Starting bias Doubts

[Ticio]

Hi everyone again!

I just ended a multiplayer game with a friend and I have some doubts about startings bias.

So each civilization has a starting bias that profit his gamestyle (england= coast; russia= snow; etc). But I think is not always the case.

- What are the parameters? I mean is this bias aplied 100% of the times?

During the game, I was England and my friend was Spain. But he appeared in the center of a continent with no coast close.

We found strange that he didn't "landed" close to water or other continents.

We checked the Starting biases for every country and we found that a lot of them have 2 bias (foe example England, Coast or coal/iron), always to give them an advantage in line with their bonus.

But Spain only has Coast bias, shouldn't it have a bias to tiles close to other continents? as transcontinent cities are his strongest bonus. My friend really struggled at the start until he reached a new continet. But by then I already had win the game as I had a lot of traders and money thanks to the british ports.


the last question would be about the city of Fez.

Tying to gain the lost terrain, my friend gained the suzerainity of Fez so he could gain a demential increase on science. So, as he had not much faith (not enought missions on other continets as he had bad luck at the start) y started conquering cities with conquistadors.

But he complained that the cities converted didn't gave him the output on science that they should for the first conversion with Fez.

Is that correct? or he was having the benefits but was unevalbe to see it?


So, to summarize, the 3 questions would be:

1- What are the exact rules of Starting bias?

2- Shouldn't Spain have a bias to tiles close to other continents?

3- Being suzerain of Fez and converting a city for the first time witha conquistador give you the Science imput?



Thank you very much and sorry for another long post!

 

[The Highwayman]

1. I don't know the exact rules, but I believe the given map seed is filled out based on the civs with starting biases, with the remaining filled in. It's by no means 100% guaranteed you'll start near your given bias - there are "tiers" so to speak, ranging from tier 1-5. So Russia can start in the desert, Spain and England can start inland, etc.
2. Spain doesn't have a continent split bias, regardless of their bonus, which is one of the reasons they are a low tier civ. Too many variables out of the player's control. Several bonuses predicated on a split you may never get. Spain would be better if they had a geo thermal fissure bias for example.
3. I believe the city must be converted with a religious unit, not conquering via Conquistador or converting all of your cities when founding your religion for the first time.

 

[Ticio]

1- Thank you very much for the information!

2- Oh too bad for Spain, I think you are right.. they are a civ that depends too much on luck. Bad luck and you are dead, good luck and it can be a really interesting one!

But why would them be better if they had the fissure bias? they are close to continent frontiers?

Maybe a "natural wonder" bias could be interesting, as they lack any religion bonus, they are often left without religion, or trying to have one left them in a very big disvantage as they have to invest too many ressources on holy sites.
This way they would gain the boost for Astrology and add them a bonus if they build a sacred site adjacent to the wonder (but I don't know if is the correct path, maybe it will be too strong as a bias)

 

[The Highwayman]

You're welcome. I suggested a geo thermal fissure bias since those are always near continent splits. Hungary has this and it's really good. However, it may conflict with the coastal starting bias. Although in my opinion that is trash for Spain and I'd take the other any day.