[MapScript] Erebus Continent

[Milaga]

Well, it should work with Orbis but I haven't added anything specifically for Orbis.

Then I have a bug to report. The game crashes the instant I try to generate a map. I don't even get the progress bar, it's just a quick CTD. There's not even anything in the logs either.

Orbis does have different terrain, which might have something to do with it. There are no swamps, but there are wetlands. And forts and castles function differently than they do in both vanilla and RiFE. I'm not a regular player, so someone else would be better suited for letting you know what flavor terrain the new civs prefer.

 

[Wodan]

Well, my personal favorite is medium cohesion and low sea level but that will end up with almost the same amount of land as high cohesion low sea level, just with a few more islands. I like the islands because in both RiFE and Wild Mana by the time you can expand onto the islands they have some tough, highly promoted barbarians or animals and can be just as tough (tougher really, in most cases) to conquer as another civ.

I my current game I found a medium-sized subcontinent and it was literally crawling with the red goblins and hill giants. Wasn't difficult to conquer, though. I had iron golems.

It's not that it generates a 'sucky' result so much as it really messes with assumptions I made to speed up several processes. It also complicates the climate options due to the shift of the min and max latitudes. If it weren't for the climate shift issues it's be no different than any other map, but since I prefer maps that simulate part of the world rather than the whole world (Civ maps are too small for a whole world IMO) I have to deal with y-wrap changing that. Honestly, since I never use it, it's pretty low on my priority list though.

Understood.

Any python exceptions are bugs so they need to be fixed. They're also not likely to be caused by a specific combination of options but rather me missing something that can cause an exception like a list being shorter than expected. There aren't any mutually exclusive options, the few that exist are all different selections of the same option so it's impossible to mix them anyway. There are some combinations that I think look wierd and there are some combinatiosn that people try that will create certain issues, but how to I cancel them out without people coming back and complaining that they don't work? Sometimes I'm amazed that somebody will try a small world with increased mountains, high sea level and 10 civs and then complain that starting positions are horrible, but if they can't figure that out ahead of time what can I really do?

Really, I'm surprised that people don't simply turn the 'bad' terrains off or at least down if they don't like the results. That's why those options exist

Yeah, I guess I see that. I suppose I read your earlier statement the wrong way.

Though, it really does depend on the algorithm, which only you know and could make a decision to go with (2) instead of (1), which I'm suggesting might be good in some cases.

Using your example, if the increased-mountains algorithm doesn't "scale" properly with small maps, then this truly is a case where you might say "If small and increased-mountains then change to medium-mountains".

See what I mean?

I mean, if the multiplayer games are ruined when somebody starts in the tundra... turn off tundras, problem solved! (Wow, you have no idea how long I've wanted to say that ) And yeah, I know, no fur or deer.

Totally agreed with that one!

I will say that one thing is mutually exclussive... realistic and balanced. A lot of people seem to want maps that are realistic (I think I have that part covered) AND balanced... at the same time... seriously? That's literally impossible, sure you can have a balanced map that looks good, but it won't be realistic.

Yep, I'm with you on this one. I used to play the boardgame "Diplomacy" and it's been a discussion in the tournament community for as long as it has been around (has it really been 50 years? course I wasn't playing all that time ).

Which have ambiguous names? I have a character limit to work within but if there is something that would be better with a different name I'd be happy to change it. I can't think of any though, I named them for what they do

I'll take a look next time I startup the game and see which ones seem like they maybe could be improved.

I did notice, there are no popup explanations, but I would swear I've seen them on other scripts. That would help a huge deal.

I don't know how else to explain that in a simple map script that can't have tooltips, popups or it's own pedia entries.

Exactly!

I agree that there are too many, but it's better than the alternative. How else would I give you the ability to setup the map the way you want it? I could bundle all of the climate options up into a single list, but then that list would have way too many selections and they'd have confusing names.

I guess I'm not talking so much about how many options, but whether each one needs explanation. I mean, the "Ensure Exists" option, for example. If it was self-explanatory then why would we have to have the description you put in the first post? And conversely, if it was not self-explanatory, are we honestly saying each player has to come here to the forum and read that post to decide which option they want to set?

Feedback is always appreciated, just look at Gekko, I haven't even tried to strangle him yet

Well, we'll keep our hopes up! (j/k Gekko!)

 

[[to_xp]Gekko]

hey, for some people suffocation is a turn on, you never know I may be one of them

how do you turn logging on?

one more thing since you agree that opening the WB ruins the fun : lately I've been opening up the worldbuilder and changing a couple water tiles to land here and there to turn islands into peninsulas if you know what I mean. would it be possible and worth the effort to add an optional routine that does that? it seems like many people dislike having islands due to bad naval AI, so that could be a nice addition

 

[Seven05]

Though, it really does depend on the algorithm, which only you know and could make a decision to go with (2) instead of (1), which I'm suggesting might be good in some cases.

Using your example, if the increased-mountains algorithm doesn't "scale" properly with small maps, then this truly is a case where you might say "If small and increased-mountains then change to medium-mountains".

