Úmarth
Megalomaniac
ODS is OpenDocument Spreadsheet. You can open it with OpenOffice.org (free & open source) or with Microsoft Excel with this plugin.
RFC Europe map development thread
- Thread starter st.lucifer
- Start date
Úmarth
Megalomaniac
What's the problem?
3Miro
Deity
Hi, I managed to open the file Balkan map file and I have some questions.
1. Why did Beograde change? Was it because it was too close to the Hungarian spawn? Right now Beograde is east of Sofia and North of Danube, both of which are incorrect.
2. The positions of some of the Bulgarian cities were slightly off. I am trying to make it so that it is possible to move the settler from the original position and found Preslav on the second turn (which was the true capital of Bulgaria back then).
3. There should be two separate maps, one Byzantine and one Bulgarian. Most cities did not change names when were passing from one to the other, but some did. Serdika -> Sofia, Philipopolis -> Philibe, Druster -> Silistra, Adrianopolis -> Odrin.
Which one of the above should I change, or for some reason all of the above should remain unchanged.
1. Why did Beograde change? Was it because it was too close to the Hungarian spawn? Right now Beograde is east of Sofia and North of Danube, both of which are incorrect.
2. The positions of some of the Bulgarian cities were slightly off. I am trying to make it so that it is possible to move the settler from the original position and found Preslav on the second turn (which was the true capital of Bulgaria back then).
3. There should be two separate maps, one Byzantine and one Bulgarian. Most cities did not change names when were passing from one to the other, but some did. Serdika -> Sofia, Philipopolis -> Philibe, Druster -> Silistra, Adrianopolis -> Odrin.
Which one of the above should I change, or for some reason all of the above should remain unchanged.
jessiecat
Divine Monarch
Edit: double post
jessiecat
Divine Monarch
Ya, my fault. The reason that I put Beograd N. of the Danube was for space mainly.
But you're welcome to change that in relation to Sofia. You could eliminate Sarajevo
altogether as it was only founded by the Ottomans in 1461 who originally called it Bosna Saraj.
Part of the problem lay in try to make the map suit both civs, as most cities did not change
names on conquest. But some did. So you are right to suggest 2 maps. I would suggest
leaving my map as Byzantine only and tweak that if necessary. And if you could make a
specific Bulgarian map that would be great. The more accurate you can make both, the better.
One question though. If we are starting the Bulgarians above the Danube why would they
go all the way to Preslav before founding a city? I know that would be historically correct
but unless we change their spawn point that's never going to happen in the game, is it?
Should they spawn further south and what if there's already a Byzantine city there?
I'd like to hear st. lucifer's view on the start position first, if you don't mind. Thanks
jessiecat
Divine Monarch
Edit: Treble post
jessiecat
Divine Monarch
)3Miro
Deity
The capital as is would be Bolhorod which is inaccurate. Only a human player would move to found Preslav. However the question is how would the new starting position change the game. How would cities that flip count with respect to the UHV.
St Lucifer?
St Lucifer?
jessiecat
Divine Monarch
Good point. BTW will you make the necessary changes and do a Bulgarian map? I'm working on the Ottoman map at the moment.
3Miro
Deity
No problem, I will do that and we can wait for st. Lucifer to give his opinion on the starting position.
st.lucifer
King
Which version of the map am I supposed to be checking? Is it jessiecat's Bulgaria cityname map, and was there more than one version?
jessiecat
Divine Monarch
Yes, it's my excel map but that's not the issue. 3miro will edit my map so it's with Byzantine names only and then make a separate Bulgaria one. It's the start position above the Danube that he's questioning. If the Bulgarians start further south, do we have new problems as he describes? I realize that your spawn area is OK historically but it's nowhere near their first capitol, Preslav, about 5 squares SW. Does that matter?.
ijnavy
Czar
- Joined
- Jan 18, 2008
- Messages
- 405
I've took up the task of the Moscow/ Kiev settler map. Should the ciy names be in Russian alphabet, English, or Phonetically spelled. Should the 2 civs have the same settler map? Also, I'll make the pripet marshes correctly.
I'll just convert it to code when I am finished.
I'll just convert it to code when I am finished.
3Miro
Deity
If we use alphabets other than English we may end up in trouble, i.e. city names that are unreadable. Use phonetic translation of the name used by Russians (i.e. Moskva as opposed to Moscow).
Úmarth
Megalomaniac
Well not phonetically exactly. Whoever is doing the Russian cities should pick a Romanization of Russian and use the original Russian names.
onedreamer
Dragon
I think the easiest for everyone is GOST.
onedreamer
Dragon
On Italy:
Sicily needs some work. 2 land tiles in the west (one added to the current westernmost and the other one a tile SE of this) should do. Calabria is also too thin.
Corsica's shape should be smaller but have fish
Genua should have fishes rather than farms. Also I'd remove the wheat and place a hill there but make rice spawn the tile directly north after Marco Polo's expedition.
The mountain pass to France shouldn't be where it is now but where the Po river is born.
The Po river should have a delta and there should be marshes there (not jungle)
I think the idea for Venice from Disenfranchised is perfect and accurate. What is inaccurate is the dimension of cities on the map, but we can't do anything about that. Venice could have pikemen able to cross marshes or a ship that can do it but I am unsure if the AI will use it. Or maybe mercenaries should be able to do it.
