Maps and Leader Traits

[Benford's Law]

Can anyone share what map types and leader traits make the game harder and easier for them?

I am referring to map sizes, sea levels, map types (ie. tectonics, pangea, etc.), and world climates.

Example:
A philosophical leader would have more difficulty with an arid climate because it would be tougher to leverage the great person birth rate due to a lack of enough food for a vibrant specialist economy.

Can anyone share other map/trait synergies or any incompatibilities (such as the example provided)?

~Benford's Law

 

[RRRaskolnikov]

Some input :

Financial: every map, but especially nice in watery map
agg, pro, cha, imp: pangea
cha: not script map related but nice in isolation (for extra happiness)
imp: continent with few neighbours
phil: high levels, OCC, culture
org is nice for dom victory (whip courts for 2 pop)

UU, UB can be a factor as well (pret and immortals shine in pangea, carrack in continent or fractal, feitoria and dutch UB in watery maps)...

Cheers,
Raskolnikov

 

[mirthadir]

Can anyone share what map types and leader traits make the game harder and easier for them?

I am referring to map sizes, sea levels, map types (ie. tectonics, pangea, etc.), and world climates.

Example:
A philosophical leader would have more difficulty with an arid climate because it would be tougher to leverage the great person birth rate due to a lack of enough food for a vibrant specialist economy.

Can anyone share other map/trait synergies or any incompatibilities (such as the example provided)?

~Benford's Law

Actually this is just the opposite. Philo is strongest in an arid climate because everyone is going to have fewer specs they can run which means you that you can devote less to specs and still get a large return. Likewise with FIN; a two tile gets a whopping 50% increase in efficiency from FIN whereas a 6 tile would only get a 17% increase; thus FIN is strongest on a water map, not on grassland/FP rich maps. Most traits follow a rule of diminishing returns; the easier it is to do whatever it is the trait helps, the less value the trait has (vis a vis other things).

Likewise Aggressive is weakest when civs are close packed and warfare is easy pickings; it is strongest when you at the edge of viable rushing.

About the only trait that has increasing rates of return is organized, which is why organized is best for huge maps with low civ density.

 

[InvisibleStalke]

Interesting thoughts on diminishing returns. I completely agree about the water / financial synergy - but the arid/philo one is one I'll need to try before I am convinced. If a city has a food surplus of +4 - thats only enough for a couple of scientists which are unlikely to generate more than one GP the entire game and only then if its early. So Philo won't get much extra out of that city.

I am pretty sure that Philo and Industrious will give you a proportionately higher benefit on a smaller map as their benefits accrue mainly in a few cities - whereas financial and organized will scale on a larger map as their benefits will apply in more cities.

I like protective leaders on a lakes / highlands map - these maps leave you landlocked with potential enemies on all sides. So I like to think like Switzerland and be prepared for an attack from any direction.

Aggressive / Charismatic leaders on any map where you can win domination without crossing the ocean.

Expansive leaders probably cope best with jungle maps - both from extra health and cheaper workers to clear all the jungle.

Creative leaders probably do well on arid / desert maps where there are a lack of trees to chop monuments and a high percentage of your tiles are useless, so getting good city positioning is critical.

 

[Gliese 581]

A general rule of thumb for me:

The more water, the easier (AI is extra poor here). The fewer tech trade possibilities between AIs, the easier (ie Pangaea = harder).

As for traits I think they vary a bit depending on difficulty settings. I value spiritual, philosophical and creative relatively more on deity than on other levels for example whereas immortal and down I'd rather have charismatic than any other trait.

 

[mirthadir]

Interesting thoughts on diminishing returns. I completely agree about the water / financial synergy - but the arid/philo one is one I'll need to try before I am convinced. If a city has a food surplus of +4 - thats only enough for a couple of scientists which are unlikely to generate more than one GP the entire game and only then if its early. So Philo won't get much extra out of that city.

I am pretty sure that Philo and Industrious will give you a proportionately higher benefit on a smaller map as their benefits accrue mainly in a few cities - whereas financial and organized will scale on a larger map as their benefits will apply in more cities.

I like protective leaders on a lakes / highlands map - these maps leave you landlocked with potential enemies on all sides. So I like to think like Switzerland and be prepared for an attack from any direction.

Aggressive / Charismatic leaders on any map where you can win domination without crossing the ocean.

Expansive leaders probably cope best with jungle maps - both from extra health and cheaper workers to clear all the jungle.

Creative leaders probably do well on arid / desert maps where there are a lack of trees to chop monuments and a high percentage of your tiles are useless, so getting good city positioning is critical.

I play with the assumption that if I'm not in a true SE, all but 3-5 of my GP will come from the GP farm. Thus the true value of philo in food poor maps is in the ability to build a GP farm in a cruddy location (no three food/green locations) or to GP farm solely off wonders (arid maps tend to have more tiles so an IW/NE city can work quite well).