But the issue in that case isn't the mountains, it's the expected amount of land for each player. Running a small map with low cohesion and high mountains works fine and produces some cool maps, the problem is that I know you want x number of tiles per civ, we all do, but I have no idea what 'x' is for you. I actually had tested a replacement for the sealevel to work based on the number of civs in the game but I didn't like the results, perhaps something more subtle like an adjustment to the sealevel (land percent technically) based on the number of civs and the map size would work better.

Yep, I'm with you on this one. I used to play the boardgame "Diplomacy" and it's been a discussion in the tournament community for as long as it has been around (has it really been 50 years? course I wasn't playing all that time ).

Has it been that long?

Thanks.

Now I feel old

I guess I'm not talking so much about how many options, but whether each one needs explanation. I mean, the "Ensure Exists" option, for example. If it was self-explanatory then why would we have to have the description you put in the first post? And conversely, if it was not self-explanatory, are we honestly saying each player has to come here to the forum and read that post to decide which option they want to set?

There's a longer explanation in the first post here because it explains a little more about how it works instead of just what it does. I could name that "Ensure climate exists for civs in the current game" but that's too long

 

[Seven05]

hey, for some people suffocation is a turn on, you never know I may be one of them

This is where I back away slowly

how do you turn logging on?

one more thing since you agree that opening the WB ruins the fun : lately I've been opening up the worldbuilder and changing a couple water tiles to land here and there to turn islands into peninsulas if you know what I mean. would it be possible and worth the effort to add an optional routine that does that? it seems like many people dislike having islands due to bad naval AI, so that could be a nice addition

You enable logging by finding your civ4 ini file: CivilizationIV.ini Normally it's in 'My Documents/My Games/Beyond the Sword'

In there you need to search for LoggingEnabled if you don't see it, just add this to the end of the file:

; Enable the logging system
LoggingEnabled = 1

1 is on, 0 is off

I actually have code in like you're asking for, but I don't use it on all of the islands and it only fills in single tile gaps. I also have code that can break land (again, only one tile) to get an inland sea to connect to the ocean. I can add a 'minimum island size' option that simply deletes any islands smaller than that, but only if you'll give up y-wrap

 

[Seven05]

Oh, and if you do have lagging enabled you may have issues in MP games, the host gets a warning that you have logging enabled and how bad that is so you may want to disable it before playing MP games.

There are only two log files I am concerned with. They will both be in your \My Documents\My Games\Beyond the Sword\LOGS folder.

PythonDbg.log has the debugging output for the map script, and some fun ascii art of the map itself. This lets you see things like how good the starting plots scored for each player, if any bonuses were skipped, what, if anything, the smart climate did to the world, etc. This file also has the random seed which I can use to duplicate problematic maps.

PythonErr.log will work just like having the pop-ups in game for python excpetions, you just won't need to grab a screenshot of them, just copy & paste the text. If all goes well, this file is empty 99% of the time you only need the first exception listed, which is 3 tracebacks and an error code, so about 8-10 lines of text.

You can ignore all of the other files in there, they won't have anything usefull for me.

 

[Valkrionn]

I think a 'Minimum Island Size' option would be far more useful than ywrap.

 

[[to_xp]Gekko]

kewl, I'll enable logging as see i I can help diagnosing the python exception issue

instead of deleting small islands, I think it would be better to raise the "single tile gap filler" to something like 3/4 tiles, that should ensure that islands turn into peninsulas so that all the land is readily available without the need for navies. I'm not talking about 1 tile islands btw, those are fine the way they are. I'm thinking of areas that are actually worth settling and are a decent percentage of the total amount of land. often unique features and/or barbarian cities spawn on those, and the fact that barbs never seem to use ships makes them feel "wasted"

don't remove ywraps, you spent time of them and that would be wasted time if you remove it. it's just an option so if people don't like it they just won't use it and btw, they are actually working pretty good with the latest tweaks.

 

[Seven05]

Ok, here are the minimun island sizes:

		worldsizes = {
			WorldSizeTypes.WORLDSIZE_DUEL:      [1,1,1],
			WorldSizeTypes.WORLDSIZE_TINY:      [2,1,1],
			WorldSizeTypes.WORLDSIZE_SMALL:     [3,2,1],
			WorldSizeTypes.WORLDSIZE_STANDARD:  [3,2,1],
			WorldSizeTypes.WORLDSIZE_LARGE:     [4,2,1],
			WorldSizeTypes.WORLDSIZE_HUGE:      [4,3,2]
			}
		if hasattr(WorldSizeTypes, "WORLDSIZE_GIANT"):
			worldsizes[WorldSizeTypes.WORLDSIZE_GIANT] = [5,3,2]

The three numbers for each world size match the cohesion (high, medium, low). SO a large map with medium cohesion will have islands as small as 2 tiles but a large map with high cohesion won't have any islands with fewer than 4 tiles. It's not an option, it just happens

I actually do this pass twice, once on the oversized heightmap before I shrink it down to the final map size and once just after defining the plot types. In RiFE (and soon Wild Mana) you can sometimes see where an island chain was since the deep ocean terrain type is altitude sensitive the 'erased' islands will never be replaced by deep ocean.

I'm going to upload 2.58 in a few seconds...

• Fixed issue with floodplains missing after desert hills flattened
• Smart climate adjustment for massive continents also takes sea level into consideration
• Adjusted flavor start options, minimal flavor now ignores preferences for north and west weights
• Player's whose names contain all of the following letters: e, g, k, o will be forced to start on a single tile island if y-wrap is enabled.
• Maps with y-wrap enabled ignore civ preferences for north weight
• Added island cleanup code based on world size and cohesion

 

[[to_xp]Gekko]

Player's whose names contain all of the following letters: e, g, k, o will be forced to start on a single tile island if y-wrap is enabled.

epic, can't wait to try it out!

 

[Seven05]

It's up, and I finally broke 50kb!

Oh, you saw that?

 

[Seven05]

instead of deleting small islands, I think it would be better to raise the "single tile gap filler" to something like 3/4 tiles, that should ensure that islands turn into peninsulas so that all the land is readily available without the need for navies. I'm not talking about 1 tile islands btw, those are fine the way they are. I'm thinking of areas that are actually worth settling and are a decent percentage of the total amount of land. often unique features and/or barbarian cities spawn on those, and the fact that barbs never seem to use ships makes them feel "wasted"

Sorry, missed this.

I actually handle that when working with the enlarged heightmap. By 'sinking' the small islands there the result is that any close to another landmass will normally 'merge' with it. Its a little more natural this way rather than just plopping down another chunk of land and I don't have to check to make sure I'm not blocking something off. This also means the land percentages won't count them, since they're not land anymore and if they are still land they're ok to keep.

 

[[to_xp]Gekko]

2.58 looks good, thanx for the details

I'll test it a bit and feedback

 

[Valkrionn]

In RiFE (and soon Wild Mana) you can sometimes see where an island chain was since the deep ocean terrain type is altitude sensitive the 'erased' islands will never be replaced by deep ocean.

Which is actually awesome... Undersea island mounts. Maybe have a chance to place a volcano?

 

[[to_xp]Gekko]

2.58, just keeps getting better

I'm going to post a screenshot that will show you what I was asking for about islands. this is small size, low sea, high cohesion. this island is a pretty good amount of land compared to the total amount on a small map, and placing a single tile of land where the cursor is would connect it to the rest ot the world and make it more meaningful

with the above settings and 6 civs, I had to use modify selection alongside with minimal flavour, since ensure exist ( which is now called differently ) would leave too much jungle in the south which in turn would result in civs being clumped up north. however, I'm surprised that with modify selection on AND the clan being in the game, I get no jungle at all. working as intended or not?

 

[Milaga]

Then I have a bug to report. The game crashes the instant I try to generate a map. I don't even get the progress bar, it's just a quick CTD. There's not even anything in the logs either.

I gave 2.58 a try with Orbis. Getting the same crash but this time it happens after initializing the game. These are the last words of the log:

Spoiler :

Distributing rainfall

Finished generating plot types.

Adding Terrain

Finished generating terrain types.

 

[Wodan]

This island is a pretty good amount of land compared to the total amount on a small map, and placing a single tile of land where the cursor is would connect it to the rest ot the world and make it more meaningful

Honestly, I don't get it. Isn't that just a lame sidestep so you don't have to research and build ships? How in the world is this "more meaningful"?

(Not trying to pick a fight... truly don't get it.)

 

[Tholal]

Good stuff. If I get a chance tonight, I'll generate a low cohesion map and see how well my Naval AI handles it.

 

[Tholal]

Honestly, I don't get it. Isn't that just a lame sidestep so you don't have to research and build ships? How in the world is this "more meaningful"?

(Not trying to pick a fight... truly don't get it.)

His concern stems from the fact that the AI in base FfH will almost never settle across water.

 

[Seven05]

Which is actually awesome... Undersea island mounts. Maybe have a chance to place a volcano?

I can do that easily enough. A creative mod author would play around in the DLL so I could define some extra settings on the plots so the event system would spawn volcanos on plate boundries over the course of the game... ooo, imagine how fun it would be if you had an earthquake event that only happened to cities that were built on fault lines.

I gave 2.58 a try with Orbis. Getting the same crash but this time it happens after initializing the game. These are the last words of the log:

Spoiler :

Distributing rainfall

Finished generating plot types.

Adding Terrain

Finished generating terrain types.

Hmm... I'll have to check his terrain types, may be the marsh/wetland like you mentioned. Do other FfH scripts like Erebus.py or MountainCoast.py work with Orbis?

Good stuff. If I get a chance tonight, I'll generate a low cohesion map and see how well my Naval AI handles it.

Sounds fun, my Lanun games are in dire need of more targets for my pirates