Water % map settings for GOTMs in 2003

[cracker]

This poll is designed to gather your inputs on the general expectations for map conditions in the GOTM games for the coming year.

Read this post carefully before voting in the poll!!

We have the software tools to expand the conditions for the typical randomly generated maps you have seen in the past year. The "out of the box" game only supports water to land ratios of 80%, 70%, or 60% but we can now upen this setting up to include any ratio that is realistically in the range of 90% to 10%.

We probably will no longer use settings above 70% water because this creates huge amounts of wasted map space since real strategic naval warfare is not deisgned into the game and Ocean tiles cannot be held or used to develop any aspects of civ power. There another technical issues with the concept of eliminating "high water games" but in general we feel very strongly that we can provide the same strategic gameplay elements without wasting so much space on worthless ocean.

The general thought process here is to keep all aspects of the GOTM game "standard" but to use our special skills to expand the options where these standard rules would apply.

We would like to know if you have inputs or thoughts in this area.

 

[Cartouche Bee]

Well taking out the water eliminates alot of game play. Without water we would no longer have the long waterborne invasion forces, that at times require navigation before they can be implemented. Sure this can be crafted into the maps but crafting is currently not required.

I also think that these heavy on the land maps create situations where things like the palace placements are far less critical, increases the importance of some wonders, minimizes the importance of other wonders,.....

The side effects of changing the optimal city numbers and research rates when you make these maps makes for a number of unintended side effects also.

Until the effects of these changes are better known and explained to the participants, I vote make no changes.

 

[Creepster]

I like the idea of trying to reduce the water for a few games. It provides a different flavor for the game!

Given the way the AI tries to optimize its city placement (no ICS style of building) it might help to make them into more of a threat when compeating against them. The only thing a lot of water seems to provide in the game are logistic problems with ferrying troops over to invade. There has never been a Naval warfare that is even worth mentioning in any of my games.

Also reducing the % of water does not meen that there are no continents, just more buildable land to use. The maps may look more like a Panagea, but not all Panageas are one continent.

 

[Skyfish]

I vote :
" Expand the range only slightly to include 70% to 40% water "

This in order to allow us to "progressively" get used to different conditions. The points CB makes are quite true, but let's try to bring a bit of change and give people the time to adapt to those changes.

 

[Cartouche Bee]

Originally posted by Creepster
I like the idea of trying to reduce the water for a few games. It provides a different flavor for the game!

Less water equals easier to milk and easier to vanquish your opponents.

 

[Kemal]

Since I like the system as it is now I'm voting make no changes. I'm especially hesitant about making changes to the random map generator that are not supported in the normal game, since that means altering the game outside the boundaries that it is designed for. If the game isn't meant to support 10/90% water coverage than I say don't add it. It's difficult to tell whether the AI can cope with these changes, and other modifications to the game (i.e. unit adding) show that the AI has troubles making correct judgements if it gets in situations it hasn't been programmed to deal with.

I also think that the GotM should be a game played in conditions that every player has access to practise in, otherwise one of the fundamental game principles of all players starting in equal positions does not apply anymore. (Gotm admin/police team/whoever has the ability to create these map conditions knowing what to expect since they can create these "abnormal conditions" and practise with it.)

As for the 80% water coverage, we might use this sometimes, lots of water makes the Great Lighthouse something to go for and, as CB has stated, early contact/expansion/conquest difficult thus forcing players to heavily rely on trade instead of just taking what you want. It certainly gives a different game than the average pangea conquest.

 

[Yndy]

I'm for less water too. For a one continent pangaea map cracker is absolutely right. MY option for less water does not mean that I want every game to have less water.

 

[zagnut]

I would vote for the game as it is presently configured. GOTM 13 had a lot of water. I didn't discover the other large continent until about 1300AD. The fact that there was no easy way to get to it was a challenge. I knew it was there somewhere, but just didn't know where. Once I located it then I had to develop an amphibious invasion stategy. It's just one more aspect of the game that imitates real life.

I also agree with with Kemal - that the GOTM should be played in conditions to which every player has access. I don't think we should be developing a special configuration of the game that only a few people are going to understand. The game concept now is pretty simple to grasp and I think we should keep it as standard as possible.

 

[DaveMcW]

Any extreme changes should be playtested extensively before using them in the GOTM. It wouldn't be good if the AI just rolled over and died when placed on a 90% water map.

 

[Phillip_martin]

Voted to change the parameters slightly (70% to 40%) just to provide some variation. After all we should let the map setter have some fun too.

 

[ainwood]

I would like to see some different games - more towards more water than less though. Basically, its about variety.

 

[ControlFreak]

I voted to let the staff decide anywhere.

