Giant Earth Concept Map (256x256) 2013-04-03

[Meteor Man]

Sorry for the double post.

I was play testing your solution, and it seems to work alright, as long as the tech is very late in the first era (as in the LAST tech available). What would increasing the tech cost do? It would definitely make it tough to research, but would it also make it hard to trade because the AI would value it more? What are your thoughts?

 

[Yoda Power]

Well the cost will go down if the player establishes contacts with more than one civ that has the tech.

In my tests, they would usually trade it for one tech that no other civs they knew had, or for a slightly higher price if others had the tech you tried to trade it for.

Most euro civs make contact with the American civs and quickly get the American tech, usually the American civs must wait a little longer to get the Eurasian tech. Sometimes (I would estimate 30%-40% of the time) the Asian civs don't get tech from trading but from research, but that's ok in my opinion.

I've also seen a tendency where it seems to work better when the AI is strong/on higher levels. Most of my tests have been on Monarch, but I also ran a few games on Regent and Emperor and a single one on Sid.

 

[Meteor Man]

Well the cost will go down if the player establishes contacts with more than one civ that has the tech.

In my tests, they would usually trade it for one tech that no other civs they knew had, or for a slightly higher price if others had the tech you tried to trade it for.

Most euro civs make contact with the American civs and quickly get the American tech, usually the American civs must wait a little longer to get the Eurasian tech. Sometimes (I would estimate 30%-40% of the time) the Asian civs don't get tech from trading but from research, but that's ok in my opinion.

I've also seen a tendency where it seems to work better when the AI is strong/on higher levels. Most of my tests have been on Monarch, but I also ran a few games on Regent and Emperor and a single one on Sid.

Ok, I'm thinking about jacking up the cost of the tech in the editor to ~300 or so, just to make it nearly impossible to research.

I'm a little lower of a player than you, I usually play around warlord, high aggression. Which is where most of my testing is getting done.

 

[Yoda Power]

If you want to run a test above your normal level, just pick Japan or England. You'll lose the game, but the AI is too stupid to kill you on those islands.

 

[Meteor Man]

If you want to run a test above your normal level, just pick Japan or England. You'll lose the game, but the AI is too stupid to kill you on those islands.

That's actually a good idea. Will try.

 

[Greizer85]

Hat off to you sir (or ma'am) for the best-looking Civ map that I've ever seen for any version. So far there's not been a single area that I'd change, and I'm very picky when it comes to Civ maps.

One weird thing about the mod/map: I changed the Russians from Expansionist to Militaristic because I view Expansionist as a useless trait and wanted to make them more powerful. However they can still build Scouts like nothin' happened. What gives? Not that Scouts are very useful without being able to enter forests, but anyways.

 

[Yoda Power]

Thank for the nice comment.

Scouts must be changed in the Units page. This is not related to the map btw, it would be the same if you changed the standard game.

On a side note: I've often seen people hating the Expansionst trait. I don't really understand why. If you explore quick the trait will ensure you lots of good stuff from goody huts (and no barbs), often an extra city and some techs. Expansionist civs are usually the tech leaders in the first age in my games. Oh well, each to his own.

 

[Meteor Man]

Expansionist civs are also the only ones to pop settlers or cities from huts. Great way to start the game. They often can pick up most of the first half of Ancient age techs through huts, too.


And I still avoid them.

 

[CIVIZIER]

Hi, first post here. Glad to find i'm not the only one playing a 10+ year old game. DL map now. Ta.

 

[Aleenik]

Hi, first post here. Glad to find i'm not the only one playing a 10+ year old game. DL map now. Ta.

Due to the state of my computer, Civ 3 is one of the best games I can play. I love Civ 3, but I do wish I could play some newer games lol.

Yoda, have you thought about making a version of the map where only select tiles can be settled? Tiles where historically there are/were important cities. If that is even possible. I know it might take some of the strategy out of the game, but really, I think the AI kinda sucks at picking the best locations to settle anyways. I remember seeing someone talk about that idea long ago, but idk if they actually went through with making a map like that.

