RFC Europe map development thread

[st.lucifer]

I don't know if this should go here, but there is a gold resource in western Bohemia. While there was some gold washing in Celtic age there are (or were) no significant gold reserves in that region.

As good a place for it as any. Would silver be more appropriate? I'm trying to make sure Germany, Austria, or whomever controls that region has access to luxury metals, as there were certainly silver, lead, sulfur, and iron mines in the region.

 

[Verily]

Just some minor comments on resources; independent Tangier spawns on top of a gold resource; should the gold be moved one tile north or east? Similarly, the Spanish start on a Wine resource, which should maybe be moved off of the starting tile.

 

[st.lucifer]

This is a reminder to myself for the next map update:

Catania needs to be taken out, the mountain needs to be one tile north, and the city needs to be replaced by Syracuse.



Now's a good time to make other suggestions, if you have them.

 

[micbic]

One minor question: Why is there that spice resource?

 

[st.lucifer]

One minor question: Why is there that spice resource?

An accident of transcription. There were once spices on this map, and I moved the entire map 12-15 tiles west at some point - I must have missed that one after covering it with ocean. Thanks for pointing it out - I'll clear it up in the next update.

 

[onedreamer]

why Calabria needs to be taken out ? O_o

 

[st.lucifer]

why Calabria needs to be taken out ? O_o

My mistake - I meant Catania. I was going to replace Catania with Siracusa, as we had discussed before.

 

[jessiecat]

Just been playing a game as England (not crashed yet at 1440) and I've suddenly realized why the map of Ireland has always looked odd to me. Having travelled there a couple of times, I know the west and SW coasts are
pretty much rocky uplands (ie moorland) with high sea cliffs while the center esp. the watershed of the two rivers on our map have a lot of peat bogs. Yet we've got them in reverse. (see screenshot). I think we need to change the terrain to reflect what I've described.

BTW How is it I am able to build farms on moorland? I thought that wasn't supposed to be possible.

 

[Verily]

Thessaloniki needs some resources, seafood, probably Fish, and maybe some Sheep. It was the second city of the Byzantine Empire for the empire's entire history post-Arabs and one of the larger cities in Europe for a while, then a major center of Jewish culture (indeed, majority Jewish from about 1520-1650) and again an important port, yet it has almost nothing in its BFC (just some coal).

 

[st.lucifer]

New map update in files section incorporating suggestions above. Details included in file post.

 

[Andrrew]

Andrrew, I looked at your proposed changes and couldn't tell the difference in the terrain from yours and the original. Would it be possible for you to redo this, having cleaned off the city names? Or was it the city names/placements that you had you were suggesting changes in?

Please check it again. I think the changes I made are obvious. If you still can't see the difference, I can post screenshots along with maps. Anyway, ignore the resource placement, the point is on the terrain (rivers, peaks, terrain type, etc.).

(My file is still in post #465, unchanged as it was 6 month ago. Maybe you looked at the wrong file.)

 

[st.lucifer]

I'm bumping this thread to move map discussions out of the files area.

 

[embryodead]

Sorry that I posted in the other thread, it just looked like the discussion was active there. Here are some comments on resource placement.

Normalization issue w/ some specific examples

I've made some research on resources in Europe long time ago in order to facilitate historical trade in my mod. That is, to have specific countries surplus of their historical exports and a deficit of their historical imports.

For instance, in the North, Sweden and Novgorod were not suitable for agriculture and thus were importers of grain, while Poland and Kievan Rus were major exporters. Sweden, however, was a major exporter of fish. So I'd suggest removing the wheat from the Sweden and putting additional fish there, while removing one of the fish from Poland's coast, while placing 2nd wheat inland. This kind of thing. As I said it's both historical and facilitates in-game trade, without breaking balance if done right.

Timber

During Middle Ages proper, most of western Europe was already heavily deforested and lacked quality timber. For shipbuilding, cathedral construction etc. timber had to be brought from Sweden, Novgorod, and later Hanseatic towns. This may be tricky as it's a strategic resource but overall I got the impression that most resources are so abundant and normalized that they pose little actual strategic value, at least until corporations kick in.

