[MapScript] Erebus Continent

[Seven05]

2.0 has been uploaded, see the first post.

I did get the most of the changes in that I wanted so you get the new & improved river code from Cephalo's PerfectWorld2.py, enhanced details on the coastlines and mountain ranges and more appropriate map sizes (using default grid sizes now).

The starting plot code looks to be pretty good right now, so far anyway. This was a major headache since I wanted decent locations that were also not piled all on one side of the map and folowed some basic rules for civ preferences all at the same time. I managed to get a working 'neighborValue' preference in as well so certain civs can be set to increase or decrease the range at which neighboring civs can start. It's not perfect since it is highly dependant on the order in which the civs are placed but it works.

I didn't get the option for lakes in and I haven't worked up new code to handle the placement of any regional features like ancient forests or any of the FfH unique features or lairs.

 

[[to_xp]Gekko]

this sounds great, I'll try it right away

does the starting plot code still try to place all players on the larger continent or are they gonna be spread up more evenly?

 

[Seven05]

The exact rule is a bit complicated, I'll try to give you an example without code

First, we need 70% of the total land to be available for player starts, if there is a single continent that is 70% of the land that one is used and no others are. The prevents possible clumping of players on smaller landmasses while others have a huge one to themselves.

Next, if we don't have 70% of the land the remaining landmasses are evaluated based on a minimum size requirement, if large enough it gets added to the possible starting area list. If this pushes us over the 70% threshold no other landmasses are added, if not we will continue to add landmasses until we have 70% of them for starting areas or until we run out of landmasses. The landmasses are selected from a shuffled list so there is no preference of picking anything that is close. I use an adjusting scale to prefer larger contiennts without simply going down the list from biggest to smallest.

Once we have our list of areas giving us at least 70% of the land another check is run to make sure those areas are good enough to sustain life, so really crappy islands should be cut even if they were of a decent size. So a large island covered in snow or desert should never be available.

And that's it. The only meaning 'new world' has in this script is preventing players from starting on small islands. However, if there is one massive continent (quite common) and it is substantially better than the others it will end up with all of the players on it because that's were all of the good locations are. I do not force player starts to be on the same or different continents, I only limit which ones they can not possibly be on. The final choice is made per play as they evaluate the list of potential city locations and pick the one they like the best making that their starting location. The surrounding city locations within a scaled range (e.g. 9 plots on a standard map with high cohesion) are then flagged so they can't be picked UNLESS nothing else is available.

So, you might all end up on one continent, or you can be spread out if there are multiple continents except you'll never start on a small island. You normally will have some breathing room between you and your neighbors (relative to the map size and cohesion) but in some cases a civ can get dropped in close to other civs due to lack of available locations. Since the map script generally tries to generate a single continent it is very likely that all civs will start on a single continent.

Does that make more sense?

 

[Jules.lt]

I managed to get a working 'neighborValue' preference in as well so certain civs can be set to increase or decrease the range at which neighboring civs can start. It's not perfect since it is highly dependant on the order in which the civs are placed but it works.

Is it possible to place the humans before the AIs, in that case?
People won't really mind if the AI Sidar is very close to other civs, but if it's the player it's more annoying.

Maybe in addition to that, start with the civs for whom it matters most?

I've been following this thread for some time, now, and I'll give it a try for the first time. I must confess that I have extremely high expectations from this mapscript, but I think it will measure up just fine

Edit: I was intrigued by the weird pattern of alternating hills and plains/grasslands on my start, so I went into the WB to check out the map.
I'll warn you right now: I liked a lot of what I saw, but some bits make the map useless to me.
I hope you won't mind what I hope is some constructive criticism that will help make the next version better...

I notice that the hills and flat terrain mingle much more than in most of the mapscripts I've seen. It's a nice touch but it happens perhaps too much. The pattern around my start was:
X_X_X
_X_X_
X_X_X
which really felt weird... maybe you could make the hills clump together just a little bit more?

Also, I thought myself lucky to have 3 food resources in my BFC without the Blessings of Amatheon option (overall: 6 resources in my BFC, one hidden); when I checked out the other civs I realised that the 3 food resources in the BFC was the norm for the 13 civs present on this large map, including a ridiculous 3pigs+wine in the first ring for both the Sheaim and the Ljos... Only the Illians had it really bad and the Orcs had a mediocre start with only three resources out of which only too could be taken with the same city.

The rest of the map had more "normal" amounts of resources. Don't you think you're improving the starting spots a bit too much?
Just for that reason I won't be able to play your mapscript, as I like resources to be scarce and valuable.

