Fairest map settings

[vicawoo]

Over the years the forum has slowly converged towards less random and fairer map settings: standard speed (because slower is unfair), no huts (unfair and random), no events (unfair and random). People also tend not to play weird map types like arboreal, tectonics, highlands, ice age. Usually it's fractal, then maybe continents and pangea.

Now the most prevalent complaint is runaway AI getting too much land or weird diplomatic situations. At least the former can be addressed by a different map type.

So what are the fairest map types?
From what I'm seeing, mirror (using one of the continents settings) seems the best candidate, with balanced possible (but that ensures strategic resources).
There's also a few mirror variants used in a polish civilization iv multiplayer ranking

http://www.civfanatics.com/civ4/strategy/map_guide.php
http://www.civilization.org.pl/?l=eng&p=ranking_kac_ustawienia

 

[vicawoo]

Mirror does seem to be bad at ensuring a good starting location though.

 

[kossin]

The main reason I still favor Fractal over any of the other scripts:
not knowing what you're getting means you're on equal foot with the AI.

If you pick Pangea, you know you don't have to build any boat at all to win.
If you play Archipelageo, you beeline GLH and Metal Casting for barb galleys.

While it has its downsides, the AI is not programmed to handle any map script differently, just the same as it doesn't even know when Cultural Victory is turned off.

Now and then though I'll play a Pangea/Inland_Sea but I like the element of surprise. That one AI can gobble up 20% of the land is part of the game. It can actually be fun when you have to work to earn your win after the first 100 turns.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

not knowing what you're getting means you're on equal foot with the AI.

If you think that 11% = 28%, then sure you have perfectly equal footing.

And that isolated AI surely knows how to play its start too .

 

[Dirk1302]

Normal speed standard? A year ago i would agree, now i'm not so sure . Agree with kossin not knowing what to expect put's humans closer to ais who haven't a clue anyway. It's not the hardest map generally though imo, often there are ways to take that runaway AI out eventually. Being boxed in (and maybe even dowed early) on a pangage can be very hard to overcome.

 

[kossin]

If you think that 11% = 28%, then sure you have perfectly equal footing.

And that isolated AI surely knows how to play its start too .

There's always Shuffle or some random map scripts

Of course, there will always be a problem due to the coding of AIs. IMO it's not worth complaining that some maps can't be won for whatever reason, be it boxed in by Shaka with no resources or going up against 20 cities Cathy.

 

[Mylene]

I like ideas like sea invasions to complete conquest, but Obsolete is right..i checked some WB stárts, Fractal is very unbalanced when it comes to land distribution.

 

[Kid R]

Custom continents, one continent per civ, would be pretty fair if either everyone was isolated or nobody was. Separation's variable though, and anyway the script doesn't seem to work properly.

Planet_Generator I've never really used before but just playing around with it now it seems OK if a bit heavy on the land area. Small world, 7 AIs, 7 continents, 2 tile continent spacing seems a bit like standard pangaea, except probably slightly later contact with the farthest AIs, and fair land area for everyone.

Also no axe rushing (nice to AIs); less mad rush for early city sites on high levels (big nerf to AIs); naval war required to achieve anything (also a big nerf to AIs). No doubt lots of other gameplay issues but it will be FAIR!

Most continents seem to get 2 out of copper/horse/iron, sometimes just 1, sometimes all 3. For some reason the script's default is non-standard floodplain placement but that can be turned off.

Sure it'll be much easier than normal but I'll give it a few games - might even try deity

 

[Zx Zero Zx]

I find Pangaea to be the most balanced. You don't get the 1 religion block continents as much where the tech rate just explodes, had a game on continents where the other continent got lib around 200 BC. Also you don't have the stupid uneven land distribution of all other maps, there's a NC game I think on fractal where 1 of the AI gets around 35% of the land if you don't HA rush him and kill your economy.

 

[Mylene]

Agree with Zero, Pangea is our standard for good reasons.
On water involved maps, sometimes very easy starts occur with a lot of land.
Or a friendly neighbor, making diplo easy. On other starts you might get boxed in by Shaka, and while you are busy solving your little problem other continents run away.

