World Size and Land Mass

[Cyc]

In previous discussions, it was more or less determined that this first Revival Game should not be made too large or to run for too long, but just to get back into the swing of things.

A Pangaea on a Standard size Map was the initial solution. This would keep the game fun and operational in DG terms, but not get too top heavy towards the end.

What are your thoughts?

 

[DaveShack]

Standard size sounds good to me. Either continents or pangaea would be OK.

It's been a while since I've played C3C, gonna have to find the disk.

 

[Furiey]

Standard sounds good, either pangea or continents would be fine. Continents would encourage us to have a navy.

I've got to not just find the disc but re-install Civ this weekend as I've finally upgraded my PC from ME to XP.

 

[donsig]

Yeah, continents. Lots of 'em.

 

[Nobody]

i like contients, standard or bigger

 

[GenMarshall]

Standard on a Contentent land mass.

It's been a while since I've played C3C, gonna have to find the disk.

You and me both.

 

[Falcon02]

I lean towards Pangaea, but Continents are okay

 

[civplayah]

I lean towards Pangaea, but Continents are okay

Same here. I also like Fantasy World, although I've never figured out what's the difference.

 

[Cyc]

It's basically 5 to 5. Pangaea to Continents.

I have never really been one to build a navy (well, there was the WWII scenario). Other than a galley or A caravel to explore, plant a city. So I'm not seeing the advantage of a smaller land mass. Why would having smaller, thinner pieces of land be better to develop a nation on? Clue me in. Why are Continents better than Pangaea?

 

[DaveShack]

Continents add mystery to the game. You don't have quick contact with everyone, and don't know what's going on with the other continent's tech speed and development. Sometimes the first you hear of a wonder is when the other continent completes it. There's more of a variety of things to build -- who builds ships on pangaea? With no ships you don't have stories about ships and sailors, no intrepid voyagers risking their lives crossing ocean in a galley, no need to research <whatever tech it is> to enable ocean trading.

Continents gives the whole game experience.

Small land mass can be avoided by using 60% water.

 

[Falcon02]

Pangaea made the Great Domino War of DG1 possible

 

[mickyd47]

I agree with DaveShack about continents adding mystery to the game. Not sure about land mass though.

 

[civplayah]

Same here. I also like Fantasy World, although I've never figured out what's the difference.

Sorry, this is CIVIII.
I think that Archipelago is even more mysterious than Continents. If we want mystery and a challenging game, I'd say that we should go with Archipelago.

 

[Black_Hole]

I would prefer continents to pangea. I kinda like have a little navy.

 

[malaywarrior]

we could try archipelago, adds a challenge with building an empire..across various islands.
if continents vs. pangaea, i would go with continents with the same reasons above =D

 

[Cyc]

Ok, it looks like we are shifting towards Continents. I'm going to put up a Land Mass poll. It appears we only have one suggestion of going larger than a Standard Map. So for now, we'll leave that as our decision. If I am wrong, please let me know.

 

[Hasdrubal Barca]

Pangea = Borders and Borders = War

 

[El Justo]

continents for me i like navies

 

[Cyc]

El Justo, please be sure and go to the Poll sub-forum and vote on these issues. We need your votes.

 

[El Justo]

done & done