MAP: Improved Huge Map of Earth

[lindberg-johan]

Scandinavia

I have made a few changes in Scandinavia (not everything in my earlier message). Here is the file! This is my first time using the editor, so please check it before using it.

Bye.

[Kaptnwakky]

Well, I Incorporated Solomyr's Changes to the Western US and Refined them Slightly - The Cascade and Sierra Nevada Ranges are now well defined - I readded a whole bunch of tundra to canada - there were just way to many plains - I also incorporated Alexandres changes to Yemen and various parts of the world - And I moved greenland 2 "squares" closer to Northamerica so Iceland is not nearly so close. I also fiddled with denmark and defined the Baltic Area much better.

Moscow is now where it should be as is mexico city - both locations were too far north
-The aztecs should have an easier time starting and also they should have reason to go south now into south america instead of into north america

-Instead of hurting china agriculturally, I took away its wheat but left grasslands - Japan just got more fish and wheat to helk out growth. Also, the area between korea and china Start is heavily forested now to discourage early cities their by china.

-The ukraine recieved wheat and the suggestion to place a few hills north of crimea with Iron and Coal was followed - this area is a major source of resources for Russia - historically and presently

-Instead of giving Russia and Germany hills where thier should be no hills, bonus grassland was added so that if it is mined they have a shot at wonder races.

-I left the Uranium in New mexico/South Utah for two reasons - #1The americas are already rather weak in quantity of early strategic resources like saltpeter and iron in my opinion and it gives them a late game trade item. ALso, there are large amounts of Uranium in those areas presently, and its where the US gets its Uranium. They should be in the desert but since you can;t place Uranium in desert, I had to put them in the mountain.

-India was weakened by adding more plains to represent the large plateau in central india and some of its wheat was taken away - however I do not think its starting location should be moved or hampered in by barbarians - India historically was not isolationist and was very much in league tradewise with Muslim countries to the west and chinese/Indochina to the east.

-With regards to North American Horses - I am just as anal as the next person with regards to historical specificity, however in the interests of gameplay and the fact that the Iroqious are supposed to represent as firaxes says in the civilopedia native peoples including the Sioux, Cheyanne etc., they should get horses. If we can believe that america starts out in the new world in 4000bc, I think the Iroquois can have a horse or two for gameplay.

Thats all, attached is map 5.2

[kittenOFchaos]

The strategic and luxury resources situation has turned into a nightmare...I'm sticking with the version 3.0 till I (a geology student with a keen interest in history) can sort it out...

In terms of gameplay giving France THAT much wine is ridiculous...and this sort of problem replicates itself...

As for the horses in America...I'm certainly not playing with the Iroquois and Americans on -I will have the Inca civilisation and the Spanish

Horses are a daft resource except for the purpose of removing them from India (horsies don't breed well there), the New World and Australia and much of Africa where horse culture didn't exist...

[Tzar Alex III.]

Please could someone answer ... because I already have downloaded 4 maps from this site and all crashed, because the computer always wanted to build his cities too close to the pole. I am tired of deleting the settlers from the save game so that I could continue the game.

AND BYE THE WAY WHICH IS NOW THE LAST VERSION ? AND WHERE IS IT ? Could you please delete the links with the old versions out of your answers. Would be nice, and keep the most actual version up at the top. Only edit your message THX

Have a nice day everyone

[ismail cem]

Asia minor redefined + importance of bosphorus

Changes made:

- Asia minor redefined, realistic
- euphyrates and tigris now separate through northern iraq, making its land less fertile than the south
-bosphorus is reshaped, dyes are added in the area, and saltpeter is relocated to that area.
-kizilirmak river added to the north, with wheat in the inner plains.


these changes were made onto the upgrade made to scandinavia by lindberg.

Thanks to all of the contributors.

[satyajedi]

I'm finding in my games that there are way too many resources on this map, so much so that it limits trading and discourages competition. Are other people finding this as well?

[Pyrodrew]

I'm finding in my games that there are way too many resources on this map, so much so that it limits trading and discourages competition.

