MAP: Real World Map

[Selanne]

6-01-02

I've added a player start tool by Gramphos. See http://apolyton.net/forums/showthre...&threadid=37749

All the Civs should start in their correct locations, if you use this tool.

It's very simple to use. It includes a "cpt" file, a "readme" file, and the start locations marked as "earth256". The readme that Gramphos made should explain it. I figured it out and I'm pretty much a computer idiot.




5-01-02

I suspect the server change wiped out my last attempt to update here goes:

Terrain changes have been made to try and limit cities in desets and tundra (and therefore the total number of cities in the game). Tundra and desert provide no food even with irrigation. You can no longer plant trees on tundra. Let me know how this works.



VERSION 2.3

7-12-01

Each civ now has atleast 40 cities. Some have up to 60.

Tech rate is now 340, as some have suggested this seems to work better.


VERSION 2.2

26-11-01

This combines 2 maps:

Earth [Real-Cities]
Earth [Real-Terrain]

The first places grassland where modern day cities are. The more grassland the larger the city.

The latter places grassland where I believe it occurs in the real world.


Quick summary:

size is 256x256. The map was not "freehanded". Measurements were taken. It's taken from a Robinson Projection.

There are 22 of each strategic resource, 11 of each luxury. Resource locations were researched.

Incans replace Iroquois.

You will need to build Istanbul to get out of the Black sea. You will need to build Panama City and the a city for the Suez canal to cross those areas. I try to avois land bridges where possible. Exceptions are Italy to Sicily and some of the Japanese Islands, mainly to make those areas look better.

Enjoy.

[RobRoy]

omigod!

It's huge!

Looks terrific at first blush. Incredible detail on the river systems. Can't find any obvious errors at a glance, but I'll let you know when I dare to play on this monster. Sicily/Italy is not as pretty as the rest of Europe...but wow...the rest of Europe/Med/Near East sure looks good, and you don't even have to short-change the rest of the world to do it.

I'm wondering if it might be a tad light on hills/mountains...there sure is a lot of attractive green space out there.

I was having some trouble finding horses. A couple of resource locations also struck me as odd (ivory in Russia, incense in Italy, spice in Croatia). Are these proxies for something else? Or have you really finished assigning resources yet? Do you recall how many of the luxury and strategic resources you put on this monster? And how clumpy are the luxury resources?

I notice you're not using the flood plain terrain tile that much. It looks like you're often choosing to use grass and plains tiles, instead, along portions of major river systems (Indus, Tigris/Eurphrates, Nile). I'm curious as to why?

I wonder if it might be better to tweak some movement rates in the rules (esp. sea movement rates) in order to compensate for the size of this thing.

Again...WOW!

[Selanne]

Each resource appears 15 times on the map, relatively evenly distributed. There should be a clump of three of each resource on the map. May change the distribution later as I wasn't going for absolute accuracy.

Just couldn't get Italy/Sicily to work properly without bumping into Greece or tunisia.

The Flood Plains/ Hills/Mountains aren't used as much as I could because my focus was to create patches of Grassland so it would be easy to identify where the real world cities went. It's a system I got into while making civ 2 maps.

Horses in Europe are in Spain (1) and Russia/ Kazakhstan (1-near the Caspain). Theres a group of three of them in Mongolia.

Any further comments would be appreciated.

[Pyrodrew]

Good work. I noticed...

1.You kept the tech rate the same at 200. Since this is a larger map you should increase this number accordingly. 300 would be more accurate.

2.You lowered the "distance from civs" to 10. This makes it more likely Civs will start closer to each other. You don't want 2 civs starting both in Japan do you? 30 for a map this size would be fine... you could go much higher tho.

3.You lowered the "optimal number of cities (corruption) to 20". This will make corruption excessively and madly rappant on a map this size. Leaving it at 32 would make corruption higher than a normal game (and many feel corruption is already high for a normal game). I would recommend raising this number to 50 for a map this size.

___________________

Other suggestions...

I'm from Arizona. Numerous illegal Mexican alliens die every year trying to sneak into the US while crossing the desert between Mexico & the US. In your map there is very little desert there (nice plush grasslands & plains instead). The mountains (the RockyMountains) in Arizona should be connected - not be seperated into single ones set alone.

Overall the shape of the US is good, but the terrain types for the areas need work.

[Selanne]

Hmmn. I'll look at Arizona. Problem is there are too many big cities in the US SW fro the terrain. If I make the terrain too accurate, Phoenix, LA etc don't have much grassland/plains to grow.

On the Editor: The options for number of cities for corruption was set at 200. The others I can fix.

[Pyrodrew]

Colorado River

In the options it has the following for the World Sizes:
Small (80x80)- Tech Rate: 100
Standard (100x100)- Tech Rate: 120
Large (140x140)- Tech Rate: 160
Huge (180x180)- Tech Rate: 200
With a map this size (255x255) a Tech Rate somewhere between 250-350 would be more accurate.

Regarding SW Growth - I would look towards the Colorado River. Irrigated Desert River (FloodPlains) provide 4 Food, which is better than even irrigated grasslands (3 food). Perhaps a mix of atleast 50%desert & 50%grasslands/plains? Game (resource) in the RockyMountains (and hills) would work too. Mexico, Nevada, California, Arizona, & New Mexico do have desert tho.

[Selanne]

In the Editor I changed the "small" size to "Ultra" 256x256. Do the editor changes not get saved with the map? Can you alter the settings once you get the map?

I'll look at the suggested terrain changes later. Maybe I'll make a map that accurately reflects terrain at the expense of cities instead of the reverse.

[Iceius]

GW!

Give this baby a little more polishing, and you can count on me using it almost all the time.

At first glance: I suggest you put som iron in Scandinavia, or in Sweden - to be exact.
(The only place I looked at the resources )

That is, IF you are going to do some more work with this one, when it comes to accurate terrain and resources.

I think that I'm not the only one the preffers to play on an "accurate" earth map... or?

[Pyrodrew]

Originally posted by Selanne
In the Editor I changed the "small" size to "Ultra" 256x256. Do the editor changes not get saved with the map? Can you alter the settings once you get the map?

The changes did save. I only listed what the game-given "tech rates" were to demonstrate that a larger tech rate is directly related to a larger map.

[Iceius]

I just felt an urge to *bump* this one...

[Selanne]

"Polished" version is coming. Researched resources and modified terrain.

[Plumbean]

Plumbean

wow this map is HUGH I love playing on bigger maps thanks keep up the good work

[Sparky]

Approval

I'm the guy who made the SMAC earth map. I'm known as Geography Boy to my friends. Your map has earned the 100% Sparky seal of approval. Excellent job. It looks like you took this straight out of an atlas.

Sorry ZEB, I think he has you beat!

PS Can't help but nag a teeny bit -- where's the Tiber!

Again, great job.

[Selanne]

The Tiber, good point. With that land the Romans do need help. I'll make sure it makes it into version 2. And thanks for the compliment.

[Sparky]

I made a version 1.01 of your map. If you're interested, I removed horses from the Americas, slightly refined the Great Lakes and Britain (I mean very slightly!), put more oil in Venezuela, and added starting locations for all the Civs I have always thought should be in (namely, the Turks, Mongols, Spanish, Arabs, Vikings, and Pheonicians).