The Hall of Players

[Seraiel]

Ofc., all graphical mods reduce the performance slightly, but with a good PC you shouldn't have any problems, especially not on Linux. I hate the basic-terrain, it just makes the game look so old. The water looks nice, but even that one imo looks better with Vincentz's graphics-package.

And yes, the Gauntlet will probably cause an overhaul of the Space Colony dates. When I think back at that 1500 AD game with Peter, I think almost everything what could go wrong went wrong, like Oracle, GLH, Liberalism, Economics, many GPs, unit-losses, the SoL... Smaller maps also used to have slower finish-times than the larger ones, so 1500 AD Space Colony is probably as worse as it can get, if one really makes an effort.

Still not finished with setting up my new, Standard / Epic Space Colony map. Can't decide on 8 or 10 opponents, Vassals and Gandhi or not.

 

[Pangaea]

Standard - Epic, eh? That will be WastinTime's 1485AD game. Surprisingly few submissions on that slot. Only three and the newest is almost 6 years ago.

I'm thinking about trying a Huge map since I've never done that before. Will probably be horribly time consuming with maybe 100 cities in the end game tho!

Tried a few different things, but to me it looks like with B&S, you get around 3000 land tiles regardless of high or low sea level. Suppose the islands are smaller on high sea level, but it's frustrating with such vast distances even with a packed map on high sea level. Maintenance is killin' me softly

 

[elitetroops]

If the standard/epic game for some reason doesn't work out and it seems you won't quite beat 1485AD, you can change gears, play it out as a time game and get rid of the last French #1 entry in the deity tables.

 

[Seraiel]

Standard - Epic, eh? That will be WastinTime's 1485AD game. Surprisingly few submissions on that slot. Only three and the newest is almost 6 years ago.

I'm thinking about trying a Huge map since I've never done that before. Will probably be horribly time consuming with maybe 100 cities in the end game tho!

Tried a few different things, but to me it looks like with B&S, you get around 3000 land tiles regardless of high or low sea level. Suppose the islands are smaller on high sea level, but it's frustrating with such vast distances even with a packed map on high sea level. Maintenance is killin' me softly

As Kaitzilla once wrote, "Huge maps are more pain than fun" ^^ . 100 cities might not be enough, not sure, but I remember having had more than 200 in the highscore games, which ofc. had a different focus though, maybe 100 is realistic if you play with Vassals. No idea how long such a game would take, could be half a year and it's possible that you can only play 1T = 1d in the really time-consuming phases ^^ .

The info about the islands is interesting btw.. I thought about a way to create larger islands, to have some production in the cities on them, but selecting islands instead of tiny islands produced smaller maps.

If the standard/epic game for some reason doesn't work out and it seems you won't quite beat 1485AD, you can change gears, play it out as a time game and get rid of the last French #1 entry in the deity tables.

No time games . Even a #1 slot held by the French isn't worth going through what those games demand from the player . Maybe in year, when I have forgotten about the 200h I spent on the Large / Marathon one, which "only" had something like 800T, because it was an advanced start, so almost comparable.

 

[Seraiel]

I just looked at quite a few B&S maps in the Worldbuilder, and found the height of the sealevel to make no difference at all, found all possible sizes and forms with both, high and low sealevel. What's interesting though, is, that tropical climate seems to not be advisable. The continent always is around the equator, so tropical climate not only gives more Jungles, but also depletes the continent of resources like Furs or Deers! Choosing Temperate imo produces much better results, even if some islands will be ice then, who cares about a late settled 3-land-tiles island anyhow. Only downside is, that tropical ofc. comes with more Rice-resources, but getting a strong Sushi isn't the problem on B&S as Kaitzilla also already found.
Islands region seperate seems to be a trap-option too, it creates wide areas with no islands, so if one starts on the wrong side of the continent, one will need to cross huge amounts of water to reach the next island. Not sure, if it also were less islands overall, but don't think so.