Another weird thing is that the Letum Frigus spawned on a grassland hill at the south of the continent, while there were many eligible locations in the tundra and ice in the north next to the illians...

I used a large map with high cohesion, low water level and slightly reduced desert, jungle and tundra. I was quite satisfied with the amount of desert and tundra that I received, but I couldn't spot any jungle at all. The last negative point I'll add is that there were too many rivers (maybe a bit less than half of the tiles in the world were irrigated); I didn't see any significant lake, but that's probably because of the low sea level.

Sorry if I was a bit harsh, but all the work you're talking about for initial placement and other tweaks makes me really hopeful, so I'll keep following this thread
Until then, I'm back to Tectonics 30%...

 

[Seven05]

Is it possible to place the humans before the AIs, in that case?
People won't really mind if the AI Sidar is very close to other civs, but if it's the player it's more annoying.

Maybe in addition to that, start with the civs for whom it matters most?

Yes, that is quite possible. In fact, if I really wanted to I could generate the map shape and climate based on the civs in the current game since all of that is known when the map initializes. I like some randomness though and I prefer more 'natural' generation so I'd probably never go that far, but prioritizing civs is easy enough to add. I should not however that the only 'flavors' I have defined are cases used for pure game mechanics reasons and not really 'flavor' in the sense of trying to stick with the lore. So I ensure the Lanun take a coastal start if possible, put the Illians in the snow, make sure the elves have some forests (and don't remove them) and a few other minor settings but most of the civs use the defaults which merely try for aplayable start.

I hope you won't mind what I hope is some constructive criticism that will help make the next version better...

Not at all, if everybody just pats me on the back and then runs off and uses a different script it's not much help

I notice that the hills and flat terrain mingle much more than in most of the mapscripts I've seen. It's a nice touch but it happens perhaps too much. The pattern around my start was:
X_X_X
_X_X_
X_X_X
which really felt weird... maybe you could make the hills clump together just a little bit more?

There is actually a lot of code to ensure clumping hills that follow more natural patterns. What you see here is most likely a combination of two things. First, during the clean-up of your start location you had too many hills so it randomly reduced 30-50% of them to flatlands since pure hill starts are pretty rough. It also reduces 33% of the surrounding peaks to hills so some of those hills may have been peaks. In the end it's at the mercy of the RNG which is not exactly reliable, the good news is that the odds of ever seeing that again are slim to none.

Also, I thought myself lucky to have 3 food resources in my BFC without the Blessings of Amatheon option (overall: 6 resources in my BFC, one hidden); when I checked out the other civs I realised that the 3 food resources in the BFC was the norm for the 13 civs present on this large map, including a ridiculous 3pigs+wine in the first ring for both the Sheaim and the Ljos... Only the Illians had it really bad and the Orcs had a mediocre start with only three resources out of which only too could be taken with the same city.

The rest of the map had more "normal" amounts of resources. Don't you think you're improving the starting spots a bit too much?
Just for that reason I won't be able to play your mapscript, as I like resources to be scarce and valuable.

The resources are added to compensate for more than just your 'fat cross' itself. If you see a LOT of added resources it's because the local area as a whole isn't as good as the best local area in terms of space available, resources available and maximum workable tiles (assuming 2 food per pop). So in your example specifically the Illians probably had a lot of open land around them, most likely they were between other civs and a vast expanse of land making it extremely easy for them to block off a huge portion of the map and expand freely. Since that can be such a massive advantage the other starting locations are compensated with additional resources since they will likely end up with fewer total cities. Of course most of this is assuming standard civs rules which aren't exactly appropriate for FfH so it does need some adjusting. What annoys me the most is the relatively limited number of resources available for normilization in FfH which causes a lot of repeating resources and since that isn't as good as haveing a lot of different resources you get more.

What I will most likely do is add another option to control starting plots a little more allowing the players to select their own amount of normilization (adding extra stuff).

Another weird thing is that the Letum Frigus spawned on a grassland hill at the south of the continent, while there were many eligible locations in the tundra and ice in the north next to the illians...

Those I don't touch at all, in fact all I do with the FfH unique features is avoid making any changes to the plot if one is found to prevent the normilization code from flattening a peak with the Guardians of Pristin Pass on it for example. I also don't alow any starting positions to be placed on top of them since that would probably freak out the AI.

