one is horrible. It's ugly, inaccurate, locked to standard, virtually devoid of natural wonders (I spotted Kilimanjaro, Mt. Everest, and the unusable Galapagos Islands), and disables tribal huts...The last one I could live with, but after Civ5's beautiful Earth (and Scrambled Earth) map this is just sad. Looks like I'll continue to be stuck with random map scripts until Firaxis gets their act together and provides a better Earth map. I do have to praise it for the mostly realistic distribution of natural resources, though, but it is in dire need of a complete overhaul.

 

[Mustakrakish]

Too many Euro civs at the moment, they can't fit.

It seems like they do hate it. No true locations since IV...

...and...

A: Why not make a large one?
B: All civs not fitting is not an obstacle. I played to death IV BTS vanilla earth map with the same predefined civs (one where you could only fit one city in Italy, France, Spain), it didn't have to fit them all and still was tons of fun. When I wanted variety in civs I used mods, but vanilla was good enough for me and I played it the most. 18 civs if I remember correctly. Lots of hours trying to take over the world with all of them and still not succeeding before V came out. Making colonies in Americas and Australia was sooo damn cool (and I mean really making colonies, there was a mechanic). Ah, those times...

 

[Disgustipated]

I finished my Earth map game which I was happy with. The AI was fairly competitive that game. Yeah it's not as accurate as we'd all like, but that's not the point. An inaccurate Earth map is still better than random map scrips. I was getting really sick of random maps. As for natural wonders, they don't mean all that much to me, I very rarely get the chance to take advantage of them (they usually spawn near the ai or city states, not me). Which leads me to

Pauls Earth Map mod. I'm running that right now. This one is more inaccurate, but on purpose. Giving Europe players a little more room, and a Japan that looks like it pigged out. Unfortunately no natural wonders or goody huts (which can be overpowered on an Earth map anyways). This mod is linked in post #26 of this thread. This may have too many resources, making the game a bit on the easy side. I'm rolling in cash in this game, and enough luxuries that entertainment districts weren't a priority. Almost finished with this game as America. Next I'll try a middle east start with maximum civs, that might be more interesting.

I won't even touch any large Earth maps. Even this standard sized Earth map gets a bit slow for my tastes in the modern age and beyond. But I'm done with random maps in this game. Earth maps are the only way to play.

 

[c4c6]

I won't even touch any large Earth maps. Even this standard sized Earth map gets a bit slow for my tastes in the modern age and beyond. But I'm done with random maps in this game. Earth maps are the only way to play.

"Gets a bit slow." Do you mean the PC handling the game, which could be mended by future hardware. Or do you mean e.g. your units exploring /conquering _giant_ maps? (which would be independent from hardware)

[Probably I ask for the size limits of 'playable' maps - regardless the content, more abstract.]

 

[Disgustipated]

Ai turn time specifically. My processor isn't exactly a spring chicken (I have a good GPU though). I mostly play this game on tiny maps (one below standard). But with the 2 Earth maps they are standard of course. It's usually not bad until modern age though. Makes me a bit reluctant to do a domination victory on one, but I am thinking about it.

edit: I have decided to go for a domination victory on Paul's Standard Earth map. I disabled everything else except score so I have no choice. His map has so many luxuries it shouldn't be a problem. Otherwise it's a pain waiting for entertainment districts to be put up in newly conquered cities.

 

[MisterBoomBoom]

No TSL on a feeble not too thought out earth map? Why bother Firaxis....why even bother? It is not like you have any idea, after years of this, what the community actually wants now do you? Feeble.

 

[McGreggD]

They should have just released a map editor and let us build our own maps. The community can make much better maps than firaxis.

 

[Zaarin]

No TSL on a feeble not too thought out earth map? Why bother Firaxis....why even bother? It is not like you have any idea, after years of this, what the community actually wants now do you? Feeble.

I'd like to point out that some of us emphatically don't want TSL. I have a lot of complaints about this very poorly designed Earth map, but TSL isn't one of them.