solution to unfair start?: unrealistic but fair

SenJarJar

Chieftain
Joined
May 25, 2005
Messages
61
We all know that Civ maps inherently cause unfair advantages among the Civs, reflecting geo-political reality. I mean it is nice to play on maps like this. But does it have to be this way all the time? I think we should be given the ability to choose between old school and auto-balancing maps. Especially for multi-player games, it would be advantageous for gameplay and enjoyability reasons that random maps generation include some form of balancing elements. Furthermore, there is no reason to think that giving disadvantaged starting locations a benefits boost has to be unrealistic. I mean it hasn't been uncommon for desert, island, and jungle civilizations to settle on a location which can accomodate a somewhat large population or robust marketplace due to found resources in the area.

Here are some of my suggestions. During map generation, the computer should analyze the terrain types around the starting location of a Civ to determine what kind of balancing benefit may be required. The area analyzed may be as little or as much as we want--but let's just say for example that the area analyzed encompasses a radius of ten tiles around the starting point. Terrain types should be divided up into four types: 1) fertile , 2) developable waste (like forest, jungle, marsh), 3) undevelopable waste (like desert and tundra, hills, mountains), and 4) water. Benefits should only kick in when the ratio of fertile tiles to the other three tiles is--let's say for example--1:5. No tiles except for the tiles around each Civ's starting location should be factored into the analysis; this would ensure that players would not try to seek out virgin tiles to mine their benefit.

1) starting locations(SL) which have a developable waste tiles to other tiles ratio of 3:5 should be given a combination benefits that kicks in both immediately and after development. Both benefits would be in the form of resources. The immediate benefit resource should include a food boosts so that that player could at least keep up with a Civ developing in fertile regions.

2) SLs which have an undevelopable waste/water tiles to other tiles ratio of 3:5 should be given immediate food and other resource boosts. I mean it's just not fun trying to play with a friend knowing he's starting among floodplains and you're stuck in the middle of resourceless mountains. Speaking of mountains, we may have to include an unrealistic food resource merely for the sake of game balance.

Both of the above boosts should be calibrated so as to make these unappealing SLs almost as desirable as starting in the middle of the plains.

People who start in floodplains and grasslands should consider themselves fortunate and be allowed to maintain their advantage.


Of course, we would have to figure out how to balance out all this. But a lack of knowledge right now about what that balance should be is no reason not to think about it.

Also, this way, we could enjoy every random map, no matter our starting location.:)

Does anyone know if we will be able to mod into the game suggestions like these?

And in case it is, why don't you share your thoughts?
 
SenJarJar said:
Also, this way, we could enjoy every random map, no matter our starting location.:)

Part of the fun (for some) is seeing how bad of a start they can come from and win.
 
How about a check box where you get to say 'no advantages' starting locations. In this case, use the above analysis for the 10 tile radius and instead of giving a food boost, give free units (extra settler and worker or somesuch)...
 
and then just outside of the ten tile radious is the juicyest empire evar which combined with bonuses push you into defacto win :p

...
 
Cataphract887 said:
and then just outside of the ten tile radious is the juicyest empire evar which combined with bonuses push you into defacto win :p

...

This right here is the an example of why this idea cant work.
 
Well I'd say a better method might be to rate the possible start locations on the map, and Then assign the spots to players based on their difficulty level... So playing on Sid you'd start on a realistic Greenland..all tundra.. max pop~3/4..Playing on chieftan would guarantee a river start with plenty of Grassland or Floodplains and probably Hills.

AIs would get randomly distributed starting locations (although on the higher levels, they might tend to get better spots and on the lower levels they might tend to get the worse spots)

Lower Difficulty level would mean you get placed in a better level of starting locations..it could also include distance to other players..Lower difficulty putting you at a minimum (or maximum) distance from other players.
 
Sid is already hard enough. If you want to go all the way masochistic and start in Greenland, fine by me, but you can do that in the editor. Sure, include an option on whether or not to weight terrain around starting location, but don't make it depend on difficulty.
 
I'd say that you can choose wetter you want a no water 20 tile desert island or a FP, grass and hill start. You would have choices like easy start (FP and grass), good start, normal start, difficult start or impossible start (the game I am playing now is about 60 tiles with plains and tundra and no water. Not impossible, but defying, as it is a huge map).
 
If you want to play civ with a difficult start, you can. If you want a hard start at regent, you can.
 
TheBB said:
Sid is already hard enough. If you want to go all the way masochistic and start in Greenland, fine by me, but you can do that in the editor. Sure, include an option on whether or not to weight terrain around starting location, but don't make it depend on difficulty.

But then Sid could be made easier in other ways..Not giving the computer an empire's worth of units to start out with for example (or Sid could actually be a truly impossible level that even the best human players were proud to Survive on rather than win)

And this keeps your starting position's goodness nonrandom but still variable.

I do like Mastertyguy's suggestion of it as a Part of the difficulty level.
Making the difficulty level customizable would be good
(so setting various AI advantages and Player disadvantages gives an overall higher level of Difficulty...might be a bit complicated though)
 
Easiest way to ensure balanced map is to make it by yourself. Or maybe Firaxis guys could include couple of dozens of well balanced maps of all size. I just think it is too difficult to make Civ so smart that it will randomly generate perfectly balanced maps.
 
The real world isn't fair. Besides if a map was fair then *theoretically* every civ would end up being equal. And i like it when you end up with 3 or 4 big civs. In multiplayer it is different you want to be fair so you can gloat. Doesn't this belong in the ideas & suggestions tread?
 
That's why I'd prefer a weighting system, you get a start based on your difficulty (making it more or less likely that you'll be one of those 3 to 4 big civs) The AIs would be spread out among the various 'levels' of starting positions. (to ensure that 3 or 4 of them became those super civs)
 
Back
Top Bottom