Salt

As I said, the area around Krakow in Poland hosts the oldest (rock) salt mines in Europe, and up to 1/3 of Polish kings' wealth came from these mines at times. They were operating since 13c. On a second thought I think it would best replace the winery, which while not entirely inaccurate, wasn't a major endeavour.

Most salt outside the Mediterranean was produced from brine, however, and probably the most important source of brine in Northern Europe was Lueneburg in Germany, also a major source of wealth of the nearby Hanseatic cities of Hamburg and Luebeck. So, I'd suggest moving salt from the coast there, and possibly moving another, e.g. from the Levant. Hansa was too important dealer in salt and right now Germans have 1 salt and Arabs 4-6, with the rest being dispersed loosely around the Mediterranean.

I don't know if this kind of analysis interests you at all, but if so, I can give a few more specific examples.

 

[Wessel V1]

I think this is actually exactly the kind of feedback we need. IMO, changes are needed to add some more diversity between regions, so I'd love to hear more of these analyses.

 

[sedna17]

Hi embryodead,

Your comments are very welcome, both on resources and naming conventions. I've looked through MEM II stuff for inspiration before -- unfortunately I think I lost my copy of Civ 3 some time ago, so I've never seen the full mod in action.

I, for one, strongly favor a general program of reducing the number of different resources easily available to a given civ. Currently, it feels like most civs end up with 1 (or 2) of a huge number of resources, making large cities too easy and limiting the need to trade. I see that olives have been slipped in as another resource while I was away. I view this as a step in the wrong direction as far as game-play is concerned. Scarcity and simplicity are important.

 

[st.lucifer]

Sorry that I posted in the other thread, it just looked like the discussion was active there. Here are some comments on resource placement.

Normalization issue w/ some specific examples

I've made some research on resources in Europe long time ago in order to facilitate historical trade in my mod. That is, to have specific countries surplus of their historical exports and a deficit of their historical imports.

For instance, in the North, Sweden and Novgorod were not suitable for agriculture and thus were importers of grain, while Poland and Kievan Rus were major exporters. Sweden, however, was a major exporter of fish. So I'd suggest removing the wheat from the Sweden and putting additional fish there, while removing one of the fish from Poland's coast, while placing 2nd wheat inland. This kind of thing. As I said it's both historical and facilitates in-game trade, without breaking balance if done right.

Timber

During Middle Ages proper, most of western Europe was already heavily deforested and lacked quality timber. For shipbuilding, cathedral construction etc. timber had to be brought from Sweden, Novgorod, and later Hanseatic towns. This may be tricky as it's a strategic resource but overall I got the impression that most resources are so abundant and normalized that they pose little actual strategic value, at least until corporations kick in.

Salt

As I said, the area around Krakow in Poland hosts the oldest (rock) salt mines in Europe, and up to 1/3 of Polish kings' wealth came from these mines at times. They were operating since 13c. On a second thought I think it would best replace the winery, which while not entirely inaccurate, wasn't a major endeavour.

Most salt outside the Mediterranean was produced from brine, however, and probably the most important source of brine in Northern Europe was Lueneburg in Germany, also a major source of wealth of the nearby Hanseatic cities of Hamburg and Luebeck. So, I'd suggest moving salt from the coast there, and possibly moving another, e.g. from the Levant. Hansa was too important dealer in salt and right now Germans have 1 salt and Arabs 4-6, with the rest being dispersed loosely around the Mediterranean.

I don't know if this kind of analysis interests you at all, but if so, I can give a few more specific examples.

This is great! Extremely helpful, and interesting - I had a hard time finding data on historical resources (and even terrain, surprisingly) when I was first creating the map, and I went with a normalized resource setup to make things 'equal'. Even the more accurate resource placements are likely to be more modern than historical. I'll happily make the changes that you suggested, and anything else you'd like to contribute would be more than welcome.

Hi embryodead,

Your comments are very welcome, both on resources and naming conventions. I've looked through MEM II stuff for inspiration before -- unfortunately I think I lost my copy of Civ 3 some time ago, so I've never seen the full mod in action.

