How much area does a single tile cover in Civ?

SYKOJAK said:
Correct! Or.... smaller maps could mean a smaller selection of the planet's surface?! Hense, a huge map is the entire surface. But a standard map could be Continent size. I will let the real mathematicians do their magic, to find the real surface area of each map size type.
Click to expand...

That doesn't work for maps that wrap horizontally. it can't be just a section of the world if you can go back to the starting point by going always east or west.

Anyway why not? Clearly all these maps aren't all places from planet Earth, the smaller ones are just... very tiny planets with... uh... inexplicably high gravity...


Going further with the math, the distance between parallel sides of the hexagons is about 107.5 km (which means pre-bronze age archers can fire at targets more than 200 km away... just... wow!)

for duel maps (24 squares) that would be a planet with a circumference of merely 2,580 km (for reference earth's circumference is 40,075 km)
for tiny maps (56 squares) that would be 6,020 km
for small maps (66 squares) 7,095 km
for standard maps (80 squares) 8,600 km
for large maps (104 squares) 11,180 km
for huge maps (128 squares) 13,760 km

So to conclude, the largest map available is actually very little compared to the land of our real planet.
To be of a comparable size the map should be 372 squares wide.
 
I have been curious to know, too.

The 4 sticking points are huge cities fitting into one hex (although they do encroach over neighbouring I guess that the length of one hex is around hexes), early ranged units, movement in relation to turn time (e.g, 1 turn represents 20 years in classical era) and 1UPT. Early ranged units and 1UPT suggest that the hexes represent a rather small area that can only fit a cohort of soldiers (around 1,000 - 2,000 soldiers). Otherwise, how on earth can an archer shoot up to 20+km away?! If they're on a mountain, maybe, but that only applies to Carthage. Huge cities fitting into one tile and movement in relation to time suggest that the hexes represent a rather large area. Otherwise, how on earth could a huge city with, say, 30 citizens, perhaps representing the current size of Hong Kong, fit into a tile with an area of just 200sq km? And why on earth would it take 20 years just to cover a few hundred km?

I am on the side that argues that each hex represents a small area (perhaps even no bigger than a few sq km), because cities these days rely on high density to cope with growing population. Unless you are superman, it is impossible to shoot an arrow or fire an arrow more than 10km away. With movement, you would have to consider having to settle and acclimatise to new environments before venturing further, as well as setting up camp for the night, looking for food and water to nourish the troops, etc etc.

We also need to be aware that this is just a game, and that just about all games have to balance between reality and gameplay. Too much reality and the game is unplayable. Too little reality and the game is utter nonsense.
 
Despite the fact that I don't own CiV, I always assumed that the area of one hex was 3 square miles, and cities/resources/units were just scaled up for clarity. As for small maps, what about it just being a smaller planet? Why not imagine a gravity-enhancing artifact at the center of the world? As for archers...

[beat]

They just get closer to their targets.

Oh, and the 1/2 inch guy is hilarious.
 
I am totally in agreement with Killbray and Sendos. In order for any game to properly work, a designer has to balancee the game's realism with its playability. Only on the surface of the moon or another very lowgravity environment is an archer going to shoot an arrow 20 km.
 
Damn, at first I was here thinking that the distance between parallel sides of the hexagons was only about 20 km... Thats because I thought that something like the Mount Olympus would cover an entire hex.

But then I saw the size of London on Google Earth and I extended that size to 60 km (given London would cover an entire hex).

Then I came here and saw these numbers of more than 100 km. Oh dear.
 
I thought smaller maps just had larger tiles, but maybe you are right?

Killlbray said:
Anyway why not? Clearly all these maps aren't all places from planet Earth, the smaller ones are just... very tiny planets with... uh... inexplicably high gravity...
Click to expand...

 
Killlbray said:
That doesn't work for maps that wrap horizontally. it can't be just a section of the world if you can go back to the starting point by going always east or west.

Anyway why not? Clearly all these maps aren't all places from planet Earth, the smaller ones are just... very tiny planets with... uh... inexplicably high gravity...


Going further with the math, the distance between parallel sides of the hexagons is about 107.5 km (which means pre-bronze age archers can fire at targets more than 200 km away... just... wow!)

for duel maps (24 squares) that would be a planet with a circumference of merely 2,580 km (for reference earth's circumference is 40,075 km)
for tiny maps (56 squares) that would be 6,020 km
for small maps (66 squares) 7,095 km
for standard maps (80 squares) 8,600 km
for large maps (104 squares) 11,180 km
for huge maps (128 squares) 13,760 km

So to conclude, the largest map available is actually very little compared to the land of our real planet.
To be of a comparable size the map should be 372 squares wide.
Click to expand...

