GeneralSpecific
Libertarian Capitalist
Looks like you might have to add a new later-day civ: Kosovo!
Happy Independence Day!
Happy Independence Day!
Accurate Earth Map in development
- Thread starter kevinman4404
- Start date
frekk
Scourge of St. Lawrence
re canals ... I don't really understand ... what do you mean like a floodplain? I would be thinking more like a blue road ... also are you planning to do away with the current functionality of forts and the possibility they allow for 2-tile canals? I don't know if I like that.
On the other hand ... two forts don't really look like a canal. A city built on a tile shouldn't automatically become a canal as it does now. These are good ideas.
As for what canals should look like, it kind of depends on which type of canal you're talking about and what your model is going to be. Senusret III's canal? Foss Dyke? The Grand Canal of China (that would be my pick)? Manchester Ship Canal? Suez Canal? Erie Canal? I think the most reasonable approach would be to pick the first canal that was used for shipping and had a very major impact on the economy and culture, for that I'd go with the Grand Canal of China. It practically built the nation into the shape it appears today, in much the same way as railroads built the US into its present day shape.
Most of the canals I've named look (except for a few areas that have been shored up with masonry or feature things like locks) like natural waterways for most of their length. For most of its length, so does the Panama:
http://www.vw.vccs.edu/vwhansd/his122/Images/panama-canal.jpg
However, I think it would confuse people to use a natural looking waterway even if you made it less winding, like a road or something. They would expect to see a more artificial look.
Mexico: the Yucatan should have more food resources. Corn. There has to be some mechanic to allow a large population there in ancient times, if it's just jungle with only a sugar or two it will be a very marginal area. The Yucatan and the Valley of Mexico were very, very densely populated for thousands of years, and held the biggest densities in the Americas from the first millenium BC until the mid-1800s. It should be alot better foodwise than, say, the Congo - despite the fact it is also more arid.
On the other hand ... two forts don't really look like a canal. A city built on a tile shouldn't automatically become a canal as it does now. These are good ideas.
As for what canals should look like, it kind of depends on which type of canal you're talking about and what your model is going to be. Senusret III's canal? Foss Dyke? The Grand Canal of China (that would be my pick)? Manchester Ship Canal? Suez Canal? Erie Canal? I think the most reasonable approach would be to pick the first canal that was used for shipping and had a very major impact on the economy and culture, for that I'd go with the Grand Canal of China. It practically built the nation into the shape it appears today, in much the same way as railroads built the US into its present day shape.
Most of the canals I've named look (except for a few areas that have been shored up with masonry or feature things like locks) like natural waterways for most of their length. For most of its length, so does the Panama:
http://www.vw.vccs.edu/vwhansd/his122/Images/panama-canal.jpg
However, I think it would confuse people to use a natural looking waterway even if you made it less winding, like a road or something. They would expect to see a more artificial look.
Mexico: the Yucatan should have more food resources. Corn. There has to be some mechanic to allow a large population there in ancient times, if it's just jungle with only a sugar or two it will be a very marginal area. The Yucatan and the Valley of Mexico were very, very densely populated for thousands of years, and held the biggest densities in the Americas from the first millenium BC until the mid-1800s. It should be alot better foodwise than, say, the Congo - despite the fact it is also more arid.
kevinman4404
Lightning Warrior
A new resource (and certainly not the best looking one)... goats:
~~~
A picture (no trees) of Albania and area, a recent rerequest from Shqype. I have granted North Albania/Kosovo a natural gas and lead.
~~~
@Frekk: I'm not sure if we are thinking of the same thing. It seems right now you are thinking of building a canal through solid land. This would lead to unideal gameplay. I was thinking of the St. Laurence canal you requested, and was thinking of making rivers into canals that ships can use (should they be short and connect two bodies of water, though I currently know no way to enforce this). As for the art, I just wanted, as you just suggested, a modern riverside industrial texture.
Here is what I was thinking, applied using the St. Lawrence River and Montréal as an example:
The biggest issue with what I've shown is that the canal is only meant to be on one side of the river, and that looks a bit odd, especially on straight rivers.
(and a note: currently forts are not involved. If they were, they would be two totally seperate things).
