Maps larger then 80x128
- Thread starter SoCalMstr
- Start date
Moderator Action: Moved to the main forum.
Only finished threads and files go into the subforums, questions and working threads belong to the main forum
.
The game is having problems with big maps, so even thinking about it is without a patch not a good idea.
Only finished threads and files go into the subforums, questions and working threads belong to the main forum
.The game is having problems with big maps, so even thinking about it is without a patch not a good idea.
goddambigcar
Chieftain
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2010
- Messages
- 36
Or would it be possible, somehow, to have multiple maps? That would be sweet.
It seems like it might be possible to create a larger map through Lua -- is this right, Dale? I notice that Terra asks for a 128x80 map on Large, and 152x96 on Huge.
The author leaves a comment warning that Huge Terra maps might run out of memory in certain situations, especially if you mess with the sea level (which he disables in the code).
The author leaves a comment warning that Huge Terra maps might run out of memory in certain situations, especially if you mess with the sea level (which he disables in the code).
cephalo
Deity
I've done a bit of testing, and I learned that my computer really cannot handle a map larger than standard. I can use a huge map on Continents barely, but I cannot use large or huge on Terra.
Another thing that dissapoints me greatly is that you cannot use tall maps! I can think of dozens of scenarios that would call for that. I tried genning a Terra map that is taller than wide, and you do get nasty, unusable artifacts to the north of where the map is 'square'.
Really, I do not understand the poor performance of the map. The graphics are not so much more detailed than Civ4:Col, but I could make gigantic maps there with no trouble. With Civ5 on a standard map the 'normal map' textures lag behind like 3 seconds and slowly cover each tile one by one, which is far uglier than any offsetting benefits could compensate for.
I'm not expecting a 2007 computer to have peak performance for today's games, but I really don't see where the performance hit could be occurring. Shadows? Certainly this could be greatly streamlined somehow.
Another thing that dissapoints me greatly is that you cannot use tall maps! I can think of dozens of scenarios that would call for that. I tried genning a Terra map that is taller than wide, and you do get nasty, unusable artifacts to the north of where the map is 'square'.
Really, I do not understand the poor performance of the map. The graphics are not so much more detailed than Civ4:Col, but I could make gigantic maps there with no trouble. With Civ5 on a standard map the 'normal map' textures lag behind like 3 seconds and slowly cover each tile one by one, which is far uglier than any offsetting benefits could compensate for.
I'm not expecting a 2007 computer to have peak performance for today's games, but I really don't see where the performance hit could be occurring. Shadows? Certainly this could be greatly streamlined somehow.
Kruelgor
Emperor
A lot of people even have a hard time running 80x128 maps on their PCs. The idea of going larger probably isn't a good idea.
GFO_Anubis
Warlord
I have no problems running huge maps on my machine.. and I would like to have a gaint earth map around 192x120 or something like that.. like the one I used in CIV IV...
My machine if anybuddy is wondering is:
Intelcore I920
Asus Rampage II motherboard
6GB PC3 16000 Corsair Dominator ram
ATI 5850 Graphicscard
"EDIT" im runnig vista business 64bit with a 7 upgrade
My machine if anybuddy is wondering is:
Intelcore I920
Asus Rampage II motherboard
6GB PC3 16000 Corsair Dominator ram
ATI 5850 Graphicscard
"EDIT" im runnig vista business 64bit with a 7 upgrade
The map I normally use in Civ 4 is 360x180 and I have no problems using in single player with 15 AI civ's against me.
My Machine is a AleinWare DualCore 2.66 with 3 gig's of Ram and dual 280 graphics card using SLI for 2 gigs. I am still using XP-Pro, I do not plan to go to Windows 7 until after the second service pack is out.
My Machine is a AleinWare DualCore 2.66 with 3 gig's of Ram and dual 280 graphics card using SLI for 2 gigs. I am still using XP-Pro, I do not plan to go to Windows 7 until after the second service pack is out.
UKScud
Warlord
Ditto....I want to make a UK map, and whilst you can do that if you are prepared to put up with a whole lot of empty Atlantic Ocean to the left of the map (which does not look good, I've tried) I'm not satisfied with how close together certain towns and cities would be.
Other than the fact that it seems to take ages for Civ5 to process AI turns even at the beginning, is there any other reason why larger, and especially taller maps cannot be implimented? It makes no sense? Surely what is important is the overall area?
Other than the fact that it seems to take ages for Civ5 to process AI turns even at the beginning, is there any other reason why larger, and especially taller maps cannot be implimented? It makes no sense? Surely what is important is the overall area?
Snoopy
Prince
I am also looking to make a very large map, but preferably higher than wide. If you do try to make a map higher than it is wide, it will prompt you with a message saying you can't do that... yet. So I assume some time in the future we will be able to go beyond the sizes too.
cephalo
Deity
That's a good example of when a tall map is absoutely needed. Other examples might be a WWI western front map, or a Nile Valley map. A moddable Civ game needs this capability without question.
It seems that there is a technical reason for this not working. You can set a map script to create a tall map but the map will not be usable. To see what I mean, set one of the size parameters in the Terra.lua maps to be tall. The game will run but the top of the map is alternating cubes.
I'd like to see this changed ASAP.
Jabarto
Emperor
Just throwing my hat in with the "need bigger maps" crowd. GEM converted just fine but it crashes when I try to run it, and with the increased city radii, smaller Earth maps are pretty much out of the question unless we get some bigger map sizes.
Just uploaded a small experimental mod that adds 2 new map sizes to the game... and yes, I've tested the new map sizes in-game 
I did try to add 3rd even bigger map size but that one always crashed the game during map generation - couldn't find reason why it crashed, no errors in lua.log.
I did try to add 3rd even bigger map size but that one always crashed the game during map generation - couldn't find reason why it crashed, no errors in lua.log.
Chiyochan
King
I'd love to have layered maps rather than one big one,
Looks pretty grim, a test map of GEM will not run on my computer even on the lowest settings, although it loads fine, the game crashes on start.
Looks pretty grim, a test map of GEM will not run on my computer even on the lowest settings, although it loads fine, the game crashes on start.
SoCalMstr, with 3 GB you might as well give up. You will not be able to run a map larger than the WorldBuilder maximum size, unless they release a version of Civ5 with considerably lower memory requirements.
In your case, getting a larger map would require more RAM, a 64-bit processor that can actually address the extra RAM, and Windows 7 so it knows how to use a 64-bit processor. Apparently the version of DirectX your graphics card supports is involved somehow, too. In the end it comes down to one thing, which is: how much RAM does your computerhave think it has?
It's a mess, and I'm reminded of the days when it took black magic to get a DOS game to use more than 640K of RAM.
In your case, getting a larger map would require more RAM, a 64-bit processor that can actually address the extra RAM, and Windows 7 so it knows how to use a 64-bit processor. Apparently the version of DirectX your graphics card supports is involved somehow, too. In the end it comes down to one thing, which is: how much RAM does your computer
It's a mess, and I'm reminded of the days when it took black magic to get a DOS game to use more than 640K of RAM.