 

[SamSniped]

I don't mind changing things up every so often. I once played a round on a Ring map. It was fun

 

[Habitus]

Also you don't have the stupid uneven land distribution of all other maps

You do, its just alot less common Inland Sea is the same, but since you have more land its often easier than Pangaea. Thou barbs are generally more annoying in it and since they are extra randomness, I feel Pangaea is 'Fairer' for comparing games.
Archipelago can also be said to be fair for land, as AI have no problem sailing thru and settling past borders and in general don't get blocked off by close borders after the very early game. The initial Island aren't always very even thou.

 

[BurN]

Over the years the forum has slowly converged towards less random and fairer map settings: standard speed (because slower is unfair), no huts (unfair and random), no events (unfair and random). People also tend not to play weird map types like arboreal, tectonics, highlands, ice age. Usually it's fractal, then maybe continents and pangea.

Now the most prevalent complaint is runaway AI getting too much land or weird diplomatic situations. At least the former can be addressed by a different map type.

So what are the fairest map types?
From what I'm seeing, mirror (using one of the continents settings) seems the best candidate, with balanced possible (but that ensures strategic resources).
There's also a few mirror variants used in a polish civilization iv multiplayer ranking

http://www.civfanatics.com/civ4/strategy/map_guide.php
http://www.civilization.org.pl/?l=eng&p=ranking_kac_ustawienia

I don`t quite understand why events or huts or huge AI`s are unfair. Let`s say you play deity... is it unfair the AI will grab lots of huts? Is it unfair they can settle like 15+ cities in the BC`s? They get all the bonusses and you want to `restrict` them, which is just as unfair. As soon as you play above or below noble it`s already unfair!

I don`t mind unpredictable maps/huts/events. One time you can block a big piece of land which requires another approach then when you`re boxed in with 2 cities. One time you get barbs from huts, the other time you pop masonry which could alter your next steps. Keeps the game interesting.

Edit: Actually I think playing a balanced pang or continent map without huts/events.. makes the difficulty drop a lot.

 

[Rubio]

I think especially for MP but also for SP they should design maps like they did in Starcraft, where everybody is on equal footing.

 

[Archbob]

I just do random map type so I don't know what it is. Bu standard speed. Huts/events I usually leave on because they are on by default. I don't like having to go in to the "custom game settings". Feels like I'm rigging it if I do that.

 

[mtr12]

Heh I kinda want to play a Ring map, though I imagine that GLH would be pretty broken as it usually is on high Surface Area:Land ratio maps.

 

[Archbob]

Have you been ever been able to beat a diety tiny island game without building GLH?

 

[Kid R]

As a new year present to the forum somebody should generate a load of maps and screen them for "fairness", then post like 50 of them in a spoiler-free sticky thread. I would do it but I'm not sure what people generally mean by fair

 

[tdy99]

Custom continents, one continent per civ, would be pretty fair if either everyone was isolated or nobody was. Separation's variable though, and anyway the script doesn't seem to work properly.

Planet_Generator I've never really used before but just playing around with it now it seems OK if a bit heavy on the land area. Small world, 7 AIs, 7 continents, 2 tile continent spacing seems a bit like standard pangaea, except probably slightly later contact with the farthest AIs, and fair land area for everyone.

Also no axe rushing (nice to AIs); less mad rush for early city sites on high levels (big nerf to AIs); naval war required to achieve anything (also a big nerf to AIs). No doubt lots of other gameplay issues but it will be FAIR!

Most continents seem to get 2 out of copper/horse/iron, sometimes just 1, sometimes all 3. For some reason the script's default is non-standard floodplain placement but that can be turned off.

Sure it'll be much easier than normal but I'll give it a few games - might even try deity

I gave up on Planet_Generator for this reason. Got tired of games where I would find myself on a continent with 2 other civs and we'd all have 10-15 cities and there would still be this gigantic continent sized unsettled area on standard size. I Figure if you want to use Planet_Generator, you should really add an extra 2 or 3 civs above the default for whatever map size you are playing.

 

[Kid R]

^ You can also up the sea area a bit. The best combo I hit on was minimum separation, raggedy landmasses, and continents arranged around center, which comes out a bit like pangaea with lots of long inlets and lakes and choke points. Quite nice but the big problem is still that even though you say "one continent per civ" it doesn't stop the generator putting capitals right together and leaving other continents empty. Fail