Standard size - easier?

[CornPlanter]

Yesterday I did play on standard map size for the first time in my life (normally its large or sometimes huge). My first impression is, that it's much easier. You need less banks, universities, etc., for certain National Wonders. You need to conquer far less land to achieve domination. Not so many opponents to juggle with in the diplomacy departament. Every annexation gives me so much more benefit on standard size than on large, because even if the number of new cities and the size of land is the same, relatively it makes for bigger part of the world. Bigger part for me, bigger part denied for other civs. Relatively bigger share of resources.

Or am I missing something? Is there a downside?

 

[Sian]

not that many to trade stuff with for one ... not as able to quickly build a big army

 

[z0wb13]

corporations get access to more resources on larger maps, making them much more powerful.

but i can't say the game is much easier, mostly it just takes way longer.

 

[kossin]

As DaveMCW put it:

If you have good diplo skills then larger=easier (more AIs to bribe to war, more trade opportunities).

Although on higher difficulties, the AI can build huuuuuuge Empires and not pay a penny for it so that's another ball game.

 

[Udey1]

I will stick to standard. Huge maps just take too much time in my opinion.

 

[CornPlanter]

If you have good diplo skills then larger=easier

I guess that explains a thing or two - my diplo skills are terrible Last Emperor game I lost with irrigated corn & 2 gold & plenty of riverside start. I lost it because Shaka unexpectedly declared on me and wiped out while my army was bussy with Monty. Shaka. Unexpectedly. If it sounds very lame probably because it is...

 

[Dirk1302]

Shaka unexpectedly declared on you?

 

[CornPlanter]

Shaka unexpectedly declared on you?

I know, I know how it sounds... but he was busy with another AI. I just missed the moment they signed peace

 

[Hereditary Rule]

corporations get access to more resources on larger maps, making them much more powerful.

but i can't say the game is much easier, mostly it just takes way longer.

I don't know if the scaling is perfect, but larger maps reduce the value of each resource's contribution towards the corporate effect to compensate for this. 5 seafood on a huge map is worth less than 5 seafood on smaller maps.

 

[UWHabs]

I don't know if the scaling is perfect, but larger maps reduce the value of each resource's contribution towards the corporate effect to compensate for this. 5 seafood on a huge map is worth less than 5 seafood on smaller maps.

The main things that change is that in a larger map, you end up with a higher land to coast ratio in general, so that you can actually have more valuable land corps. Or if you play a water-heavy map (islands or archipelago), then you have so much coast that Sushi becomes very very strong.

Overall, it all depends on the game. Sometimes, smaller maps can be frustrating, since you get like 2 religions set up in the world, and then nothing works. Or I've even seen cases where like 6 of the 7 people end up in the same religion and everyone's all nice and happy.

However the flip side is on a huge map, you can really not care about like half the world, and know you won't need to worry about them. Like playing a European power on Earth, sure, you have to pay attention to China, Mongolia, and India, but you really don't have to care too much since they're so far to do anything to you.

There's more diplomacy to deal with on a bigger map, but more of it also doesn't matter. With only 6 or so opponents (less if on continents), every bit of diplomacy matters. One wrong move and you can lose half your trading partners.

 

[Jerrymander]

corporations get access to more resources on larger maps, making them much more powerful.

The bonus-per-resource ratio goes down on larger maps, but the amount of resource generally more than makes up for it.

 

[Hereditary Rule]

The bonus-per-resource ratio goes down on larger maps, but the amount of resource generally more than makes up for it.

Understood - but that point withstanding, does the fact that Huge maps become easier at Medicine makeup for the fact that they are tougher in other ways from 4000BC to Medicine?

Racing for wonders, late religions, lib, and founding 8 cities minimum to build national wonders are aspects of the game that are a little tougher on larger maps with more opponents IMO. Diplomacy is a wash - more opponents make for some easier as well as some tougher situations.

 

[totalnastiness]

on larger maps there are more AIs racing for Wonders and key techs

 

[dirtyparrot]

I always found that on Monarch and below, the smaller the map the easier the game. And on small or tiny it practically feels like cheating. As long as you can micro decent, on small and tiny maps, you can REX the AI into having only a tiny amount of land and it's pretty much game over at that point. At Emperor, the tables become even or a little in the AI's favour.

 

[bitplayer]

I pretty much always play a huge map and I think it is a quite a bit harder than standard sized maps. Of course I always put custom settings on- no tech trading etc- and pack 16 or so rivals in there so the fighting usually starts early and my games rarely end without getting donkey punched, or dog piled, a few times.