Discussion in 'Civ3 - Creation & Customization' started by Celeborn, Oct 27, 2003.
I'm not the editor-savvy guy here, but is allowing a -1s resource on a 0s terrain safe?
Yes it's safe, at least in my mod so far
Sorry to change subject, but have you discussed unit movement yet?
I know tundra is closed, but hmm. can we still plant forests on it?
By wilderlands socalian, are you referring to the dense forests type of things which I had mentioned above, or to a sort of sparse moors type of terrain?
P.S. Mightypunkass, I'm working on a file with a proposal of stats for all units including movment. It will porbably get thrown out or disregarded the instant I post it, but, I'll put it up when I get it done.
RRNut, your terrain text file has a broken link.
I prefer (like the majority seems to do) to keep Marshes as a terrain, and have ashlands as the LM Terrain.
All sea terrains should have defense bonus 0 IMO.
I think that volcanos can have the usual bonuses, production, but no roads, in the random map version, at least.
On the Middle-earth map, it would be a bit odd if there wasn't a road to Mount Doom ... remind me, can LM terrains allow roads when the base terrain doesn't?
By wilderlands I was refering to a more of a steep-thicket thing that PCH was talking about.
I suppose so, just give it a commerce bonus.
it dosent really need a road on it, but at least have a road to it. BTW is there a map beta that i could look at? or are you just still modding this up?
Hmm, thats odd. as far as my file never mind. its not that different. The only differences from the original civ3 is dense forests for jungles at 0-1-0 0-0-1, and added a base shield to Montains ( to make them useful in the early ages).
Actually it wouldn't be too odd if there was a road to mount doom, simply because there was one...
And Saverok, I had posted a map several pages back on this thread. Sombody else later had also upgraded it to conquests, adding marshes and a volcano. but we are really still modding it up.
alright, ill wait until I get conquests, then ill be back to check out what the agenda is
Not so, as you would have to be able to link to a fresh water source. As I mentioned earlier only 2 out of 5 groups of tundra tile had access to a fresh water source. Moreover, I feel if it should get 1f at all, they should have to work for it, or it should come later. When we allow irrigation without a freshwater source.
No, because grassland is fertile enough to make irrigation allow a surplus, which would go into the stockpile - creating more citizens.
Why does regular civ3 give a standard defense bonus of 10? What possible good could come of changing this? I think civ3's naval battle system is well thought out, and should be strongly looked at for guidance.
Yes, it does completely take away a darker Mirkwood, but as you say, this can easily be mended with Land Mark terrain. I aint doin no dumpin on nobodys work man, just saying that a jungle-thick forest is rather pointless when you think about it. However, would it not be easier for to cut and paste certain Snoopy trees\land onto a swamp-grassland overlay? So a thick forest is not the main line. This could lead to a more sparsely populated, and IMO more attractive moor land style.
Thats an interesting point, however the ashland terrain would not necessarily represent direct ash spewed from a volcano. I think it should be reminiscent more of the territory Sam, Frodo and Gollum traveled through. Much of which we can assume was out of the range of such eruptions. I think it represents stronger, deeper roots. The land of the enemy was barren and diseased, regardless of eruptions, IIRC.
...Amen. I mean, yeah! thats the ticket. However, I do believe we were trying to work on the random map first and foremost. For sure that was the policy we held for resources.
I am all for leaving it as you say, I resigned to that type of tundra a long while ago. But you have to understand, a lot of people dont express their opinion on the subject, unless they are directly asked. We have been discussing it for nearly week now, and only in the last few days has someone besides embryodead, The Last Conformist, and mrtn really expressed an opinion.
This is a perfect example. We have about three different opinions on this subject, and many who havent said anything. So;
Who wants Marshes?
Who wants Ashlands?
Who wants something else?
I agree, but that doesnt really tell me what to do with the jungle terrain in the random map. We need to do something with Jungle, but what?
Who wants a Dark Forest?
Who wants a moor like Wilderland?
Who wants something else?
All the fens I can think of can be represented with a river delta, except the dead marshes. Which is so significant, so unique, that it in itself is more deserving of a Land Mark than anything. Not to mention that it was only around in third age.
Good point. But this also means we get singular islands filled with Dark Forest too. I dont think this should sway us as much as which terrain belongs in Middle-earth, and which doesnt. We have the Harrad, AFAIK the only civilization in our game that lived next to desert. Yet we all seem to agree that the desert is quite necessary, we need to get some priorities straight, which terrains do we need, and which do we want.
