Alternative Map for DOC

[merijn_v1]

I've been for a long time wanting to edit the settler and warmaps, but I have little clue on how to do it--I had to turn off stability to play this without weird stuff happening like southern Persia flipping to Tibet. We'll see where this is going, but so far I'm enjoying what I see.

I suggest editing the stabilitymaps and warmaps with the WB. There is an export button which puts the changes into a plain text files. The output can directly be copy-pasted into the correct python files. Editing the maps should be fairly self-explanatory, but feel free to ask question how to use them if you have them. (There is a small guide in the pedia explaining how the editor works)

 

[Temujin8k]

Thank you, merijn_v1! So you mean that I just use the WB to edit the maps, then export it and copy-paste?

If I have to manually edit them in a notepad app, sadly, I don't exactly know the meaning of each numerical value in the stability and war maps. I need to know what each one means and maybe heuristics or standards on when to assign a certain value to a plot.

 

[Leoreth]

Settler maps: 90+ is historical, 3 will never be settled by the AI. Otherwise, the higher the number the more likely it is to be settled. Usually core territory is 400-500, important desired city spots are 800, historical usually 90-300, but these are not hard rules. It's best to observe AI settling patterns for a given settler map and adjust accordingly.

War maps: always 0/2/4/6/8/10, if you want the AI to target cities on specific plots you should make the value higher. Usually the core has a high value (8 or 10) to encourage civs to reconquer it in case it is lost.

 

[merijn_v1]

Thank you, merijn_v1! So you mean that I just use the WB to edit the maps, then export it and copy-paste?

That's basically it. There are some examples of exported files in the Export folder in the Main DoC folder.

The dropdown menu to select the settlervalues contain only some of the most common values. If you want to add values to that list, search for 'lPresetValues' in Consts.py and add the new values to that list.

 

[Fresol]

That's basically it. There are some examples of exported files in the Export folder in the Main DoC folder.

The dropdown menu to select the settlervalues contain only some of the most common values. If you want to add values to that list, search for 'lPresetValues' in Consts.py and add the new values to that list.

Off-topic in this thread but can you make the WB "move city/ city+units" function change city names accordingly? It was previously present but caused error when the new city spot did not have a default name. Later the city name always stayed the same. It'll be nice to bring back the change name feature.

 

[merijn_v1]

The feature is still in the game. But a small bug (the word "not" missing somewhere) disabled the feature from working. Will upload a PR soon. Thanks for noticing it.

 

[1SDANi]

Where can I find a download for the latest version of the map, if one such "latest" version exists. If not could someone upload their version, I noticed there's an upload on the first page, but I'm not sure if it's been updated or not. Has it?

 

[Leoreth]

I don't think there's been an update since then.

 

[1SDANi]

I don't think there's been an update since then.

Even though there's been 13 pages of discussion after it?

I think I may take it upon myself to compile all the suggested changes to the map, most recent changes taking precedence ofc.

 

[Leoreth]

The thing I have agreed on is that Bautos will handle the first iteration of the map, and want I don't to take that away. It's better to iterate from this final suggestion later on, especially considering that I won't be able to work on this until some time later.

 

[1SDANi]

The thing I have agreed on is that Bautos will handle the first iteration of the map, and want I don't to take that away. It's better to iterate from this final suggestion later on, especially considering that I won't be able to work on this until some time later.

Oh, in that case I'm fine with waiting. Though I'd love to test any in progress builds @Bautos has, I am incredibly interested in seeing how much the game changes with a larger world.

 

[Temujin8k]

Thank you, Leo and 1SDAN! Is it still the same for reborn and "reborn" civs?

EDIT: The scenarios will surely depend on Bautos42's edits, but I think that if we start working on the stability and war maps now, as well as the rest of the Python code, we can speed up the development of the new map. This means that we can get to test it sooner, like as soon as everyone here thinks the base map's already all good. I'm not exactly sure how Leo's planned overhaul of RiseAndFall.py is going to affect this one, though, but I seriously have a positive outlook on this.

