Destruction of Foes (DoF) - Diplogame Light

[St Jon]

Why such utter contempt for the idea of doing a real world map?

Some of us are bored of playing the exact same kind of random map we've been playing for 5 years straight.

I don't view your ideas with 'utter contempt' but simply fail to see what you wish to achieve here that will lead to a better game experience for all of those involved.

I am deeply suspicious of your 'colonist' ideal which lay behind DoC. It was wonderful for those who had access to those continents that lay open but was a nightmare for someone like me stuck in the middle.

A strict European or Mediterranean map requires it to be flat unless you have colonisation as your aim once again. Neither scenario appeals to me for the following reasons.

1. Flat Maps are a thing of the past, thankfully, and always leave at least four players with one utterly safe border. Don't get me wrong, I loved being stuck in a corner back then as it was a wonderful place to go for all out conquest right from the start. Sad, they have not stood the test of time.

2. Colonisation based on a European or Mediterranean map would be outrageously unfair with, nominally, 14 players. Europe cannot support that many nations, regardless of how big the map is, anyway! When we come to the actual expansion into new lands you leave a very large number of people out in the cold whilst others will simply disappear into glory. Possibly, you might fit 14 into a Mediterranean map but the results are identical.

I would oppose all of this far more strongly if it were a full Diplo but, at least, here annihilation is allowed; but not until 1000AD. Here, also, you have the problem that there is no such thing as a 'measured war' where we all kiss and make up. I can just persistently attack my neighbour until 1000AD so that by that time they are so weak and feeble they will fall like a sleeping cow. Chances are that I will have driven them out of the game by that time anyway due to being in an utterly hopeless situation. If you are stuck in the centre there is no other way to deal with the problem than war.

Now, please do sell me the advantages of what you propose.

[LzPrst]

The mediterranean has the advantage that it creates a lot of geographically separated areas with natural borders. The high frequency of rugged terrain, rivers and mountain passes will give defence a slight advantage. A good way to do it is to place civs in areas where the core is easily defendable and they can fight over open ground which several civs have access to. Here is a quick suggestion of possible starting places. I found 13 logical starts marked with red circles, but was a bit uncertain regarding the 14th. I made 4 different suggestions marked with blue circles.


Note that mountains will be used to create mountain passes, the rivers I have put on the map should be water 1 tile-wide in order to make crossing a difficult process. The occasional wading point would make ships very practical yet not a necessity. Unless a player is truly incompetent then defending his core lands should be reasonably easy. The border provinces however would be easier to lose and gain, hopefully creating a lot of dynamic fighting over overlapping easily conquerable territory, and ensuring that a civ would require considerable effort to wipe out. Regarding your complaints St.Jon:
1. Though some civs are in a corner here they all have at least 2 neighbours that should be able to challenge them. In addition, the ocean rivers as well as the easily sailable mediterranean would allow colonial outposts, sea raids, and expeditionary forces sent to deal with powerful civs at some distance away. The increased ship movement mod may be appropriate.
2. There would be no age of exploration on a flat map, however, there would be possibilities for early to mid game colonization, races to grab various islands, inaccessible or low-value terrain and inland river-coast cities.

Some areas with mostly hills would not likely be settled until at least the advent of Machinery. Other areas could be made near-worthless until the development of civil service, or the discovery of clustered resources that would make for good cities only after the discovery of coal or other tech. A minor mod making Corn discoverable with Astronomy could lead to new races to settle previously infertile lands. These are all ideas and examples.

What advantages are there to this? First of all a pre-made map would be more balanced than a random one. Second of all, I think it would be interesting to play a real location with all the advantages and disadvantages stemming from it. The great thing with the mediterranean is that due to the prevalence of peninsulas and map-edited sailable rivers, no civ has to be stuck on central flat land and forced to fight their way out. Everyone can build a ship, sail down the river and plonk out cities on foreign coasts or undiscovered islands or on some other riverbank.

[Inca (DoE)]

I don't see any pictures, but that sounds good. Flat maps do give corner players an advantage, but if they're no script-based, then natural barriers for all players should reduce this advantage. I know you guys are anti-tiering, but letting weaker players take the corners can further help.

1-tile rivers is a great thing, I like to do it as well on my maps.

[OzzyKP]

Awesome post Lz. Very good ideas and placement too. I hadn't considered the navigable rivers, but you're right, that's a great idea. Also having corn show up after astronomy is a great idea too. And, as long as we are making a mod, we could have rice show up too. (or I could create a potato resource instead). I like Inca's idea of putting weaker players in the corner if that's a balance concern. I like your 5 & 6, having a Hungary and Bulgaria could be pretty neat for certain diplo regulars.

As for the 14th civ, I'd definitely say we should create an Israel. That'd be very cool. Also, I'm a bit concerned about Spain & France having too much land to themselves. Perhaps removing the civ from the Caucasus and making Portugal would help balance things. Have Spain start further east so they would (hopefully) contest southern France.