I think we should get the terrain discussion complete first, otherwise I will be able to put little progress in the overview. (I could always say hey, remember those 6 pages on tundra and irrigation)
There go those false impressions again ;-). I dont have any problems with arguments of this ilk, in fact when people stop to disagree with me, thats when I would get worried, really worried. I dont know all the modding points, or where the checks and balances should come in. My opinions usually change until I find a place where I think is good, and has some good merits to defend. Remember when I wanted 2 commerce for road-ed tundra?
As for the tundra debate, since no city can be build in tundra, a laborer would embody a work force sent out to make the most of a tundra style land. Then they would be forced to be hunters and gathers, or they would actually be a bane on the city, buying food and making only 1 commerce. And since they are a bane on the city, the city would not support them, instead move them to a more fertile square.
but are you saying that a laborer doesnt need to do anything to get food from tundra? That he can just live off the fat of the land? Surely that is what a 1f bonus gives, without any type of irrigation\farms. But as I said before, we can disagree about this forever, on both sides it is a matter of taste, more than anything else. Neither side is really wrong. As for the development to irrigate desert, the Persians and Egyptians had the ability to build anti-contemporary Suez Canals and huge stone dams for irrigation. I would give the Men\Elves\Dwarves more credit than that!
I get that all the time, see, I would like to use a some type of smile here but I cant do to the image limit.
So this will have to suffice! ;-)
-btw, try this
SoCalian- How would having a Dark Forest, which give the same effects as jungle allow for new strategies?
On Ashland- yes your right, there is far more marshes than ashland lying around. The catch is there is only one ashland and that stretches the entire kingdom of Mordor and beyond. It is far more expansive than any marsh, or all added together. But because of this, the only way it could be correctly added to a random map game is by replacing marshes or jungle.
1.) Your point on being a highly specific terrain is valid, but then again so is desert.
2.) Adjacent to a river? It can be adjacent to a river, but it can equally be on the edge of a desert with no river in sight.
3.) Sauron or Morgoth ? I also am beginning to see where this would be good to have wilderland replace jungle, as marshes and jungle often intermingle. -meaning ashland and wilderland would also.
embryodead, Not yet, I still dont know what to add into the .biq besides 1f for tundra!
Sigh, double post.
Excuse a couple more Tundra comments:
No matter how hard it is to get Tundra irrigated, the realism problem exists if it's in any circumstances possible to wring as much food out of a Tundra tile as from a temperate Hill.
Grassland is rich, but not rich enough to support an urban population without agriculture. Thus, irrigation must be understood to imply not agriculture as such, but particularly intensive and large-scalely organized versions of it.
As regards other terrains, I'm a bit confused about the entire "wilderland" concept. To me, a "wilderland" is simply unsettled, uncivilized land - be it then impregnable forests or barren steppe.
I'd vote for keeping marshes and desert in, with ashlands as an LM. Jungle could be renamed "Dense Forest" or whatever - on random maps it could be assumed to include tropical jungles along with other unpleasant variants of forest, à la Mirkwood.
A moor would be a more correct, less Tolkien-esque name for wilderland.
Tropical jungles? In deep Harad, I assume?
My votes and yours-
A moor? The wilderland concept seems to be getting shakier and shakier...
I vote for Marshes and "Dark Forest".
The wilderland just seems to be plains/forests/marshes/hills.
I also vote for Marshes and Dark Forest (+1F +1S, and no mines?)
As for the coast/sea/ocean defences, I don't get your point PCH. A week or two ago, you were trying to persuade me that 0 is better than 10. All open terrains in Civ3 have +10 bonus. Why? Well, I suppose it's just to favor defenders by 10%. If you want to keep that 10% advantage, do it. I wanted this from the very beginning.
To my knowledge, no jungles are ever mentioned in JRRT's work, but since Middle-earth is theoretically our world, you'd expect to find some down in Far Harad. The random map generator will place alot of whatever replaces Jungle in equatorial areas, so it'd make sense to assume that tropical jungle is included in "Dense Forest" if you go by that route.
I vote marshlands and dense forest as well....
I like marsh and dense forest.
Maybe ashland could be the LM marsh.
Of course, I'm pretty easy going on this. I will play this mod regardless of what terrain is available.
Separate names with a comma.