(June 14th, 2013, 17:58)NobleHelium Wrote: I thought about making a comment about the American concept of Rangers versus the British one but I didn't really know what the British version is actually referring to, so yeah.
Rangers in the UK means either Glasgow Rangers or QPR, a football team in London.
So, discussed with Seven what the problem with the map script is, and it turns out that the waterways setting produces different types of lakes and seas than is normal on the Mirrorland map script, which was the basis for Torusworld. Wish I'd known that at the start, but oh well. The more interesting point is that Seven said the map script is actually intended to be a base for a map maker to then go and edit, rather than a standalone method of generated a balanced but random map, which wasn't my understanding at all.
So yeah, Brick, no worries about the map, you are right that a totally random map is what we asked for, and it was my misunderstanding on just how balanced the waterways setting actually is that lead to this happening. At least we know now that we still need map makers, so Commodore isn't out of a job Seven is currently thinking baout ways to solve the problem of players having significantly less land ot expand into due to the extra seas. I have a couple of ideas, but I know that they are probably all worthless due to code necessities (like not taking 2 years to generate a single map).
Still, I wish Ceil hadn't decided to spoil the previous map
I know I probably can't persuade you, but I wish you would report, at least every few turns, this game. I think it might be more interesting to see how an expert player deals with a losing situation than a winning one. Think of it: the ultimate challenge! Even if you lose you will be praised!
And what is this "mailing in the turns"? Isn't that what everyone does? (Wait for it ...)
No chance to win with a quick alphastrike? [strikethrough](Have not yet read the most recent turn report).[/strikethrough]
You don't think that you will be successful in your war?
Merovech's Mapmaking Guidelines:
0. Player Requests: The player's requests take precedence, even if they contradict the following guidelines.
1. Balance: The map must be balanced, both in regards to land quality and availability and in regards to special civilization features. A map may be wonderfully unique and surprising, but, if it is unbalanced, the game will suffer and the player's enjoyment will not be as high as it could be.
2. Identity and Enjoyment: The map should be interesting to play at all levels, from city placement and management to the border-created interactions between civilizations, and should include varied terrain. Flavor should enhance the inherent pleasure resulting from the underlying tile arrangements. The map should not be exceedingly lush, but it is better to err on the lush side than on the poor side when placing terrain.
3. Feel (Avoiding Gimmicks): The map should not be overwhelmed or dominated by the mapmaker's flavor. Embellishment of the map through the use of special improvements, barbarian units, and abnormal terrain can enhance the identity and enjoyment of the map, but should take a backseat to the more normal aspects of the map. The game should usually not revolve around the flavor, but merely be accented by it.
4. Realism: Where possible, the terrain of the map should be realistic. Jungles on desert tiles, or even next to desert tiles, should therefore have a very specific reason for existing. Rivers should run downhill or across level ground into bodies of water. Irrigated terrain should have a higher grassland to plains ratio than dry terrain. Mountain chains should cast rain shadows. Islands, mountains, and peninsulas should follow logical plate tectonics.
(June 13th, 2013, 11:32)Old Harry Wrote: Sounds like a Rangers fan.
????
Football joke - Rangers fans are Huns - I thought Krill would get it but he seems too depressed.
oh, soccer.
there are two professional teams with the moniker "Rangers" in the US, a hockey team (NYC) and a baseball team (Dallas). I didn't think you would be familiar with either, hence my confusion.
Please don't go. The drones need you. They look up to you.
(June 14th, 2013, 18:53)Merovech Wrote: No chance to win with a quick alphastrike? [strikethrough](Have not yet read the most recent turn report).[/strikethrough]
You don't think that you will be successful in your war?
(June 14th, 2013, 18:53)Merovech Wrote: No chance to win with a quick alphastrike? [strikethrough](Have not yet read the most recent turn report).[/strikethrough]
You don't think that you will be successful in your war?
Warfare on quickspeed is impossible early game.
Care to elaborate? Not much experience with quickspeed.
Global lurker ; played in Civ VI PBEM 4, 5, 15; DL suboptimal Civ VI PBEM 17
Basically it's this: units move at the same speed, they heal at the same speed, but they cost less and they have less time to be productive in: a unit will take part in less battles whilst it is relevant on quick speed compared to normal speed because there are fewer turns between military techs, and between unit builds.
Another way to think of it is, per percentage unit of productive capacity, a unit can move fewer tiles. With some nice management, you can easily add a unit per turn into a city on quick speed. You're not punching through a competent player doing that.
Normal Speed and nerfed whipping makes it much more difficult to defend an attack, as you've seen in PB8.
Seven is currently thinking baout ways to solve the problem of players having significantly less land ot expand into due to the extra seas. I have a couple of ideas, but I know that they are probably all worthless due to code necessities (like not taking 2 years to generate a single map).
; played in Civ VI PBEM 4, 5, 15; DL suboptimal Civ VI PBEM 17