I, for one, strongly favor a general program of reducing the number of different resources easily available to a given civ. Currently, it feels like most civs end up with 1 (or 2) of a huge number of resources, making large cities too easy and limiting the need to trade. I see that olives have been slipped in as another resource while I was away. I view this as a step in the wrong direction as far as game-play is concerned. Scarcity and simplicity are important.

Agreed, and I'm sorry that I took the overkill approach. In at least one case (Netherlands), I wanted to make sure that they weren't totally strapped for resources and unable to build colonies (as their starting position and date offers zero chance for expansion), but there are definitely more resources on the map than need to be there. I'm not sure when and how the olives were added, but I have no real attachment to them either. Having played a number of games now, I'm happy to start making major rebalances to the map - while I feel like some resources (wheat, fish, wine, iron) should be common, there should be fewer luxuries on the map, and certainly fewer available to the western civs.

 

[jessiecat]

I'm in broad agreement with both of you about the recent overkill in many areas which has often been driven by the understandable concerns of other posters. I agree we've probably erred on the side of too many resources, too many colonies, and just about reached our limit on techs, units, buildings and wonders. And while there may still be room for occasional additions in rare cases I think we should now be fine-tuning and balancing what we have. For my part I intend to do all I can towards finishing the Civilopedia text entries as soon as possible.
So my vote is for more quality instead of more quantity.

 

[micbic]

@st. lucifer: The map file doesnt work perfectly for me. While first opening it, I took Burgundy, no problem etc. At the second attempt, Burgundy was unable to be taken, I took Byzantium and....application problem...out. What could be on blame? (edit: got it to work, except the doubled units, which are no real problem)
@jessiecat: I totally agree. While the mod has now a good number, we should now aim at a) balacing these features and b) adding, after beta, some new.

 

[embryodead]

I, for one, strongly favor a general program of reducing the number of different resources easily available to a given civ. Currently, it feels like most civs end up with 1 (or 2) of a huge number of resources, making large cities too easy and limiting the need to trade. I see that olives have been slipped in as another resource while I was away. I view this as a step in the wrong direction as far as game-play is concerned. Scarcity and simplicity are important.

Hello! I like the olives actually because they're so region-specific, but overall I agree about scarcity and simplicity. I think it's good to aim at vanilla ratios, e.g. having around the same amount of total health and happiness so that these factors do not become trivial, especially with supermarket/grocer equivalents available so early in the game. For scarcity, I think BTS works more or less like this:
strategic: max. 1 per player
marble/stone: 0.5 per player
bonus: 0.5-1 per player
It could be something to aim for.

This is great! Extremely helpful, and interesting - I had a hard time finding data on historical resources (and even terrain, surprisingly) when I was first creating the map, and I went with a normalized resource setup to make things 'equal'. Even the more accurate resource placements are likely to be more modern than historical. I'll happily make the changes that you suggested, and anything else you'd like to contribute would be more than welcome.

I can see a lot of resources like marble, salt, silver and gold are mostly in their historical locations already. So below is a list of suggestions with more scarcity and concentration in mind (so whenever I suggest adding something I mean moving it from a less important location). Dates are added if you ever use that resource-placing script.

Salt
I'd say that apart from the omission of the major sources near Hamburg and Krakow (13th c.), salt is placed accurately: Austria, Hungary (rock salt - 13th c.) and specific places in the Mediterranean. I don't know the sources in North Africa and Levant, I imagine they're accurate as well, it's just that the proportions look skewed, as if Europeans relied on Arab salt. I think since Arabs/Moors only trade with Europe here, their salt output could be reduced considerably (currently 12 between Morocco and Turkey not counting islands).

Furs
The furs Serbia could go, possibly Scotland too, leaving Sweden and Northern Russia as the historical exporters.

Honey
The major exporters were Novgorod and Castile. Russia looks OK but the latter isn't reflected and could be used for concentration.

Marble
The only thing that doesn't match with my data is marble in France and no marble in southern Spain, but I can't really argue for either.

