Feedback: Maps and Terrain

[Jarlaxe Baenre]

Same deal with this file as with the other. Rename it and all that.

Edit: What do you think about the aesthetics of it? I keep feeling that I went too heavy on the resources.
Also, I moved a mountain south at the western tip of Scandinavia.

 

[Jarlaxe Baenre]

Sometime tonight I will replace the grasslands I added to greenland with tundra and the tundra with ice, rework Alaska to be less powerful and have cities in more realistic places and remove a mountain in Incan lands. I will also add more rubber resources. I will rework Iceland some more to make the best city located in the most realistic area, and whatever else I think of.

 

[Nightstar]

Finally got around to trying the latest version, and discovered that the only civs available are the Nubians and Khmer.

 

[Jarlaxe Baenre]

Oh, I did that again?

 

[AluminumKnight]

Oh, sorry.
Remember to change the name of the original huge earth map and then rename this one as that.

Ok, am I missing something here? I download your map into the Private Maps folder. I rename the Earth (Huge) map to something else (first I tried "Earth (Huge) backup"). Then I rename your map to "Earth (Huge)"

Everything seems fine, I go to launch the game and it immediately crashes. What gives?

 

[Jarlaxe Baenre]

You launched it from within HR, downloaded the one in the post directly above yours and added .CivBeyondSwordWBSave to the name as well?

 

[AluminumKnight]

You launched it from within HR, downloaded the one in the post directly above yours and added .CivBeyondSwordWBSave to the name as well?

Well it took some trial and error (like, first, I put it in PublicMaps). But basically, I downloaded the file, put it in PrivateMaps. Then I renamed the existing Earth (Huge) to something else. Last, I renamed your file to Earth (Huge). I noticed that the extension (.CivBeyondSwordWBSave) was still there.

I can try to get you a screenshot of the folder? I don't get an error message, just a crash.

EDIT: Spelling

 

[Xyth]

Rather than renaming, try moving the original Earth (Huge) out of the folder completely. If that doesn't help, post the crash log. Might be a clue in there.

 

[AluminumKnight]

There is no crash log. The game just crashes to desktop and I get the generic Windows dialog (...Civilization 4 has stopped working).

EDIT: I did try removing the original Earth (Huge) out of the folder and got the same results.

 

[Xyth]

BTS won't generate one, but Windows should. I don't know where to find it though, unfortunately.

 

[cel10]

I've been playing on the standard Earth map pretty much exclusively (my poor laptop can't handle anything larger) and I've noticed that there are hardly any Stone resources to be found. I don't mind it, particularly, but that means that unless you get very lucky, Paved Roads (among other things) are out of the question.

I don't know much about what goes into creating maps and I'm certainly not well-versed on the geographic locations of where resources are found but I feel like that map could do with a couple more Stones. At the very least one somewhere where Rome could have access to it to save my poor Legionaries from marching around on dirt.

 

[Xyth]

I've been playing on the standard Earth map pretty much exclusively (my poor laptop can't handle anything larger) and I've noticed that there are hardly any Stone resources to be found. I don't mind it, particularly, but that means that unless you get very lucky, Paved Roads (among other things) are out of the question.

I don't know much about what goes into creating maps and I'm certainly not well-versed on the geographic locations of where resources are found but I feel like that map could do with a couple more Stones. At the very least one somewhere where Rome could have access to it to save my poor Legionaries from marching around on dirt.

I'll make a note of that, but can't promise I'll get to it soon. Maintaining the real world maps takes a lot of time and effort that I prefer to use for developing HR itself. Currently, it's only the Huge and Large Earth maps that are up to date with HR's terrain and resource changes, thanks to the much appreciated efforts of volunteers. (Not Natural Wonders though, as that involves some coding by me).

 

[cel10]

I'll make a note of that, but can't promise I'll get to it soon. Maintaining the real world maps takes a lot of time and effort that I prefer to use for developing HR itself. Currently, it's only the Huge and Large Earth maps that are up to date with HR's terrain and resource changes, thanks to the much appreciated efforts of volunteers. (Not Natural Wonders though, as that involves some coding by me).

Yeah I get it, just wanted to throw it out there. HR is the only reason I play Civ anymore so I'm just glad it's still being worked on in any capacity!

 

[Eucalyptus]

I've been playing on the standard Earth map pretty much exclusively (my poor laptop can't handle anything larger) and I've noticed that there are hardly any Stone resources to be found. I don't mind it, particularly, but that means that unless you get very lucky, Paved Roads (among other things) are out of the question.

I don't know much about what goes into creating maps and I'm certainly not well-versed on the geographic locations of where resources are found but I feel like that map could do with a couple more Stones. At the very least one somewhere where Rome could have access to it to save my poor Legionaries from marching around on dirt.

I've said it before: "Everyone must get Stone."