While I am completely happy playing at normal settings, the GOTM seems to be a great place to provide unique challenges to gamers. The GOTM folks (now under new management) seem to be responsible in their decisions, including the transition period for PTW. I say most GOTM should be normal map settings (half vote for no change) but if Cracker or whoever thinks of something interesting that can only be implemented with 90% water (or 10%) go for it.

 

[Creepster]

Originally posted by CarouchBee

Less water equals easier to milk and easier to vanquish your opponents.

It may/may not be easier to milk the game. Part of what I would like to play would be a more "all out game" where the AI has a chance to develop more cities and infrastructue to deal with.

If the AI can build up more units than it will be more of a challenge to deal with them. They are stuck with a non-dense city palcement setup that limits their growth very quickly. Think of the more land concept as a fight just for the Europen area. The end goal would be a game that is more unique and better than what we have been playing.

A similar argument can be made for increasing the amount of water and having a game based on island cities. There is so much water that you are limited in city placement to one or two cities per land mass. This too would be different then what is currently played within the current parameters. Part of the GOTM experience should be to play unique, interesting, and challenging games. Not all of these ideas may work, but it is worth trying them.

 

[Cartouche Bee]

I stand by my comments, all you have to do is look at HOF, big land mass equals best milking opportunity and easy conquests.

 

[ainwood]

Actually, you could possibly achieve the high water effect with standard settings on an edited map. Just make home continents small(ish) in relation to occupants, and have large distances of sea/ocean between them. It will severely restrict expansion and conquest until at least the industrial age. Especially if the great lighthouse effects are edited

 

[Cartouche Bee]

Yep, you can edit lots of stuff in the files and play potluck.

 

[Bamspeedy]

More land usually means the AI spends more time in the initial expansion phase of the game (producing settlers instead of military and infrastructure), so it's easier for the human to build up a military and strike him first when he is unprepared. Of course if there is way too much land (huge map with only 8 AI), the AI will stop expanding (once it's reached the optimal number of cities) and only re-expand after it gets it's forbidden palace built. And even after the forbidden palace is built they will stop expanding eventually and leave large areas of unclaimed land.

The AI likes to build it's forbidden palace pretty close to it's capital. So even if they own a large chunk of territory and they seem invincible due to their size, the outer cities are so corrupt that you can easily chip away at this civ (before railroads).

I think it would be more fun to just manipulate some standard maps a little bit. Have a pangea map that is a 'true' pangea map with all civs one ONE landmass. The Zulu game was pangea (just barely), but other pangea maps (gotm6 India as an example) routinely end up looking like continent/island maps. Likewise, wasn't GOTM7 (deity-Iroquois) supposed to be an island map, but turned out to be a sprawling pangea map? GOTM6 was fun (yes I know it was easy because it was Warlord level), in that you didn't have iron by you, so it made everyone realize that you don't need Iron for the War Elephant. And most of the AI were on the biggest landmass, so you had to work to get off your little continent. A map with 6 opponents where each civ is on a separate island all by themselves and no one can contact anyone else until navigation might also be fun (but many AI civs will probably be so scientifically backwards it won't be a challenge).

 

[cracker]

I need to intervene a little bit here because this discussion has nothing to do with randomly editting lots of stuff and the decision to push the discussion in that direction is disruptive and distorts the intent of this process.

We are not discussing or proposing changes to the standard rules sets that might lead any reasonable person to label the games "goofball" or "putzed with".

Unfortunately for all of us, the first response posted by Cartouche Bee included some information that was missleading if not completely false. The option to release a pangaea map that would include only 50-45% water would not substantially alter or diminish game play and saying such a thing just suppresses the ability for others to look more closely at these issues. Yes, more land will support the potential for high scores on a map but our process will normalize this out and drawing comparisons between this process and HOF games has no place here.

Remember that these polls are methods for collecting inputs into the process that will be used to guide implementation of potential changes that may be necessary to support some bigger picture issues. Please do not interpret these polls as a "vote" because no one wins in a vote when even one person is not in the final solution.

Nothing that will be implemented in the GOTMs for 2003 will do anything to diminish the opportunities for more people to play the games as part of an experience community of players. We want people to play these games even if they are not Warlord or Deity and to expect new challenges in the Civ3 game at least within the limits and expectations of the Sid Meier legacy. There are dimensions of the standard game that most players have not yet explored on their own. There will be some new things in the coming year and we will need to proceed cautiously and cooperatively to keep our sense of perspective. This is supposed to be a fun and challenging set of game events played within an open and exciting community of players.

 

[Cartouche Bee]

Moderator action:
Release of information under review in the staff forum is not allowed because it may distort views by sharing items that still require further investigation.

Because this can be disruptive of all processes. A second deliberate release of information of this type will require stronger action.

 

[Gen. Maximus]

If we are too add more land % for the map, please put more unfavorable terrain like mountains/hills/tundra/desert to make it less milkable. I hate to see milked games coz I never have the patience for it! But maybe just one fine day...