Not so sure anymore, that B&S now really is so much better than Terra. Better Sushi ofc. is a factor, but Terra seems to have the unique advantage, that the main continent is in the upper hemisphere, so with choosing tropical climate, it's in the perfect zone, so Forests but still all possible resources, and more food in general on the map. Need to look at some standard-sized Terra maps next before I can make a final decision, at least I have found in the meantime how many opponents I'll want and who they will be.

 

[Seraiel]

I can't confirm this for sure, but it really seems, that Terra maps have a lot more Forests. They even seem to be bigger in total, 1650 population in average compared to 1500 from B&S, but that'd be when choosing B&S with tropical climate, so more like 1650 against 1300, when choosing B&S with Temperate.

--------

Now what is better:

Most islands and land reachable pre-Astronomy.
Easy possibility to found Colonies for a lot Happiness.
Better Sushi.

Or:

Possibility to find Astro in a Hut and to settle great amounts of land because of being earlier to Astro, also easier conquest because AIs are locked on land and not islands.
More land, more Forests, less Coast.
Lower maintenance through Flat worldwrap.

--------

Definitely non-trivial. I could imagine B&S to be better for smaller map-sizes, because conquering the major-part of the territory then is np. Also, Colonies are needed more, if there are less civs alive which run Emancipation, because Emancipation is lower when more Civs are still in the game. Slower gamespeeds also seem to favour B&S, because the slower the gamespeed, the easier the Conquest, you know.

Terra however comes with early-game advantages, because Forests are an advantage for the human, due to the inability of the AI to chop. Also, both maps are already so big on Standard size, that the territory in the old world may already be enough pre-Astro, and because Terra's continent is less snaky, it allows those great 100% land-locked Hammer-cities, that can produce an Engine in 4T on normal speed.

If only Colonies were easier on Terra. There are some Terra maps, that have more seperate landmasses, but that's something I wouldn't gamble for... Any input appreciated. Maybe I should stick to B&S because of Epic gamespeed...

 

[Seraiel]

And what I also wonder: Could it be, that B&S is simply the richer mapscript? I remember all those double and tripple Gold starts on it, then the bigger possibility to even have a coastal capital, which makes settling islands easier and also allows for great buildings like a Custom House (partly funny, because Wastin and me couldn't believe Custom Houses can be great 'til Replay #3, but sometimes they give up to 20 , which with multipliers can be more than 70 in a Buro capital) . I still remember it always having been really difficult to get a decent start on Terra, maybe part of the higher maintenance on B&S already gets mitigated by its resources?

 

[Seraiel]

WastinTime dodged a bullet. I decided that I can only answer the question about Terra or B&S by playing a game on B&S that is almost completely comparable to the last game I played on Terra (Small / Normal) , so I'm playing Small / Epic and go for the slot of bcool! Will also test out Vassals and my new set of opponents, which includes Gandhi again (I hate him because of Oracle, but elitetroops said he is an awesome techer, and he's an easy peacevassal too) . Decided for Frederick as a civ, because of his similarity to Peter. Maybe like that, we'll get a definite answer to the question that couldn't be answered in the Gauntlet, probably it'll only get more difficult with the information I'll aquire though .

Should I afterwards still not have enough of Spaceraces and difficult setup-decisions, I'll probably make a video out of the game for the Standard / Epic slot which I'll call Replay #10: The end of wastin time, which would be worthy aswell as a 10th Replay, as also as the possible end of the series, but also probably the end of the semester break, which even allows me to think about a mega-project like this. I hope you're glad to read this and will all watch it, should I ever find a way to cut down 200-300h to something like 40-50.

[EDIT]

Maybe I'll also go for the Standard / Normal slot held by STW. Better noone knows for sure, so that noone gets the idea he could steal the #1 from me .

 

[shulec]

That is probably STW's best game. I would be impressed to see it beaten by something other than WCs, Immortals, Quechaus, or Praetorians. If not... meh.

 

[WastinTime]

c'mon, that Std/Normal game 1570AD was OCC!

Yes, it was an awesome game...for an OCC.

