Starting location is really important!

[Nikox]

Starting location is really important and who can say that he never re-started several times the game trying to get the best starting point?
In my idea this can be solved giving an amount of point to spend on it.
Eg:
everybody has 50 points and he can spend in choosing between

- 40 point to start on a river
- 20 points to have one hill
- 30 points to have two or more hills
- 10 point to have a mountain
- 30 points for a resource in the first tiles around the city
- 20 points to have a resource in the next tiles
- 30 points to have a luxury

...and so on. And maybe this can be just the % chance to get it randomly.

What I want, giving the idea of this option, is not to add a cheat at the game, but a way to have random map playable without the needing to restart the game till you get one "unbearable" starting point.

And it's not a ready to use one.
I think is in the meaning of this forum to start from an idea and develope it till it can become an usefull one.

So, of course it need to be organized and balanced, but with this option also MP or PBEM games started with a random map what can be opened without the risk to have the starting point in an awfull place and with the sureness that nones knew the map before the game started or needing to wait someone else wrote a new one.

In my idea this option added to a random map with balanced rules what are giving to each player the same chance to win can improve a lot the game life as playing against other human player is better than every AI.

 

[Mei]

I dunno. Might be a good optional rule in MP but for SP games I don't think it'd be that good an option.

 

[Tomoyo]

However, those points seem to be poorly alotted. Only 100 for a river, but 300 for two or more hills?

Also, it's not a requirement for points to be in increments of 100 to make them seem bigger.

 

[Nikox]

I dunno. Might be a good optional rule in MP but for SP games I don't think it'd be that good an option.

In SP games do you always start from the first place the random map give you or you try till you get a good one??

If it's so you've to be a really good one!!

 

[Nikox]

However, those points seem to be poorly alotted. Only 100 for a river, but 300 for two or more hills?

Also, it's not a requirement for points to be in increments of 100 to make them seem bigger.

I'm not a game designer and as I said all of it need to be organized and balanced. The example I made was just to explain the idea of it.

Otherway if I can plain it better I'll be working for Firaxis!!!

 

[Flintlock]

I don't really like it, it gives too much control to the player. When you restart because of a bad map, it's different since, hopefully, the start was just unbearable; and the game simply wasn't worth attempting (otherwise it's cheating).
Here, you're just cheating all the time, since certain combinations will be clearly superior to others, and it would make stacking the deck much easier (ie playing as the Persians and starting with a resource)

 

[Nikox]

hopefully, the start was just unbearable;

This is the point to have a starting location not hopefully unbearable, but surely unbearable. Otherway you don't even start the game.

Giving the chanche to choose what you consider "unbearable" that it can be different from what I think is "unbearable".

If you cheat in a strategy game is better you choose another kind of game.

What I want this options give is one more strategy option: the choice how to start the game. It's enough to balance the amount of point to spend with the cost of every choices so you cannot fill it up with every thing. And you still have the random on which kind of resource of luxury you'll get. If you wanna spend a lot of your starting point to discover it instead to be sure to start from a river. It's enough to set the cost of it higher. As example if you got 500 to spend and river cost 400 and resource cost 300, you can choose just one of it and thinking how to spend your last 200 points...

Think about maps generated to allow MP games. Do you have any starting point "unbearable" ??? I don't think so..

What I want, giving the idea of this option, is not to add a cheat at the game, but a way to have random map playable without the needing to restart the game till you get one "unbearable" starting point.
And if the research of an "unbearable" starting point is ok for an SP game think about games played as MP.
Playing MP games you NEED a map with an "unbearable" starting point for all players and these maps are already done, so there is always someone who already played it. Is he cheating as he already knows the map?? ...what I can say is that certainly he has a lot of advantage on who never played it before.

In an SP game if you think at it as cheating you don't have to restart your game till you find an "unbearable" starting point, otherway you're cheating too...

 

[Nikox]

I played C3C as deity and I'm playing RAR mod as emporer....

 

[Trade-peror]

Tomoyo brings up a good point--how could the point values be assigned in a balanced way? If they are not, then this will lead to combinations that are invariably more advantageous, and lead to less starting position variety.

Also, does "starting position" only mean the squares already discovered when the game starts? Just modifying these squares may not make much of a difference anyway, if the surrounding area is extraordinarily good or bad. Of course, if we consider these other squares, we would have to determine how far out the "starting position" is...

 

[Crazy Jerome]

A better idea would be to make a routine in Python that assigns the relative weights, but let the map generating code use the routine to give balanced starting locations, rather than letting the player pick. (Python is so it can be tweaked by modders.)

I agree that the map generating code does a poor job of giving balanced starting locations. I disagree that it would be good for the player to have a lot of say.

 

[Synergy67]

I think it would be a nice feature to have some much greater variables control on startup than presently offered. I don't care to start in tundra or jungle, and usually not in the very corner of a huger pangea map where I am not going to be at all in the thick of anything (unless I want to play that kind of game). Sometimes I'm in the mood to only start on a river, or on the coast, or on a river on the coast. Anything from there is strategy, but I often like shopping for an appealing start site.

Seems there's no reason the game couldn't offer the option to start on a river, or not in the desert, tundra, or jungle. It's my game. I paid for it. It's just a game, not casting a ballot. Why not be able to fashion the kind of scenario I truly want to play without unnecessary hassle? I'm not interested in making it easy, because that's not fun. But it's not fun to start with a crappy city most of the time either. Games I admire the most put the power of decision truly into my own hands.