Timber
- Major exporters were Sweden, Northern Russia, Hansa along Baltic coast and Germany along the Rhine
- Shortage in England was particularly bad even before colonial times - they should be an importer
- Same with Holland; it'd be nice to force them to import though I imagine they're already crippled.
- France/Burgundy could do as importers as well
- Hungary never had much forests, they could do without timber
- Venetian nearby source of timber is correct and should definitely stay
- I recall reading that Portuguese were quite self-sufficient, largely because of massive re-planting efforts; I'd move one of the Spanish sources to Portugal to reflect that

Silver
Most historical silver mines are on the map already. For addition/concentration I'd suggest more in Saxony (#1 European source for centuries) and Bohemia (#2 source, made Bohemia very rich, currently 0). These could appear in 12-13th c. if scripted.

For removal: 2 or all 3 Silver in Sweden. While Sweden was famous for its silversmiths, apparently their single silver mine operated from 15th c. and was only enough for local minting. Silver was imported, looted and remelted (vikings accumulated a lot in the past).

I don't know anything about the silver placed in Southern Russia and Anatolia but it looks lonely and minor

Gold
Not sure about that gold in Sweden, but other than that the placement looks good, with Hungary as the only major European source (14th c. if scripted)

Copper, Sulfur
Saxony was also the most important source of medieval copper. Austria was rich in metals as well. Extra copper and sulfur taken from elsewhere would make them the historical strategic locations. Deficit of food could offset this, partially done already. Going further, honey and/or deer in Saxony could be removed.

Sweden was exporting copper since the Middle Ages and has none. That would offset that silver removal.

Sicily is mentioned as the main source of world's sulfur "from the Middle Ages down to the end of the nineteenth century".

Fish
Major exporters: Norway & Sweden. Again I'd recommend moving a few loose fish there.

Wheat/rye
You probably want a lot of it, but for some extra +/- :

Major exporters:
- Kievan Rus & Muscovy (OK though it's a bit of an overkill atm)
- Poland (could use 1 more)
- Egypt (has 0... move from Damascus?)
- Sicily (OK)

Major importers:
- Sweden (so 0)
- Novgorod (way too much wheat in Northern Russia)
- Netherlands (again)
- Portugal (OK)

 

[st.lucifer]

New map update!


Changes:

-Fixed the rest of the rivers in Eastern Europe. Guys, if you're going to make changes to the river systems, please make sure they're flowing in the right direction - nothing makes a map look unprofessional like a backwards river. Hopefully this is the end of that problem.

-Redid many resources as per Embryodead's suggestions. Some general trends:

-Removed barley from Western Europe (except Scotland, which is geographically closer to Scandinavia than England or France)
-Removed timber from many previous locations (France, Hungary, parts of Spain, England). Added timber to Stockholm's BFC, Rostock area, Portugal, Galicia, Poland, and Austria. I think the Dutch timber resource is going to have to stay, just to give them some production and the ability to build colonies, but I recognize its historical inaccuracy and feel at least a little bit bad about it.
-Forested more of Germany and Poland. Deforested and flattened parts of Hungary.
-Added more metals to Saxony, Bohemia, Austria, and Hungary. Removed copper from the Massif Central and a couple of other locations. Germany should now export silver; Hungary should now export gold. Both are uncommon elsewhere. I left precious metals in Sweden just to give them some luxuries, but they're down to 1 each.
-Added salt as suggested on the Baltic coast and S. Poland. Removed many of the salt resources from Arabian territory.
-Rearranged fish in the Baltic and added crabs to the Gulf of Bothnia.
-Thickened and extended the northern arm of the Carpathians.
-Shrunk some of the swamps of Poland. Tried to make Hungary a slightly more attractive piece of territory by rearranging some resources and adding a few more grain. Improved the area around Prague.
-Eliminated furs from the western half of the map (unless I missed one somewhere.) Added a few more in the east. Did the same sort of thing with gems - there are some in the Maghreb, but I think I eliminated all of the others.
-Added wheat to Alexandria/Cairo BFC.
-ARGH! Forgot to make Morocco more inhabitable. That'll stay on the list of things to do for the next update.

There may be some other minor changes, but this is most of it. Further suggestions are welcomed and encouraged.


Also, I can't code this, but I'm definitely in favor of taking Embryodead's suggestion and replacing Gdansk with Koenigsberg. How do others feel about it?