I used a large map with high cohesion, low water level and slightly reduced desert, jungle and tundra. I was quite satisfied with the amount of desert and tundra that I received, but I couldn't spot any jungle at all. The last negative point I'll add is that there were too many rivers (maybe a bit less than half of the tiles in the world were irrigated); I didn't see any significant lake, but that's probably because of the low sea level.

I'm not sure I'll ever win with the rivers They are extremely dependant on the shape of the landmass since that has the most impact on the climate. About the only think I can promise with any degree of certainty is that the percent of desert tiles will not exceed the defined limit and the amount of land will be close (within 5%) to the target based on sealevel. A single mountain range in the right place can change the climate enough to make jungles all but non-existent even with them set to 'massive.' The actual location of the land will also make the amount of snow/tundra/jungle/marshes impossible to predict.

Sorry if I was a bit harsh, but all the work you're talking about for initial placement and other tweaks makes me really hopeful, so I'll keep following this thread
Until then, I'm back to Tectonics 30%...

Well you were doing good until that bit about Tectonics

Seriously though, I appreciate the feedback, when everybody is quite I can only assume it's perfect. Now that I have the landforms where I like them and all of the kinks worked out of the base starting plot code I can focus on ensuring better gameplay with the addition of a few simple options like allowing you to choose between balanced and natural starting location resources. I do need something to control rivers and lakes better too so expect that one soon.

 

[[to_xp]Gekko]

Yes, that is quite possible. In fact, if I really wanted to I could generate the map shape and climate based on the civs in the current game since all of that is known when the map initializes.

that would be awesome. if you ever get around to implementing a system like that, I'll be really happy to check it out

 

[Jules.lt]

Thanks for appreciating the feedback, seven

About the hills-flatland start, is it possible to flatten one or two randomly shaped "chunks" of 3-4 hills, rather than giving each hill in the area a chance of flattening? That would probably avoid this kind of weird patterns.
I agree that for forests and jungles giving each one in the area a chance to disappear is the way to go, but hills and flatlands need to be more continuous.

The Illians had some space to expand to if they avoided going my side, but that was extremely far from compensating their start on tundra only and with only one resource (deer). Especially when other people have 3 food resources and some have 4 in their first ring...

For the amounts of specific types of terrains requested by options, maybe do another pass at the end checking if some terrains are in abnormal amounts and correct it?

 

[Seven05]

that would be awesome. if you ever get around to implementing a system like that, I'll be really happy to check it out

How did I know you would like that idea? Like I said though, it's not likely to happen, maybe as a different map script all together but if I try to add it to this one the amount of work involved in maintaining natural continent generation AND civ-specific definitions during creation is frightening. I could probably use it to make small adjustments to the climate, so having the Illians in the game for example could increase the minimum temperature for snow resulting in more snow tiles.

Thanks for appreciating the feedback, seven

About the hills-flatland start, is it possible to flatten one or two randomly shaped "chunks" of 3-4 hills, rather than giving each hill in the area a chance of flattening? That would probably avoid this kind of weird patterns.
I agree that for forests and jungles giving each one in the area a chance to disappear is the way to go, but hills and flatlands need to be more continuous.

I might be able to do something like that. Currently I have is set to clean up an area larger than the city radius so it can help with your 2nd and 3rd city in many cases. so I'll have to see if I can keep that at the same time without making it any slower.

For the amounts of specific types of terrains requested by options, maybe do another pass at the end checking if some terrains are in abnormal amounts and correct it?

I might be able to get something like that in for tundra and snow but it wouldn't help with jungles. The problem is that enforcing terrain percentages beyond the deserts, plains and grasslands will result in some very odd and unatural climates, Cephalo discovered this with Perfect World a while ago and I didn't believe him until I tried it myself. I also tried something a bit more elegant by adjusting the top and bottom latitudes based on where the majority of the land was but again it creates an opportunity for some really bad results depending on the final landmass sizes, shapes and positions. At least right now the world will be good most of the time and never really horrible, even the complete absense of jungle isn't game breaking (even in FF with the Lizard races). I guess a lot of it depends on what you like in a map, I like natural and unpredictable so I'm reluctant to force it to become unatural or predictable.

 

[Jules.lt]

It's strange. Once you've detected that there isn't enough jungles, isn't it possible to just extend the jungles that are there, or select one big forest at the correct latitude and change it?
You know that better than me, I guess

btw, if you have options present for the player to set the amounts of each terrain type they're going to expect that part to be predictable
That doesn't mean that any other characteristic of the map will be predictable...

