that should be clear

now, is it true that you also get more techs when you are lower on the list of civs? and that you get worse land then. and that civs that are higher on the list get better land but less start techs?

Andz83 - I think the formula for starting techs is even more obtuse than the Powergraph chart. It *does* seem that the first few civs taken get the better terrain (perhaps because the software treats each civ individually, rather than counting them all first), and it *does* seem that the software tries to balance things afterwards by awarding techs. But there are so many possible variables that I really don't think it is possible for anyone to derive the method by play-testing.

I think the best you can do is use a general assumption that the start position and techs are roughly balanced as well as the software can arrange it.

Still, I have been host, chosen Romans, gotten a great starting position, *and* had extra techs. I think there is a built-in bias toward the host.

Each tribe gets placed in order on a good spot. (usually the late civs, esp. the greys, get worse starting locations, but it is not sure, and it IS also random, so it might be the other way round.

Then, depending on proximity to other civ/s, terrain and island size, you are granted more or less knowledges and/or another settler.