Okay, so this map is based on a modification of Seven's mirror script that is sized to be 32x32. There is a decent amount of water, but it is under the circumnavigation number. I added a decent amount of food, so the map is more food friendly than 43 has turned out. I've also made numerous minor edits differently in each player's part of the map (i.e., if there were 4 forests in a square, i would delete a different forest for each player) to add an element of difference while retaining very even overall map fairness. The start positions are offset, so each player should have a decent chance of encountering all 3 other players over land.
Break it and tell me where I messed up so it can be made better.
Novice tool analyzation results:
Total map unfairness (standard deviation in weighted land quality): 7
Player 0
Lincoln of Mali
170 land tiles.
(105 grass, 48 plains, 6 deserts, 10 tundra, 1 snow. 56 forests, 10 jungles, 1 flood plains, 1 oasis. 52 hills.)
2224.0 total land quality.
8.86 average land quality.
474.5 total food potential.
1.89 food per non-ocean tile.
226.0 total hammer potential.
0.90 hammers per non-ocean tile.
362.0 total commerce potential.
81 coastal tiles.
1 ocean tiles.
9 strategic resources (1 uranium, 1 stone, 1 coal, 1 horse, 2 oil, 1 copper, 1 aluminum, 1 iron).
10 happy resources (1 sugar, 1 silver, 1 incense, 1 gold, 1 wine, 1 whale, 1 spices, 1 fur, 1 dye, 1 gems).
26 food resources (3 fish, 3 clam, 1 deer, 1 corn, 1 sugar, 2 rice, 4 crab, 4 pig, 1 whale, 1 banana, 2 sheep, 1 wheat, 2 cow).
27 health resources (3 fish, 3 clam, 1 deer, 1 corn, 1 sugar, 2 rice, 4 crab, 4 pig, 1 wine, 1 banana, 1 spices, 2 sheep, 1 wheat, 2 cow).
I assume all of the unnatural resource/tile combinations are done on purpose?
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.
Well it's hard to screw up a mirrored map. Took a look anyway:
* Practically meaningless, but there are two city ruins N of the Malinese start's horse/banana pair. (Probably a misclick.)
* Early expansion to the north seems more difficult than in other directions. Maybe unjungle the banana and lengthen that river segment 1S, so banana and horse are riverside? Nothing too drastic.
(November 17th, 2012, 23:17)Kuro Wrote: Given the lurker thread...does anybody agree with my assessment on the Furs?
As a tile to work I would barely prefer the camped furs to a river grass cottage:
Base tile yield of riverside grass hill fur (1/1/2) is about equal to a riverside grassland (2/0/1). Cottage I estimate as an improvement worth approximately 2.5 commerce, so just 0.5c worse than the camp which is worth 3c. FIN bonus is a wash since it applies to both.
More important are the required tech (hunting might be out of the way, but could also lead conveniently into AH as the first two techs; I'm not sure), and the fact that the furs are +1 happy.
![[Image: 9zBaO.jpg]](http://i.imgur.com/9zBaO.jpg)
Took a look anyway:
