Optimal number of civs for a given size map

[civhelp121]

Hi, since last time I played the CTD for large maps seem to have been eliminated, so I've been trying much larger maps than the usual. It seems that using the default civs in the larger maps leads to very late game contact, or at least borders don't touch until very late. I enjoy games where aside from the odd wilderness or island there is no more room to expand by the classical or medieval age. With that in mind, what do you guys think is a good amount of civs to play on, say, the second largest map?

 

[Sgtslick]

gigantic, giant, huge, large, normal.. i assume you mean large tho, it depends on your settings (like how much land/ocean). But i think like 12-14 for large, similar to huge, but probably more like 14-16. I like snaky continents with only like 50 ocean. Some people only use 8 for huge but i think thats not enough. Also I don't use barb civs which is extra room.

 

[WimpyTheWarrior]

I've been playing Gigantic C2C_Terra with the default 15 Civs (including me) but I agree with the OP in that it is very open and there is lots of room to expand, even with Barb Civs enabled. HOWEVER I've been playing with "start as minors" which is now understood to constrain the AI expansion, so I'll wait to see what Koshling does for that before making radical changes to the number of starting Civs.

 

[Koshling]

I've been playing Gigantic C2C_Terra with the default 15 Civs (including me) but I agree with the OP in that it is very open and there is lots of room to expand, even with Barb Civs enabled. HOWEVER I've been playing with "start as minors" which is now understood to constrain the AI expansion, so I'll wait to see what Koshling does for that before making radical changes to the number of starting Civs.

The latest GEM has 42 I think on gigantic. It's probably a bit TOO dense for an equivalently sized random map, but I'd say gigantic (random) likely needs 30+

 

[civhelp121]

@sgtslick- I like playing with large land masses, so perhaps that can make somewhat of a difference. I meant Giant, but I'll try to scale it up based on 14-16 for large.

@Koshlin- Wow thats a lot of civs. My comp would probably be very slow at gigantic with 30+, so as mentioned before I'll stick with Giant.

So then perhaps between 14-16 and 30, 25 is a good compromise?

 

[strategyonly]

@sgtslick- I like playing with large land masses, so perhaps that can make somewhat of a difference. I meant Giant, but I'll try to scale it up based on 14-16 for large.

@Koshling- Wow thats a lot of civs. My comp would probably be very slow at gigantic with 30+, so as mentioned before I'll stick with Giant.

So then perhaps between 14-16 and 30, 25 is a good compromise?

I agree, i have a so called "Super PC" and i have a very HARD time playing any GEM map, its just too big, UNless you have alot of patience, in-between turns, which I dont

Hydro always recommends playing on PerfectWorld2f, but its just way too much water for me and Thundra/Ice, i'd rather have more land than water.

Now also depending on your PC Specs, if you have XP, i'd only recommend playing on Large or Standard size maps.

 

[Koshling]

I agree, i have a so called "Super PC" and i have a very HARD time playing any GEM map, its just too big, UNless you have alot of patience, in-between turns, which I dont

Hydro always recommends playing on PerfectWorld2f, but its just way too much water for me and Thundra/Ice, i'd rather have more land than water.

Now also depending on your PC Specs, if you have XP, i'd only recommend playing on Large or Standard size maps.

Have you tried GEM with the new turn-slice option enabled that I added a few days ago? Works wonders for me on my laptop.

 

[JosEPh_II]

Personal preference is Giant map with 8-12 AI, No Barb Civ.

I don't play the GEM or Perfect World maps either. I do prefer Archipelago, Island, Fractal, and Lakes. But I do use Custom Continents from time to time. I like Navies and finding new landmasses. I do not like starting on a crowded map.

JosEPh

 

[strategyonly]

Have you tried GEM with the new turn-slice option enabled that I added a few days ago? Works wonders for me on my laptop.

Is that in the Options area, or the game options area? i didnt see it??

