Thanks to Ali Ardavan, Major Advantage and haleewud for their logs, and well done for speedy progress. I hope URUWASHI managed a bit more time for the game despite much analysis of running Civ2 under Windows 7 (as well as the start position / hut option rule which he was complimentary about in the game spoiler itself.)
Just a few background notes....
The discussion in the Future GOTM thread (see for example this post by our moderator) suggested that the group might find interest in a "normal" game with 1) more of a headstart for the AI and 2) limited good terrain. The headstart for the AI might help the interest level, and the limited terrain would provide continuing interest and keep the game from growing too large. It can also favour the human player. There were no traps or tricks intended, although I hoped Atlantis might cause a smile. It was intended to be a good map for the use of ICS and trade strategies, and with 7 players and our being purple, it meant the game would be familiar once underway. I think the logs suggest this is what happened.
I did not expect the hut option rule to have a big effect, but it might have made for some extra interest, and it has certainly increased my understanding of the options.
The techniques to create the game were learned as a side-effect from the investigation of the problem with the "all forest map" of GotM 121.
The map itself was edited from a "CivMapGen" original. Peter Blackman's CivMapGen program provides more difficult terrain than normal. The program includes an estimate of the number of reasonable city sites - for this map it is 60. It also analyses the terrain: for this map the split is Ocean 64%, 8% swamp, 6% glacier, 5% grassland, 4% plains, 4% mountains, 2% forest, 2% desert, 2% jungle, 2% tundra, 1% hills.
Magic did encourage me to play this GotM but I prefered not to having done quite a bit of setup and testing. But thus encouraged... unofficially I did move the City to the 4-special site and try OCC (I don't know a way to do this within the OCC rules because of the size-1 trick.) The Germans won.
Just a few background notes....
The discussion in the Future GOTM thread (see for example this post by our moderator) suggested that the group might find interest in a "normal" game with 1) more of a headstart for the AI and 2) limited good terrain. The headstart for the AI might help the interest level, and the limited terrain would provide continuing interest and keep the game from growing too large. It can also favour the human player. There were no traps or tricks intended, although I hoped Atlantis might cause a smile. It was intended to be a good map for the use of ICS and trade strategies, and with 7 players and our being purple, it meant the game would be familiar once underway. I think the logs suggest this is what happened.
I did not expect the hut option rule to have a big effect, but it might have made for some extra interest, and it has certainly increased my understanding of the options.
The techniques to create the game were learned as a side-effect from the investigation of the problem with the "all forest map" of GotM 121.
The map itself was edited from a "CivMapGen" original. Peter Blackman's CivMapGen program provides more difficult terrain than normal. The program includes an estimate of the number of reasonable city sites - for this map it is 60. It also analyses the terrain: for this map the split is Ocean 64%, 8% swamp, 6% glacier, 5% grassland, 4% plains, 4% mountains, 2% forest, 2% desert, 2% jungle, 2% tundra, 1% hills.
Magic did encourage me to play this GotM but I prefered not to having done quite a bit of setup and testing. But thus encouraged... unofficially I did move the City to the 4-special site and try OCC (I don't know a way to do this within the OCC rules because of the size-1 trick.) The Germans won.