micbic
Optimistic Pessimist
IMHO because the map is made as per a European map, not a world map. If you see aprinted map of Europe, you will notice that tilt as well 
RFC Europe map development thread
- Thread starter st.lucifer
- Start date
Panopticon
Utilitarian
It is not meant to be in line with a latitude/longitude grid. You can't accurately project a rectangular area on a rectangular map anyway.
embryodead
Caliph
It's a matter of projection type - there are many Euro maps that have correct latitute/longitude and no "tilt" but they also have distorted land masses (UK and Scandinavia are larger, African coast or even Turkey & Span are smaller than in reality - example here). RFCE map has obvious tilt but land masses are of correct size. As Panopticon said you can't have at all right, it's either this or that.
dragodon64
Noble
I'm aware of the either accurate shape or accurate area problem that all rectangular maps possess, but Iberia seems very strongly tilted. There are a few other shape distortions, of which northeastern Anatolia (extends too far north, no curve) is probably the biggest one.
Personally, I think shape was sacrificed a bit too much for size in the case of Iberia. I'm pretty sure that a version tilted about -20 to -30 degrees would still be big enough and look much more realistic. But I don't think its and too big of deal, hence unlikely to change (also, it would involve a ton of work).
Personally, I think shape was sacrificed a bit too much for size in the case of Iberia. I'm pretty sure that a version tilted about -20 to -30 degrees would still be big enough and look much more realistic. But I don't think its and too big of deal, hence unlikely to change (also, it would involve a ton of work).
The resources on the map are very good balanced, only the polish capital could use a food resource. A plain horse is the only resource of the polish capital (the coal in the only hill doesnt count, you wont get the tech to reveal coal with the slow polish tech speed). Maybe give them a wheat, poland gets a second wheat at minsk later anyway.
jessiecat
Divine Monarch
Or Walrus tusks. Either one.
All right but then something should be done to their model and to the resource name.
merijn_v1
Black Belt
The resource name is fine. It says ivory. But I agree the art must be changed. But their is no art "aviable" that looks like a walrus or something.
sedna17
Emperor
- Joined
- Mar 12, 2008
- Messages
- 1,091
In fact, I'm not sure there will ever be a way to make it so that one resource (ivory) can be represented by two different graphical styles (elephants in Africa and walrus in the north). I have never seen this done previously, and much of the graphics code is not moddable.
I am unhappy with the current situation. New players always assume it is a mistake. I think we should eliminate the northern ivory.
BurnEmDown
Emperor
- Joined
- Jul 18, 2008
- Messages
- 1,718
Well I don't really care but I guess it should be replaced with another happiness resource then, since that will really hurt the Norse who have no motivation to settle Iceland except for the UHV.
Actually if it's replaced by a new unique resource only available in Iceland that could help the Norse in trade and happiness.
I just have no idea what this resource be but we can always name it "Northern Tusks" or something like that if we find the right graphic stuff.
Actually if it's replaced by a new unique resource only available in Iceland that could help the Norse in trade and happiness.
I just have no idea what this resource be but we can always name it "Northern Tusks" or something like that if we find the right graphic stuff.
Wessel V1
Emperor
I don't know for sure if it is possible, but I think it is. After all, there are also multiple graphics for forests, the graphics we use for woodland and forest. Maybe the code is somewhat the same so we can change the elephants for something more appropriate this way.
sedna17
Emperor
- Joined
- Mar 12, 2008
- Messages
- 1,091
It is true that there are multiple "flavors" of forests (in fact all terrain "features"), but that does not mean that such a thing is even theoretically possible (let alone easy) for bonuses.
Let me put this another way: I have never seen this done in another Civ4 mod, I do not know how to do this, and I will not be able to figure it out. Perhaps 3Miro could figure out how to make it work. Absent that, what is the best way forward?
As BurnEmDown suggests, we could replace these with some other luxury resource to maintain some motivation to settle Iceland.
Deon
Lt. of Mordor
Do not eliminate it please
. If I make walrus graphics, will you include it?Also will you listen to my previous posts about east part of the Azov sea?
http://forums.civfanatics.com/showpost.php?p=8708735&postcount=632
sedna17
Emperor
- Joined
- Mar 12, 2008
- Messages
- 1,091
Do not eliminate it please
Also will you listen to my previous posts about east part of the Azov sea?
http://forums.civfanatics.com/showpost.php?p=8708735&postcount=632
If you make a walrus graphic I will include it. I think we can actually drop Ivory from the south without any great loss (there are already a lot of luxuries here).
Your map changes are on my to-do list.
Deon
Lt. of Mordor
Good. I will make walruses in a day on two, depends on my schedule. I am pretty sure I know how to make them already (animated) 
.
.
sedna17
Emperor
- Joined
- Mar 12, 2008
- Messages
- 1,091
Good. I will make walruses in a day on two, depends on my schedule. I am pretty sure I know how to make them already (animated)
Awesome.
Disenfrancised
Beep Beep
Just have piles of white cylinders to show carved and processed ivory - maybe use the Aluminum graphic as a base?
This thread has been abandoned for a while, but there are still some map problems especially in the far east :
I know the Byzantines start off with lots of cities already, but Mistra in the Peloponnese and a city in northern Anatolia are really missing. They were important parts of the empire.
There is still a problem with the silk route. IMO, its representation right now (3 silks and a tea in the south-easter corner) is not satisfactory. I think that it could be replaced by 2 or 3 special resources (called silk route) that would make it possible to build trading posts in Persia, India, Mongolia,China... that would be like early colonial projects, each giving its own bonuses.
And I still think that Toulouse should have a river going through it.
I know the Byzantines start off with lots of cities already, but Mistra in the Peloponnese and a city in northern Anatolia are really missing. They were important parts of the empire.
There is still a problem with the silk route. IMO, its representation right now (3 silks and a tea in the south-easter corner) is not satisfactory. I think that it could be replaced by 2 or 3 special resources (called silk route) that would make it possible to build trading posts in Persia, India, Mongolia,China... that would be like early colonial projects, each giving its own bonuses.
And I still think that Toulouse should have a river going through it.
