Bug (customize world) world age.

[GPR]

Ever since I plays on Amiga, I thought that the one of option in "customize world" options when you started the game gives the wrong result.
Now, thanks to the mod JCivED from @darkpanda, I found out that I was right.
What exactly do I mean?
Mark 3 bilillion gives is less mountain than 5 bilillion years.
I started 10 games with both 3 and 5 bilillion years, land large, opened the maps in JCivED and counted all mountains

The counting made an average of 35 mountain tiles for 3 billion years and 78 mountain tiles for 5 brillion years.
I did not count the hills, but probably it will be related. I was interested in mountains because they are less useful for development

So we have bug

 

[tupi]

Don't trust this mountain-hills picture. Dunno about Amiga, but in dos version you can press right mouse button to bring up a help message about every map setting. The "Age" message is:
"A younger planet has large areas of similar terrain (forests, mountains, etc.) - An older planet has smaller, more broken up features".
darkpanda investigated the world generation logic and this description is correct:

Civ1 Map Generation explained

This thread is meant to document the internal routines used by CivDOS to generate new, random maps. To generate new maps, CivDOS uses a set of 4 input parameters, whose value ranges from 0 to 2: Land mass: this controls the total land mass of the map, i.e. the total number of non-ocean...

forums.civfanatics.com

 

[GPR]

is not correct.
2 maps for quick:
First is 3 billion years:

and 5 bilion:

I think you can see the difference

I generated now 4 maps: 26, 53 / 69, 95 mountians so the average is more or less similar (screens presents 1 and 4)

And if you think Im wrong so generated your 10 maps with these two settings and count the mountains. For me it turned out to be the opposite of selecting.
CIV DOS 5.1

 

[rhaul]

This data is very interesting.
How many maps have you checked?

 

[GPR]

at now above 30.

 

[rhaul]

Well, it is clear that it is a small bug. Do you have any solution?
Thanks for this information, I always chose the 5 one assuming that it was the best terrain without mountains and it never occurred to me to compare it with the 3 one.

 

[Tristan_C]

Well the solution is just to pick 3 billion if you want more flat land.

When I posted a poll on this subject some years ago I was also very suspicious about this. Here's three more maps.

3 billion

4 billion

5 billion

 

[rhaul]

I was referring to a solution to fix this bug in the game, maybe it will be easier to exchange the images in the game.
What I do think is that the maps are not really random, since I remember that in two different games I was playing on the same map.

 

[GPR]

you remember that you seem you playing on the same maps.

 

[Tancretus]

I was referring to a solution to fix this bug in the game, maybe it will be easier to exchange the images in the game.

Any followup from anyone on this? God I was always wondering why my 5 billions maps sucked.

 

[rhaul]

Any followup from anyone on this? God I was always wondering why my 5 billions maps sucked.

Yes, what I did was to edit the image of the mountains swapping the positions and then edit the text.