 

[Leoreth]

Yeah, it should be the same. If I recall correctly, the maps are per civilisation already, so you don't need to worry about rebirths at all.

I'm kind of wary of early changes to the code to accommodate the new map because I have no idea what else is going to change before that even becomes relevant. Merging things back will only make everything more complicated.

 

[Temujin8k]

I'm aware of that. I'm not going to make PR's right now for that, though, if ever I can finish it. I'll just keep it in my fork separately. I just think that things could go somewhat faster and easier if the stability and war maps could be finished now, assuming the final version would not be very different from the initial one posted here.

 

[AtlantaMarty]

I've been really excited for a long time now about the new map, but I know this is still going to take a long time (since Leoreth plans this for v1.17). And since I've been bored recently playing DoC with other civs not in the right pace of tech, I started making the 600 AD and 1700 AD scenarios in my free time. There has been lots of progress for both, although surely there are still lacking stuff (esp. buildings) plus a lot of inconsistencies since I only bothered to edit the terrain and resources along the way without modifying the base 3000 BC one. I know the map still needs a lot of polishing, and this may be a bad move, but I think it's okay to do the scenario files again just in case.

I didn't simply copy the two scenarios, though. What I made is a much more populated version, with more cities. Also, in the 600 AD scenario, I placed Persia (Sassanids), India (Gupta), Ethiopia, and Maya. Persia and Maya should collapse easily within a few turns, though, and as it is intended to be such, they are marked unplayable in the scenario. In the 1700 AD scenario, I put an alive Moors and Italy (the latter should have a decentralized civic though).

I've started a 600 AD game with the new map (currently on the RC tag of the develop branch), and edited Python stuff along the way. I'll work on it some more before pushing it to a branch on my fork.

In the meantime, here are screenshots (1099 AD, Marathon):

This looks amazing - great work! Any chance you could post a few more screenshots?

(Also, please consider moving both Sardinia and Corsica 1S - that way, they're not connected to the mainland, which looks really strange)

 

[Temujin8k]

This looks amazing - great work! Any chance you could post a few more screenshots?

(Also, please consider moving both Sardinia and Corsica 1S - that way, they're not connected to the mainland, which looks really strange)

Will do when I have time! I've also tested an Iran 1700 AD scenario (Normal), looks good so far. Scenarios aren't 100% done yet though

Almost finished with the core area definitions, but I still have to look into the changed core areas since I don't know how to look at the original ones visually without loading up a new game with the old map. Problem is that the individual stab maps are much more daunting and I often have short attention span I'll also deal with resource spawns next time.

Re: Corsica and Sardinia, I left that untouched from Bautos42's original version. Not sure if it'd be better 1S?

 

[AtlantaMarty]

Re: Corsica and Sardinia, I left that untouched from Bautos42's original version. Not sure if it'd be better 1S?

Seeing Corsica attached to mainland Italy just looks really wrong to me, especially considering it's part of modern France. Moving both Islands 1S allows them to both be separate from other landmasses. (I also added another land tile to Eastern Italy, which is both more cosmetic and more accurate)

 

[Leoreth]

Yeah, you have been pushing this many times already, and I think everyone agrees. Let it rest.

 

[Temujin8k]

Could be fine to me, except that it's too near Maghreb. Too much overlap among Tunis, Palermo, and Cagliari (is it the most important city in Sardinia?).

 

[AtlantaMarty]

Could be fine to me, except that it's too near Maghreb. Too much overlap among Tunis, Palermo, and Cagliari (is it the most important city in Sardinia?).

It's the least bad situation, unless we move Africa down 1S and extend the Levant, which might be an interesting idea.

I'm not sure Cagliari is really that important historically - only Palermo and Tunis are really necessary. It should probably be one of the cities that is built by the AI only occasionally, kind of like Mokha (Yemen) in SoI