I am getting P O'd here.....

[justjake73]

They OBVIOUSLY changed the map generator..and it SUCKS!!! I have NEVER had so many starting locations that are this poor - open desert, marsh, jungle, vast tracts of shieldless grassland, starts without a viable irrigation source in sight - and trying to find a LUXURY so your cities don't start RIOTING by 2000 BC is IMPOSSIBLE!! I want a PATCH TO FIX THIS ASAP!!!!!!!!!!!

[asleepathewheel]

Here's a pretty decent start I had recently on Emperor. There were three luxuries within easy settling distance and a fourth on the continent (2 large continents, 16 civs, raging barbs etc) and the kicker is that one of the luxes was...ivory. Fun map, two civs as neighbors with the dutch to the south building Amsterdam on a two tile isthmus.

Ctrl-shift-q is your friend, use it. It took me a few tries to get this one.



edit: I have the save if anyones interested, a great map that shows the power of the maya-barbs raging (one camp, unless it was respawned, can be blocked for farming purposes) and two weak civs, aztecs and dutch, all of the ancient resources within reach.

[mimi]

I thought that marshes were standard on all generated maps in Conquests. I start either in or within 4 squares of marsh EVERY SINGLE TIME... I just assumed this was how it was supposed to be? (At a wild guess I'd say I've started about 30 maps in Conquests, with everything set to the middle setting, or sometimes just random (and in the complete random cases, I'm ALWAYS near a volcano.)

I have to say that I dislke the new terrain types and don't really know why they were put in? They just add irritation and nothing particularly useful...

[RobC]

I've played hundreds of games, and on average, I've had much better starts in c3c than in PtW...

[DrSpike]

It's hard to say so far, but for me out of 4 starts 2 were hideous.

[vmxa1]

Too few games to make a statement, but so far they are pretty good, except for food bonus.

[MrWhereItsAt]

Re: I am getting P O'd here.....

Originally posted by justjake73
They OBVIOUSLY changed the map generator..and it SUCKS!!! I have NEVER had so many starting locations that are this poor - open desert, marsh, jungle, vast tracts of shieldless grassland, starts without a viable irrigation source in sight - and trying to find a LUXURY so your cities don't start RIOTING by 2000 BC is IMPOSSIBLE!! I want a PATCH TO FIX THIS ASAP!!!!!!!!!!!

Well the luxuries are more scarce in C3C - that was a design decision and not a bug. Change it in the editor if you like.

Not sure about the bad starts, but I have seen 2 out of 2 atrocious ones - not just for immediate land area but for growth potential too. Have not seen enough to judge however.

I see marshes as jungles that are easier to clear (I THINK). Just imagine if that was PtW and those were jungles and not marshes - they would take even LONGER to get rid of.

[Hagbart]

I'm very often (almost all the time) starting very close to the sea.

[TheArsenal]

Originally posted by Hagbart
I'm very often (almost all the time) starting very close to the sea.

I don’t think I’ve ever had a start where I couldn’t put a reasonably close second city on the sea (and I play Large maps mostly), and in most cases, my first city is less than 3 squares away from water. I’ve played a handful of starts in C3C and the results have been varied, but none too terrible. Of course, I now have changed the criteria to what is a “good” start based upon how close I am to ivory.

[alva]

I see marshes as jungles that are easier to clear (I THINK). Just imagine if that was PtW and those were jungles and not marshes - they would take even LONGER to get rid of.

I like it, it makes for a slower early game (and I have a hunch (no proof) that this will slightly benefit the human (worker action anyone) )

[Jaybe]

In the C3C editor, the appearance factors for resources are not any different from PTW, so it appears the meaning of the appearance factors have changed -- and they did NOT change the description in the editor help!

So I am ALSO P O'd!

[Forster]

I've started around 20 games so far, and I haven't counted, but I'll be damned if 18 didn't have bad to rotten starting locations. About half did not have a luxury near by (w/i 5 hexes). all but one did not have iron in my empire! I really don't think they have changed luxuries and resources for the better.

[Catt]

Originally posted by Jaybe
In the C3C editor, the appearance factors for resources are not any different from PTW, so it appears the meaning of the appearance factors have changed -- and they did NOT change the description in the editor help!

So I am ALSO P O'd!

I haven't done any independent exploration, but there is a very interesting new thread at CFC that at least has the patina of a comprehensive understanding of how the new resource distribution works. It is here.

Catt

[lockstep]

Thanks for the link, Catt!

BTW, it seems that the distribution of strategic resources in C3C comes very close to what was done in v1.17 of the AU mod.

[Fried-Psitalon]

No luxuries within 5 tiles and you consider this a great offense? Oh, that your civilization might have to actually search for something instead of having it handed to you? C'mon now. While luxuries are more scarce, starts are the same random beast as ever. Besides, the single player community has one rather hefty advantage as someone pointed out above: Ctrl/shft/q. If there was a problem with consistently bad starts, you'd hear about it over on the ladder forum in multiplayer land, where restarts aren't an option.... and while there's all kinds of groaning and moaning about scarcity of luxuries (and some say resources as well) no one's started a rant thread about overall starts yet.