There are typically a lot of horses & iron in Huge Maps since that occurs at the beginning of the game while players are scrambling to find them... typically like 22. However, it seems that there are about 40 irons on these maps & too many of the others as well.

Where to cut back would be the places in which those places are *not* the leading producers or leading geographically with those resources. My earlier posts explained along those lines why India should have coal & iron, Greece aluminum, etc. Likewise someone mentioned Scandavia having the 3rd largest source of uranium - that's a good reason. Thus, if someone wouldn't mind reviewing the old posts & writing down these "largest sources" and "largest producers" rather than those posts which only say, "NewZealand has iron". Then everything would be more accurate. Once that is done I think anything could be adjusted from there for the more important gameplay balance.

Also luxury items should be more clumped together in 1 or 2 (3 at most) groups to force trading. Most 1 spot luxury items should be removed (the same luxury item on several nearby small islands would be a good clump). Whether everyone wants to do that with some the strategic resources as well is a big question.

I don't have the time to do this right now, but if someone else doesn't do in the next few weeks or months I will make a more balanced resource map later.

[Alexandre Madeira]

Ok, I added ismail cem's changes to Kaptnwakky's and made further resource changes (most I did before but someone undoed them).

Kaptnwakky, I dont see your bonus grassland addition, or you didnt add many , I added a bunch near player starting locations and a few in other places.

I changed the oil fields, again. My locations are based on another game's world map, and remember, oil is so important there can be wars because of it, dont add dozens of oil fields in the map so everyone has it. It will make the game more interesting.

I moved the English' starting location a bit south (still one square north of the coast). Ok, London is not a coastal city, but remember a single tile in the civ3 map represents a bunch of square miles , I'd rather have London as a coastal city in civ3 so it can build ships.

satyajedi, I agree with you, so I have again removed some resources from the map, or made them more seperate. Dont think a single city should have more than a single resource of one type.

I agree with all those wines in France beeing ridiculous, removed a bunch of them, added one in Portugal (you dont know Oporto Wine?).

Ok, here's 5.3, mostly resource balance. Updated from a combination of 5.1 and 5.2.

(Map updated)

[Alexandre Madeira]

Updated 5.3 with some of Pyro's sugestions. More aluminium in Greece, Uranium in scandinavia, coal and iron in India.

I disagree with clumping luxury items together, a single city shouldnt be able to have more than one, if you want to be able to trade, expand your empire so you get more inside your borders. There may be exceptions of course.

[Dreifels]

Originally posted by kittenOFchaos
In terms of gameplay giving France THAT much wine is ridiculous...and this sort of problem replicates itself...

As for the horses in America...I'm certainly not playing with the Iroquois and Americans on -I will have the Inca civilisation and the Spanish

Horses are a daft resource except for the purpose of removing them from India (horsies don't breed well there), the New World and Australia and much of Africa where horse culture didn't exist...

- If you make a map of today, lot of whine is right in Kalifornia, France, Germany, Spain, Italy
- If you make a map of 5000 BC, wine ONLY has to be in Egypt at the southwest oasis and in Italy, NO other place.
- In a 5000 BC map horses on the american continent are absolute wrong, same in Africa below aequator, but in Babylon + Egypt + Persia must be a lot then !!! Also some west of China at the beginning of tundra, but not so much. Elephantes in India + mid Africa only, but enough to trade with. (If you set only 1* the recource, the owner don't trade with it)

In Germany some hills have to be at Cologne (Today also there is good whine, and there also iron + coal is, as well as near Dresden (do you have a German map ;-))?) are hills and coal, salpeter + uran
Between Germany and France also is coal + iron + salpeter where the Rhine is.

[warlon]

Nice changes from 4.3/4.8 to 5.3

Good overall modifying with the map.

I believe though that some things still have to be considered:

Ironworks
I believe that area near Tokyo /or Kyoto, Ruhr District in western Germany. Area near London, area near New York/Washington, area near Ural, Area near Milan and area near Beijing in China should all have opportunity to build Ironworks.

