Can you see the omalos in CivDOS?

Posidonius

Civherder
Joined
Jun 28, 2015
Messages
201
Location
US of gawldarn A
In CivWIN i can see the omalos, but didn't see mention of it on this forum's decade+ of archives. Makes me wonder: can you see it in the DOS version? Some civvers have seen the Seam In The World, the longitudinal parallel across which you can not connect roads, but nobody has talked about the omalos, and most folks here play in DOSbox. Every detail of gameplay is identical in CivWIN, the only differences are presentational. I am certain that the omalos exists in the DOS version as well, but no one ever talks about it. Makes me wonder, have a growing suspicion, that you can't see it in CivDOS?

Don't know what it's supposed to be called, but i call it the "omalos" after the Greek concept of the Bellybutton Of The World. Most old cultures had the same idea. Aztecs considered the Temple Of The Sun in Tenochitlan to be the navel of the world, and the Subcontinent is littered with stupas which are all copies of one very ancient stupa, which Hinduism considers the navel of the world. Naturally, ancient Australians thought it was Ayers Rock, and ancient Americans thought it was at Devil's Tower.

In CivWIN i can see an odd square, as a distortion of the mouse cursor. It acts like there's a unit there which i can move, but there's not. Sometimes it's on open ground, sometimes the omalos is on a rival's city, can even find the omalos inside tracts of darkness covering squares not discovered yet.

For years, was always just "hey that's weird." Then i thought the omalos was marking a spot at a balance point of the world's population, your rivals included. Later, realized that i never saw the omalos on water, so logically it can't be a midpoint for any collective human statistic, duh? Then one game, i found the omalos early on, and the next rival i conquered? That color respawned right on top of it.

At first the Civ1 omalos was a complete mystery to me, but now i (think i) understand that it is the AI's programmatic "hook" into the gameboard. Think about it, in 4000 BC if you are the first player to move, then there are no cities planetwide. The AI has units, but no centers to expand from. Just like booting an OS, there must be an initial process thread for everything else to branch off from. The omalos seems to be a very early branch in Civ1.

Observed phenomena led to testing, and now i know that it's tied into how the game decides where to locate a newly spawned rival civ. Before you knock over the capital of a 1st-of-its-color rival, the AI has already decided where to locate the replacement's larval Settler. In a game where there are rival civs but no rival cities, where is the omalos? You guessed it: on the larval Settler who is highest in the turn order. That spot is the AI's prime directive. From a game design standpoint, that really sounds like a part of the initial idling process, the base AI, the ghost in the machine.

And the omalos moves. Early, had no idea why it moved. Then connected the shifting omalos to reports of overseas wars. But when i learned how to kill off rival civs and settle islands in a certain order, i finally learned how to move the omalos by myself.

Haven't the foggiest how to mod it, can mildly hack it, but there's no mention of it on this forum, except for one possible hinting Q many, many years ago which went unanswered. That makes me wonder if the omalos is invisible in CivDOS? Is it just a quirk of CivWIN's broader range of cursor styles over DOS, making the omalos visible only in CivWIN?
 
I have never played CIVWin - always CIVDos - and I have never seen or heard about the "omalos".

This is as i suspected, no one has talked about it here. I have not played CivDOS for 15 years, and don't remember: can you move units with the mouse, or only with the keyboard?

If you can move units with the mouse, does the mouse pointer change into a smaller directional arrow when you hover it at the edges and corners of the active unit? I suspect not; don't think DOS can do pretty tricks like that.

In CivWIN, there are a few mouse cursors. There's the normal top-left-facing arrow, an hourglass when the game is thinking about something, and when you start a new game, Civ makes the cursor into a little Earth with the Americas facing forward. And, when the active unit can move, the cursor changes to a smaller directional arrow when hovered over the edge or corner of that unit... the center of the unit is the normal cursor, so you can click to bring up the unit's info. Click when the cursor is a directional arrow, and the unit moves.

But those are all presentational things, not gameplay differences. Everything people talk about here, as far as playing Civ1, is identical in CivWIN. That is why i am certain that the omalos exists in CivDOS, even if you can't see it. And i think i figured out why you can't see it: because DOS can't do fancy cursor tricks.

But believe me: the omalos is real, and you have one in CivDOS.
 
This is as i suspected, no one has talked about it here. I have not played CivDOS for 15 years, and don't remember: can you move units with the mouse, or only with the keyboard?

If you can move units with the mouse, does the mouse pointer change into a smaller directional arrow when you hover it at the edges and corners of the active unit? I suspect not; don't think DOS can do pretty tricks like that.

Answering your questions:

1 - Yes, units can be controlled by both the keyboard and the mouse.
2 - Your suspicion is correct. The mouse pointer stays the same and always looks like a torch.
 
Answering your question:
The mouse pointer stays the same and always looks like a torch.

Thanks for the confirmation, it seems that the hook of the AI onto the gameboard was intended to be invisible, but the people who ported the code into winland didn't cover 100% of the possibilities.
 
If i knew a (free) way to make a video screen-capture, i'd show it to you. It is a map square which may be empty, may have an enemy unit or city on it, or i can walk a unit onto it if it's empty. In CivWin, when you move the mouse cursor around the edges and corners of your active unit, the cursor changes to a thick arrow. Click then, and your active unit moves that way. The omalos does the same thing, making it look like an enemy unit, or rival city, or even an empty patch of land, can be moved by you. Of course they can not be moved by you.

