Standard (80x52) World Map TSL

[Veneke]

I hadn't actually intended on setting out to make Africa crowded but that's how it seems to have worked out and I'm not terribly disappointed with the results. Europe, as always, remain an interesting place to start.

Given that Korea is a separate DLC I'm not keen on including it, although an exception was made for the Inca in past incarnations so there's no reason why one couldn't be made here; except that to include anyone I'd have to remove someone and if I'm removing someone then I can just add Mongolia back in...

Aye, the Mayan/Panama starting positions are switched to avoid giving Brazil relatively uncontested access to S. America and having three Civs in N. America. It's a more extreme sacrifice of realism to gameplay than what had happened previously with La Venta and what's currently happening with Poland.

Dropping Carthage and Indonesia for the Incas and the Iroquois is certainly a possibility and could well work out better than how it is currently. I'm less certain on the Panama/Maya switch, keeping as is with the Civ swaps would give 3 Civs in N. America and 3 in S. America. If Indonesia works out, however, then potentially swapping Byzantium for the Incas (and putting a city-state nearby) and leaving Indonesia in there could prove interesting. Carthage still be swapped for the Iroquois.

One other swap I'm toying with is dropping Arabia for Mongolia. At the moment Assyria is somewhat trapped for space and while having Assyria surrounded by City-States might impede their growth it would guarantee at least one second, decent, city.

 

[bwoww78]

I hadn't actually intended on setting out to make Africa crowded but that's how it seems to have worked out and I'm not terribly disappointed with the results. Europe, as always, remain an interesting place to start.

So each civ in Africa seems to at least get a decent 2nd city? That's good to hear (I suppose Africa is a bit bigger than S. America anyways). I'd say of the remaining group, Carthage would be the one I'd use to replace, if I had to choose...

Given that Korea is a separate DLC I'm not keen on including it, although an exception was made for the Inca in past incarnations so there's no reason why one couldn't be made here; except that to include anyone I'd have to remove someone and if I'm removing someone then I can just add Mongolia back in...

You're right about Korea for the reasons you mention; also it has a tight spot for it's TSL. I think that any expansionist ways from China would be better checked by Genghis in that regard anyways...

Aye, the Mayan/Panama starting positions are switched to avoid giving Brazil relatively uncontested access to S. America and having three Civs in N. America. It's a more extreme sacrifice of realism to gameplay than what had happened previously with La Venta and what's currently happening with Poland.

I see your point and could live with Panama being north of Palenque (looking back through posts, it's a little embarrassing to see that I might have been the one to initially suggest the Mayan placement in the first place - oops!). Panama is a decent choice as it's nice to have a variety of CS flavors; however, La Venta could also continue to be placed there if you have find you have too few religious flavored CS... (I'm not sure about the current balance)

Dropping Carthage and Indonesia for the Incas and the Iroquois is certainly a possibility and could well work out better than how it is currently. I'm less certain on the Panama/Maya switch, keeping as is with the Civ swaps would give 3 Civs in N. America and 3 in S. America. If Indonesia works out, however, then potentially swapping Byzantium for the Incas (and putting a city-state nearby) and leaving Indonesia in there could prove interesting. Carthage still be swapped for the Iroquois.

One other swap I'm toying with is dropping Arabia for Mongolia. At the moment Assyria is somewhat trapped for space and while having Assyria surrounded by City-States might impede their growth it would guarantee at least one second, decent, city.

While I have done no playtesting yet (so just from a theoretical perspective), I'd encourage the following swaps:

1. Arabia for Mongolia: you help out Assyria, freeing up some space in the middle east, and add back in a check on China and solid warmonger for a bigger/emptier (barbarian-prone) part of the map. Even a struggling Indonesia still has a great civ bonus for it's likely 2nd city placement, and for some reason I kind of like Byzantium (or even Ottomans) in that regional spot.

2. Carthage for Inca: You'd know best with play-testing, but it might help out Morocco/Egypt expand vs their two offensively minded continental neighbors while adding some more flavor to the S. America map. Also, I definitely wouldn't remove both Carthage and Byzantium, but having both is maybe why I keep trying to remove one.

2a. Rather than Carthage for Inca, Carthage for Iroquois. You'd keep Mayan start as is, but swap Panama for La Venta (if CS flavors may need balancing, plus it's just a bit more historically accurate TSL). I'd guess that Shoshone grabs up a LOT of territory (and quickly after city #2), so you could move Cahokia a bit south, Shoshone a bit north and add Iroquois to somewhere in the forest-y north/northeast as a balance. Quebec City could really be even more on the NE coast (can anybody reach that whale out there?) or simply removed to make more room (Hiawatha does have Montreal, etc. in his city names list...). To this end, maybe you'd also add some more deer/forest/etc. as necessary to the N. America for balance. The more I think of it, the more I like removing Quebec City...