I'd also put a forest or two on the Baleares to make it a decent place to settle.
Sicily needs some work. 2 land tiles in the west (one added to the current westernmost and the other one a tile SE of this) should do. Calabria is also too thin.
Corsica's shape should be smaller but have fish
Genua should have fishes rather than farms. Also I'd remove the wheat and place a hill there but make rice spawn the tile directly north after Marco Polo's expedition.
The mountain pass to France shouldn't be where it is now but where the Po river is born.
The Po river should have a delta and there should be marshes there (not jungle)
I think the idea for Venice from Disenfranchised is perfect and accurate. What is inaccurate is the dimension of cities on the map, but we can't do anything about that. Venice could have pikemen able to cross marshes or a ship that can do it but I am unsure if the AI will use it. Or maybe mercenaries should be able to do it.
I'd also put a forest or two on the Baleares to make it a decent place to settle.
Disenfrancised
Beep Beep
st.lucifer
King
Various updates:
-I'm comfortable moving the Bulgarian spawn point to the spot marked Preslav just above the forested mountain, but I'd really prefer Varna. My thinking is this: Bulgaria is likely to be in conflict with the Byzantines from the beginning, and Preslav isn't a very strong city site for either defense or production (although we can change both by putting it on a hill and shifting around some resources). Additionally, it means that AI expansion is likely to move NW into Hungarian territory, which Bulgaria will lose upon Hungary's spawn. The late spawn is likely to gut them in terms of territory, population, and power, and may collapse a civ which is likely to remain unstable and backwards due to trade/culture/foreign relations. On the other hand, if we start them in Varna, on the river and the coast (we could also add a two-tile river to represent the Ezero, if people feel that Varna's too far from the Danube to justify the stretch), they'll have much better commerce and access to more trading partners. Expansion will move west through the Danube valley and the Balkans, and north to the Danube delta and Moldova/Wallachia. They'll still be in conflict with the Byzantines, but from a better starting position.
Edit: Thinking about this further, Preslav is a better capital for a 'control the Balkans' UHV. That may actually be better for the historical empire. I'm open to further argument for and against either position.
Move Beograd 1 S and it's fine. It's not W of Sofia, and is S of the Danube at the confluence of the Sava, where it should be.
On Onedreamer's Italy suggestions:
-Sicily does look better with the two extra tiles. I'll change it.
-Corsica stays its current size, but I'll add fish.
-I originally had Mallorca/Majorca as 2 tiles rather than one, but people argued that it was too big. An island of that size populated for as long as it's supported cities isn't going to have appreciable forest, but it will have a salt resource to represent the island's salt mines - that should provide plenty of incentive to settle it.
-I'll move the mountain pass. The Po delta, as Disenfrancised said, is marsh; jungle = marsh for our purposes until we can get resources and terrains updated.
-We're not going to have rice in the mod as a food resource, which is why I went with wheat for that part of the valley. If there's another grain which fits better, that might work. Is it ok if we substitute clams for fish? I'd prefer to have clams be a more Mediterranean-centric resource, while fish are more Northern/Western, to promote trade between the two. There will also be fish off of Corsica, which Genoa is likely to control.
-I'm comfortable moving the Bulgarian spawn point to the spot marked Preslav just above the forested mountain, but I'd really prefer Varna. My thinking is this: Bulgaria is likely to be in conflict with the Byzantines from the beginning, and Preslav isn't a very strong city site for either defense or production (although we can change both by putting it on a hill and shifting around some resources). Additionally, it means that AI expansion is likely to move NW into Hungarian territory, which Bulgaria will lose upon Hungary's spawn. The late spawn is likely to gut them in terms of territory, population, and power, and may collapse a civ which is likely to remain unstable and backwards due to trade/culture/foreign relations. On the other hand, if we start them in Varna, on the river and the coast (we could also add a two-tile river to represent the Ezero, if people feel that Varna's too far from the Danube to justify the stretch), they'll have much better commerce and access to more trading partners. Expansion will move west through the Danube valley and the Balkans, and north to the Danube delta and Moldova/Wallachia. They'll still be in conflict with the Byzantines, but from a better starting position.
Edit: Thinking about this further, Preslav is a better capital for a 'control the Balkans' UHV. That may actually be better for the historical empire. I'm open to further argument for and against either position.
Move Beograd 1 S and it's fine. It's not W of Sofia, and is S of the Danube at the confluence of the Sava, where it should be.
On Onedreamer's Italy suggestions:
-Sicily does look better with the two extra tiles. I'll change it.
-Corsica stays its current size, but I'll add fish.
-I originally had Mallorca/Majorca as 2 tiles rather than one, but people argued that it was too big. An island of that size populated for as long as it's supported cities isn't going to have appreciable forest, but it will have a salt resource to represent the island's salt mines - that should provide plenty of incentive to settle it.
-I'll move the mountain pass. The Po delta, as Disenfrancised said, is marsh; jungle = marsh for our purposes until we can get resources and terrains updated.
-We're not going to have rice in the mod as a food resource, which is why I went with wheat for that part of the valley. If there's another grain which fits better, that might work. Is it ok if we substitute clams for fish? I'd prefer to have clams be a more Mediterranean-centric resource, while fish are more Northern/Western, to promote trade between the two. There will also be fish off of Corsica, which Genoa is likely to control.
