MAP: Improved Huge Map of Earth

[Trifna]

Originally posted by satyajedi
Well, there's the iron in Northwest Italy, which I presumed would go to Rome but would also serve as some tension with France. Are you saying France is getting to that one first?

I updated 6.2 with two small corrections:

1) the creation of the canary islands was having a small unintended effect; the coastal spaces of the canaries and Haiti / DR were now close enough to be passed with a galley. Last time that happened, the computer AI was smart enough / badly programmed enough to cross the Atlantic and the new world was contacted before 500 BC. One of the 2 islands has been removed to make this impossible.

2) Fish were spead liberally throughout the world, because for whatever reason, 6.2 had no fishes.

Other than that, this is the same as 6.2

I would really like to come out with a definitive version to give to Firaxis and see if they'd use as the official world map. We're definately getting close to the point where we are so accurate, most of the suggested changes are opinions rather than improvements, and of course opinions can go on forever. ANyway, think they'd go for it?

-Satya

About fishies... Someone knows which places had espescially lot of fish? I know that the waters on east of Canada, around the islands, was very fishy for exemple.

[Alexandre Madeira]

Looks good.
Satya, I think you removed the canaries, they were just one island, the other one is Madeira (Yea, im named after an island, lol, not really, madeira = wood)

I added a few coal, +1 in India, Australia, W. Canada, Eastern Europe. Cause I read these countries have large production of coal.
Added one Iron in Germany so there's another good spot for a city to be able to build the Iron Works.

Thats it.

There's a river in W US, not connected to the Sea, is that the Grand Canyon?

Also, if you're changing some Civ's starting locations (particularly China), shouldnt we change the Capital name to go with the location change? I can agree with changing the Chinese starting location, but having Beijing in the middle of China is not good!

[warlon]

I added some rivers in northwestern Africa and added some fishies some places and removed them some other places, also Arabian Peninsula was changed a tad bit in the south regarding grasslands.

Other than that the one thing that is still a tad bit off-realism is the size of Australia. It is simply to small compared to Europe and other places for that matter. Australia should span from Northen Europe to the tip of Italy. and be ranging from France to Poland. Right now the size is just like central Europe. Also Greenland is a bit out of proportions in its size.

Below is the approximatly number cities that some nations can naturally support before they begin to start having sail through oceans, and start their major conflicts.

England: 7
Japan: 8
France: 8
Rome: 6
Greece: 9
Germany: 9
Russia: 12
Babylon: 8
Persia: 7
China: 11

[warlon]

doh ooops!
sorry Alexandre. Was writing my post before I saw you had already post one new map

[Crazy_Ivan80]

First post here.... heh

I'm currently playing on the 6.21 version of the map and i like it... a lot.

The game dumped me in the Russian starting position and I'm currently expanding south to the Black Sea. After my exploration of the area I noticed that the Crimea and the Ukrainian (sp?) plains are lacking in grain resources.
It could be interesting to add some grain in the region as it has been an agricultural powerhouse for at least 3 millennia. The Greek were one of the first to acknowledge the potential of the area (for food and trade), but many have followed. The latest were the Russians. During the Tzarist reign and the USSR the Ukrainian (sp?) plains and the Crimea were one of the most important agricultural region of the entire country.
Even now the area is considered to be one of the most fertile in the world... if you put some work in it of course.

Could you check this out and maybe consider adding these resources? If it doesn't wreck the balance of the map that is.

Thanks.

P.S. could do it myself but i'm still learning to play the game, so editing isn't for today... or tomorrow... or the day after that.

[Alexandre Madeira]

No problem, small changes, I did it again.

I didnt touch the plains Crazy_Ivan is talking about, not sure if they've been updated with his sugestion since 6.21, cause I do see some grain resources there

Edit: Maybe I had the wrong region, added a few wheat near the black sea.

[Alexandre Madeira]

One other thing, Satya, by changing the rules in the map, I think you're making it impossible for people who use MODs to use them.
Cause I guess the rules of the map (scenario) override the default rules (civ3mod).

What we can do is "ally" with one of the MODs being done, make this map the MOD's official map. Sugest the changes necessary. If the MOD has new resources, we put them on the map, if it doesnt, we sugest some to the mod maker(s). Think its a cool idea.

I bet firaxis cant make a fan made map "official". (Maybe they can include this map in an expantion's cd, as part of a "Best of the Net" scenario collection like they did in Conflicts of Civilization add on for civ2).

Right now, best bet is to find a good MOD whose mod maker is willing to use our map.

Im going to test the Blitz mod now.

[warlon]

No NEW resources!!!!

I think that there is no need for new resources, I can't think of any more "important" strategic nor luxury resources that have a "big" impact on the world. I think the resources we have now covers up for various different resources too. For example Gold is symbolizing precious metals. Aluminium is symbolizing light-weitght metals, uranium also symbolizing plutonium and other radioactive stuff.

Besides Firaxis just released a patch where alot of the "bad" stuff is fixed. Firaxis will probably release lotsa more patches too, and I think that using them for this map is the best choice.

The world map that Firaxis released with the game is one of the msot unrealistic "world maps" I have ever seen. It is totally unbalancing and doesn't even look like earth. Perhaps have Firaxis to set this map as downloadable from their webpage as a correction to their own world map.