3. ...or, then again, you could go crazy: Iroquois for America! (though actually, I like having US in the game when I'd play as them, but otherwise it'd be neat to play with a European start and meet (now mostly) just "new world" civs in the Western Hemisphere. I doubt you'd want to have too many versions of the map; it's just a thought.)


Lastly, I might be the only one, but Baja California seems really huge and just looks funny to me. I'd swap that interior-most coastal tile, which is basically in Nevada/Arizona right now for a desert tile and maybe move the Barringer Crater SW one tile(?).

Thanks again for the shout out and considering my input.

 

[Veneke]

So each civ in Africa seems to at least get a decent 2nd city? That's good to hear (I suppose Africa is a bit bigger than S. America anyways). I'd say of the remaining group, Carthage would be the one I'd use to replace, if I had to choose...

Well, everyone except the Zulus. They are forced down a warlike path as they are surrounded by city-states. Somehow, I don't think Shaka will have much of a problem with this.

...

I see your point and could live with Panama being north of Palenque (looking back through posts, it's a little embarrassing to see that I might have been the one to initially suggest the Mayan placement in the first place - oops!). Panama is a decent choice as it's nice to have a variety of CS flavors; however, La Venta could also continue to be placed there if you have find you have too few religious flavored CS... (I'm not sure about the current balance)

It never really occurred to me to check for balance of CS types, I tossed Panama in there simply because it was new and threw La Venta out because it wasn't. I'm going to look more closely at Panama/La Venta and see what, if anything, could be done.

1. Arabia for Mongolia: you help out Assyria, freeing up some space in the middle east, and add back in a check on China and solid warmonger for a bigger/emptier (barbarian-prone) part of the map. Even a struggling Indonesia still has a great civ bonus for it's likely 2nd city placement, and for some reason I kind of like Byzantium (or even Ottomans) in that regional spot.

Yeah, I'm liking the idea of an Arabia for Mongolia swap. That will be in the next update (this weekend, hopefully? It depends on if I manage to convince myself of all the various changes by then.). I don't particularly mind Byz/Ottomans either but they usually struggle - badly. Reckon I'll swap Byz for Ottomans though, if only to try something new.

Carthage for Inca: You'd know best with play-testing, but it might help out Morocco/Egypt expand vs their two offensively minded continental neighbors while adding some more flavor to the S. America map. Also, I definitely wouldn't remove both Carthage and Byzantium, but having both is maybe why I keep trying to remove one.

Aye, Carthage of either Inca or Iroquois will almost certainly happen. I do need another Civ removed though to ensure three Civs start in N. America and S. America. BYZ are my first preference for removal, followed by Japan and England. I'd really rather avoid removing England - although the possibility of replacing them with the Celts is always there. At any rate, removing either Japan or England brings balance issues to both continents that removing BYZ doesn't... Will have to have another look at this but BYZ seems like the best option.

... I'd guess that Shoshone grabs up a LOT of territory (and quickly after city #2), so you could move Cahokia a bit south, Shoshone a bit north and add Iroquois to somewhere in the forest-y north/northeast as a balance. Quebec City could really be even more on the NE coast (can anybody reach that whale out there?) or simply removed to make more room (Hiawatha does have Montreal, etc. in his city names list...). To this end, maybe you'd also add some more deer/forest/etc. as necessary to the N. America for balance. The more I think of it, the more I like removing Quebec City...

If there are three Civs going in N. America then removing one, if not both, of the city-states up there makes a degree of sense. I like Cahokia as a border and Quebec might work if I push it out of the way a little more but if the Iroquois are going back in then a little more attention to N. America is almost certainly warranted.

3. ...or, then again, you could go crazy: Iroquois for America!

I've thought about this (and variations thereof) a couple of times but mostly it comes down to the very simple fact that people like playing as their own Civ especially on TSL Earth maps. And yeah, I'm growing increasingly concerned at the number of maps I'm toting around. Once I'm happy enough with the BNW map I'll likely add a Limited Civ variant and an AIOW variant and then leave it at that. Although, I've been toying on and off about the possibility of a Small version as well. At that point, it might be worthwhile sitting down and figuring out how best to organize all of that.

Lastly, I might be the only one, but Baja California seems really huge and just looks funny to me. I'd swap that interior-most coastal tile, which is basically in Nevada/Arizona right now for a desert tile and maybe move the Barringer Crater SW one tile(?).

