Yes, that's right - the 362 tile width or height restrictions are not mandatory! There's no reason that one (not both) of them can't be greater on a Civ3 map! Created and tested! BIQ's attached at the end of this post to show documentation of this ability.

The inspiration for poking around with this came from Leaven's thread about the maximum world size on the front page of this forum today. Conventional wisdom has always held 362x362 to be the maximum, but I already knew from hex editing that the 7-flavor limit was artificial, at least in terms of what the game can handle (I have not done testing to see if more than seven flavors were actually used by the computer with in-game calculations). So why not the map size, too?

It turns out the 362 tile limit isn't arbitrary. 362*362/2 = 65522, just below 65536, aka 2^16, or the maximum value of a signed integer in 32-bit systems. And indeed, Civ3 cannot handle more than 65536 tiles. An attempt to use a map larger than this will result in the preview looking either like nearly all ocean, or very wonky (see the file 512x256=65536.biq in the ZIP), and trying to load such a file in either the editor or Civ3Conquests will cause a crash to desktop. However, Civ3 does not, as far as I've been able to tell, have a limit on the number of horizontal or vertical tiles - that is entirely in the editor's settings. If there is a limit, it is very high. I've tested with 710 horizontal tiles and 1191 vertical tiles (in separate BIQ's). Considering that the total number of tiles must be below 65536, those tests (both included in the ZIP) already result in very stretched-out maps.

Credit also goes out to Steph, whose editor's map tools made the creation of these very large BIQ's possible without excessive effort. Note that his editor does not currently support editing the actual terrain, but the regular editor does support editing these files, including the terrain. Thus, it appears that there is nothing preventing a map maker from making, for instance, a 450x250 map (remembering to divide by two because of the isometric grid, thus yielding 56,250 tiles), provided they use Steph's editor's map tools to expand an initial map, and the regular editor to create the actual terrain.

The game seems to function properly with these BIQ's as well - a test on the 110x1191 BIQ, which clocks in just a shade below the limit at 65,505 tiles, shows it working properly throughout the AI's turn.

(warning: the zip decompresses to about 12 MB from 300-some KB. Those decompressed Civ3 BIQ's really are not compressed!)

:clap: :clap: :clap:

I'll even second, "Glory to the ..." ... Hypnofish? :hmm:

Best,

Oz

Great Discovery Quintillis... This will come in handy for many people who want larger game maps.

To make sure that I understand this correctly, you are using Steph's editor to make the larger height/width maps, and then the regular editor to set the terrain.

The regular editor will not go farther than 362 either for height or width. It this a correct understanding?

Yeah, it's right. However, remember, that the regular editor can still add terrain to maps which have already extended past 362, although you probably knew that.

That's an amazing discovery! Great job, now to await for the next 1268x896 world map WW2 scenario to come out :)

Tom

Yeah, it's right. However, remember, that the regular editor can still add terrain to maps which have already extended past 362, although you probably knew that.

Hmmm, does not help me that much, since I have yet to get Steph's editor working on my Windows box. It loads nice, and then does nothing. As for what the regular editor does, I am still learning. I am sort of leary of super large maps because of the in between turn time becomes excessive. Depending on the number of civilizations and barbarians, I get bored waiting on the turns of a 256 by 256 map, since I do most of my playing on my Mac Ibook laptop, non-Intel chip.

However, a nice long skinny sea map would be fun to play on with no wrap around. Put a small continent at each end, and then add a bunch of resource rich islands, and have some fun. Put some nice barbarians, boosted of course, on each island for added diversity, and see where I meet the AI.

I heard in some thread somewhere the possibility of a ringworld scenario. This makes it more possible to scale.

To make sure that I understand this correctly, you are using Steph's editor to make the larger height/width maps, and then the regular editor to set the terrain.

The regular editor will not go farther than 362 either for height or width. It this a correct understanding?

Yep, that's correct.

That's an amazing discovery! Great job, now to await for the next 1268x896 world map WW2 scenario to come out :)

Tom

Hold on - you missed part of my first post there. There's still the 65536 tile limit (might actually be 65535 - I didn't try anything closer than 65522). So a 1268x896 map still won't be possible. What would be possible is, for instance, a 435x300 tile map, giving a bit more east-west detail, and leaving out, say, the poles, or allowing a better representation of certain areas that are either more wide than tall, or vice versa.

Hmmm, does not help me that much, since I have yet to get Steph's editor working on my Windows box. It loads nice, and then does nothing. As for what the regular editor does, I am still learning. I am sort of leary of super large maps because of the in between turn time becomes excessive. Depending on the number of civilizations and barbarians, I get bored waiting on the turns of a 256 by 256 map, since I do most of my playing on my Mac Ibook laptop, non-Intel chip.

However, a nice long skinny sea map would be fun to play on with no wrap around. Put a small continent at each end, and then add a bunch of resource rich islands, and have some fun. Put some nice barbarians, boosted of course, on each island for added diversity, and see where I meet the AI.

Do you happen to have 64-bit Windows? It seems that Steph's editor doesn't cooperate with 64-bit XP, although I have no idea whether it works with 64-bit Vista. If you use 32-bit Windows, I don't know why it wouldn't work, given all the standard prerequisites are fulfilled.