If Fred can launch that early...with a little human help, certainly the human can do it faster alone.
Or you could play non-OCC and still use a PA.

 

[Pangaea]

What are the decay times on marathon? Think it's 10 and 40 turns for units and buildings on normal settings. Is the multiplier x2 here, so 20 and 80 turns?

Definitely not 10T for units, because I get the warnings, yet are not lost.

 

[Pangaea]

Another question, about events. Got one that mentioned herbalists had found a new plant, chose the option that said 50% chance for 2 and 90% for +2. Was probably lucky, as it apparently was a resounding success (with no pop loss). Is that extra permanent?

The doesn't wear off for 60 turns, which twice what I expected. Really wish the events and quests were better explained in-game.

 

[Pangaea]

I'm currently playing a 'lousy' 1xGold start btw. But my neighbours are de Gaulle, Brennus, Peter and Washington, and by turn ~100 I had stolen 8 workers, including 4 from the Frenchie, so figured it was worth continuing

Hopefully wonders and such turn out good too.

And I really hope a Huge map won't be too much of a pain in the neck

 

[Seraiel]

Another question, about events. Got one that mentioned herbalists had found a new plant, chose the option that said 50% chance for 2 and 90% for +2. Was probably lucky, as it apparently was a resounding success (with no pop loss). Is that extra permanent?

The doesn't wear off for 60 turns, which twice what I expected. Really wish the events and quests were better explained in-game.

The of that event is permanent. It's the best event in the early game. I've never finished one game where I got it though, somehow, all games where I got it failed.

 

[Seraiel]

I'm currently playing a 'lousy' 1xGold start btw. But my neighbours are de Gaulle, Brennus, Peter and Washington, and by turn ~100 I had stolen 8 workers, including 4 from the Frenchie, so figured it was worth continuing

Hopefully wonders and such turn out good too.

And I really hope a Huge map won't be too much of a pain in the neck

Deity? Are you playing with the "raise domination limit" approach?

 

[Pangaea]

The of that event is permanent. It's the best event in the early game. I've never finished one game where I got it though, somehow, all games where I got it failed.

Ah, that sounds good then The unhappiness from the event is a problem right now, but it will pass eventually.

Deity? Are you playing with the "raise domination limit" approach?

No, it's Immortal. Please don't target it anybody Not thought much about the raise dom limit tactic yet, but it will probably happen no matter what at some point with so many AIs.

Have played a game to ~T200, but this one may look more promising, despite a 1-gold capital and solid middle-finger diplomacy

Have 9 cities at T150, Elizabeth just got Alpha, but with a shot economy I'm far away from being able to trade for it. Amazingly Judaism hasn't been founded yet, so I hope that means Oracle will be late. A good handful of civs without slavery too.

One bummer was that I didn't get a single hut, not even one! Had to check the settings screen if I had messed up something.

Considering I'm roughly at break even at 0%, would it be advisable to hold off on warfare for now?

Spoiler :

After killing Brennus, who at one point was hated by 11 civs, diplomacy is f*cked, Peter is to my north, but it may be nice to have him around and hope he gets some hatred down the line.

Those who have played Huge maps before, should I stop warring for a bit now, focus on the economy (already building many cottages), and fill in settled cities?

 

[Seraiel]

You (imo) should never stop warring, unless you've enough land to get into problems with the dom-limit. Build less troops, don't war so fast, recover while warring.

 

[Pangaea]

Even if the economy is fecked and the other possible victims a fair bit away? I worry the higher maintenance (than on flat Terra) will grind teching to a halt. And I need Math, Alpha trade, backfill plus Priesthood to Oracle Currency in due time to get out of the hole.

This is when another capital gold or two would have been preferred. On the positive side I already have improved marble and stone - just need masonry now

One thing I've noticed is that almost all AIs are along the coast on these huge maps, so basically a large swathe of jungle in the centre.

 

[Noble Zarkon]

On the positive side I already have improved marble and stone - just need masonry now

lol lol lol

 

[Seraiel]

Can't you whip and chop into Warriors to get ?