Map Size Balancing Philosophy

Posted on Thursday, December 22, 2016

As a player who almost always plays on small maps, I'm often curious about how map size seems to be ignored during balancing and I'm curious if this is intentional or not.


For example, the ideology trees have very different impacts based upon map size. On an insane galaxy one extra class 10 planet is a very small boost, on a small or tiny map it is a significant increase in power. 

The building that gives you 1 ideology point? On a tiny map you have barely any spare tiles, on an insane map it's far easier to populate a group of worlds with these.


I haven't really seen this issue discussed in any of the dev journals. Would any of the devs care to share the teams thoughts? Are the balance differences a boon, making different strategies important on different map sizes, or simply a balance problem?


I used to play GalCiv 2 an awful lot and I eventually learned that on a small map the Spin Control Centre was something to beeline for. The boost it gave to apparent power was small on huge maps but on a small one it meant i could basically ignore my military and the AI players would all fear my supposed enormous military power.