~~~
I had done much of North American resources/terrain fixes, but everything I have done since last update, including a fixed Eastern Europe, was lost in a serious system error. I had noticed an anomaly in an American River, clicked to fix it and wham.
Kevin
~~~
A picture (no trees) of Albania and area, a recent rerequest from Shqype. I have granted North Albania/Kosovo a natural gas and lead.
~~~
@Frekk: I'm not sure if we are thinking of the same thing. It seems right now you are thinking of building a canal through solid land. This would lead to unideal gameplay. I was thinking of the St. Laurence canal you requested, and was thinking of making rivers into canals that ships can use (should they be short and connect two bodies of water, though I currently know no way to enforce this). As for the art, I just wanted, as you just suggested, a modern riverside industrial texture.
Here is what I was thinking, applied using the St. Lawrence River and Montréal as an example:
The biggest issue with what I've shown is that the canal is only meant to be on one side of the river, and that looks a bit odd, especially on straight rivers.
(and a note: currently forts are not involved. If they were, they would be two totally seperate things).
~~~
I had done much of North American resources/terrain fixes, but everything I have done since last update, including a fixed Eastern Europe, was lost in a serious system error. I had noticed an anomaly in an American River, clicked to fix it and wham.
Kevin
Shqype
Shqyptar
Not to hijack the thread, but it's already there:
http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=263874
Shqype
Shqyptar
Damn Kevin, great job on both fronts. Albania is looking nice, and those canals look really good. Their implementation is one that has been long coveted in Civ. Keep it up!
frekk
Scourge of St. Lawrence
About the canals ... I see what you mean now.
How would the AI deal with canals? Would it understand and build them appropriately? Does it now ever use the 2-fort trick and create Suez/Panama type linkages?
I know that it being only on one side of the river is not ideal, but I think people would not compain much. Canals have been kind of a holy grail as far back as civ4 was being discussed a year before its release! If you can get them done at all, nobody will complain too much that the graphic only shows up on one side of the river. If that's your "biggest issue", I think you can pat yourself on the back here ... I think they look fine anyway ... alot of canal sections get shored up only on one side where the current is hitting the bank at a bend.
How would the AI deal with canals? Would it understand and build them appropriately? Does it now ever use the 2-fort trick and create Suez/Panama type linkages?
I know that it being only on one side of the river is not ideal, but I think people would not compain much. Canals have been kind of a holy grail as far back as civ4 was being discussed a year before its release! If you can get them done at all, nobody will complain too much that the graphic only shows up on one side of the river. If that's your "biggest issue", I think you can pat yourself on the back here ... I think they look fine anyway ... alot of canal sections get shored up only on one side where the current is hitting the bank at a bend.
kevinman4404
Lightning Warrior
@Frekk: I'm starting to get confused about the forts... have they always allowed ships to go through them? I never noticed that...
The AI is an issue, though not a big one. I cannot unfortunately change the AI at this point (maybe in the future). For now, it will be dependant on my mod, and I will use python to force a civ to do it, or, failing that, just make it come into existence at the approrpriate time.
Coastal cities and canals are, in essence, an extension of water tiles. If getting from A to B will be quicker by using a canal, I'd imagine they'd use it.
Now another problem: We keep calling these canals. What I made with the artwork isn't so much a canal, but a modification that allows you to travel down short connecting rivers. Canals are supposed to go through land. This is where I am completely lost. Is this what we wanted? If not, how should I reapproach this?
(@Nahnatoj: It would let you through. It is basically an imaginary water or city tile. However, if we use the city method (for Suez and Panama canals) then you can control it, and although I doubt it would be possible or realistic to make a civ pay as it is used, it could undoubtably bring revenue to the civ who construced it)
Kevin
The AI is an issue, though not a big one. I cannot unfortunately change the AI at this point (maybe in the future). For now, it will be dependant on my mod, and I will use python to force a civ to do it, or, failing that, just make it come into existence at the approrpriate time.
Coastal cities and canals are, in essence, an extension of water tiles. If getting from A to B will be quicker by using a canal, I'd imagine they'd use it.
