Favorite Game Setups

[meatpardle]

Has anyone on this thread tried the Terra Incognita map script? If so, what did you not like about it?

Somewhat related...



I really do not understand the appeal of the random map type settings. Yes, the surprises and unknown aspects of the game would be a positive. But you have to balance that against how easy it is for the map settings to nerf civ abilities, both the players or the AI. Civ III and IV leaders were not so vulnerable to map characteristics, but in V many UU and UA just don't work for the majority (by count) of map possibilities. Using random personalities also nerfs the AI since the developers have, as best they can, tuned several personalities for synergy with their UA.

So if you want random opponents (which is the default of course) who are not likely to be crippled by the map, your are stuck with pangaea, continents, fractal, small continents, and a few variants. And with knowing something about the map which you would rather have as something to be discovered.

For the folks saying that random map type is their favorite game setup:
If you roll something terrible like Great Plains with Celts or a naval civ, do you just suck it up and play?

Personally I'd rather play a tough map/civ combo on an easier setting than set up all my favourites/what is likely to be successful and play on the harder ones.

More variety that way I guess.

 

[beetle]

Personally I'd rather play a tough map/civ combo on an easier setting than set up all my favourites/what is likely to be successful and play on the harder ones.

I agree completely, which is much of my interest with this thread, since my assumption was that maybe people have hit upon combinations where the games tend to be more interesting than not. But that does not really necessarily seem to be the case.

My Favorite Game Setup is to download a map from Strategy and Tips (see the ICL and DCL) or GotM. Curated maps are so much more reliable than RNG! (But you still end up with the occasional game with a land-locked Venice or other defective opponents.)

You said you like Huge, which makes the harder, and Marathon, which makes the game easier. But I my understanding is that the developers tuned Huge to match Epic, so I must assume that your games are tougher than standard/standard. My main objection to larger and slower games is that means playing fewer games. And then if it turns out a couple AI opponents have been nerfed by the RNG map setting, you have really lost a lot of time to a map that is of less interesting than it really could have been.

Too many Random options and the majority of your games will be defective in some noticeably way! So variety is a plus, as is surprise. But variety I can control well enough by picking map types. And the most common surprise is a naval civ opponent (or even two) who is land-locked. So I would rather trade the surprise and variety for AI opponents who are not handicapped by the map.

 

[Roller123]

Marathon does not make the game easier. Huge on the other hand does, or rather mostly more land does, because it leads to more optimal city locations, more city states, more techs to trade, and reduced per-city penalties, like said.

 

[beetle]

Marathon does not make the game easier. Huge on the other hand does

??? Marathon => more time to do thing ==> easier games.
Duel maps are obviously easier than standard. It follows that Huge maps are harder than standard.

 

[Roller123]

??? Marathon => more time to do thing ==> easier games.

No that doesnt work that way. Production times are adjusted with game speed so there isnt more time to do anything. Quite the opposite. Move speed isnt adjusted so on Marathon troops move with lightning speed, and every mistake is punished hard because there isnt time to recover, nor can you escape by elevating to a higher tech level because techs take forever to develop. If youre rushed on Marathon - your done. Marathon is a difficult unforgiving bloodbath.

 

[stormtrooper412]

Exactly. So if you hit your key domination tech properly, your units have a much wider window to do dish crazy punishment without the AI teching away into being harder to kill. I'm going to assume that a Standard sized Epic/Marathon game with Mongolia would be trivial to win in any difficulty

 

[Roller123]

This works both ways yes. However its then things dont go as planned the problems start and every mistake can cost the game on Marathon. Which is what makes it more difficult. Presetting the game doesnt really count as argument, since its really very specialized, get an isolated start and Babylon and its a fast path to victory on Standard and easier than Marathon, bulbing kinda sucks on Marathon. I also have a strange feeling that one of you has not played Marathon and the other hasnt played larger maps.

 

[stormtrooper412]

It's true, I only play standard maps on Quick/Standard speed because I really don't have the time to play a single game for weeks. I obviously don't know how it works but that one example I gave is I'm sure 100% accurate

 

[Roller123]

And i completely agree with that particular scenario. On the other hand having like 10 allied maritime city states is kinda nice too.

 

[catweazle]

Pangea, huge, domination, marathon, immortal, the Netherlands (being Dutch), no CS, sometimes barbarians, no ruins.
I play about 4 or 5 games a day, but only 5 turns a day. I keep my progress in the games in a Excel-sheet. Some games can take almost a year to finish...

 

[Drakarska]

Interesting, no one has mentioned continents plus.

Map: Con +
SZ: Huge
VC: Varies with map conditions
SPD: Epic to Mara ( free time is a luxury, lol)
DIFF: Diety
CIV: Random

Usually play 18 AI's, the rest CS's. barbs random, same for ruins. I also have quite a few mods active as well, just to make the game more interesting.

 

[Der_Zorn_gottes]

Exactly. So if you hit your key domination tech properly, your units have a much wider window to do dish crazy punishment without the AI teching away into being harder to kill. I'm going to assume that a Standard sized Epic/Marathon game with Mongolia would be trivial to win in any difficulty

Thats true. Once I won a huge inland sea game (Immortal) by conquest where none of the AIs reached medieval age (using community patch with weaker cities).
It is possible, but you do it once, smile, brag on the internet, and then just play differently.

 

[Gustavus Rex]

I like it pretty standard with a some variation. Continents or Pangeas. I like "cold" over hot and wet over arid. I prefer sparse or standard recourses but sometimes it's nice with legendary as well.

Ice Age, Tilted Axis and Sandstorm is my favorites among the more "special" map-types.

I like most civilizations but tend to have most fun with Greece and Germany. If I have to pick one set of settings to play the rest of my life it would be: Immortal, random civs, continents, standard time, standard size, and random for temperature, recourses, world age etc.