I could easily see it solving that problem with AgesAs for my tastes, this is fine. I pretty much never choose Pangea for my games. And since Civ IV introduced Terra map script, that was one of the most fun maps to play.
Then Civ V did not have it at first, and when it was introduced, it appeared that Civ V’s systems turned Terra script irrelevant. When you finally had the ability to get there, no new cities were needed, so this map script was totally pointless.
The nature of Civ VI, sadly, made this map script pointless as well. By the time you get there, you’ve basically already won the game on your old landmass.
But will Civ VII make Terra maps at least as great as they were in IV?
There’s a screenshot of game set up with a map option set to “Continents Plus.”
In past games, “Continents Plus” was the Continents script with more islands throughout.My guess is "continents plus" means bigger continents
In past games, “Continents Plus” was the Continents script with more islands throughout.
I'm cautiously optimistic, if modding is at least at civ6 level.It will be interesting to see what map choices we get, presumably TSL will be more difficult too.
What's unhistorical about exploration being dependent on technological development?I don't get why you guys keep explaining it like a pangea that opens up to more exploration during an artbitrary and gamey age change or completely forced terra mechanics are some unfathomable concept. We understand, some of us* don't want every map to be a terra map or some completely gamey and unhistoric pangea+ hybrid.
For people that like to explore, TSL has always been the most boring mode to play anyway. If exploration is to be favored more in civ VII, it makes sense than concerns about TSL aren‘t in the focus.I've already said elsewhere good luck with TSL Earth thanks to forced Civ-changing.
This maps hint just compounds that for me.
You're asking me what is unhistorical about exploration of the map being bound by arbitrary crisis and age mechanics that all players experience at the same time that prevent players from getting ahead on technology and artifically seperates campaigns into three distinct rounds?What's unhistorical about exploration being dependent on technological development?
It worked like that in previous Civ games by blocking travel over oceans. Applying the same concept to land doesn't sound like a stretch.
But I agree I'm sceptical of hard locks when soft ones have worked fine until now.
Expand as in not existing before or just not discoverable due to ocean limitations? So far nothing to suggest one over the other has been said, I am pretty sure.no it didn't work anything like this in previous civs because there was no age system and the map did not literally expand as the game progressed
I'm not even sure what the point of this is.You're asking me what is unhistorical about exploration of the map being bound by arbitrary crisis and age mechanics that all players experience at the same time that prevent players from getting ahead on technology and artifically seperates campaigns into three distinct rounds?
did anyone argue otherwise?I'm not even sure what the point of this is.
Game mechanics for a historical 4x are always artificial and abstract. What else could they be?
Soft locks on growth as well as catch up mechanics have been a part of Civ games... scrap that, they've been a part of games, full stop.
You could apply the word "arbitrary" and "artificial" to just about any mechanic in any civ game to discredit it.
Not really. I assume you've seen a Roman map of the world?Even as an abstraction of history, the map literally expanding between eras is silly.
It does still. There are ways of ensuring a First Age civ free area to explore on a map that becomes a true Pangea in the Second Age.
Basically all you need some land terrain that is effectively impassable in First Age and passable in the Second Age.
It will be interesting to see what map choices we get, presumably TSL will be more difficult too.
Personally, I usually stuck to continents anyway (Pangea always felt weird to me), but I can understand the discontent for those who love a Pangea. Not that we know anything for sure yet of course, the slightly premature outrage remains strong it seems.![]()
As for my tastes, this is fine. I pretty much never choose Pangea for my games. And since Civ IV introduced Terra map script, that was one of the most fun maps to play.
Then Civ V did not have it at first, and when it was introduced, it appeared that Civ V’s systems turned Terra script irrelevant. When you finally had the ability to get there, no new cities were needed, so this map script was totally pointless.
The nature of Civ VI, sadly, made this map script pointless as well. By the time you get there, you’ve basically already won the game on your old landmass.
But will Civ VII make Terra maps at least as great as they were in IV?
That's a great idea. After a crises you don't just rebuild what you had before, but you have to pivot towards a completely different way of doing thing. Do you stubbornly keep things as they were before, because change is too costly? Or do you nimbly adapt to the new optimal? This seems like a really exciting choice to give the player, and one that can easily have a natural rubber-band element to it.
In past games, “Continents Plus” was the Continents script with more islands throughout.
I'm cautiously optimistic, if modding is at least at civ6 level.
MOD WISEThis is purely a cosmetic distinction. A conveniently impassable mountain chain or deep desert is just as forced as a conveniently inpassable ocean.
Terra is one of my favorite map scripts, one of the things that kept it interesting was the occasional geographic accident where you might be able to bounce off of a Faeroes-Iceland-Greenland chain and reach the new world early.
Or realizing a rival could.
Given this and some of the other mechanics TSL is most likely gone. A true TSL map would allow for the possibility of Japan, Aztecs, Zulus, Eqyptians and Germans on the map at the same time
This is obviously impossible with the Age Of Exploration mechanic.
I mean at this point they are ALL Terra map scripts, with one of the fun wrinkles removed (see above) because we have gone from a sandbox to a forced narrative
The cost here is removing the sandbox element, which has always been a core Civ principal.
You know how you keep the sandbox element and have a completely different experience?
By starting a new game
Do you know what the difference between a sandbox that lets you start in a later era and a forced narrative that does what amounts to a soft restart at era changes?
The former isn’t forced on you
This is by far my favorite script. It gives you a sandbox with exploration potential. It also allows a situation where you find a new continent with civs that may be disadvantaged and you get to decide whether to orey on them or not. Or you are on the back foot and now the challenge is can you pull otf an Adowa.
Or we just force a narrative and you are always Cortez.
Each dev reveal is saying to me that we are replacing a sandbox with a curated forced narrative. This will likely put some restrictions on what modders can do.
Things like mandatory civ switching and era crises, as well as doing a soft restart are probably baked in pretty deep
Each dev reveal is saying to me that we are replacing a sandbox with a curated forced narrative. This will likely put some restrictions on what modders can do.
Things like mandatory civ switching and era crises, as well as doing a soft restart are probably baked in pretty deep