Great map btw.

 

[Yoda Power]

Hi Aleenik.

Have a look at this earlier post of mine.

My approach to restricting settlers is that I want to push the player/AI in a direction, without forcing them to settle in specific places, e.g. as in Cheezy the Wiz' Earth mod. My theory is that the less you force upon the AI the more diversified games you will get. This clashes with creating a map that plays realistically, but I think I found a balance with this map.

(edit: just realised you've already seen that post, since you commented on it earlier)

Basicly it can be done, but I believe I found a much smarter way. With a mix of imposing terrain restrictions and making different types of settlers available I think got a very realistic settling pattern, while still maintaining the strategy of the game.

That said if you want the map like you say, then by all means go ahead and make it. Here is how you do:

Choose one terrain type (my suggestion would be marsh). Remove that terrain from the map. Then change it under the terrain tab in the editor so that only marsh is settleable. Now you can place the city locations how you want them. Keep in mind that there is a limit of 512 cities.

 

[Aleenik]

Hi Aleenik.

Have a look at this earlier post of mine.

(edit: just realised you've already seen that post, since you commented on it earlier)

Basicly it can be done, but I believe I found a much smarter way. With a mix of imposing terrain restrictions and making different types of settlers available I think got a very realistic settling pattern, while still maintaining the strategy of the game.

That said if you want the map like you say, then by all means go ahead and make it. Here is how you do:

Choose one terrain type (my suggestion would be marsh). Remove that terrain from the map. Then change it under the terrain tab in the editor so that only marsh is settleable. Now you can place the city locations how you want them. Keep in mind that there is a limit of 512 cities.

Well, that's embarrassing lol. I completely forgot that I commented on that already. Well, at least it gave your thread a bump haha.

 

[timerover51]

Expansionist civs are also the only ones to pop settlers or cities from huts. Great way to start the game. They often can pick up most of the first half of Ancient age techs through huts, too.


And I still avoid them.

Hmm, I have popped settlers from goody huts while using the Dutch, who are not expansionist. I cannot remember popping a city though. I will need to do some tests.

At Yoda,

I was looking through your government list, and you have fascism as more productive than democracy. The data that I have on production in WW2, using the US as the base of 100, gives the UK a production of 95, and Germany a production of 80. In Count Ciano's diary, Italian workers in Germany were rated at about 80% of German workers production if from North Italy and about 40% of German production if from South Italy. Japan was something like 25% of the US per worker-hour. Based on those examples and figuring that Germany and Italy were definitely Fascist, and Japan was sort of that way, I cannot see rating Fascism production that high. Corruption was also pretty bad in Italy, while working at cross-purposes was common between the Japanese Army and Navy (the Japanese Army started building its own aircraft carriers in 1944 for one example), while the activities of the SS with respect to extermination policies diverted a lot of German production. Slave labor did not help much either. Did you do that for play balance or what?

 

[Yoda Power]

edit: oh btw: You can still pop settlers if you're not expansionist, but the chance of doing it increases considerably if you're expansionist.

At Yoda,

I was looking through your government list, and you have fascism as more productive than democracy. The data that I have on production in WW2, using the US as the base of 100, gives the UK a production of 95, and Germany a production of 80. In Count Ciano's diary, Italian workers in Germany were rated at about 80% of German workers production if from North Italy and about 40% of German production if from South Italy. Japan was something like 25% of the US per worker-hour. Based on those examples and figuring that Germany and Italy were definitely Fascist, and Japan was sort of that way, I cannot see rating Fascism production that high. Corruption was also pretty bad in Italy, while working at cross-purposes was common between the Japanese Army and Navy (the Japanese Army started building its own aircraft carriers in 1944 for one example), while the activities of the SS with respect to extermination policies diverted a lot of German production. Slave labor did not help much either. Did you do that for play balance or what?