 

[OnmyojiOmn]

This would be a great script if not for the crazy number of rivers. With reduced desert and jungle, 80% of the map is riverside grassland.

 

[Seven05]

It's strange. Once you've detected that there isn't enough jungles, isn't it possible to just extend the jungles that are there, or select one big forest at the correct latitude and change it?
You know that better than me, I guess

Jungles are placed by rainfall and temperature, areas with high rainfall but lower temperature are thick forest regions. The temperature is the product of latitude and altitude primarily with some influence from the winds and relative distance from the ocean(s). The settings that adjust jungles simply increase or decrease the temperature requirement for them. What I find interesting though is that you seem to think there are so few when most maps I generate have a LOT of jungles unless I use one of the reduce settings. God bless random numbers

btw, if you have options present for the player to set the amounts of each terrain type they're going to expect that part to be predictable
That doesn't mean that any other characteristic of the map will be predictable...

The only really predictable setting is 'none' all the others are just guidelines that typically result in something that you would expect. Setting tundra to massive can still result in little fewer tundra tiles than using the default setting if there isn't enough land in the northern portion of the map. Even massive deserts can be tame if the landmass is broken up so that there isn't really a single huge land region or you get 'lucky' and all the mountains are in the west so they don't block the wind & rain. My recomedation is to open up the file and tweak some of the constant variables more to your liking, they're all near the beginning of the file and have comments explaining what they do so it shouldn't be difficult. But be forewarned, the RNG gods will unleash their wrath upon you after you adjust something and it will swing far more than expected in the other direction

Anyway, while it seems simple to count the number of jungle tiles it really isn't that simple. What if jungle already covers more than half of the 'good' grassland areas and all that is left are narrow bands of grassland along the coast or mixed in with plains or tundra? Or maybe there is very little tundra on the main land but several islands making up 10-15% of the total land are covered with it. While a lot of this is easy to see when you look at a map, writing rules to accomidate every potential result to try and force something is going to end up either being very unatural looking or so complex that it doubles or tripples the (already painfully slow) generation time. Actually, even the most basic setup to count the terrain type while applying them and then trying to adjust the threshold before re-applying the terrain would have a significant impact on the time needed to generate the map, and with that there wouldn't be a guarantee of anything better that you had the first time around. Even now, when the script tries to ensure 8% of the tiles are below desert threshold it doesn't mean that 8% of the flatland and hill tiles will be desert, many of the tiles below the desert threshold may be in very cold regions and end up as snow, or they may be high altitude tiles that get turned into peaks. Some of them may be lone desert tiles in an otherwise 'wet' area that gets cleaned up and changed into plains while post processing the map to remove ugly spots. So while I am positive that something very close to 8% of the tiles are in fact below the desert threshold for rainfall I can never be certain that 8% of the tiles are actually desert.

It's frustrating to have no real control over the randomness which is both the biggest advantage and disadvantage of this method of generating the world and it'll never be perfect for everybody, but at least they're pretty maps

This would be a great script if not for the crazy number of rivers. With reduced desert and jungle, 80% of the map is riverside grassland.

River settings will be in the next version, it's an easy manual adjustment right now (search for self.riverThreshold and increase it from 5 to 6). When I was testing it with countless builds I ended up with some maps with too many rivers and some with too few, I found that lower threshold generally had too many rivers on most and a higher threshold generally had too few on most maps so I went with the average. Also, reducing the river frequency is likely to all but eliminate rivers in deserts so you have to keep that in mind.

 

[OnmyojiOmn]

River settings will be in the next version, it's an easy manual adjustment right now (search for self.riverThreshold and increase it from 5 to 6). When I was testing it with countless builds I ended up with some maps with too many rivers and some with too few, I found that lower threshold generally had too many rivers on most and a higher threshold generally had too few on most maps so I went with the average. Also, reducing the river frequency is likely to all but eliminate rivers in deserts so you have to keep that in mind.

I suggest looking at the number of riverside tiles, rather than just the number of rivers. Generate a certain number of rivers with start points placed uniformly across a land mass, then count the number of riverside tiles and divide that number by total number of tiles. When counting riverside tiles, you could weight plains down and/or grassland/desert up. Next, subtract a threshold value from that ratio. The result is your percentage chance of generating an additional river. Repeat until you fail to generate a new river.

Just thinking out loud.

As for rivers in deserts, flood plains are the reason I usually play scripts with options for desert reduction. You usually end up with a desert made entirely of flood plains, which is pretty silly in my opinion. Continents and Islands with -50% desert and Very Clumped terrain for the win!

