Yes you can! I'lll start making the map as soon as I know the number of players. In the mean time, all players are welcome to give their specifications, wishes, etc. for the map.
|
Civ5 PBEM 5 Organizing Thread
|
|
Ok sign-ups are still open until Sunday, but I think we could start voting on the settings
Speed: any objections to quick? Ancient Ruins: on/off Barbs: on/off/raging Civs: ban preferences/no bans? Civ pick: snake pick/random with rerolls/random without rerolls/other? Religion: ban Desert Folklore? May not be necessary on a custom-made map City states number: default/higher/lower? City states: ban Worker steals? Anything I forgot that's worth discussing? 
Wall of text incoming.
I have some very strong feelings about what the map should look like. I have played in two Civ 5 PBEM games on this site, and both were determined by the map. In both cases, despite my solid play, the game was decided on the other side of the world before I could do anything about it (Civ 5 PBEM 1, Civ 5 PBEM 2). Both were really unrewarding experiences, and I would like to do everything to avoid that here. So, these are my very strongly felt map requests. I would like everyone's input on them as well, as I am but one of 6(?) players 1. Natural Feeling Cliche at this point, but. I hate gimmicks. No spokes on a wheel, nothing like that. I want something that feels like the one of the map scripts in the base game could have generated it. 2. Mirrored-ish Starts Terrain doesn't matter as much in Civ5, but I still have some requests on this front. As an aside, we need to conduct the civ-picking (more on that later) before the map gets finished. Each start will have to be slightly tailored to allow civs with a terrain centric bonus (Celts) to get to do shit. Here's what I expect from each start: 1. River 2. 3-4 luxury resources at the start/within settlign range 3. A 6 iron 4. A 4 Horses 5. No jungle, or intermittant jungle 6. No Natural wonders 3. No super lush centers I've seen some talk here of encouraging early aggression by knocking down defensive terrain and encouraging people to rush the center of the map. So, at this point we've seen time and time again, you can put good shit in contested territory, but don't make it an auto-win for whoever gets there first (What was that game with deserts and 4 oasises?). This is especially critical in Civ 5 because you can't walk into undefended pink dots, they defend themselves. Possession is 99% of the law in this game. See PBEM23 (one of RB's best maps ever imho) and it's islands and jungled areas for a map that put enough shit out to encourage settling towards the other players, but not enough to give you a win for getting there first. With that in mind, I would suggest designing the map along these lines: In the center, put some jungle and rivers (And to be clear, not all jungle and rivers). The idea here is that you have to put in lots of worker turns to turn thisinto productive riverside farms or tech turns and production to get to universities for +2 science. Put 2-3 unique luxuries, and perhaps a natural wonder (towards the center-ish). The bottomline is nice bonuses, not 3 plains salts or something absurd like that. Between players, place additional horses, iron, maybe another copy of local luxury resource. Boom, enough stuff for players to compete over without giving the win to someone 4a. Map needs to support as many different civ picks as possible And 4b. Map needs to allow players to access each other This is especially critical if we do a random draws for civs. We need a map that allows maritime civs (Ottomans, Polynesians, Indonesians, etc.) to thrive. Additionally, we need players to be able to get to each other. To accomplish the first aim I would suggest one of the following: 1. Six-player pangaea with decent-sized offshore islands (accessible pre-astronomy) each with a unique luxury resource. 2. Two three-player continents that can access each other pre-astronomy, alongside the same decent-sized offshore islands with unique luxury resources. Of the two, I prefer the latter, as it gives incentive to play Civ5's naval game (one of the stronger aspects vs. Civ 4 imho), and allows players to more easily access someone who threatened to runaway with things. Having offshore islands gives Indonesia a place to settle for spices, and gives the Ottomans somewhere where barb ships can spawn. Two continents, allowing for a focus on naval play but not priveleging it over being strong on land, allow a civ like England to do well. And so on, and so forth. As far as "encouraging aggression," just make sure there are no overlong mountain ranges that prevent players from getting at each other. Other than that, I wouldn't worry about it. 5. Be careful with city-state placement Need to be included in the game based on how many civs derive their strength from them. I also like them as a point of contention between otherwise placid players. The key thing is to make sure that nobody has exclusive access to a city-state, or if they do that it's not an especially strong one. For example, if we were to have 12 city-states for 6 players, I would suggest about halfway between each of the players on the coast, place a mercantile/cultural. On offshore islands, perhaps between the player luxury islands, place a less desirable one (religious/militaristic/maritime), although still ideally in an area where boats from both players can reach it (perhaps linking off of luxury islands and between two). 