Giant Earth Map (Eurasia Upscaled), 24 civs

Let us know when the modified dll file that works with the latest patch is out.

First off nice map...I almost exclusively play on Earth maps and this is one fo the best.

So far I've played a few games as Incas, Aztecs and Romans and so far I've liked it. The extra wheat for Europe allows nicely for small civs to still become powerful, though I d think the Americas get kind of shafted. Incas pretty much get screwed by barbarians if they can't get the GReat Wall (and so far Germany has been the first to complete it in two of the games) and I found population to grow pretty slow in most of central and south america.

I do think you have to play with Thai rather than Celts, otherwise India and China become monsters easily and without any holdups. It also frees up Europe slightly and lets Greece/Russia kind of build up to compete.

Can't wait to get the patch fix.

Not that I am overly worried, but does this map have a lot of slowdown as the empires grow?

dozens said:

First off nice map...I almost exclusively play on Earth maps and this is one fo the best.

So far I've played a few games as Incas, Aztecs and Romans and so far I've liked it. The extra wheat for Europe allows nicely for small civs to still become powerful, though I d think the Americas get kind of shafted. Incas pretty much get screwed by barbarians if they can't get the GReat Wall (and so far Germany has been the first to complete it in two of the games) and I found population to grow pretty slow in most of central and south america.

I do think you have to play with Thai rather than Celts, otherwise India and China become monsters easily and without any holdups. It also frees up Europe slightly and lets Greece/Russia kind of build up to compete.

Can't wait to get the patch fix.

Click to expand...

In my test play games, Incan were always doing quite well - so well that I think in my latest release, I gave it Prince difficulty to offset a little. So I am not sure why you experience it differently.

abuaftab said:

Not that I am overly worried, but does this map have a lot of slowdown as the empires grow?

Click to expand...

That is the trade off, bigger map means slower turntime. Hard to say whether it is acceptable. At the moment, I can tolerate the slowdown.

Ghengis

Great map. I really want to play it, but I keep getting allocation error crash to desktop on saves and autosaves at about 500 AD or so. I have AMD 3200, 2 gig RAM, and a 7600 GeForce card. I went to minimum graphics, but got the crash again a short while later. Is there anything else I can do?

Really like this map!

Genghis,

Its good to see that you are back. I have not played the map since the new patch. I will down load the latest 2.1 and give it a go.

Worm,

Even the best computers have trouble past 500AD. This map is will push the limits of each system. Mostly in the memory and system speed. I have a 3.4 Ghz Pent IV with 2Gb of memory and turns take many minutes if I even make it to 500AD. I would also suggest keeping an eye on your taskmanager and watching your memory to see if you are maxing it out before the crash.

I would sugest if you want to play past the 1000AD modify the game settings so that all civs start in a different era.

Slowdown

I wonder if it depends on the civ you play? I've tested out a number of civs and so far I found that the most slowdown was with playing as the Romans. I have got the furthest in time with the Indians. There is a slowdown as the game progesses but it's tolerable. It's been rather cool. The only downer that I can think of is the fact that the American continental civs are blocked out of trade and or religion as compared with all the rest. Seems a little bit harsh that the ocean blocks them off. I wonder if the game would be "better" if the New World was reachable earlier? Play testing maybe?

BTW there are no deer in Australia, except in zoos. Game balance?

Hi, I love this mod but I really want to play as churchill, and I'm not allowed to select him as my leader when I am the english. I see that one of the patch updates says that victoria is set as the english leader. Is there any way for me to change this?

I've searched everywhere I can think of inside of the files that accompany this mod. The only file that contains any reference to victoria or churchill has them both set as available.

I've also searched the modding faqs and none tell me where I can set leader availability. Please let me know how to do this.

Thanks

Lord Oden,
I have started building my first scenario on Giant World Map - I picked 1200AD, the Genghis Khan's Age. This time, I wish to get more help from other people for getting all the historical settings as historical as possible. I will set up a excel file like i did with the map and see if I can get some voluntees to help filling in it.

abuaftab,
I think Opening up America to the old world too early is not as fun, in my opinion.
Please see post 23 on page 2 for deers in Australia.

akjone02,
You only need to edit the worldbuilder file in text editor and changing the leader from Victoria to Churchill.

Genghis,

I am excited about your scenario. Starting in the year 1200 AD is a good time to start. What are your plans? Are you going to add just historical cities, standard units, standard techs, or are you going to add modded units and techs?

I guess the main question is what is your goal. Having a firm goal to reach will make it easier to achieve.

I would be happy just using the standard set. But you have already tweaked a few things like the "super grassland". Even trying to keep things simple and historical will be a challange and time consuming.

Good luck

Great, thanks! I didn't think of that. Just started a game as the English and its going great. Love this map

why is it tellin me "failing to read worldbuiler save" when i load it up? just got 2.1 with the new 2.08 patch. am starting it up by clicking the wbsave. is this wrong? always worked before.

EDIT: works now. i'm just lazy when it comes to loading a mod.

oh another thing. my first contact with egypt was with a lion on top of a mountain in the northern himalayas.

The thing that irritates me about most C3C world maps is they are way too small. The idea of their being "one tile" space between Washington and Baltimore is preposterous for a "world map." I know why it happens this way: limit to ~500 cities in C3C (or at least earlier unpatched versions of it). Also, I know that, when a map gets truly huge, it slows down the game, but that just means buy a faster/bigger chip and more memory!

The key thing to consider here is this: what are the two closest-lying very-large cities that any Earth world map MUST have on it in order to do justice to Earth?

Washington and Baltimore downtowns are about 39 miles apart according to map quest

It looks like Essen and Dusseldorf (Nordrhein-Westfalen, Germany) are about 23 miles apart, and they have both become major cities in the last 300 years. If these two German cities are not the most closely packed major cities on Earth it is probably irrelevant because going any smaller in scale is probably not feasible.