I believe I made it like that to try and ensure the possibility of two coastal cities down there. I definitely haven't reconsidered it though since the Shoshone made an appearance so that sea can be shortened a bit depending on likely Shoshone city placement.

 

[Barak]

I disagree with Mongolia for Arabia. In truth, Arabia fits better than Assyria, who although they are new to the BNW, really don't fit in very well to the map. I personally would go back to having Arabia and Persia and take out Kabul. It would allow The Byz, Persia, Egypt and Arabia a good spot to fight over for a 2nd city near their capital. Not having Assyria there allows the Byzantium to have a spot to expand. Perhaps give the Byz an Iron as well?

 

[bwoww78]

It never really occurred to me to check for balance of CS types, I tossed Panama in there simply because it was new and threw La Venta out because it wasn't. I'm going to look more closely at Panama/La Venta and see what, if anything, could be done.

FWIW here's a link to what seems to be a comprehensive listing of city states.

 

[Veneke]

Just to clarify, as I got lost myself a few times in the post below. The current swapping envisioned is as follows:

- Carthage for Iroquois.
- Arabia for Mongolia.
- Byzantium for Inca.

I disagree with Mongolia for Arabia. In truth, Arabia fits better than Assyria, who although they are new to the BNW, really don't fit in very well to the map. I personally would go back to having Arabia and Persia and take out Kabul. It would allow The Byz, Persia, Egypt and Arabia a good spot to fight over for a 2nd city near their capital. Not having Assyria there allows the Byzantium to have a spot to expand. Perhaps give the Byz an Iron as well?

I think, at present, that you're right in that previous versions had a nice rush to where Assyria/Babylon would start for a decent but not spectacular second city spot. Dropping Assyria for Persia and removing Kabul would be fine (although Egypt should be blocked to that particular position by Jerusalem - they have a spot nearer Alexandria though and a few more besides so they're good) but it leaves the problem of Mongolia and creates problems for a three Civ start in both N. and S. America. If Arabia isn't swapped for Mongolia then swapping Byzantium for the Inca doesn't make any sense which would undermine the whole justification for swapping Carthage for the Iroquois. None of this would be overly problematic but for the fact that, after a couple of games, it has become obvious that leaving Mongolia out was an error that needs to be addressed and reverting to the Middle East from before the BNW map doesn't fix this.

Indonesia, Japan, Carthage and England are all prime candidates but Indonesia is actually doing alright while Japan and England can do reasonably well. Carthage for Mongolia could work though.

FWIW here's a link to what seems to be a comprehensive listing of city states.

Thanks for this!

 

[Qlover]

hello,

first thank you for working on this map!

is there a possibility that you can take all the winning conditions including some round limitation out for a version with bnw?

since bnw the sdk is not working for me and i love long "marathon" infinite play

ps: my english is very bad, sorry...

 

[Barak]

@Veneke

Was wondering since there are soooo many civs available now could you create 2 different maps with some civs in both but some others in one or the other? For instance, different euro civs in each, different middle east civs in each?

Just a thought...

 

[Veneke]

@QLover - Sorry to hear that you're having trouble. They do seem to have managed to break the SDK for some people with BNW (although for me it's been semi-broken since a patch or two ago). Fortunately, a workaround is to sign-up for the beta version of the SDK. Details on how to access it are here: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=500778

@Barak - Definitely a possibility, although I am concerned at the growing number of variations of one map. This started out as a very simple Standard Earth TSL map and has rapidly changed into a map pack catering for increasingly diverse desires.

 

[bwoww78]

FYI: In line with my previous list, this post seems way more comprehensive and helpful.

@Veneke: any time frame on an update? thanks in advance.

 

[ariel552]

Hi Veneke,

Since I play it a lot I have one suggestion, could you make a BNW version where the vanilla civs are replaced by GK and BNW? for example, poland instead of russia, celts in england, denmark in germany, etc?
And one version with civs in america and another without? since it leaves the continent for european expansion and doesn't slow the turns so much.

Thanks a lot! very good job!

 

[Lachlan]

Could you make a 500 BC version of this map ?
Could you remake 1000AD version ?

No need for a mod for that, you could make it in the spirit of 1000 AD for Civ 4...
Just a scenario, you could just updating your first version of 1000AD by transposing on your actual Earth map...

 

[clinton]

I'd like a version of the BNW map with no victory conditions if possible. As much as I try sadly the worldbuilder keeps getting stuck on the loading screen.

 

[Sag Bobet]

This mod looks really cool, but I'm kind of new to Civ and don't know how to download this mod. Where does it say to do that? Sorry if this is a stupid question.

 

[twilson1972]

old thread, but going to try this as england tonight - so wanted to say thanks for making it