6.Be careful with natural wonders Ordinarily a big cause for concern because Spain. But I think we should just outright ban Spain this game. If this is the case, I leave it to mapmaker's discretion regarding how they want to integrate natural wonders. I would recommend nowhere near your start. Good places might include, one in the center of the continent(s), in the culture of city states, on the offshore luxury islands). No El Dorado or Fountain of Youth Alright, that about covers my requests for the map. Let's now talk about settings: Speed: Quick, especially with 6 players. Ancient Ruins: On (Shoshone) Barbs: On (Germany, Incentivize Honor) Civ bans.....I'll get to this below Civ Pick: Random with 2 rerolls. Going first in turn order is not sufficient to make up for being last to pick a civ. I don't want people stuck with something they don't want to play, but I also can't imagine getting 3 civs in a row that I would have no interest in playing out. The argument in favor of choosing would be that it A. Gets people more invested in the game (eh, does it really?) and B. We don't have enough experience to know what's strong or not so picking first doesn't confer any great advantage (although people can just look online for idea if they don't have the experience. Also important to note yet again, civs must be chosen before the map is finalized. Religion: I trust our mapmaker to not allow for a huge expanse of flood plains where Desert Folklore will be a "Win Now" button. City-States: 6-12, mapmaker preference depending on what the final map looks like. City States 2: Worker stealing has a consequence in game, if people want to do it let them. Nothing I can think of off the top of my head. Wait, what about DLC civs, allowed, not? (Denmark, Spain, Inca, Polynesia, Korea, Babylon) Alrighty, Civs Ban: Huns - Just no, they either win big early or lose big early. Not very fun for a game like this imho. Also battering rams don't have strong counterplay. Mongolia - Fuck this. Like Byzantium in Civ 4. Counterplay is kill them early, screw them for production. Keshiks are incredibly annoying to play against and I don't trust people to not get run over by them. Spain - Worst. Designed. Civ. Ever. Just no. I think that takes out everyone who would make the game unrewarding to play.
Woah, that was a lot of text =) In random order:
1) Regarding the choice of civs - since the power differences are huge in civ 5 I suggest the standard FFA method of each player banning 1-2 civs and then randomly assigning 3 civs to each player to choose from after seeing their start. Everyone get the chance to ban their least favorites and the less common civs actually see play. 2) DLC - they do not give anything crucial and most civs they give are not suitable for competitive play but I have no strong opinion on them. 3) How much map knowledge do you want beforehand, how much do you want to leave to exploration? 4) Starts - I would prefer to make general starts and avoid any tailoring for certain civs and leave the players with a choice of civs after seeing their starts. 5) Natural feeling - I completely agree if you can live with that it might take some extra time. I think that assymetry is important for a natural feeling but it's easier to balance mirrored starts/maps. 6) Super lush centre vs. cap/starting area - My intention is mainly to make capitals equal to the rest of the terrain to avoid the boring trad, everything int the cap play. In a FFA the central, hard to defend places need to be worth going liberty or 5 city tradition for. Not anything crazy like the 4 oasis game. I agree that islands need something enticing as well. The heavy jungle idea seems a bit weak as you get jungles rolling quite late, often after you have stopped settling, there needs to be a fair amount of other bonii to be able to get that university up in reaonable time. 7) Land/naval - I would try to make navies important while also avoiding too narrow chokepoints as are sometimes found on scripts like fractal.
Also, if anyone wants a SP challenge I recommend Ackens mod: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=550671. It greatly improves balance and AI capabilities while remaining recognisably the same game. I helped playtest/brainstorm it and agree with 90% of the changes if you want to know my standpoint on balance.
|
