I think the new changes look workable. Thrace got quite a bit out of that - normally, building on that city state a horrid choice.

The changes do make the terrain more hospitable - it does give a very very different feel to Thrace's area (as that 4 spot city site was a major stumbling block to be worked thru.)

My view was that anything that makes life easier on Thrace would probably make life easier on Illyria & Crete.

If change is considered for that area, how about removing the dual coast on Scythia? Maybe split Scythia in two as well?

Well lets not get crazy here!

Lets see how these things help. Illyria, Crete and Thrace have decent AST positions so I'm not inclined to be TOO nice..

I live in Italy.
My daughter is right now studying at school barbarian invasions in Italy at the end of the Roman Empire.

Gothes and other Middle/East-Europe tribes were very afraid about Romans, not really because they were strong on they borders, but because they were known to be. When the Huns invaded Eastern Europe these tribes had two choices:
- being destroyed by Huns
- attack Rome

they obviously decided to attack Rome with the consequences we know.

This to introduce the proposal I am about to do.

Introduce the Northern Europe panel with Brits, Gothes, Huns cultures.

This could eventually extend eastward thru Northern Asia with Russia, China (Huns were Mongols).

Any ideas?

Raffaele

Actually, there exists an informal "panel 13", but it´s far from finished. It reaches from the british isles to the western end of panel 12. I dont think there´s any room for more starting civilizations (anyways, the celts never built cities and the goths and huns are not period), but it would mean some more non-city living space north of the current north-western map edge. The whole question of panel 13:s "be or not be" is based on weather the current map is discriminating towards the western civilizations chanses of winning, and if bringing more non citysite-areas inte the game would bring equality. Other that that, I personally think the panel is beautiful, but then again, I´m biased.

My current problem with finishing the north west is the area of the Sarmatians, which reaches from the Vistula to the Volga. The area is enormous and I´ve found it hard to find much reference material on the subject. The area named "Sarmatae" on panel 3 is where the sarmatians moved/were moved later in history. On my map, the area is renamed "Upper Danube"...

I know my players would scream bloody murder if more land were given to the western civilizations before attention is given to the eastern side. Hopefully, we will have some good indications of what needs to happen over there.

So far, having Iberia,Rome,Illyria,Thrace, and Crete all packed in there seems to be pretty viable.

Velusion might disagree.

Well specificly Advanced Civlization covers the periord from 8000BC to approximatly 200 AD (give or take a century). Most of the tribes you describe during that time don't exist or don't exsit as a viable civilizaion (they are the barbarian hordes). Rome itself was at the height of its power.

Now... if we ever did a Medevial version of Civ.... those ideas will be considered!

I wonder how well a Meso-America version would work. There are certainly enough tribes running around, and the Carribean makes for a nice Mediterranean Sea.

I'd like to try that! Though if this is ever completed I'd probably try China next...

McBeth, just curious, but where in the east does it seam to be a shortage? I take it the Old World is doing just fine, but is India and/or Central Asia to crowded?