 

[Jules.lt]

I think that you're trying to balance your mapscript for too many possible settings... and if you make options available that do not give the expected result, users are going to think that your mapscript is "broken" even if it gives excellent maps.

I'd say: try to make it give out relatively reliable amounts of each terrain type with the basic settings, and then consider adding options to raise or lower the amounts of each.

Or just drop the options, since they are what make users think that they are going to get reliable amounts of each terrain types and make the script adjustable by some easily accessible variables in the mapscript file. Adjustable levels of jungles and tundras are not the main purpose of this mapscript anyway, are they?

 

[Seven05]

In a sense the adjustable climates are one of the main purposes. The main concept is to simulate a region of a world, not an entire world. Originally I had options to adjust the location of the region, so things like 'equatorial' or 'northern hemisphere' as options. But then I realized it could do so much more if I had options to give control over individual aspects, and it eliminated the need for me to come up with one option for each potential combination. I also originally had fewer options with more differences between them (4 total including the option for none), but the finer incriments were requested by other players. The nice thing about this is it becomes easy for you to play on a map with a lot of deserts while still maintaining an arctic region if you chose, or playing without an arctic region (no tundra) but not being either tropical or heavy on deserts or even no deserts but plenty of tundra and jungles. So really, it's just a bunch of different climate settings divided over four options instead of being crammed into one list.

But still, having 'reliable amounts' of some terrain or feature types isn't possible without also having 'reliable amounts' of land in particular shapes at specific latitudes or dropping the climate model all together and switching over to something more like the fractal terrain used in the base map scripts. That is definately not what I want since the climate model is a big part of what I enjoy most about the maps created with this script. Please keep in mind that it is using a climate model based on the heightmap, so rainfall and temperature simulations are run after the world is created, the world is not created with a specific climate in mind. As long as the base heightmap is random the climate model is random even though there is very little randomness in the climate code itself, if that makes any sense

What you are asking for is to override the climate model with a set of hard rules to enforce specific climates regardless of the shape of the world. Unfortunately that isn't what this script will do as that would be throwing away half of the code, or rendering it useless and favoring a balanced climate over a modeled one. Since there are many map scripts out there that give you balanced climates this offers a different approach when you have a realistic climate that may or may not be balanced. For me, that is a huge plus and creates worlds that are more interesting to explore and interract with. Compare the deserts this script generates with those on fractal maps, this climate model doesn't force deserts to be a pre-set latitudes and prevent them from ever appearing outside of those limits. You can have one massive desert dividing a continent in half or you may get several smaller deserts spread out over several areas. Fractal maps give you two distinct bands of deserts, period. So you then know there will be deserts at specific places every time but they will never be anywhere else. If I add code to say, 'this setting means you will have x - y tiles covered in jungles' I then have to force the climate to generate that number of jungle tiles which will result in unwanted artifacts such as jungle adjoining the tundra regions. With tundra & snow this can create cases where you have harsh divisions where the adjustment results in snow tiles adjacent to desert tiles. While some of these cases are not entirely unrealistic the terrain & feature sets has lead us to expect that 'desert' or 'jungle' means 'hot' due to the lack of biomes such as 'steppes' or 'savanah' and no features for temperate or sub arctic wetlands and marshes. All of those would be quite easy to place using this climate model, but since they don't exist in the game I'd then have to answer the rash of questions about why the maps generated by this script can place 'hot deserts' in the middle of snow or jungles next to tundra regions.

A lot of this is also complicated by my choice to allow them to be controlled independantly. When you adjust any one of the settings it has no direct impact on any of the others. This means that increasing tundra does not implicitly decrease grasslands, plains or deserts. The only potential conflict is with deserts and jungles because increasing deserts will result in fewer grasslands and jungles require grasslands. To a lesser degree increasing tundra has the potential to reduce deserts but only because I do not allow desert to be placed when the temperature is low enough to be tundra or snow for astetic reasons.

Edit: However, in the interest of improving the script I will rename the options and option values so that it's easier to understand what they each do and avoid any misunderstanding. So instead of 'decreasing' the 'jungle' setting I will have you 'increase' the 'minimum jungle temperature'

 

[Jules.lt]

Ok, thanks for the clarification. I think that renaming the options will make things clearer
(sorry for the bother)

You might also make it clearer in the first post that your idea is to generate this kind of realistic climate, so people coming here know what to expect.

