Tweet
I love Earth maps. I noticed that PTW allowed 362x362 maps (twice as big as 256x256), and I was wondering that if you ever played had a host with a powerful enough computer to run the map, how many of you would play an Earth map of this size?
I also noticed that the new map editors allow y-wrapping. If you turn both wrapping's on, you can create a monopolic world-akin to a transverse map- those are far more accurate for area of Earth projections on a rectangular map(the regular Civ3 distorts the shape of the Earth, making areas to the poles much larger then they are in real life).
How many of you would think it would be interesting for the South Pole or North Pole to be in the 'middle' of the map, and say the equator to be where the north pole should be? Game play would be the same as the world would wrap around, it just would be at a weird angle.
Which civs would be the best for a Multiplayer game on Earth, take into account geographic starting locations.
I'm going to say the Americans for their expansionist and industrial strengths as well as their amazing starting location. They get two Continents with some of the richest land and resources in the world. An Early Neighbor, three oceans acting as a natural barrier to the early aggressors-It's ~150-175 Tiles from Washington to London so not until the late Industrial ages can an invasion to either continent be pulled off.(It's only 10 tiles from Paris to London). Their Unique Unit also is better for the late game world wars(Air Units can go to any Carrier, city, or Airfield in the world in one turn.)
Would you support modding the game so water units move faster?
How should major rivers be drawn? Should they be a civ3 'river' or a coastal?(The Amazon, the world's widest river, is 30 Mi at its height in width, which could be represented by one tile). While few Rivers actually get close to the 21 Miles, a coastal square more accurately represents improved movement with boats, the importance of fishing, and in some cases, the ability to allow land locked cities to be attached to near by oceans and seas. A coastal square, however, is usually bad for troop movement, and I think that if the crossing is under 11 miles, it should be a river instead of a coastal.(A river impedes road movement, but it gives extra gold.) A nice expansion one day would be allowing Workers to build Canals for ships to move along, and allowing ships to move along rivers(or even better, maps that are 1 tile x 10 miles).
Should the Oceans be smaller? If the oceans are smaller that means that the continents are larger, on a 362x362 map North America is over 20k Tiles. I think a better idea would be to increase ship movement.
How many resources should there be? I think that the best 200 Horse places on Earth should get a horse, the best 50 or 100 Iron places get Iron, ect. Although I wouldn't be basing this off of production, rather on actual resources-as Production is based off of cultural strengths of the moment.
Also I would take into account that a lot of how we treat modern resources(And one could include modern ecology into this for the topography of the map) are such that humans have depleted the resources at other locations in the past. Civ3 will automatically 'deplete' resources for us so ancient resource maps are sometimes good for determining resource locations. On the downside, horses where not available in the new world until after the Spanish came. I recommend splicing the two together based off of how it improves game play. If an ancient map will make the gameplay better use it, if a modern map will, use that. This applies as well to bonus resources. There's generally one of each bonus resource per 100-200 tiles that support it(If there where 100 Plains tiles, 100 coastal, and 100 Flood Plains tiles there would be 2-4 Wheat, 1-2 cow, and 1-2 fish). This will give you an upper limit on the number of fish and whales and other things you can have, and if you can find the top 500 fishing spots in the world and the top 500 farming locations in the world, you know where to put your bonus resources.
Finally would anybody ever play an Earth map where each land tile represents a certain number of the world's current population, or wealth, or some other factor.(On a Wealth Map America and Germany and Japan would be huge and Africa would be small, on a population southeast Asia would be huge and Canada would be small, ect)?
I also noticed that the new map editors allow y-wrapping. If you turn both wrapping's on, you can create a monopolic world-akin to a transverse map- those are far more accurate for area of Earth projections on a rectangular map(the regular Civ3 distorts the shape of the Earth, making areas to the poles much larger then they are in real life).
How many of you would think it would be interesting for the South Pole or North Pole to be in the 'middle' of the map, and say the equator to be where the north pole should be? Game play would be the same as the world would wrap around, it just would be at a weird angle.
Which civs would be the best for a Multiplayer game on Earth, take into account geographic starting locations.
I'm going to say the Americans for their expansionist and industrial strengths as well as their amazing starting location. They get two Continents with some of the richest land and resources in the world. An Early Neighbor, three oceans acting as a natural barrier to the early aggressors-It's ~150-175 Tiles from Washington to London so not until the late Industrial ages can an invasion to either continent be pulled off.(It's only 10 tiles from Paris to London). Their Unique Unit also is better for the late game world wars(Air Units can go to any Carrier, city, or Airfield in the world in one turn.)
Would you support modding the game so water units move faster?
How should major rivers be drawn? Should they be a civ3 'river' or a coastal?(The Amazon, the world's widest river, is 30 Mi at its height in width, which could be represented by one tile). While few Rivers actually get close to the 21 Miles, a coastal square more accurately represents improved movement with boats, the importance of fishing, and in some cases, the ability to allow land locked cities to be attached to near by oceans and seas. A coastal square, however, is usually bad for troop movement, and I think that if the crossing is under 11 miles, it should be a river instead of a coastal.(A river impedes road movement, but it gives extra gold.) A nice expansion one day would be allowing Workers to build Canals for ships to move along, and allowing ships to move along rivers(or even better, maps that are 1 tile x 10 miles).
Should the Oceans be smaller? If the oceans are smaller that means that the continents are larger, on a 362x362 map North America is over 20k Tiles. I think a better idea would be to increase ship movement.
How many resources should there be? I think that the best 200 Horse places on Earth should get a horse, the best 50 or 100 Iron places get Iron, ect. Although I wouldn't be basing this off of production, rather on actual resources-as Production is based off of cultural strengths of the moment.
Also I would take into account that a lot of how we treat modern resources(And one could include modern ecology into this for the topography of the map) are such that humans have depleted the resources at other locations in the past. Civ3 will automatically 'deplete' resources for us so ancient resource maps are sometimes good for determining resource locations. On the downside, horses where not available in the new world until after the Spanish came. I recommend splicing the two together based off of how it improves game play. If an ancient map will make the gameplay better use it, if a modern map will, use that. This applies as well to bonus resources. There's generally one of each bonus resource per 100-200 tiles that support it(If there where 100 Plains tiles, 100 coastal, and 100 Flood Plains tiles there would be 2-4 Wheat, 1-2 cow, and 1-2 fish). This will give you an upper limit on the number of fish and whales and other things you can have, and if you can find the top 500 fishing spots in the world and the top 500 farming locations in the world, you know where to put your bonus resources.
Finally would anybody ever play an Earth map where each land tile represents a certain number of the world's current population, or wealth, or some other factor.(On a Wealth Map America and Germany and Japan would be huge and Africa would be small, on a population southeast Asia would be huge and Canada would be small, ect)?
!
- posting a picture of the projection you're talking about would be nice):
. It wouldn't be that much of a problem, if it wasn't civ3 and it's AI:
) there. It's only usefull to pump your ressources inthere if there is a ressource you really need. 
- that, or redefine river movement - make them really hard to cross, before you built bridges.
Comment