The omalos will never appear on water, mountains, hills, arctic/tundra, or on swamp/jungle, nor on any square near your own cities. In other words, it will only appear on a square where a respawned civ can appear. In fact, it marks the spot where the AI may place a respawned rival, should you destroy an enemy civ that turn. If you do that while one of your own units is on the omalos, the new civ's Settler appears and your own unit winks out of existence.

Say that there are two areas which are eligible for a respawned civ to appear. One will have the omalos. You destroy a rival, and if the respawn happens atop the omalos, then the omalos jumps to the other area. If the respawn happens at the other area, the omalos stays put. The position of the omalos changes as game situations change, and its position is recalculated by the AI whenever it needs to, even in the middle of your turn. Often, it moves and i can't find it for a while.

The omalos always exists in every game of Civ1, as long as there is a rival civ. And there is always a rival civ, because if there weren't, then the game would be over. I know that it marks respawn spots, and suspect that it does more than that. But the point of this thread, is that it exists in CivDOS, the only difference is that in CivDOS you can not see it, because the mouse cursor doesn't do tricks like directional arrows in DOS.
 
wtf is omalos ? )

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Omalos

...maybe?

.
.

Maybe something common in greek, turkey and/or eastern europe
- but not ...common in parts of the world elsewhere.


Better explain what 'omalos' means to you -
'deliver' a

disambiguation, Posidonius.

Don't know what it's supposed to be called, but i call it the "omalos" after the Greek concept of the Bellybutton Of The World ...
isn't ...clear enough.


... otherwise the babbasandreu may come and get you. ;)
 
Last edited:
Better explain what 'omalos' means to you - isn't ...clear enough.
'deliver' a
disambiguation, Posidonius.

In CivWIN i can see an odd square, as a distortion of the mouse cursor. It acts like there's a unit there which i can move, but there's not. Sometimes it's on open ground, sometimes the omalos is on a rival's city, can even find the omalos inside tracts of darkness covering squares not discovered yet.

Was running a game yesterday, trying to get quicker at trapping rival civs. Smacked Zulus and found the infant Babylonian Settler, and ran him up into a mountain range. At that point, the omalos is on top of the Baby Setty. It makes that Settler look like a unit i can move, even though it's not my color, so obviously i can't.

Try it yourself. Get a copy of CivWIN, install it (with Win7+ you need a VM), and play for a while. Eventually, you'll find the omalos and you'll say what i said: "what the heck is that?" Again, i am certain that it exists in CivDOS too; you just can't see it.

Now that i know more about how it behaves, am supremely curious about what the codebase may reveal about it, in case someone might examine the code and find the routine which calculates and recalculates the omalos position, he may say to himself "what the heck is that?" And, unable to see the omalos in CivDOS, that person might not grok what the code is doing. But, now knowing that the omalos exists, and having a field report of how it behaves, he or she might be able to connect a couple new dots, and further understand how the Civ1 AI does what it does.

That's what i would love to find out. It seems like a ridiculous waste of processor cycles and memory for the game to merely keep track of a potential new civ respawning site. This game was written when both resources were much more precious than today. For this reason, i strongly suspect that the omalos performs a more central role in the AI. Would love to know, but my Assembly skills are both rusty and rudimentary.
 
... Get a copy of CivWIN, install it (with Win7+ you need a VM ...
Oh no, never.
"Case closed."

:nono: ...just reminding the thread title of yours is

Can you see the omalos in CivDOS

1991 CivDos isn't CivWin of ~1995 (game engine, details of gameplay behaviour, bugs),
we had discussion about this here really often, in the last decade of the CivFanatics Forum.

But -finally- even /me understand your question,
and i guess there is such a 'function', a placeholder -
or whatever i would call it - in my own way
as a non-computer-language-programming human being.

i did see such things in the visible ai-moves when playing with partly still hidden map in CivDos 475.01 version's shift56 cheat, yes.
"...they come out of something, and they move into something" - preferrable if it's a still dark unexplored field (for the human player).
 
Last edited:
1991 CivDos isn't CivWin of ~1995 (game engine, details of gameplay behaviour, bugs),
we had discussion about this here really often, in the last decade of the CivFanatics Forum.

Would like to know more. Have read all the thread titles and delved into a couple hundred threads when it seemed to be about something i'm interested in, but we know that not all threads contain discussions strictly 'on topic' considering the title. Might you be able to give some links to threads where the differences between CivDOS and CivWIN are discussed, perhaps within a thread that appears to be about something unrelated?

Earlier this year, i did stumble over a post from a dozen years ago, from a CFF mainstay, saying that CivDOS and CivWIN were functionally identical. So far, i have found only one other difference in the engine, behavior, or bugs discussed here. That's the startling thing: all the bugs described here for CivDOS are found in CivWIN. You'd think some of them would have been cleaned up '91 - '95, but... no.

The other functional difference i found, so far, is that i can save the game in 4000 BC, which apparently CivDOS can not. Not exactly a world-shattering variance. The possibility does exist that the omalos i see was introduced into the codebase during the port to Win-land, but since 99.99% of the games are identical, i still don't think it is likely.

But i'm eager to learn about other differences between CivDOS and CivWIN, so please do share links to any threads where i might learn more!
 
Top Bottom