Geographical placement of Mountains so close to Beijing is not accurate, there is hills there not mountains. The mountain range is also not that large surrounding China in mountains. And the highland there is hardly mountains when comparing them to the Himalayas or even the Alpes. Take a look at civ2 map of the earth or "The Times Atlas of the World". The Sinkiang province have the largest population in China. Remove some hills creating the sort of vale that is there?

It is still disheartening to see that the cattle are absent in China, Japan, England and Russia, while America have alot of them.

I think that the strait of Sicily is again uncrossable.

The Hindu Kush (mountains in Pakistan and right now also in Iran)shouldn't be so vast. I believe on line of mountains is quite sufficient, even modifying it into some hills.

IndoChina isn't all covered in jungle. There should also be plains and grassland with some hills. And the Malay Peninsuala is simply too large compared to Indochina.

Also there is no Uranium in either Yugoslavia nor Scandinavia. The "heavy water" in Norway doesn't justify two uranium resources there. Australia and Japan should have 1 more uranium each.

Etiopia is still covered in desert.

Also Western Russia should have some hills to represent the central Russian Uplands. Also the forests in Western France should be replaced by forests.

Whales should be added near Norway and so should oil in a land Square around Norway (Norway is around the top exporters in the world of Oil). More wheat in Ukraine, Japan, India and China.

THERE IS ABSOULUTELY NO GOLD IN HIMALAYAS (Not worth 3 fields of gold that is )

I shall soon start working on the latest version implenting some of these stuff if they haven't already been implented by the time I start.

[lindberg-johan]

Scandinavia and Uranium

Hi!

When I uploaded 5.1 I added Uranium in the north of Sweden. Now someone has added Uranium in the mountains between Sweden and Norway. That is wrong! First, Sweden may have Uranium, but not that much. We DO NOT have the world's third largest resource, as some people remain to say. Second, the newly found resource is completely malplaced. There is quite much Uranium where I put it, and also some in southern Sweden (though not much enough to make a resource out of it). Some people here seems to think that Sweden is a big Uranium producer, too, which is not true. The Uranium in Sweden is not mined. There are two reasons for this: First, we don't approve that much of nuclear power as other countries do (we do have some reactors, though), and second: there is much Uranium in Scandinavia, but it is so low rate (300g/ton), so it is not worth mining it. Therefore, I suggest: Remove the resource in the mountains, and perhaps the one in Lappland (northern Sweden), too.

[subheat]

Fixed up NZ again

I see my old changes were lost somewhere along the way, and in the latest map NZ still looks like a blob of spilt Green Oil in the South Pacific. So i readded it again onto the latest map on the thread.

Made it smaller, cause it was waaayy to big. Fixed the resources up yet again. And readded samoa and fiji (someone has to represent these guys on this thread, and I probably come closest

Subheat.

[protista]

Awesome map!

I have a few questions.

I tried to modify some of the parameters of the map scenario, and was able to change the number of starting civilizations, but attempting to set barbarians to villages only repeatedly fails. Minor problem, I just don't like barbarian distractions! How can I set the barbarian paramater with this map?

Secondly, can I load the map (5.0) into the CIV editor and change the rules? I would like to be able to set the difficulty level to warlord. When I loaded it, the rules changes were greyed out.

Thirdly, at the very beginning screen, after I select the mod (5.0), it offers the option of modifying the map. I tried this selection, but it appeared to revert back to the computer generated random map?

I really appreciate the efforts you put into this world map! I just wanted to be able to "tweak" it a tad.

[Solomyr]

RESOUCES!!

alright, i am going through the thread and hunting down where people have said "such and such a counrty was a world leader in this resouce". but i doubt that will be enough. so how about everyone (since i know not eveyone is going to do this, let's try) got hunt down some information on which area of the world was a LEADER, not just a producer of a certain resource. this should, IMHO be measured by what kind of impact that source of whatever had on the world market at the time. let's try and work together and not against each other (not that i want to sound all fluffy about this)

SO GET TO WORK