(October 26th, 2012, 21:09)Qgqqqqq Wrote: Having rolled a few now, I stand by my statement about LOTS of land per player.
WHether that is what you want or not, up to you.
Krill and I are also of the opinion that Large/Low is probably a better setting. If you guys insist on Huge, you'll get it, but a smaller map looks a lot nicer.
(October 26th, 2012, 21:09)Qgqqqqq Wrote: Having rolled a few now, I stand by my statement about LOTS of land per player.
WHether that is what you want or not, up to you.
eh, we must have a different opinion on what lots is. like I said, 11 players is the default for huge in SP - and I usually add more ais than the size calls for in SP, heh.
Please don't go. The drones need you. They look up to you.
(October 26th, 2012, 21:09)Qgqqqqq Wrote: Having rolled a few now, I stand by my statement about LOTS of land per player.
WHether that is what you want or not, up to you.
Krill and I are also of the opinion that Large/Low is probably a better setting. If you guys insist on Huge, you'll get it, but a smaller map looks a lot nicer.
this is fine with me, then. I assume yall have a reason for that preference.
Please don't go. The drones need you. They look up to you.
(October 26th, 2012, 21:15)Commodore Wrote: Large/Low is best.
heh. why is your spoiler thread a poll?
Also just realized that with the new forum software you can't see the first few sentences of a thread by hovering over it. Sad that I can see everyone's witty opening post :/
Please don't go. The drones need you. They look up to you.
Hey, are we still doing the "worst leader/civ gets best starting location" (after edits) and vice-a-versa? I thought we were, but Mardoc just informed me that he thought we were not.
Even if I wasn't Augustus of Arabia, I would be in favor of it.
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.
No, that balancing was only proposed as an alternative to the mod. People voted in favor of the mod instead.
On map size yeah, that's the thing. Though it's not like we picked our leaders based on the size. More like I don't think the players can really judge it fairly at this point. Probably best to just let Mardoc decide.