Redesign the World. (Map Settings)

[Fried-Psitalon]

People talk a lot about that, but in practice, it never happens. Old world empires have well-developed cities and infrastructure. New World cities have to start from scratch. It's trivial for an old-world empire to generate an army to shred the new world upstart while they're still getting their cities up to size 5. Even a half-dozen units would badly disrupt growth in "new world" while the old world sat undamaged, developing a huge juggernaut to finish the job.

It's a neat theory, but the realities of MP are very different. You can easily monitor tech progress - no one will get a "sneak empire" in the New World - the powerhouses might, but only they. No one will be "rising again." Caravels will easily alert the major powers on the Old World if a New World empire is starting.

It just doesn't happen in reality - SP? Sure. MP - never amongst quality opponents.

[ForesterSOF]

If we took your beliefs into real world geography then lots of countries would want lines redrawn.

Whenever designing a world I think "does it happen in the real world". We all/ including Civs, have dificulties to face and overcome.

I want my games to emulate the real world as much as posible except when trying to make a SciFi world.

Then it is looking at human behavioral patterns.

[Fried-Psitalon]

Civ is not a history simulator. We do not face the same issues in the game as the real, therefore the difficulties faced will be completely different. All tribes didn't start at the same time. The land itself changed, rising and falling. Environmental factors kicked in. The game also lacks civil war, time-lapsed communication, governmental upheavals, assassination of world leaders, disasters...

That argument makes as much sense as "Does this happen when I eat an apple?" because it has about as much relevance. What happens in the game will be vastly difference and have no relation at all to what happened in real history.

[ChrisiusMaximus]

you forget this is a different game altogether any strategies from civ 3 will be nigh on useless here in this game. I think all teams represented here have some very talented civ players and id be surprised to see a team rise to such an extent by the time of caravals that no other team would be able to explore and settle there.

you simply cannot warmonger as effectively as you could in civ 3.

|Terra map would indeed be a great map and an interesting element for roleplaying. It gets my vote.

[DeepO]

Originally posted by ChrisiusMaximus id be surprised to see a team rise to such an extent by the time of caravals that no other team would be able to explore and settle there.

galleons, not caravels. But the same applies, I guess.

DeepO

[UnOrthOdOx]

I am going to say one thing on the map thing.

Upping the map to huge size, especially a terran - huge, will eliminate some potential turn players from the respective teams based solely on hardware. My own PC will likely not be capable of playing such a map if we get into the industrial or so.

[UnOrthOdOx]

Originally posted by binTravkin
Hey I just had idea, dunno if you'll like it but sounds fun to me.

We have some teams which are such strong RP characters, that even their starting terrain can be determined by their profile:

Team			Terrain
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Vox			Not sure
The Horde		Steppe!
Gathering Storm		Near mountains or sea (where storms gather)
Team Alpha Centaurians	Somewhere we can grow xenoweed and other stuff for our xenobrew
Team Banana		Next to banana-rich Jungle
Sarantium		Hill on a sea/river coast, to build a glorious capital upon
The Mercenary Team  	Some hilly/mountainous/forested place - wild lands, wild warriors
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

How do you like?

Mercs want a solitary island equal distance from all customers, actually. Oh, and preferrably within galley travels too.

[Krill]

Whatever GS gets it has to be nothing but rock and sea and desert.

[DeepO]

Originally posted by Krill
Whatever GS gets it has to be nothing but rock and sea and desert.

and a few floodplains, perhaps?

Also great are whales just out of reach

DeepO

[Krill]

OK, I'll buy into that. Those 8? Flood plains pretty much controlled the entire game, now you mention it...

oh, and the whales, the whales...

[Rhothaerill]

Originally posted by binTravkin
Hey I just had idea, dunno if you'll like it but sounds fun to me.

We have some teams which are such strong RP characters, that even their starting terrain can be determined by their profile:

Team			Terrain
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Vox			Not sure
The Horde		Steppe!
Gathering Storm		Near mountains or sea (where storms gather)
Team Alpha Centaurians	Somewhere we can grow xenoweed and other stuff for our xenobrew
Team Banana		Next to banana-rich Jungle
Sarantium		Hill on a sea/river coast, to build a glorious capital upon
The Mercenary Team  	Some hilly/mountainous/forested place - wild lands, wild warriors
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

How do you like?

Vox should be placed on a small, nearly resourceless island connected to wherever GS is located.

[NicodaMax]

Originally posted by Fried-Psitalon
Civ is not a history simulator. We do not face the same issues in the game as the real, therefore the difficulties faced will be completely different. All tribes didn't start at the same time. The land itself changed, rising and falling. Environmental factors kicked in. The game also lacks civil war, time-lapsed communication, governmental upheavals, assassination of world leaders, disasters...

C'mon Fried, we've had CIV4 for three months and you're already thinking in CIV5

On a more serious note...

...It's trivial for an old-world empire to generate an army to shred the new world upstart while they're still getting their cities up to size 5. Even a half-dozen units would badly disrupt growth in "new world" while the old world sat undamaged, developing a huge juggernaut to finish the job.

Wouldn't the team that sent its army half across the globe to squat some new world uprising be debilitating its position in the old continent, exposing itself to become a tempting target for a team that wants to consolidate its hold there?

While I'm inclined to bow to your proven wisdom and experience in this game, isn't your view on this also a little SP-biased?

[Krill]

I'd call it MP biased, and from what I have seen in my small amount of MP experience is that FP is right.

I would bow to the older adn wiser head, as it were. Though I know FP would dispute one of those two.

[Fried-Psitalon]

The end of the world is coming, truly, if I am to be SP-biased.

I haven't played a SP game since...eh, I'd guess v.52..

[NicodaMax]

Instead of just editing that post (SP-Biased was a really poor choice of words), I'll explain myself. I just meant that if there are other "quality opponents" (teams/humans) in the old continent, wouldnt sending a huge army offshore be a little dangerous?

The term was based on the idea that if your continent was full of AI players, that'd be the way to go, hense the SP part. Sorry, no offense meant