Now another problem: We keep calling these canals. What I made with the artwork isn't so much a canal, but a modification that allows you to travel down short connecting rivers. Canals are supposed to go through land. This is where I am completely lost. Is this what we wanted? If not, how should I reapproach this?
(@Nahnatoj: It would let you through. It is basically an imaginary water or city tile. However, if we use the city method (for Suez and Panama canals) then you can control it, and although I doubt it would be possible or realistic to make a civ pay as it is used, it could undoubtably bring revenue to the civ who construced it)
Kevin
deanej
Deity
Forts allowed canals with BtS. The AI does not use them, for some reason.
snipperrabbit!!
Deity
- Joined
- Nov 23, 2006
- Messages
- 3,396
I think canals must be tile improvements that are :
- limited in number allowed (making it strategic)
- set as non competitive with towns, workshops, farms, etc
- considered as city tiles but with no real cities
- allowing limited numbers of naval units
- layered graphically under roads, railroads
- providing a +1 commerce boost but no further
- animated with cranes moving and rotating
- coming into play during industrial era
- as hard to complete as "jungle deforestation+plantation"
- with ||]
- limited in number allowed (making it strategic)
- set as non competitive with towns, workshops, farms, etc
- considered as city tiles but with no real cities
- allowing limited numbers of naval units
- layered graphically under roads, railroads
- providing a +1 commerce boost but no further
- animated with cranes moving and rotating
- coming into play during industrial era
- as hard to complete as "jungle deforestation+plantation"
- with ||]
kevinman4404
Lightning Warrior
@Snipperrabbit, could you please explain your 5th and last points?
Also, realize this mod pretty much MUST be run without animations. I am using 10GB of virtual memory just to use my map without the dozens of civs in place yet. A lot of the resources being static also led me to that decision. But I can definitely add a static crane, if I figure out what I'm doing...
Also, realize this mod pretty much MUST be run without animations. I am using 10GB of virtual memory just to use my map without the dozens of civs in place yet. A lot of the resources being static also led me to that decision. But I can definitely add a static crane, if I figure out what I'm doing...
Players should choose whether or not to have that
frekk
Scourge of St. Lawrence
That's pretty much the definition of a shipping canal. Most of them - including the Suez and Panama - are principally a series of natural and artificial lakes and rivers. Sections of masonry-walled trenches (the first thing that usually comes to mind when you think 'canal') are usually just tiny connecting bits only a few miles long.
EviltheMonkey
One Primate Think Tank
- Joined
- Dec 7, 2006
- Messages
- 85
I'm sure its been mentioned and impliemented already (even if I can't find it!): Cotton?
Also do you plan to have any mood altering substances of questionable legality (opiates, cannabis etc.)?
Also do you plan to have any mood altering substances of questionable legality (opiates, cannabis etc.)?
Building a canal should be a seriously expensive project.
Ie: it consumes a worker and costs a bunch of $,
Or, it requires special-purpose workers,
Or it requires multiple workers (like the golden age) to start, which are mostly consumed, and then many turns to finish.
Ie: it consumes a worker and costs a bunch of $,
Or, it requires special-purpose workers,
Or it requires multiple workers (like the golden age) to start, which are mostly consumed, and then many turns to finish.
kevinman4404
Lightning Warrior
@ Frekk: Agreed, but how could I keep the graphics of a land and water canal consistent?
@ EviltheMonkey: Remember, all res. are listed on the mod page: cotton and opium are already implemented, with cannabis being represented by hemp, as I value more its use as a fiber
@ Yakk: Yeah, it'll either be like that or it'll be a wonder which you can complete more than once. Just look at the panama canal, described as the 8th wonder of the world, nevermind the smaller landmarks that are included as wonders.
I am really sick and have been since Sunday, so progress is extremely slow right now. I have done the empire extents/amounts of a few civs. I will get the earliest civs fully finished and in game as soon as I can, and post some pictures/info.
