Starting locations NEED to be somewhat standardized, or at least have the option to be, to be an effective strategy game.

Currently (or supposedly) the maps are randomized. You could create maps, but you will most likely be asked to also place goodies and resources and and and... and in the end, people will learn the map, so for replayability you will need to create many maps, which is a lot of work.

By standardized, I simply mean each start location should have, as an example, one shard and two other resources (forest and river included) within 3 tiles of the plop location on randomly generated maps.

I (personally) could care less about static maps.  Of course they can be tweaked however the user wants.

Seanw3

just for fun.  I dont know the code.  Is it possible to code a big ol' baddie to chase you around after hitting ctrl-n so many times.  after the 3rd or 5th time you hit ctrl-n he spawns and chases you around the map and knocks on the door of your first settlement.  That would teach em'

I thought the book that pops up and tells you the Sov story after each Ctrl+N was the punishment. It just keeps playing and playing if you restart the map.

       Map making is FUN !      

... and randomized starting locations  SHOULD  still be an option for maps  randomly  created by the game. 

If I understand correctly, the game (when set on randomize), in a 90X90 map, will take say 100 pieces of pre-made pieces, each of 9X9 tiles, and puzzle them together to form the map. Modders and devs can easily create a new piece (or stamp), and the game will automatically place it into the maps.

Assuming this is the case, a modding tool should be added for these stamps, with, by definition, this field: starting location value, starting location range minimum, starting location range & chance.

The value, placed between 0-100 will decide a chance for that specific piece to be the starting location. I assume you can manually set the specifics, such as making sure the middle tile has a 3/3/2 or other size. With each randomize, the game will have higher chances to roll the lower chances. Note that a 99 stamp will occur 33 times more than a 3 stamp.

Range minimum will decide the minimum range (in stamps) from the starting location. A range minimum of 3 will means there are 2 stamps between this stamp and a starting location, and if map too small it will never appear.

Range & chance similar to range minimum, but allows to reduce the chances that the tile will be close, instead of preventing it (minimum is chance=0)

But then again, to me Random map means RANDOM MAP.

The lack of a true random map generator was one of the things that really bothered me in WoM.

I do not see why you would be upset as my original post stated to give an option at the start so EVERYONE could pick what they wanted and be happy.

To call it nonsense just implies that you fail to see that different people enjoy different things.

That is why games have standard maps for standard games and random maps for random games. At least all of the rts and tbs games I have played in my years of gaming had these options.

AI bug found, they don’t put any concern on player build up unless THEY dislike the player.

Don't push that one too far, I always hate it where you are in harmony with a player and they suddenly want to kill you if you are too strong. Maybe having allied victory conditions would prevent an AI to turncoat on the player because he know he can win with him.

With regard to unfair starting conditions -I think players who use Ctrl-N should play the AI on one level beyond challenging to make it fair. Because those who hit Ctrl-N to get that good starting spot are getting a pretty huge advantage.

In board games, this is generally solved by giving player multiple choice at game start. For example, instead of selecting a race or a character randomly, you give 2 to each player and they chose 1.

You could have something similar. Either you show 2 starting location and ask the player to chose which one they want, or show a large starting location and ask them where they want to start in that area to be able to build a city on the first turn.

Other ideas could create a similar effect.

I wonder what kind of tax levels the AI used? Maybe the AI is building military units too early in the game? In the early game you don't have enough population to support any kind of an army, and in addition to that the early militia isn't that useful. I would suggest that if building a military unit results in higher unrest in major cities, then the AI should not do it.

Another thing: rush build when there is single turn left! This can reduce build times by more than 10% while it doesn't cost that much to do.

Yes, you can rush-build the three turn limited buildings, pretty sure that is a bug.

Rushing buildings that take more than three turns is beneficial, too. The last turn's part is usually just a few production points, and thus is inexpensive to rush. You get your building one turn earlier AND get to construct the city's full production point amount for the next building. Thus it is almost always worth it to buy the last turn's portion away.

create a contest mega events (within the meaning developers can create). and implement the most successful in the game. in the events - the basic "life" of the game (I recall galactic civilization 2)