The only thing I see is that Australia is still too SMALL!!!
map 4.9 had a propotioned size of Australia? Perhaps use that instead? of course Australia would have room for much more than one civilization and would probably be colonized by the Zulu, Indians, Japanese, Chinese and Persians. That would be somewhat different than the singlehandely English colonization of Australia. And do we want to see war in Australia? Should Australia be a "substitute" for the warfare done in the other European colonies around 1700-1800?

[narmox]

Originally posted by satyajedi
Well, there's the iron in Northwest Italy, which I presumed would go to Rome but would also serve as some tension with France. Are you saying France is getting to that one first?

yes I always saw France get to it first... Now, if I was playing the Romans, I'd go for that one in an instant. But in my 3 games played as the Babylonians or the Greeks, the Romans always went for the iron in asia minor, going to war with me if necessary - but not with France... (in fact they went to war with me and they're the ones who lost Veii which was close enough to eventually get the iron or at least fight France for it).

Something else I noticed, in those 3 games I mentioned, played at Regent with all 16 civs in their correct location. All 3 times most of the civs in europe and middle-east reached the middle-ages by 430BC. In the 3rd one, when I met the Russians between 3000 abd 2500BC, they already had half the techs to get to the middle ages. So I removed _most_ of the goody huts (leaving one near each starting location, leaving all in Australia and other islands), and I played again. Middle Ages in 70 BC (a little better imho )... So I think there are too many goody huts (when combined with Russia's Expansionist ability) if you aim to follow a close-enough timeline to our own Earth..

I would really like to come out with a definitive version to give to Firaxis and see if they'd use as the official world map. We're definately getting close to the point where we are so accurate, most of the suggested changes are opinions rather than improvements, and of course opinions can go on forever. ANyway, think they'd go for it?
-Satya

Hey, that'd be nice! If htey'll go for it, I won't even try to guess though

[Trifna]

Why did this post lost a star in its rating? Just don't understand...

[satyajedi]

I was kind of annoyed about the star too :-)

Don't get me wrong, if Italy isn't getting that Iron, it should probably be moved closer to Italy. My thinking is that wherever the natural border between France and Italy is, the iron should be just inside (on the Italian side).

And that's a good point about the goody huts. Indeed, I have found also that Europe progesses very fast. One other note: England usually in my games has started out technologically backward, because early in the game France, Germany, Rome et al are trading their initial free techs with each other, and have everything attractive by the time England gets off the island. Perhaps some Russian goody huts can be moved to England to make up for this? As an expansionist Civ, this could help 'em a lot. Japan, too.

-Satya

[warlon]

Europe and Middleeast is usually far ahead tech-wise than American civillizations. I have managed to get around middle ages in about 1600 BC without finding one goody hut and without great library due to the sheer exchange of techs.

I think the number of goody huts encourages exploring.

[warlon]

Here is 6.25 with updated goody huts and a name change to some of the cities in China and some army leaders name add and change.

[Dreifels]

the goodies effect all as the AI at once trades a tech that one civ gets to the other.

I tested it by deleting *all* goodies and got a real surprise: All AI factions were well balanced until around 1800, they made no war before. Then 2 of 16 (the French and the Japanese) all other AI took as target to attack, and that the AI continued until 1965. In that time the AI stopped the wars as all AI civs had similar expanding and level, no significant difference.
Meanwhile the game was getting unplayable, as there still were 16 factions and all had so much cities and units, that one turn need around 10 - 20 minutes waiting for next moves (depending if there some diplomatics happened between that Ai factions)
(Pentium III 800 MHz)

In any case, if you like to play with a historical setting, you have to watch:
- Americans as race didn't exist
- Germans, Fance + Russia didn't exist as race (the only the Romans and Greek had been at that time in West Europe. In so far the Civ2 races had been better) Anyway, at last you then you can play with max 13 races only. 2 on American continent, 2 in West Europe, 2 on African continent (Egypt + Zulu), 2 in MiddleEast (Babylon + Persia), China, India, Japan.

The horses then are restricted to Egypt, Babylon, Persian, China. All other didn't have horses at that early time. Means, these 4 must have so much then, that they can trade with horses.

England a disadvantage has in any case: Lot of wonders give an advantage "for all cities on the same continent", but in fact it's valid for the same land, there isn't set a continent border in civ3, and where is water there ends a continent for the AI. So a wonder for England gives only advantage on the English iland.

If you like that a real trade happens between the factions, then you must set the recources so, that only 2 or 3 factions own one kind and miss some other. Trade only happens, if a faction has surplus of a resource and needs an other. No trade happens if a faction has it only 1*. I.e.: a faction having 1 iron never will trade iron.

[satyajedi]

"In any case, if you like to play with a historical setting, you have to watch:
- Americans as race didn't exist
- Germans, Fance + Russia didn't exist as race (the only the Romans and Greek had been at that time in West Europe. In so far the Civ2 races had been better)"

I'm confused. What are you trying to say here? CivIII doesn't keep track of race, it keeps track of nationality. That's why a Greek family under Roman rule has Roman citizens. And there definately is an American nationality.

By the way, there's a great deal of racial distinction between Germans, French and Russians. As a resident of Dresden, it seems odd that is not fairly self-evident to you. Social Darwinism, Nazism, and the history of slavic oppression -- which underlies the Russian Revolution, the Stalinization of Eastern Europe, and the recent horrors in Bosnia -- are all the consequences of racial distinctions made inside Europe.

-Satya