I heard in some thread somewhere the possibility of a ringworld scenario. This makes it more possible to scale.

Yep, that's part of what I had in mind for where this might be useful.

Do you happen to have 64-bit Windows? It seems that Steph's editor doesn't cooperate with 64-bit XP, although I have no idea whether it works with 64-bit Vista. If you use 32-bit Windows, I don't know why it wouldn't work, given all the standard prerequisites are fulfilled.

I will need to check with my son as to whether or not the XP version I am using is 32-bit or 64-bit. I bought the computer for editing from his high school, and he set up Windows for me, as I am a Mac person. If that is the problem, then I guess that I will not be using it.

Nice. Another limitation overthrown. Sort of.

Good find Quint.... Now maybe someone could make that Halo scenario that everyone has been talking about making for several years now....

Hold on - you missed part of my first post there. There's still the 65536 tile limit (might actually be 65535 - I didn't try anything closer than 65522). So a 1268x896 map still won't be possible. What would be possible is, for instance, a 435x300 tile map, giving a bit more east-west detail, and leaving out, say, the poles, or allowing a better representation of certain areas that are either more wide than tall, or vice versa.

I am not sure what you mean by a tile limit of 65536, when you say that a 435 X 300 tile map would work, since that is a 130,500 tile map and 362 X 362 is 131.022 tiles. Also, a correctly proportioned map of Earth, showing the entire planet from pole to pole, would be twice as wide as it would be high, say from 360 X 180 to 480 X 240.


Do you happen to have 64-bit Windows? It seems that Steph's editor doesn't cooperate with 64-bit XP, although I have no idea whether it works with 64-bit Vista. If you use 32-bit Windows, I don't know why it wouldn't work, given all the standard prerequisites are fulfilled.

I checked with my son, my Windows expert, since I am a Mac person, and he verified that I am using 32-bit Windows XP on my Windows game editing box. I will have him take a look at things the next time he is home from college, and try to figure out what is going on.

There are only (X*Y)/2 tiles in the map because of the staggered columns. It took me a while to catch on to that too.

I heard in some thread somewhere the possibility of a ringworld scenario. This makes it more possible to scale.you're probably referring to a thread I posted. Thanks, Quintillus. now I shoild have more flexibility in making some (:mischief:) playable ringworld maps.

I'm looking forward to a playable 16x8192 map. Just sayin'

I'm looking forward to a playable 16x8192 map. Just sayin'The ring orbital maps I've played messed around with around with look better with a vertical orientation, imho. And less than 20 tiles wide doesn't give much elbow room. That would mean 40 x ? - giving an effective width of 20 tiles. 48 x 1360 (including a 2 tile wide border of impassible terrain on each side for the ringwalls) would give a nice large playable area. Still not large enough to do Ringworld in proportion, however.

The ring orbital maps I've played messed around with around with look better with a vertical orientation, imho. And less than 20 tiles wide doesn't give much elbow room. That would mean 40 x ? - giving an effective width of 20 tiles. 48 x 1360 (including a 2 tile wide border of impassible terrain on each side for the ringwalls) would give a nice large playable area. Still not large enough to do Ringworld in proportion, however.

Well, given a movement rate of 1 to start with, if you started from one end and headed for the other end, moving straight with no deviations, it would take you 1360 to get to the other end, or more that an entire game, assuming just one unit. With multiple units, and lots of deviations, I would say that a 48 X 1360 tile map would be enough to keep a Louis Wu player busy for a complete game. Even if you add Speaker and fly cycles.

Plus, you have that entire map of Earth to explore on the World Ocean, along with Mars, and Kzinti. Ideally on the Earth map, you would need to do an Arctic Polar projection or maybe an Antarctic Polar Projection, to keep Antarctica frozen as a single ice and land mass.

The ring orbital maps I've played messed around with around with look better with a vertical orientation, imho. And less than 20 tiles wide doesn't give much elbow room. That would mean 40 x ? - giving an effective width of 20 tiles. 48 x 1360 (including a 2 tile wide border of impassible terrain on each side for the ringwalls) would give a nice large playable area. Still not large enough to do Ringworld in proportion, however.

No - but much overlooked are (IMHO) Iain Banks' superior "Culture" series of books, in which "Orbitals" (solar orbiting "ringworlds" of approximately planetary mass) should be feasible.

Best,

Oz

No - but much overlooked are (IMHO) Iain Banks' superior "Culture" series of books, in which "Orbitals" (solar orbiting "ringworlds" of approximately planetary mass) should be feasible.If you look at the thread where I posted a scenario starter pack including an "Orbital" map (based on Gaea) (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=324219) you'll see that I have some Culture references & even tech icons. I have read all the Culture novels. Some, like Player of Games, multiple times.

If you look at the thread where I posted a scenario starter pack including an "Orbital" map (based on Gaea) (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=324219) you'll see that I have some Culture references & even tech icons. I have read all the Culture novels. Some, like Player of Games, multiple times.

Cool. Great minds think alike - and so do we. :D