If the Civ4 standard 3 tile separation between city centers is followed (with Essen and Dusseldorf as the closest possible cities) then that gives us 7.7 miles hexes. I know what you are thinking . . . a ridiculously, incredibly massive map . . . maybe it is simply impossible, but if it IS possible . . . ?

Using the figures of 25,000 for east-west, and 10,000 for north-south (allowing circumnavigation of the Old and New Worlds with max latitudes of about 77 north and 64 south), in order to render an Earth map with tiles that are 7.5 miles on a side, we'd need the following size map (in tiles):

1334 tiles north-south axis
3334 tiles east-west axis

If we use the more precise figures of 24,900 and 9750 we get

1300 tiles north-south axis
3320 tiles east-west axis

Anyone know what the maximum map size is in the Civ4 mapmaker editor?

Anyone have any idea what would HAPPEN in terms of game speed if you had a Civ4 map of this scale, WITH all 2006 major cities, and infrastructure, and then added the units? Would it require Deep Blue or something to run it?

ADDIT: One major thing that would help with game slow-down, as well as being probably critical for realism, is to impose stacking limits. Say for example 8 units in a city, 7 in grassland, 7 in plains, 5 in desert, 16 in water tiles (assuming many ships represent much smaller numbers of vehicles and guys than do most Civ land units), 6 in hills, 4 in jungles, 3 in mountains (distinct terrain type from "snow-peaked mountains), 2 in snow-peaked mountains (impassable to all but mountain units).

Anthropoid, you have too much free time.

im making a 1000AD scenario using this map, i have 6 cities in france and spain already, i think ill be editing the XML for the maintenance becuase 6 cities at start would kill the AI that has to play for Saladin.

ZB2 said:

Anthropoid, you have too much free time.

im making a 1000AD scenario using this map, i have 6 cities in france and spain already, i think ill be editing the XML for the maintenance becuase 6 cities at start would kill the AI that has to play for Saladin.

Click to expand...

Oh no I don't! Its called PROCRASTINATION

My main interest is just to make the BIGGEST POSSILE ACCURATE EARTH MAP that is runnable in Warlords Civ4. I figure it would take me at least a year of working on it a couple hours each evening. I love making maps, and have actually finished a few for C3C so I might not be aspiring beyond my predecent. I'm talking about this with my buddies over in the "El Justo's The Cold War" thread too

Quote:
Originally Posted by Anthropoid
Using the figures of 25,000 for east-west, and 10,000 for north-south, in order to render an Earth map with tiles that are 7.5 miles on a side, we'd need the following size map (in tiles):

1334 tiles north-south axis
3334 tiles east-west axis

If we use the more precise figures of 24,900 and 9750 we get

1300 tiles north-south axis
3320 tiles east-west axis

Anyone know what the maximum map size is in the Civ4 mapmaker editor?

Whoa, whoa, whoa! Have a look at the computer performance comments about the 210 x 90 map I mentioned in my post above...oh, I see you are already in that thread.
That 210 x 90 map has 18,900 tiles. You are proposing a map with 4,316,000 tiles, 228 times as large. I work at IBM, but don't have access to any of our supercomputers, which I think is what you need to play a map that huge.

As much as I would love to play such a map, I don't think there are computers available to the general public that would play such a map. Then again, to hand make a map that size would take you a few years, so by then technology may have caught up.

Click to expand...

The key statement I'd like you (or anyone for that matter ) to clarify is:

"don't have access to any of our supercomputers, which I think is what you need to play a map that huge."

The key phrase here being "I think." If you think 4 million tiles is too much, then how much is the limit? You tell me how big it can be and I'll commit to building the map in Warlords for next Xmas!

I just DLed Rhye's huge map, and also auto-generated a huge map in Warlords. Looks like the "biggies" at this point are about 210 x 90 or in that ballpark. Perhaps this is as much as is "possible" given procesing speeds but let me be frank: a map of Earth that is only 210 "steps" in circumference is ABSOLUTELY PREPOSTEROUS. This is my fundamental gripe about all Civ scenarios that seek to render accurate and realistic alternate history scenarios at large scales: the scaling is totally out of whack.

An in-shape human being can walk 20 to 30 miles per day (which is generous assuming things like mountains and deserts,and taking time off to rest etc.). This remains about the max for a modern day foot-soldier unit. Assuming a rate of 20 miles per day (which is VERY fast) that means it should take AT LEAST 1245 "turns" for a warrior to circumnavigate the Earth. Instead, it is possible in the current max-size "world maps" in 16% that required time-frame: 210 turns.

Click to expand...

So my question is: what is the MAXIMUM size map that is possible for a top-notch machine to run in Civ4 Warlords?

Anthropoid said:

So my question is: what is the MAXIMUM size map that is possible for a top-notch machine to run in Civ4 Warlords?

Click to expand...

Infinite Size. just infinite. providing you live in a naighbourhood with lots of cottages to fund your massive tech race to the future tech in 2050.

ZB2 said:

Infinite Size. just infinite. providing you live in a naighbourhood with lots of cottages to fund your massive tech race to the future tech in 2050.

Click to expand...

Well luckily we don't need infinite

Anything smaller-scale than 1300 x 3320 tiles would be overkill.

i think 1 tile for 50-100 miles might get it as real as possible, but trying to have every city on the planet, and every town and 'other locales' represented as a cottage plot would take it to the extreme, and even then, what sort of scenario would you have with it? 'play modern day were everyone hates the west but when you try to act, the west turns against you, marking you as the enemy so they can suck up to others' scenario?

if you make a map that big that is the whole world, only a post modern scenario (WW3) or some of the big wars from history, or 1000AD scenario would make it worth the load time