Land Mass Shapes Bite The Big One

[PaulNAdhe]

With v1.07 the shapes of the land masses were satisfactory. Somewhat ovoid with irregularities. The civs were evenly distributed over the land and there were real continents separated by water.

With v1.16f the shapes of the land masses are atrocious. In a 70% water continent game, all but 1 civ is on the same misshapen continent. That continent looks like Gaia stretched out.

On any archipelago map, instead of many ovoid land masses we get long thin land masses with barely enough room to build 2 cities across from each other. It's like the continent map shriveled from hunger. With the intense corruption, if you happen to begin at one end of the string, your corruption eats you up by the time you get 25 squares away.

Firaxis touted the map creation routine in v1.16f as being more realistic.

After seeing several complete 70% archipelago maps revealed, I am reminded of nothing more than a dog with diarhea trailing his dung across the lawn.

Please Firaxis, fix this misshapen map generator.

 

[dannyevilcat]

Yes, I have to agree. The generator now is better than the Civ II one, but I'm particularly picky about my maps, since I'm going to be playing on it for a long time.

After too many weird, irksome looking maps, I now make it a policy to save, retire, and take a look at the map. Seriously, I have spent HOURS starting new games to find one--JUST ONE!-- that resembles a "normal" "natural" map, with nice continents.
Usually I get shapes like the sharp pointy ends of spears, or gangly isthmuses that just tick me off.

I like how the tiles are placed, the geographic layout, etc. But by God, the shapes... the shapes!

 

[Lt. 'Killer' M.]

and then these isthmusses are always desert/plains - maybe realistic, but that means that your population center will be split in two and corruption goes up through the roof. SUCKS!

I`m back to playing Pangaea maps

 

[etj4Eagle]

Originally posted by dannyevilcat
Yes, I have to agree. The generator now is better than the Civ II one, but I'm particularly picky about my maps, since I'm going to be playing on it for a long time.

After too many weird, irksome looking maps, I now make it a policy to save, retire, and take a look at the map. Seriously, I have spent HOURS starting new games to find one--JUST ONE!-- that resembles a "normal" "natural" map, with nice continents.
Usually I get shapes like the sharp pointy ends of spears, or gangly isthmuses that just tick me off.

I like how the tiles are placed, the geographic layout, etc. But by God, the shapes... the shapes!

Use the editor to generate your maps then. Should save you a bit of time in the regenerating scheme (less steps). Also would allow you to touch up a map if you feel that with a few tweaks it would be good.

 

[slothman]

Since the editor doesn't have a zoom it is actually slower for me that to save and retire.
When Firaxix adds a zoom to look at the whole map in the editor in the next patch (hint) it would be worth my time.

 

[homegrown]

Since the editor doesn't have a zoom

Maybe it's the games that I play, but I don't own a game that has an editor with this function. All the large maps scroll in the Pharaoh, Zeus, AoK, Stronghold and Civ 3 editors.

 

[dannyevilcat]

I would make my own maps, but like it's been said, the lack of a zoom or even a mini-map makes it just as bad. Plus, I don't entirely trust myself to be fair with resources. Even if I felt I was, I still know I'd make sure I had the essentials, which takes away from the fun. Also, if I know that later on in a certain area-- say oil is going to appear-- then even in the middle ages, I'll be taking that into account. I like the lottery feel to resources.

 

[-proletarian-]

This is one thing that really gets on my nerves too! Especially on archipalego, all you get is spindly little spokes as islands, never a nice rounded one.......

 

[NY Hoya]

i am very disappointed in the map generation of civ3. definitely think civ2 was better at this. i usually play on a huge map/ continents. This always results in two huge continents, each with 1 or 2 tiny islands off the coast. Add this to the fact that i always start with the same civs on my continent, it kinda pisses me off.

Maybe i just have an idealized memory of civ2, but it seems like the map generator/civ placement used to work better

 

[Cruiser]

Originally posted by dannyevilcat
I have spent HOURS starting new games to find one--JUST ONE!-- that resembles a "normal" "natural" map, with nice continents.
Usually I get shapes like the sharp pointy ends of spears, or gangly isthmuses that just tick me off.

I like how the tiles are placed, the geographic layout, etc. But by God, the shapes... the shapes!

I guess things haven't changed much from Civ II. At least in that game I had a Cheat Mode and could quickly check the map to see if it made any kind of sense, and that my civ wasn't stuck on a tundra tile surrounded by mountains next to the south pole!

 

[NY Hoya]

Originally posted by Cruiser



I guess things haven't changed much from Civ II. At least in that game I had a Cheat Mode and could quickly check the map to see if it made any kind of sense, and that my civ wasn't stuck on a tundra tile surrounded by mountains next to the south pole!

yep, that's right. it's an actual regression from civ II...

 

[SkyShagger]

I agree totally with the archipelaigo comment, though i have gotten one good map with three quality island. But I got started on an island of size and latitude comparable to Madagascar in relation to the world. But then again, what can you expect from this game. (Ha, I really like it but am enjoying jumping on the "doesn't meet expectations" bandwagon!)

 

[Cruiser]

yep, that's right. it's an actual regression from civ II...

And that means, ADD A CHEAT MODE, Sid!!