But yea, this looks fantastic. I'm excited!

[Inca (DoE)]

Yeah, there are a ton of extra resources in some mods like RoM. I know AND has potatoes, tobacco, hemp, apples, lemons, coffee, cotton, olives, pearls, salt, shrimp, and tea, and strategic resources like lead and obsidian. Adding the strat resources is probably pointless, though, save to add hammer-rich tiles (perhaps obsidian can be a happiness resource with a hammer/commerce mix as it is both a gem of sorts and also can be used for productive purposes). I don't recall it being very difficult to take resources out of a mod like that and create a small resource mod with them. Apples, berries, pears, and such make more sense as "renaissance techs", as that is roughly when they were cultivated in reality (due to relative difficulties in cultivating them versus grains, etc). They shouldn't be as +food as grains, etc, but if you place them in otherwise marginal areas in decent quantities, they'll make the areas settleable. A lot of them are really more +commerce resources than +food, as I'm not sure berries really add too much to the food supply, but they make for expensive crops. More like the wine resource +1food, +4com or something like that.

But adding extra resources is great. You can make regions more unique/realistic, and the AND sea resources make coastal locations better, which is more realistic, and basically adds more usable tiles to the map.

Making some resources like corn/coffee/rice appear post-Astronomy would make sense. It would give people a reason to go after Astronomy, as it's a good bit less useful in an "inland sea" map than usual. Where to put them is the difficult part, as they don't really get cultivated in Europe.

Yeah, "rivers" like this are nice:

XXXXXXXXXXXXXX
~~~~~XXXXXXXX
xXXXXX~~~~~~~~
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

You can settle a city in one of the middle squares, and the river remains navigable, allows the settling civ to control access up/down stream, and gives you a crossing point as well. It's fairly realistic for larger rivers, as then ships can move from the sea/ocean into the heart of the continent, and it makes for really great strategic cities. The more strategic locations you can create, the more interesting and complex the game gets.

[Calanthian]

Guys,

the ideas concerning the map sound very good indeed.
The Med map, the extra resources, the navigable rivers: great!
I am really motivated to compete..

On the corners:
it would be good to give the players in the 4 corners an extra small challenge:

* a slightly less appealing starting position with more late game resources and less early game ones..
OR * fixed civilisation characteristics: e.g. CRE and PRO, no FIN
OR * civs with NO special early UU (e.g. Americans)
OR * set goals per civilisation
OR * the above mentioned weaker players in the corner

[LzPrst]

This is strange... I can't see the map in firefox (also logged in with another 'poly account), but it shows well here in chrome...
I will try again:

http://apolyton.net/attachment.php?attachmentid=168834

[Calanthian]

When is the game due to start?
It seems we have the players and we are close to a map decision so let's start

I am ready for a lot of in-character action ..


PS.
If we decide for a mediterranean map a lot of inspiration can be found in the "The Ancient Mediterranean" maps.
Hell, we might even decide to play the Ancient Mediterranean mod itself (this one is good!).

wwwdotmoddbdotcom/mods/the-ancient-mediterranean
(on these maps the Romans really do have a chance..)


PS
(replace "dot" with ".". I wasn't allowed to post the link otherwise)

[Calanthian]

LzPrst: I can't see your maps either..

[LzPrst]

one. more. try.

[Inca (DoE)]

I can see!

Let's do it already!

[2metraninja]

I start to change my mind about preferences for a random or real map.
Yes, the map looks good and Hungary and Bulgaria would be great, although a bit spoilerish about their players.

Lately I finished 2 time consuming pitbosses and nothing special happens around me in the other 3 games I am in, so come on Robert, lets get this thing moving!

[Robert Plomp]

Do we have a consensus?

[2metraninja]

I think we do. Only 1 other guy I think was against the real world map. Sorry - forgot who exactly.

Who will made the Mediterranean map? Looks like a lot of job to be done, but it has the potential of becoming a masterpiece.

[Inca (DoE)]

Perhaps this Europe will get made in time to replace the smoldering ashes of the current Europe?

[St Jon]

I have no desire to play on a map of this kind - one that I know in advance or flat - nor with additional rules concerning seeding which simply add complexity for minuscule gain. Count me out.

[Calanthian]

Count me IN!

Really like the map.

All numbered civs can be filled with actual ancient civs..
The map of "The Ancient Mediterranean" mod is a very good one for this..
Maybe that one can be adapted..

[Calanthian]

Look at the attachments..

[2metraninja]

I think the map is somewhat OK, but I am against all those new races, resources and most important - technologies. Lets just play the good'ol Civ4 BTS. It will take some time to try and understand those new techs and units and who can guarantee that the mod is well balanced? It sounds interesting, but just dont know....

[Inca (DoE)]

Personally, I'd like to see a bunch of new resources (that have the same properties as preexisting ones or are weaker). But, then, I could go through a laundry list of things I'd like to see changed (walls being effective for all units, eg), and there's no way 13 other people are going to agree with me

And adding a mod to the game is going to ensure no one is going to get into agreement in the next 3 months unless it's a very basic mod (like we did in DoE).

Then again, new resources (if balanced) aren't very earth-shattering, and I assume we're doing some mod, if not solely for great people names

[OzzyKP]

Actually, yea, I agree with Inca. "New resources" I think would be great just for flavor reasons. Perhaps replace bananas with olives (exact same stats). Perhaps replace rice with... barley or something. Etc. Things like that purely for flavor reasons, but keep all the stats exactly the same so it won't affect balance.

I am against any new techs, and I am against that list of new civs, I think we should play stock civs as much as possible, however it won't always be possible. I think we will need a new Hungarian, Bulgarian and Israeli civ. Those are pre-made, we can all tweak the settings to ensure they are balanced. I think it would enhance the game greatly and be a fairly simple, balanced change.

[Inca (DoE)]

Since we never see leaderheads in-game, and since people can change the name attributes of their civs (or you could do that pregame), I'm not sure we even need new civs. Here's my suggestion, and I know at least most of these already have artwork done in other mods like Med and RoM/AND.

Suggested resources:

Health/food

Olives +1F/+1C, plantation: +1F/+2C +1Health (Med mod)
Barley +1F, farm: +1F +1Health (??)
Peas +1F, farm: +1F, fresh water: +1F +1Health (??)
Salt +1C, mine: +1H/+3C +1Health (Med/AND)

Happiness/commerce

Amber +1C, mine: +1H/+3C +1 (Med)
Honey +1C, camp: +1F/+2C +1 (Med)

Trade/production

Papyrus +1H/+1C, farm: +1H/+2C, paper: +2C (Med)
Flax/Hemp (Flemp) +1H/+1C, farm: +1H/+2C (Med)

[Germany (DoE)]

We've waited so long I'd be happy to wait further for a fully customized game, including significant mods.

I prefer Earth to Mediterranean and agree with some of Jon's points but am inclined to follow the inspiration and vision of ozzy and others - we need something different!

[Calanthian]

* I can imagine your position.

But I'd like to add that TAM is a fully fledged, well balanced mod on a good map:
tam dot ancient dot eu dot com (change " dot " with ".")

I'd prefer an existing, tested mod versus making a mod ourselves.


Proposal (as I don't see us agreeing on TAM):
1) * change existing map (TAM or other) with navigable rivers

2) * use existing civs

3) * maybe add an Moroccan / Mauretan civ (E) in leftcorner, or place Arabs there

4) * give players total freedom upon civ name etc..

5) * position civs based upon number of players who are competing.
As having AI's will surely debalance a game with corners.
(Unless all have similar chances to attack an AI > which would only be possible with Rome (4) and Byzantium (9) )

[2metraninja]

5) * position civs based upon number of players who are competing.

Agree.

And I think we will not have AIs at all, atleast not intentionally.

[Inca (DoE)]

The problem with using a new mod is that players that have no experience with it are at a significant disadvantage compared to those who do. It is likely that poorer players will also have a harder time adjusting than "good" players, further increasing the skill gaps.

Given that there is no tiering and it's a far more competitive game than the full diplos, weaker players and those new to MP shouldn't be having curveballs thrown at them. I agree with making an "easy" map that gives players a good chance at staying secure for a long time with "hard" areas for the expansive/good players. I think adjusting/modding for a more defensive game will help the weaker players. Stuff like castles/walls working against gunpowder (or being slightly stronger +10% each, eg), making defensive units (LBs, CBs, muskets, MGs, etc) a bit cheaper in hammers also would help, or making CG promotions 5% more per. Perhaps all of that together would overbalance towards defense (but then a good siege can be devastating long-term), but it's a "light mod" (as are new resources) that doesn't require too drastic a change, is easy to adjust to (be more defensive) for weak players (who would be defensive to begin with), and still lets the strongest players dominate (as turtling is a fairly short-term solution; longbows don't hold up well against cavalry).

New mods are nice, but I don't want to spend a few weeks learning the ins and outs. If others want it (I am new to this community, so I am not used to playing MP, so stock BtS is still "new" for me), I won't complain any further. Just airing concerns here. I'm still grappling with BtS I'm sure TAM is balanced and well-tested, but there are still concerns with a full mod.

[Calanthian]

As I said:

I don't see us agreeing on TAM

so let's drop that topic; i give up


>> can we start voting on preferences, and then decide on the map/civ positions, so we get this thing moving?

>> who is still in?

[dot80]

I am

[Toni]

I am still in.

Did I read somewhere right that someone proposed that we rotate civs? I would very much prefer to start with my civ and end with it.

[Robert Plomp]

Is this still diplo light?
using mods is not really light. neither is using tiers....!