Hmm, so in that case, even the huge Earth map is still nowhere near representing Earth's actual size?

I've been wondering about that. Even on huge, places like the British Isles and Japan still can't get represented in enough detail. Perhaps a 372-hex-wide map would possess finer detail. :goodjob:
 
yes but ppl make maps bigger than huge as mods dont they. so there are bigger earths than the one firaxis intended us to fight over...
 
sendos said:
I have been curious to know, too.

The 4 sticking points are huge cities fitting into one hex (although they do encroach over neighbouring I guess that the length of one hex is around hexes), early ranged units, movement in relation to turn time (e.g, 1 turn represents 20 years in classical era) and 1UPT. Early ranged units and 1UPT suggest that the hexes represent a rather small area that can only fit a cohort of soldiers (around 1,000 - 2,000 soldiers). Otherwise, how on earth can an archer shoot up to 20+km away?! If they're on a mountain, maybe, but that only applies to Carthage. Huge cities fitting into one tile and movement in relation to time suggest that the hexes represent a rather large area. Otherwise, how on earth could a huge city with, say, 30 citizens, perhaps representing the current size of Hong Kong, fit into a tile with an area of just 200sq km? And why on earth would it take 20 years just to cover a few hundred km?

I am on the side that argues that each hex represents a small area (perhaps even no bigger than a few sq km), because cities these days rely on high density to cope with growing population. Unless you are superman, it is impossible to shoot an arrow or fire an arrow more than 10km away. With movement, you would have to consider having to settle and acclimatise to new environments before venturing further, as well as setting up camp for the night, looking for food and water to nourish the troops, etc etc.

We also need to be aware that this is just a game, and that just about all games have to balance between reality and gameplay. Too much reality and the game is unplayable. Too little reality and the game is utter nonsense.
Click to expand...

You forget that the units would be able to move about in the area, One can and often would have to assume that when bombarding/attacking the units on both side go at each other on the borders, the archers wouldn't be bombarding from the opposite end of their area, but would be up at the border of it.
 
Killlbray said:
2,580 km (for reference earth's circumference is 40,075 km)

for huge maps (128 squares) 13,760 km

So to conclude, the largest map available is actually very little compared to the land of our real planet.
Click to expand...

Well, this fits the scale of game :D I don't really expect my Huge Earth Map to be as detailed as real Earth, with 20 huge cities in Japan alone :D
 
Killlbray said:
That doesn't work for maps that wrap horizontally. it can't be just a section of the world if you can go back to the starting point by going always east or west.

Anyway why not? Clearly all these maps aren't all places from planet Earth, the smaller ones are just... very tiny planets with... uh... inexplicably high gravity...


Going further with the math, the distance between parallel sides of the hexagons is about 107.5 km (which means pre-bronze age archers can fire at targets more than 200 km away... just... wow!)

for duel maps (24 squares) that would be a planet with a circumference of merely 2,580 km (for reference earth's circumference is 40,075 km)
for tiny maps (56 squares) that would be 6,020 km
for small maps (66 squares) 7,095 km
for standard maps (80 squares) 8,600 km
for large maps (104 squares) 11,180 km
for huge maps (128 squares) 13,760 km

So to conclude, the largest map available is actually very little compared to the land of our real planet.
To be of a comparable size the map should be 372 squares wide.
Click to expand...

Those archers might shoot 200km away, but on the other hand, they have 40 years to do so!
 
Humans beings in the world of Civ may be able to shoot arrows 200 km away, but it also takes them 40 years to walk that distance.
 
It covers the area of a game tile...It is a game and it doesn't work to a real life scale...live with it!
 
masternetra said:
You forget that the units would be able to move about in the area, One can and often would have to assume that when bombarding/attacking the units on both side go at each other on the borders, the archers wouldn't be bombarding from the opposite end of their area, but would be up at the border of it.
Click to expand...

Longbows.
 
Well, history books say they were quite good at aiming, maybe they also made good use of the wind directions?

Or maybe wormholes.
 
uh why's it gotta be cylindrical? does a base hexagon not translatable to a sphere? pretty sure it can.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

kryat
Borders and True Diplomacy in Civ VII
Replies
1
Views
347
luca 83
luca 83
J
[Civ2] Does a city need to be directly on a river tile to get river tile bonuses?
Replies
2
Views
790
jsclev
J
C
conservative civ 6 should use sote level world gen
Replies
0
Views
597
civilizationfanatic2000
C
Leoreth
New and Changed Civilizations in 1.18
9 10 11
Replies
200
Views
26K
HNation
HNation
Recursive
  • Locked
New Version - 3.8.3 (August 27, 2023)
3 4 5
Replies
96
Views
13K
Recursive
Recursive
Top Bottom