1. Firaxis celebrates the "Asian American and Pacific Islander Heritage Month", and offers a give-away of a Civ6 anthology copy (5 in total)! For all the details, please check the thread here. .
    Dismiss Notice
  2. We have selected the winners of the Old World random draw and competition. For the winning entries, please check this thread.
    Dismiss Notice

map balance

Discussion in 'Civ4 - Giant Earth Map Mod' started by civvver, Sep 21, 2011.

  1. civvver

    civvver Deity

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2007
    Messages:
    5,854
    I love GEM. I've won with about 5 different civs, in multiple ways, and started countless games I never got around to finishing. After playing ancient and modern world scenarios though it has become very apparent that the map is not balanced for a few civs.

    All of east asia has an enormous amount of food. Even the isle of japan can support a few gigantic cities. These eastern civs are typically always near the top of the scoreboard when controlled by the AI. There's also a pretty decent amount of room for them and wang kon is always there and he doesn't expand much.

    India has similarly ridiculously good land to start, but is usually in a tight competition with the mughals and persia for land so it's not as obvious.

    Europe has the best land on the map in terms of balance of production and food with some commerce resources mixed in. It's balanced though because so many civs are present there, so each one ends up with one a couple cities with room to grow. Compare that to the chinese who can easily build 6 cities without having to go to war. For the player though european civs are probably the easiest to play since you can just conquer your neighbors and have the best land and plenty of space.

    The middle east and north africa is well balanced. All the starts there (carthage, egypt, israel, babylon, persia, arabs) have nice land, but not obscenely good, and room for 3-4 good cities.

    Africa however pales in comparison. Shaka has pretty food poor land in the south, mansa's land is ok but a lot of jungle and lacking in resources, and zara has to fight a lot of hills and tundra. I realize the tundra is due to a realistic map and the elevated terrain there but throwing in more resources to compensate would be nice.

    Then travel to the americas and austraila... their food output is barely half of what's in asia. I've tried many times to play one of those civs but it's just not that fun building a bunch of mountain cities as inca or expanding into the great plains with the souix. The usa does have some nice corn and wheat for growth but it's still not as good as china.

    I'm sure this was all intentional. My question is was this done for the sake of map authenticity? In real life asia does support huge amounts of population and it seems the map is made to model this. But if that's the case the huge amounts of food in europe don't seem to fit. Or was this done with the idea that civs with more room have worse resources (inca for example has a ton of space but not the best land)? Or was it simply that some civs are supposed to be more challenging to play?
     
  2. Dinkir9

    Dinkir9 Chieftain

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2011
    Messages:
    3
    While you're right and while the East Asian civs are definitely my favorite, tjis guy tried to make it realistic, I think it would definitely be a bit more balanced if rice farms did not produce the same amou t of food as wheat & corn farms. This guy tried to make it realistic in gameplay, so the civs that were kost dominant at their time will typically be at their peak around that time (Egypt & Babylon being strong early in the game, Rome being a powerhouse from 1000B.C.-600A.D., European hopefully gaining massive power, and all east asains gaining extraordinary power after calendar) so China will always be its strongest, but I think the guy tried to fix this problem by adding the Baiyue and the Mughals, which really even out some of the land. I also noticed that civs that don't get floodplains at their capital or are surrouned tend to SUCK. the prime ones being Scandinavia, Germany, Russia, Greece, Maya, and sometimes France & England. What I think would remedy this balancing issue is by adding atleast one rich food tile (grassland, floodplain, corn/wheat/rice) so that they would atleast be ready to go at the same time as other civs. germany especially sucks because they don't get any coastal cities, tney have no happiness resources, and they are surrounded. greece gets trapped by Hungary even though it looks like they should be able to barely squeeze by, Hungary is ridiculously strong too, they have TONS of food, and a good expansion route to EVEN MORE food. I think that the guy who made this could fix some of it by adding some furs, dyes, wines, to those civs i mentioned, and by adding some extra food. because without em, they get trapped and will be forced to conquer early on if they ever want a slim chance of winning the game.
     
  3. Shizuko3

    Shizuko3 Chieftain

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2011
    Messages:
    51
    funny what you said about Hungary, in my current game they are the strongest nation fallowed by india and china (as you described extremely favorable lands), not only that they vassaled the Carthaginians, Scandinavians, Polish, Mughals all at same time. Australia is so poor and weak that is not even funny they being in the game... Korea and Mongols are always owned...
     

Share This Page