 

[Philips beard]

The area next to the starting city is really not allways the most important thing to judge how good a starting location you got!
It's also importent how the rest of the nearby potential for colonization area is, where close the other Civs start, how large your island/continent is etc......

It's really not the most important thing to start next to a river, it can still be a bad place to start. What's important is nearby fresh water somewhere, and a huge potential for expantion!

 

[Nikox]

Tomoyo brings up a good point--how could the point values be assigned in a balanced way? If they are not, then this will lead to combinations that are invariably more advantageous, and lead to less starting position variety.:

This is one reason why I posted it in a forum, to discuss about weak points and find an help to solve them.

Maybe one solution can be giving just point enough to chooose few rules as:

using my 500 points
- I need from 200 to 400 points to choose just one kind of terrain for my starting point
- I need from 200 to 400 points to choose just one exception for surrounding area (no tundra, no desert, etc.)

So I need to use a little strategy to combine the two or more factors what can affect the random generator.

 

[Nikox]

A better idea would be to make a routine in Python that assigns the relative weights, but let the map generating code use the routine to give balanced starting locations, rather than letting the player pick. (Python is so it can be tweaked by modders.).

This can be one more solution what need to be developed.

The point is not if my idea is good or not.
The point is to find a way to have random map playable without the needing to restart the game till you get one "unbearable" starting point.

 

[Nikox]

The area next to the starting city is really not allways the most important thing to judge how good a starting location you got!
It's also importent how the rest of the nearby potential for colonization area is, where close the other Civs start, how large your island/continent is etc......

It's really not the most important thing to start next to a river, it can still be a bad place to start. What's important is nearby fresh water somewhere, and a huge potential for expantion!

These can be more options what someone need to make a choice.

Is it a strategy game? Good let the strategy starts from the begginning of it.

I need to choose between a good a starting location, a good surrounding area, where close the other Civs start, how large your island/continent is.

And of course we have to think how to balance all of it avoiding someone to choose all best purpose.

To start to think how to balance it we can start to make short lists of items what someone need to choose wrote from, starting from most important.

As example:

Surrounding area:
1- for river
2- fresh water
3- for one resource
4- for one luxury
5- for one hill or mountain

Starting area:
1- no tundra
2- no desert
3- no jungle
4- no full of hills mountains

Starting continent:
1- start on large continent
2- start on large area/ no corner point
3- start on medium continent

where close the other Civs start...

 

[eddie_verdde]

Starting in a "poor" location wouldn't be so imbalancing if the game considered the adaptation of human comunities to different environments....

you can start in a desert but if you learn (i.e. develop apropriate techs) to deal with the desert conditions, you can get by as much as a civ starting in a grassland location...the difference would only be the initial strategy: whereas the desert civ will initially exploit the resources from desert, the grassland civ will initially exploit the resources from grassland...

And yes, I'm aware that in real world grassland can yield more food than desert, but humans have this incredible ability to optimize the yield from such harsh environments...they just need the apropriate technology and knowledge to survive in a particular environment...

I mention desert (eg: egyptians) only as an example. The same idea can be applied to mountain(Inca) or jungle (Aztec) starting locations...


Similar idea in my thread: "new food/shield output system"

 

[Nikox]

Starting in a "poor" location wouldn't be so imbalancing if the game considered the adaptation of human comunities to different environments....

I mention desert (eg: egyptians) only as an example. The same idea can be applied to mountain(Inca) or jungle (Aztec) starting locations...


Similar idea in my thread: "new food/shield output system"

A "poor" starting location is (in my idea) the place from where you don't have any chance to win the game.
But the meaning of "poor" location can be different from each one as well we all play in a different way..

And it don't have to be unlinked to the other starting set. You can first choose your civ with the apropriate technology and knowledge to survive in a particular environment then have different cost for the same option.

Eg: If you start as Egyptians and you choose desert it will cost more than for other civ for which desert is an handycapp.

What will be if you choose Egyptian and your starting location is on mountains, or Incas on jungle, or Aztec on desert with the wrong technology and knowledge to survive in a particular environment... ???

Are you playing the game anyway or it have to be like for seafaring civs that always start on coast??

And anyway also the chooser of a seafaring civ can find some kind of coastal starting location as a "poor" location to play the game...

 

[eddie_verdde]

What will be if you choose Egyptian and your starting location is on mountains, or Incas on jungle, or Aztec on desert with the wrong technology and knowledge to survive in a particular environment... ???

Maybe I wasn't clear enough...you only choose the civ you play with. You wouldn't choose its starting location or its special abilities before the game starts...you would choose which technologies to research that best suited the specific characteristics of your starting location, resources available, etc...this way you would follow a unique path of research, but with the same goals of every other civs and in a balanced way...

 

[Nikox]

Maybe I wasn't clear enough...

Maybe my knowledge of english is not enough....

 

[Nikox]

You wouldn't choose its starting location or its special abilities before the game starts...you would choose which technologies to research that best suited the specific characteristics of your starting location...

But I think is better to link specific characteristics to a civ "considered the adaptation of human comunities to different environments".
And usually who learned to play with a particular civ (eg: Egyptians) will not love to be an Inca just becouse he started on a mountain...

Or I misunderstood it again as my knowledge of english is not enough....