Technically I didn't do it. That part has been left completely unmodded from the original game (you haven't been playing much unmodded civ lately I take it ). I'm quite sure that Firaxis made it like that for gameplay reasons and out of the idea that the Nazis could raise their production with Concentration Camps and whatnot.

 

[timerover51]

edit: oh btw: You can still pop settlers if you're not expansionist, but the chance of doing it increases considerably if you're expansionist.

I would say that is correct, and I do not ever remember popping a city without an expansionist civilization, such as America. Against that, as a civilization can have more than two characteristics, I could always add expansionist to say the Dutch and English.

Technically I didn't do it. That part has been left completely unmodded from the original game (you haven't been playing much unmodded civ lately I take it ). I'm quite sure that Firaxis made it like that for gameplay reasons and out of the idea that the Nazis could raise their production with Concentration Camps and whatnot.

I guess that I should look more at Fascism as a government type, and I do not play a lot of unmodified Civ3 at all. Mainly the Age of Discovery scenario, when I do. I have won that as the English, but have yet to win it as the Dutch. I normally use a modified Monarchy for the game, with minimal corruption and a lot of buildings set to reduce corruption, along with additional free units from cities. Keeps the game fun and still quite challenging.

 

[Babylon746]

Having started Civ3 recently again, I found this map.
It looks - literally - gigantic!

A very accurate map of the earth, with some interesting rule tweaks.
Which of the three American civs (Inca, Maya, Aztecs) would be easiest to play?

 

[Yoda Power]

Probably the Inca. They have room to expand and no enemies in the first age. Their main disadvantedge is falling behind in tech, which they are almost sure to do. Maya and Aztecs probably require that you conquer the other to have a fair chance.

 

[Babylon746]

I'll give the Inca a try after finishing my current game (regular C3C) with the Maya.

 

[Brainiac18]

So...

I played this map from 4000bc till 2000ad, triggered domination (which was custom by yoda 50%pop/25%land), it was the only victory condition I set. I was regent and Inca, usually I play monarch, but I didn't knew bout all the modified stuff, so I wanted to learn all that stuff. I'm a World map maniac and I play big like that often.

In this game I automated (regular automated) all my workers for the first time. That was very poor decision from my side, never again.

Thank You for this map! Like I said, I love World maps, this brings up the feeling of realism I need for my play. Some feedback:
- Jungle and mountains forbidden.. I was very sorry for myself for choosing Incas. It was an interesting challenge.
- Very accurate terrain indeed, very very very good. Among the best, like Rhye's world map.
- Marsh.. I was waiting till the last tech to get the ability of clearing it, but..
- Saltpepper I think is way too rare.
- When learned about Navy seals, marines disappeared, and seals never showed up, although I had the resources. Since then never got a chance to conquer a single tile city islands.
- Great ideas about modified/new units, awesome job. Some description could've been added to Civilopedia though!
- Personally I wouldn't mind to have more than 22 civs with 30 minute turns Someone could be placed in Micronesia region or Australia. And yet again, India is overpowered on this World map too.

This was very entertaining for me, thank You for your work again, I will do someone else on it later.

Three screenshots and a save right after victory are in the attachments.

 

[Yoda Power]

Interesting report. Thanks!

Some responses:

1) The challenge is very intended. As mentioned in the first post, initially civilizations cannot expand out of their original homeland.

2) There's really so little marsh, and if I allowed it to be cleared it would make space for more cities, which would slow the map down.

3) Actually there is exactly one strategic and luxury resource for every civilization (with the exception of Uranium), they are just placed in a way so you will have to trade for it. The East Asians and Europeans have plenty of Saltpeter so you could have traded with them.

4) Actually Marines upgrade to Special Ops who also have the amphibious ability. I can even see Special Ops in your screenshot, so you did have that option. It's a fault of the lacking civilopedia, but I figured people would understand it because of the upgrade paths.

5) You can add more civilizations if you want. Just remember to add more resources (as said I use one for each civ as a rule of thumb). If you need advice on where to add them, just ask.

I have a question for you. What do you think of the domination condition? Should it have been higher? Maybe 33% land instead?