 

[Xyth]

I'm considering dropping some of the real world maps from HR. Most haven't been updated with the new terrain and resources yet, and I struggle to find the time or motivation to do so. I vastly prefer playing and developing for random maps. Each map also increases my workload when adding new civs or leaders. Here's the maps I'm thinking of dumping:

• Earth (Large)

The Earth (Huge) map is more popular by far, and several kind volunteers here have helped to keep it relatively up to date. It's not perfect, the small size of Africa, the Atlantic, and especially the Pacific bothers me. Earth (Large) has more accurate ocean sizes, but an even tinier Africa and some really fundamental problems with landmass shape. Of the two, it's the weaker.​

• Earth (Small)

This one is reasonably well made and positioned, but does anyone really play it enough to warrant keeping it maintained? It's small size seems to me to defeat the point of playing an Earth map in the first place.​

• Eurasia (Massive)

I really like the scope of this map but it's just too big. Will be a real chore to update and I don't think many play it anyway. It's pretty well made though, so I'm tempted to chop it up and use part of the eastern section to replace East Asia (Standard).​

• Europe (Huge)

Europe on this map is actually about the same size as it is in the Europe (Standard) map. Most of the extra area is largely useless terrain in Russia and North Africa (neither map can support Egypt, both can support the Berbers). Mesopotamia is a more useful addition, but not exactly needed on a Europe map - that's what the Mediterranean map is for.​

• Middle East (Small)

No need to maintain two Middle East maps, and the larger one is much better quality and allows for better placement and expansion of its civs. Has India, but not enough to really be useful, so I might trim some of the eastern edge off.​

 

[cel10]

I actually play Earth (large), Earth (standard) and Middle East (small) almost to the exclusion of any other map, so I'd be a bit sore if they were dropped. I prefer to play quicker games (600 or 900 turns) but maintain the sense of "alternate history" that I love from the Earth maps, so the smaller maps suit me very well.

Mostly I'd like to fight for keeping Earth (large), since it does have the new resources and is still a decent size - when I play on my Mac especially it's about the largest map it can handle in the mid-late eras without crashing/freezing constantly. I wouldn't mind as much about the other two though and I've never used the Eurasia map at all.

 

[Xyth]

I actually play Earth (large), Earth (standard) and Middle East (small) almost to the exclusion of any other map, so I'd be a bit sore if they were dropped. I prefer to play quicker games (600 or 900 turns) but maintain the sense of "alternate history" that I love from the Earth maps, so the smaller maps suit me very well.

Mostly I'd like to fight for keeping Earth (large), since it does have the new resources and is still a decent size - when I play on my Mac especially it's about the largest map it can handle in the mid-late eras without crashing/freezing constantly. I wouldn't mind as much about the other two though and I've never used the Eurasia map at all.

The Earth (Huge) and Earth (Large) maps are actually really close in size, 124x68 vs. 128x64. The latter has comparatively more ocean area though, thus why I bumped it down to Large. They both have the new resources and most of the new terrain. You shouldn't see any performance issues switching to the Huge map (and can lower the number of civs if you did) and it's a more accurate map (except for the Atlantic and Pacific not being wide enough).

The Middle East (Large) map is the same size as the Earth (Standard) map (100x58 vs. 100x56), but again, due to the different proportion of land area, one is Large and one is Standard. If I trimmed India from the Middle East (Large) I'll probably reclassify it as Standard. Is there any other reason you prefer Middle East (Small) over the Large?

 

[cel10]

Hmm, I had never thought to compare the actual sizes -- interesting. (I probably got a performance hit because I assumed the map was larger, so added more civs.) In that case it should be fine.

I prefer the smaller one because it's smaller? I don't know what the exact size difference is between them but when I'm looking for a really short game (conquer the world in 2 hours or less!) I play the small map (as Egypt especially, since on the small map Egypt gets tons of easy resources ). Again though I wouldn't be upset if you strike it in favor of the Large/Standard one, since they are that similar.

 

[Skidizzle]

I presume you're referring to adding more than 18 civ entries at the top of the map file. Bear in mind that doing that breaks the map for anyone playing without the DLL which is why I do not include such a change myself.

Ah, was unaware of that. Would having two copies of the same map, one being labeled as "**Windows 40 Civ DLL Only**" be something you'd want to include?

(Deleting the extra civ entries isn't enough - tile reveal info for each player and other such info also gets saved by Worldbuilder and is a real pain to edit out).

I just copied the original map file, then started a game with just me. Deleted the units, unrevealed the map, made my terrain edits and hit save as. From there I just copied the map data from the new save file to the original file, which preserved the starting positions. Deleting the extra player and team ID slots should work for you, right?

 

[Xyth]

Ah, was unaware of that. Would having two copies of the same map, one being labeled as "**Windows 40 Civ DLL Only**" be something you'd want to include?

No. I prefer to keep support for that DLL unofficial and separate from HR. Also trying to reduce the amount of map maintenance required, not increase it.

I just copied the original map file, then started a game with just me. Deleted the units, unrevealed the map, made my terrain edits and hit save as. From there I just copied the map data from the new save file to the original file, which preserved the starting positions. Deleting the extra player and team ID slots should work for you, right?

Ok, if you unrevealed everything it should be alright. Post it and I'll have a look.