For now, here is a teaser to keep this alive and well:
There may be no ice caps, which I've added since (and plan to have them extend and recede, even moreso in an ice age), but I'll admit it looks quite real. Notice the interior of greenland is all ice cap EDIT: I've also added Franz Joseph Land right at the top. EDIT: and realize that although some areas like Ellesmere Island are grey from this image, that just means there are hills, and they are in fact covered in snow. Hills make the terrain seem gray from that far up
See those dark lines running across the right side of the image? That's where I'm getting a permanent graphic glitch. It runs both on the minimap and on the real map, where you see thick dark lines over the terrain. As well, shadowing of the terrain does not work in these regions.
Let me know what you think of the final product of the actual mapmaking
Kevin
@ EviltheMonkey: Remember, all res. are listed on the mod page: cotton and opium are already implemented, with cannabis being represented by hemp, as I value more its use as a fiber
@ Yakk: Yeah, it'll either be like that or it'll be a wonder which you can complete more than once. Just look at the panama canal, described as the 8th wonder of the world, nevermind the smaller landmarks that are included as wonders.
I am really sick and have been since Sunday, so progress is extremely slow right now. I have done the empire extents/amounts of a few civs. I will get the earliest civs fully finished and in game as soon as I can, and post some pictures/info.
For now, here is a teaser to keep this alive and well:
There may be no ice caps, which I've added since (and plan to have them extend and recede, even moreso in an ice age), but I'll admit it looks quite real. Notice the interior of greenland is all ice cap
EDIT: I've also added Franz Joseph Land right at the top. EDIT: and realize that although some areas like Ellesmere Island are grey from this image, that just means there are hills, and they are in fact covered in snow. Hills make the terrain seem gray from that far upSee those dark lines running across the right side of the image? That's where I'm getting a permanent graphic glitch. It runs both on the minimap and on the real map, where you see thick dark lines over the terrain. As well, shadowing of the terrain does not work in these regions.
Let me know what you think of the final product of the actual mapmaking
Kevin
Shqype
Shqyptar
That looks spectacular, Kevin. I'm anxious to test it out!
Genghis_Kai
GEM modder
Great work!
One comment: Hawaii looks a bit too close to Mexico. It looks like it is just a few tiles away.
One comment: Hawaii looks a bit too close to Mexico. It looks like it is just a few tiles away.
frekk
Scourge of St. Lawrence
It looks great! This has got to be the best Earth map out there, period. It's so detailed ... I think it's got to be the first map I've seen that can actually show Gotland as an island, without a whole lot of distortion.
Although, from this perspective, I do have a small criticism. There's just too much Arctic Ocean. All that stuff up north, ie northern Greenland, Ellesmere Island, Franz Josef Land, etc ... is it really necessary? Nobody should be able to settle there and the only tactical value of it is lost in a projected map since it's not possible to fly over the pole or take advantage of the small size of the circumpolar region. Not really a big deal though.
Overall ... great job!
Although, from this perspective, I do have a small criticism. There's just too much Arctic Ocean. All that stuff up north, ie northern Greenland, Ellesmere Island, Franz Josef Land, etc ... is it really necessary? Nobody should be able to settle there and the only tactical value of it is lost in a projected map since it's not possible to fly over the pole or take advantage of the small size of the circumpolar region. Not really a big deal though.
Overall ... great job!
Shiggs713
Immortal
you do know that forts act as canals don't you? they can only be used 2 in a row though, so in your example of Montreal, you would need to place 1 fort NE of it and 2 forts SW of it and those 3 forts along with the city would act as a canal. That is, in BtS at least.
Great work, although I have my doubts this is even playable the way I would like to play it (with 32+ civs). I've tried Genghis's map, I could play it, but turns were mighty slow after awhile... Its just about unplayable late in the game due to a consistently lengthy AI lag. (I have dual P4's 2.8ghz apiece, and a nvidia 8600, an above average gaming setup)
Again a very beautiful map. Could I possibly get you to make a map of the eastern united states for my American Civil War mod?
Great work, although I have my doubts this is even playable the way I would like to play it (with 32+ civs). I've tried Genghis's map, I could play it, but turns were mighty slow after awhile... Its just about unplayable late in the game due to a consistently lengthy AI lag. (I have dual P4's 2.8ghz apiece, and a nvidia 8600, an above average gaming setup)
Again a very beautiful map. Could I possibly get you to make a map of the eastern united states for my American Civil War mod?
