They may end up that way, but as you can see from the first map, they are all still there very early in the game, it is very unlikely that they were all conquered at that point. City-states can be conquered or protected or traded with, I'm guessing that however they are handled by the major powers doesn't change how they look on the mini-map.
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Strategic View
Collapse
X
-
Lets face it CFC is the de facto official Civ site. I like it better that way though.
Their on topic is a lot "noisier" with all the kids posting the same things over and over again.
Old people like things a bit slower and quieter.Quendelie axan!
Comment
-
Im about the same age as you, and yeah I like the slower pace of it hereOriginally posted by Sir Og View PostLets face it CFC is the de facto official Civ site. I like it better that way though.
Their on topic is a lot "noisier" with all the kids posting the same things over and over again.
Old people like things a bit slower and quieter.
we need a cocoa before bedtime forum
Safer worlds through superior firepower
Comment
-
That's really minor improvement (even if there is one) compared with the ugliness of the map. I want my squares back!Originally posted by Elok View PostBut that jagged hexagonal coastline looks much more natural than a jagged square coastline...The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so
certain of themselves, but wiser people so full of doubts.
-- Bertrand Russell
Comment
-
Good point. I didn't look too closely at the minimap myself.Originally posted by OzzyKP View PostThey may end up that way, but as you can see from the first map, they are all still there very early in the game, it is very unlikely that they were all conquered at that point. City-states can be conquered or protected or traded with, I'm guessing that however they are handled by the major powers doesn't change how they look on the mini-map.
Comment
-
You WANT distortion? FoolishnessOriginally posted by MxM View PostThat's really minor improvement (even if there is one) compared with the ugliness of the map. I want my squares back!
I want octagons.
Can't make a planar graph out of regular octagons.
I want hexes!
And you're getting hexes, is there an issue here?If there is no sound in space, how come you can hear the lasers?
){ :|:& };:
Comment
-
CFC is awful. So full of teenagersOriginally posted by Sir Og View PostLets face it CFC is the de facto official Civ site. I like it better that way though.
Their on topic is a lot "noisier" with all the kids posting the same things over and over again.
Old people like things a bit slower and quieter.

But it really is awful.If there is no sound in space, how come you can hear the lasers?
){ :|:& };:
Comment
-
Originally posted by Elok View PostBut that jagged hexagonal coastline looks much more natural than a jagged square coastline, and doesn't distort the map at all! Just like the real world, all peninsulas and bays are bulbous and lumpy.
What distortion? Plane can be covered with squares without any distortions. The units could move differently, if you want to have more accurate distance movement for the units. Diagonal move could be counted as 1.5.Originally posted by Hauldren Collider View PostYou WANT distortion? Foolishness
Plus, hexagons are not without distance problems as well. They are OK only in 6 directions.The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so
certain of themselves, but wiser people so full of doubts.
-- Bertrand Russell
Comment
-
-
I have said several times, that this problem would disappear if you count diagonal move as 1.5 distance - it is simpler and more accurate solution than going to hexagons, and still be on squares.Originally posted by Modo44 View PostDistance distortion. The one you want to "go around" by introducing some arbitrary rules for diagonal movement (i.e. more distortion). The one you keep ignoring, or maybe failing to understand.The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so
certain of themselves, but wiser people so full of doubts.
-- Bertrand Russell
Comment
Comment