 

[Jean Elcard]

Hi Seven, would you mind changing this:

def getGridSize(argsList):
	mc.initialize()
	mc.initInGameOptions()
	grid_sizes = {
		WorldSizeTypes.WORLDSIZE_DUEL:		(10,6),
		WorldSizeTypes.WORLDSIZE_TINY:		(13,8),
		WorldSizeTypes.WORLDSIZE_SMALL:		(16,10),
		WorldSizeTypes.WORLDSIZE_STANDARD:	(21,13),
		WorldSizeTypes.WORLDSIZE_LARGE:		(26,16),
		WorldSizeTypes.WORLDSIZE_HUGE:		(32,20)
	}
	if (argsList[0] == -1): # (-1,) is passed to function on loads
			return []
	[eWorldSize] = argsList
	return grid_sizes[eWorldSize]

to:

def beforeInit():
	mc.initialize()
	mc.initInGameOptions()

Since you are not overwriting the grid sizes anymore, the gridsize function is actually no longer necessary. I'm asking, because it would allow me to change your map script at one position less any time I add one of your new versions to a new version of FlavourMod.

 

[Seven05]

Ok, thanks for the clarification. I think that renaming the options will make things clearer
(sorry for the bother)

You might also make it clearer in the first post that your idea is to generate this kind of realistic climate, so people coming here know what to expect.

It's no bother, sometimes I forget to explain things up front and just assume everybody knows what I mean

I'll re-word all of the options to make it a bit more clear and add some more detail to the first post regarding the climate model.

def beforeInit():
	mc.initialize()
	mc.initInGameOptions()

Since you are not overwriting the grid sizes anymore, the gridsize function is actually no longer necessary. I'm asking, because it would allow me to change your map script at one position less any time I add one of your new versions to a new version of FlavourMod.

I can do that, I was actually going to look into moving the init function calls but then got side-tracked.

What other changes do you end up making? I can probably work them in for you and just ad a 'FlavourMod = True/False' option at the top to save you even more work

Actually... I should be able to read game options, I think anyway but I never tried it, that would be the best way to do it as then you wouldn't have to touch a thing and the script could just adapt if Flavor Starts were enabled and do nothing if the option either doesn't exist or is disabled.

 

[leo.]

this map script doesnt really work for me. it seems like it works in 1 of 20 cases. i've already tried to fix this problem but i always get a phyton error when starting a game.

 

[Jean Elcard]

I can do that, I was actually going to look into moving the init function calls but then got side-tracked.

Great, thanks.

What other changes do you end up making? I can probably work them in for you and just ad a 'FlavourMod = True/False' option at the top to save you even more work

There is only one more place I make a change:

		[COLOR="SeaGreen"]# Varying distance preferences based on world size and cohesion[/COLOR]
		worldsizes = {
			WorldSizeTypes.WORLDSIZE_DUEL:      [7,6,5],
			WorldSizeTypes.WORLDSIZE_TINY:      [7,6,5],
			WorldSizeTypes.WORLDSIZE_SMALL:     [8,7,6],
			WorldSizeTypes.WORLDSIZE_STANDARD:  [9,8,7],
			WorldSizeTypes.WORLDSIZE_LARGE:     [10,9,8],
			WorldSizeTypes.WORLDSIZE_HUGE:      [12,11,10]
			}
[COLOR="SeaGreen"]#FlavourMod: Added by Jean Elcard 02/26/2009[/COLOR]
[COLOR="Blue"]		if hasattr(WorldSizeTypes, "WORLDSIZE_GIANT"):
			worldsizes[WorldSizeTypes.WORLDSIZE_GIANT] = [14,13,12][/COLOR]
[COLOR="SeaGreen"]#FlavourMod: End Add[/COLOR]
		grain_list = worldsizes[gameMap.getWorldSize()]
		grain = grain_list[gameMap.getCustomMapOption(0)]

The first line checks, if the map size "Giant" exists in the mod you are playing, before executing the second line. This allows to run the map script with and without FlavourMod.

Thanks in advance, if you decide to add these two line in too.

 

[lokifireson]

First game with this mapscript, and I must say, it is *very* fun. The world itself looks like it could really happen, and I like the little bonus of the continent not wrapping around the sides of the map.

Are there supposed to be gigantic swathes of forest covering the landmass though? On the Huge map I am playing, the west most third is full of jungles, the center is desert, and the east most third (with all but 3 of the civs) is (was) an epic forest the likes Earth will never see.

The Infernals spawned right in the desert, converting it all into a fiery expanse of doom that felt just... right.
-------------------------

tl;dr