I would suggest moving towns closer together slightly. Civ's like Britain and Sioux/Aztec (3 tp card), seem to have an advantage. Due to the choke point at the middle, the access to trade routes, and the fish, it makes turtling too easy. Not including the ottoman issue, the map is very competitive. The new resource distribution is quite good. Pampas: Inconstant trade rout location can really hurt civs like ottomans. I think this map gives advantages to civs like sioux or germany and it might need a few tweaks to clear space on the map. New England: Resource distribution and natural barriers can make some civ's very susceptible to raids, and yet difficult to attack outright. They are almost certain to miss a full rotation of the trade rout. Trade post distance gives civ's like ottomans a pretty big disadvantage. Large numbers of yaks still give civs like China an edge. Mongolia: Access to war elephants can give certain civs advantages even though I don't see it used too often. Hunts can be on the low side, but its fine. Himalayas: Cliffs can give certain civ's advantages as well as trade post locations. Hunt screws have really seemed to be less common. Certain treasure distributions can give civs advantages, but nothing too bad. Great planes: Good resource distribution. I managed to get 12 sheep in a game recently, so sheep overdosage might still be an issue.
Some of the cliffs in the middle can be annoying, but they are probably not making the map any less competitive.
Also the Inca are a little on the strong side.Ĭalifornia: Good resource distribution. Here are my notes on every competitive map under consideration:Īndes: Well balanced map, good res distribution, the occasional very good treasure can create imbalance.
0 kommentar(er)
