Permanently visible continent boundaries?

[Stringer1313]

I get that there's a continent filter but it would be nice if *land* continent boundaries were super clear on the map without having to toggle a filter (with the option of course, to turn it off). Given how much some civs depend on it it seems like a hassle to keep turning the filter on and off

 

[Joketa]

Well, that would be easy enough to do. Personally, I just wish continents were separated by obvious physical features (mountains, seas, oceans) and then there would be less need to draw a line in the sand.

 

[King Jason]

Personally I think it'll be more obvious to players actually playing the game. In the thread where I pretty much outline the continental boundaries when this discussion was brought up before - I can still go back and watch that video and have a solid idea where the continents sit.

Sure, I watched the video a few times and made note of the tooltips, but I think the same intuitive knowledge of the continents would remain if I were playing the game and had the ability to toggle on a filter a few times. Games of civ tend to take a few hours at least and I think that most players will probably have a good sense of the continental layout of the map within that time.

However! civ6 brings the return of map pins from civ4. Players could use these to remind them.

 

[Hakan-i Cihan]

If there would be hotkeys for the different lenses, it would be easier. Should there be borders in addition to or as replacement for the different colours for continents in the continent lens? I do think that the coloured continents seem be not as beautiful and clear as it is now.

 

[joncnunn]

Moderator Action: Moved to Ideas & Suggestions

 

[nukehumvee]

I think continental boundaries should occur on narrower sections of land. Think about it. An isthmus separates the Americas. The land is narrow between Asia and Africa. (I still have no idea how Europe and Asia are split) Something like that. Isthmus.

 

[Loaf Warden]

I think continental boundaries should occur on narrower sections of land. Think about it. An isthmus separates the Americas. The land is narrow between Asia and Africa. (I still have no idea how Europe and Asia are split) Something like that. Isthmus.

Europe and Asia are generally considered to be "separated" by the Ural Mountains and the Caucasus Mountains.

Sure, this is arbitrary--if we were going entirely by tectonic plates, India and Arabia would be continents while the whole of the rest of Eurasia would be another one. We don't go by plates, of course, because the concept of "continent" long pre-dates knowledge of plate tectonics, and there are historical, human reasons why the continents are defined the way they are.

For that reason, I think in-game Continents should be separated either by isthmuses, as stated here, or by mountain ranges. After all, if you've got one giant plain, the inhabitants of the civs on it will not be defining their continents such that the divide is right in the middle of it. If that is how it works in-game, though, I guess we can assume that the Continents are based on the underlying tectonic plates rather than by what definitions the inhabitants of the civs use. Although that would make the "home continent" and "other continent" bonuses a little wonky. (Think Victoria getting bonuses in India but not in Hong Kong, despite Hong Kong being even farther overseas than India, because tectonically speaking, Hong Kong and England are on the same continent.)

 

[King Jason]

I don't think there's anyway to design it where the translation from reality to game is going to be perfect in everyone's eyes. Having continents only form around Isthmuses and Mountain ranges offer just as many oddities as the way it appears to work now. Further, it would make potentially formidable abilities even stronger.

America has a bonus in his home continent, so the likly area that his civ may expand naturally - but with the isthmus/mountain model, now he's surrounded by choke-points he can seek out and defend even easier.

I don't think continents should be defined by what are essentially, in game terms, strategic footholds. Everyone would be surrounded by walls, coasts, and choke points.

 

[nukehumvee]

I don't think there's anyway to design it where the translation from reality to game is going to be perfect in everyone's eyes. Having continents only form around Isthmuses and Mountain ranges offer just as many oddities as the way it appears to work now. Further, it would make potentially formidable abilities even stronger.

America has a bonus in his home continent, so the likly area that his civ may expand naturally - but with the isthmus/mountain model, now he's surrounded by choke-points he can seek out and defend even easier.

I don't think continents should be defined by what are essentially, in game terms, strategic footholds. Everyone would be surrounded by walls, coasts, and choke points.

Regarding Teddy's bonuses, maybe it applies only if the enemy unit is also on his continent. That would moot the point of making a chokehold at the isthmus, if the part of the isthmus the enemy attacks from is not the American continent.

 

[Atlas627]

I wouldn't be bothered if the continent division was in the middle of a desert or plain. The people generally live on one coast/river or the other, and they defined the continent before that land got filled in. Columbus thought the Native Americans were Indians; the natives defining the continents may think of the other people across the desert as living on a separate continent.

Besides, the original continents were defined by the Greeks. Europe was where they and their colonies were, Asia was Turkey, and Egypt was Africa. The Chinese treated everything as the Middle Kingdom or not-the-Middle-Kingdom. North and South America were originally just America until the Europeans mapped out Panama, and if they had found the Himalayas before sailing to India, they may have decided to call India its own continent.

As long as there is some reason for the boundary to be there (even if its just halfway down the middle of a desert nobody crosses), I'll be happy. And I can probably invent a satisfactory one even if the game decides arbitrarily.

It would be nice to have it more apparent, but I'm sure I can remember where the boundaries are (roughly) after looking at the lens once. I can turn it on if it affects combat and there's combat near it, and leave it off otherwise (or turn it on if it affects settling, etc)