Posts: 2,062
Threads: 4
Joined: Aug 2020
I don't like these artificial land bridges between players much. Ancient war is typically unprofitable as is. PB56 was a bit of an exception because it was so cramped.
Maintenance cost difference between Emperor and Monarch is not significant enough to agonize over the choice.
Posts: 6,680
Threads: 44
Joined: Nov 2019
(May 12th, 2021, 08:22)civac2 Wrote: I don't like these artificial land bridges between players much. Ancient war is typically unprofitable as is. PB56 was a bit of an exception because it was so cramped.
Maintenance cost difference between Emperor and Monarch is not significant enough to agonize over the choice.
Especially if we move closer to 120 tiles per player I don't think formal land bridges should become standard. Not saying they aren't nice sometimes, but as always map maker do things and stuff.
This is a noob me talking, but isn't the happy difference a bigger deal than the research cost / maintenance / civac costs.
Posts: 2,062
Threads: 4
Joined: Aug 2020
There isn't any happiness difference.
Nice typo
Posts: 8,599
Threads: 92
Joined: Oct 2017
(May 12th, 2021, 08:06)Tarkeel Wrote: I said earlier that the concept I'm working on is based on PB58, which as far as I can tell has been liked by all the players. In the interest of fairness I'm reposting some of my praise for the map from my spoiler thread; there aren't anything here that will be a spoiler for the current state of the game. I'm not saying that all of these will be part of this map though!
(April 14th, 2021, 13:42)Tarkeel Wrote: Map Musings- The main contact points against neighbors were long, slender landbridges with jungle, making for stable early borders
- Having a large backline against the centre-spine to expand into, making early wars less profitable
- Meeting along the spine opened up more contacts, but there are still relatively few east-west passages
- Everyone had easy early access to copper, the main defensive resource, while ivory was early and secure
- Iron and horses, the offensive resources, were only available later on, limiting early rushes
If anyone has any special requests for the map, now is the time to make them. So far I have the feeling that everyone wants a game that won't be dominated by ancient era wars, while not becoming too large. I also get the feeling that none of you particularly want "cute stuff" like pre-placed barbarians or improvements.
I'm not really comfortable selecting the difficulty, but with barbs off I'd lean into Emperor if forced to select. Don't forget that colosseums in CtH reduces WW, and I did propose to lower the costs of jails, which should make it more manageable but still a factor.
So long as we have at least slightly more food than that wasteland, ill be happy.
"Superdeath seems to have acquired a rep for aggression somehow. In this game that's going to help us because he's going to go to the negotiating table with twitchy eyes and slightly too wide a grin and terrify the neighbors into favorable border agreements, one-sided tech deals and staggered NAPs."
-Old Harry. PB48.
Posts: 8,293
Threads: 83
Joined: Oct 2009
Yeah map sounds good. I don't like early conflict and land grabbing because it can knock you out of the game before it really begins.
@ Civac, on map making in general: The alternative to land bridges is to just have undesirable terrain between civs. Desert, jungle, peaks, plains, low food etc.
Posts: 8,293
Threads: 83
Joined: Oct 2009
Nobody answered if we are using CTH. I'm out of this is vanilla.
May 12th, 2021, 14:22
(This post was last modified: May 12th, 2021, 14:23 by Mjmd.)
Posts: 6,680
Threads: 44
Joined: Nov 2019
(May 10th, 2021, 23:35)Mjmd Wrote: Ok, as has become standard in games I play: A SPREADSHEET!
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1...edit#gid=0
I did include a size vote, but I would prefer not to get too large, as trying for a faster game. On the other hand something about being warrior rushed still lingers in my brain
edit: I also included map type, but as map makers usually don't follow it, don't expect too much!
edit x2: Mod version CtH fyi
Yes CtH. I'm fine with slightly less desirable terrain. Or put floodplains in between!
Posts: 8,293
Threads: 83
Joined: Oct 2009
Thanks, sorry I missed that.
Posts: 4,572
Threads: 31
Joined: Nov 2016
(May 12th, 2021, 13:43)superdeath Wrote: So long as we have at least slightly more food than that wasteland, ill be happy.
What do you mean, wasteland? (Almost) Every city has a food resource.
(May 12th, 2021, 14:19)Jowy Wrote: Yeah map sounds good. I don't like early conflict and land grabbing because it can knock you out of the game before it really begins.
@ Civac, on map making in general: The alternative to land bridges is to just have undesirable terrain between civs. Desert, jungle, peaks, plains, low food etc.
The other alternative is to have no clear border areas, line in PB56. *shudder*
Posts: 2,062
Threads: 4
Joined: Aug 2020
(May 12th, 2021, 14:53)Tarkeel Wrote: The other alternative is to have no clear border areas, line in PB56. *shudder*
That's how it should be. Then the players can come to a mutually acceptable compromise or have a proper knife fight over the border area. Either way works fine.
|