ianinsane
Prince
I could do that with mainland Europe...
MAP development
- Thread starter kbrennan7654
- Start date
Genghis_Kai
GEM modder
There are 18900 tiles in GEM. Are we sure we want to invest our time to name them? 
Adhesive86
Warlord
Well, you could name only the important ones
If it's easy to do then I think this would be a nice addition and there's no problem just naming important areas I agree with Joe.
It's not going to be a gamebreaker though, so if it's difficult then that'd be a different kettle of fish.
I'm happy to suggest names for UK+Ireland and any other region which might be missing.
Quklis
Chieftain
There are 18900 tiles in GEM. Are we sure we want to invest our time to name them?
It makes the game just a bit more special.
How about we just name tiles Surrounding Urban Areas (i.e. Chicagoland), Special Geographic Features (i.e. Lake Michigan, Mt. Everest, the Grand Canyon), or Towns that just weren't quite big enough to make the final cut as a city (i.e. Springfield, IL, Buffalo, NY, etc.). That way were not naming every single tile, but only the ones that really have something on it 
.
.Mattygerst
King
I don't know if this means anything to you NikNaks...
But GenghisKai PM'd me last night because I had written him a PM 2 1/2 weeks ago asking what help, etc. he needed with the DLL bc we, honestly, aren't going anywhere and said he isn't going to work with us on the mod anymore because he doesn't have the time for modding in general anymore.
But GenghisKai PM'd me last night because I had written him a PM 2 1/2 weeks ago asking what help, etc. he needed with the DLL bc we, honestly, aren't going anywhere and said he isn't going to work with us on the mod anymore because he doesn't have the time for modding in general anymore.
Adhesive86
Warlord
Well you did just trash his map that he was ready to work from and did all the city and civ info for months ago.
Mattygerst
King
No, I wrote him a PM like 15-17 days ago - when I originally tried to get the board jump-started, again. Asking him about what he needed help with in terms of the DLL and where he is with everything.
If you'd like a copy I can probably dig it up.
He wrote back saying we've dragged this on too long and he doesn't have the time for modding in general anymore.
If you'd like a copy I can probably dig it up.
He wrote back saying we've dragged this on too long and he doesn't have the time for modding in general anymore.
Adhesive86
Warlord
Right, yeah i can believe that. He's said as much in public forums. But redesigning the map and needlessly making redundant alot of the work he's already done is hardly a good way to combat any perception of it dragging on. It makes it worse. Therefore i'm hardly surprised he finally called quits on it last night.
Matty, I don't particularly dislike your map, and I agree with much of what you say about moving forward, but at the moment you are riding roughshod over people and taking the project backwards instead of forwards by trying to make too many changes that are not required. If we need 50 civs fine, if we need 48 then fine, and i agree let's do it quickly, but nowhere did anyone ask for a total revamping of our civs. It undoes alot of work needlessly, is holding up my work and i guess other people's too.
Other people have rightly been ignored for months, each complaining they would prefer certain civs in, out etc and I don't see why this should be any different.
There are two key issues here:
1) Should we reduce the civ count slightly to a working dll? YES, OF COURSE. WE ALL AGREE. This could be done with minimal effort or effect, achieving what we have wanted for months.
2) Should we totally re-evaluate the map? NO, this is clearly not necessary and whenever mentioned before has been politely declined on the basis that work has been done and is continuing with the current civs and that a lengthy debate has already taken place. Also it would slow things down, directly in conflict with point one, on which we all agree.
ianinsane
Prince
Mattygerst, you wrote that currently the map work is done. Did you use the WW2 scenario GEM map as a starting? And did you use Genghis excel sheet for city sizes? Did you already place ideologies using my excel sheet?
Mattygerst
King
GEM map: Yes.
City sizes: Yes (but, we are going to be - most likely - putting in a new terrain type so that we can cut the food penalty in half to let the cities actually be as large as they need to be. Because at this point - using Genghis' excel sheet...the cities are starting out at 30 population with only enough food to support 18-21 in most cases. So...once we test it...I'm going to have to use the Marsh feature from RFC's map and instill it into GEM).
Ideologies: Have not been placed yet. Have to first change them in the ReligionInfos, etc.
City sizes: Yes (but, we are going to be - most likely - putting in a new terrain type so that we can cut the food penalty in half to let the cities actually be as large as they need to be. Because at this point - using Genghis' excel sheet...the cities are starting out at 30 population with only enough food to support 18-21 in most cases. So...once we test it...I'm going to have to use the Marsh feature from RFC's map and instill it into GEM).
Ideologies: Have not been placed yet. Have to first change them in the ReligionInfos, etc.
ianinsane
Prince
I actually did that several months ago. It's up on the SVN. It should be working.
Mattygerst
King
I need some suggetions on what we are going to do with game populations.
Ghengis has a 1940 statistics labeled, but they're simply not going to work here.
This is the issue:
1940 scenario:
Germany is represented with a population ratio of 0.17 : 1 = 17% correct
Denmark is represented with a population ratio of 0.13 : 1 = 13% correct
China is represented with a population ratio of 0.05 :1 = 5% correct
Netherlands = 4% correct
on the flip side:
Australia = 37% correct
America = 21% correct
So there are major gameplay-balance issues.
2009
London = 30 population
Paris = 28 population
Canary Islands = 15 population
Glasgow = 15 population
Barcelona = 21 population
The bottom line is...no matter what we do. Populations are just going to be WAYYYYYY off.
So any suggestions on what we should do about Paris having 11 million citizens which in civ breaks down to 28 population. And the Canary Islands have 2 million citizens which is 15 population. Obviously areas such as the Canary Islands and Glasgow are not going to be able to support such population numbers. Especially with London taking up the entire island with a population of 30 in game. And then we have a One-tile island taking up 15 population. And we also have Paris at 28 population bordering (approx.) Barcelona with 21 population. This is simply not going to work...
So...we need real ideas that can be implemented right now so I can get this done. Only idea I have is to arbitrarily cut every population in half. But, I don't know. What do you all think?
Ghengis has a 1940 statistics labeled, but they're simply not going to work here.
This is the issue:
1940 scenario:
Germany is represented with a population ratio of 0.17 : 1 = 17% correct
Denmark is represented with a population ratio of 0.13 : 1 = 13% correct
China is represented with a population ratio of 0.05 :1 = 5% correct
Netherlands = 4% correct
on the flip side:
Australia = 37% correct
America = 21% correct
So there are major gameplay-balance issues.
2009
London = 30 population
Paris = 28 population
Canary Islands = 15 population
Glasgow = 15 population
Barcelona = 21 population
The bottom line is...no matter what we do. Populations are just going to be WAYYYYYY off.
So any suggestions on what we should do about Paris having 11 million citizens which in civ breaks down to 28 population. And the Canary Islands have 2 million citizens which is 15 population. Obviously areas such as the Canary Islands and Glasgow are not going to be able to support such population numbers. Especially with London taking up the entire island with a population of 30 in game. And then we have a One-tile island taking up 15 population. And we also have Paris at 28 population bordering (approx.) Barcelona with 21 population. This is simply not going to work...
So...we need real ideas that can be implemented right now so I can get this done. Only idea I have is to arbitrarily cut every population in half. But, I don't know. What do you all think?
ianinsane
Prince
The best thing I think is to provide e.g. the Canary Islands with enough fish resources to support this population size. This should be easy.
Adhesive86
Warlord
- Use the +food corporations and if necessary mod them to make them stronger. Put these in the likes of Paris, London. This is a) going to work and b) realistic as our food production is increasingly efficient. One problem would be that some civs aren't going to have the required resources. I say this is fair as in reality many people in poorer countries with inflated populations starve.
Ps In GEM i'm pretty sure that 15population in Canary Islands and Glasgow IS sustainable. I don't even think islands such as the Canaries need a corporation for this as they're surrounded by sea squares with at least 2 food each. Infact i've just checked this and 15 population would be fine for Canaries even with no corporation so long as you don't completely squash its culture.
I would stick to Kai's list as he's obviously done lots of work on it and come to those conclusions for a reason. I would hope that the above solution allows it to happen. The only issues I think are going to arise from this are for a massive city in a small civ with either a) small culture or b) lack of food. So maybe in a few cases a bit of food resource editing may be necessary (as per ianinsane's idea), but I don't think this is necessary for many cities such as Canaries or Glasgow so perhaps this problem is not as big as you might have imagined?
Ps if anyone can explain how to put up a print screen i'll show Canaries perfectly fine at 15pop.
Ps In GEM i'm pretty sure that 15population in Canary Islands and Glasgow IS sustainable. I don't even think islands such as the Canaries need a corporation for this as they're surrounded by sea squares with at least 2 food each. Infact i've just checked this and 15 population would be fine for Canaries even with no corporation so long as you don't completely squash its culture.
I would stick to Kai's list as he's obviously done lots of work on it and come to those conclusions for a reason. I would hope that the above solution allows it to happen. The only issues I think are going to arise from this are for a massive city in a small civ with either a) small culture or b) lack of food. So maybe in a few cases a bit of food resource editing may be necessary (as per ianinsane's idea), but I don't think this is necessary for many cities such as Canaries or Glasgow so perhaps this problem is not as big as you might have imagined?
Ps if anyone can explain how to put up a print screen i'll show Canaries perfectly fine at 15pop.
Mattygerst
King
I don't disagree with that. But...they are also surrounded by other cities that take up the majority of their squares because all the cities have massive population. So, while they have all these squares, they won't even be using many of them due to long-term culture issues with borders from large cities, etc. Which will lead to long-term gameplay & balance problems.
Adhesive86
Warlord
That isn't the case in GEM with most cities, but then I haven't seen your latest city placements for this scenario so i'll have to take your word for it. Just basically if the city density is similar to GEM i don't think this is a massive issue for the majority of large cities that can't be gotten around by using a food corporation in certain places. I certianly don't think a new terrain is necessary.
I'm happy to make these suggestions in specific instances once having seen the map.
ps are we using the standard corporations, or the ones that were thought up for this scenario ages ago? (HSBC etc)
Having thought on the food thing a bit more, I have 2 key solutions:
1) Corporations as used in game, made stronger if necessary.
2) Give a food bonus to granary and/or grocer, market, supermarket. e.g. Grocer = +3 food. (I've not thought exactly about the details, but basically if a bonus is given it'd make sense that this is linked to some sort of controllable in game decision instead of just deciding terrain at the beginning which obviously cannot be changed.)
Mattygerst
King
-At the moment, no work has been done on the corporations at all. Though, I do plan to change the names of them & modify their bonuses where possible to get the best results for the sim.
-The only problem with giving a food bonus to buildings is that all cities will get access to these bonuses. So we'll have massive cities growing in desert type areas, and in areas like Siberia, etc. Which will affect balance.
Nevertheless. Once I get this map done, I'll get to posting it and we'll see what we think.
Adhesive86
Warlord
Fair enough. I personally favour the corporations route at this early stage for those same reasons. Having said that, I wouldn't be too worried about cities springing up in the desert etc:
a) Big cities do just spring up in deserts now. I'm no expert, but Dubai, Cancun...
b) The nature of the map means that with turns slow it is pretty unlikely such cities are going to often get to that position.
c) In terms of new cities, you can just make settlers very expensive.
Anyway, yes i agree let's see once you've got the map done.
Similar threads