 

[Koshling]

Is that in the Options area, or the game options area? i didnt see it??

Its on the BUG options 'General' tab below AI Pathing

 

[Acularius]

May I ask what it does?
If it really cuts down on turn time, I'll add a note to say that it would be a 'good idea to turn on this feature'.

I'm going to give it a whirl today.

Personally, I have a fair amount of patience, the turns times aren't so bad, definitely in comparison to another game I play called 'Pride of Nations'.

 

[Koshling]

May I ask what it does?
If it really cuts down on turn time, I'll add a note to say that it would be a 'good idea to turn on this feature'.

I'm going to give it a whirl today.

Personally, I have a fair amount of patience, the turns times aren't so bad, definitely in comparison to another game I play called 'Pride of Nations'.

Basically it doesn't give the main game engine any turn slices to perform semi-useless animations and similar overhead in (essentially the main engine seems to do a full map update, at least at a cursorary level, every time control returns to it from the DLL). The AI now executes ALL the AI turn (for ALL AI civs) in the smallest number of turn slices possible, only returning control to the game engine to update the display when human units are attacked and so on. This means that the graphics get updated once for all AI moves, rather than progressively, so visually it's a bit all-at-once ish, but performance-wise a large gain is realised, because these display updates are pretty inefficient.

Jerking and frozen animations duirng the AI turn is the penalty you pay for the improved performance, but graphics should be smooth again during the human player turn.

 

[Acularius]

Basically it doesn't give the main game engine any turn slices to perform semi-useless animations and similar overhead in (essentially the main engine seems to do a full map update, at least at a cursorary level, every time control returns to it from the DLL). The AI now executes ALL the AI turn (for ALL AI civs) in the smallest number of turn slices possible, only returning control to the game engine to update the display when human units are attacked and so on. This means that the graphics get updated once for all AI moves, rather than progressively, so visually it's a bit all-at-once ish, but performance-wise a large gain is realised, because these display updates are pretty inefficient.

Jerking and frozen animations duirng the AI turn is the penalty you pay for the improved performance, but graphics should be smooth again during the human player turn.

I can live with that... and it only really matters when the human plays so I tend to enjoy this option now in all its new found glory. XD

 

[ls612]

On a related note, what are the areas for different sized maps, ie how many tiles does each size have?

I know that Gigantic is 134% bigger than Huge, but what does that compute to in actual numbers?

Also, getting on to really crazy ideas, how much work is it anyway to add new map sizes? I am totally unfamiliar with the map generation process, so could someone please enlighten me?

 

[AIAndy]

On a related note, what are the areas for different sized maps, ie how many tiles does each size have?

I know that Gigantic is 134% bigger than Huge, but what does that compute to in actual numbers?

Also, getting on to really crazy ideas, how much work is it anyway to add new map sizes? I am totally unfamiliar with the map generation process, so could someone please enlighten me?

Map sizes are governed by the map scripts. Some of them rely on the default map sizes defined in a specific XML file but most define their own sizes.
To add a map size you add the new entry to the XML and then go through all map scripts and change the actual size returns there.

 

[ls612]

Map sizes are governed by the map scripts. Some of them rely on the default map sizes defined in a specific XML file but most define their own sizes.
To add a map size you add the new entry to the XML and then go through all map scripts and change the actual size returns there.

Ouch, that sounds like far more work than it's worth. Nevermind.

 

[AIAndy]

Ouch, that sounds like far more work than it's worth. Nevermind.

It is less work than it sounds as the function getGridSize that returns those sizes looks very similar in the different map scripts.

 

[Acularius]

Maybe I'm happy by the new function, but Koshling's new function cuts down on the AI's need to hog time during turns, which improves the wait time between turns.

He had a better explanation of it somewhere, but I'm noticing improved game play with more civs than I did before.

To give an example the Giant Earth map deals with a map 210 (plots wide) and 90 (plots high) to give a total of 18,900 plots written.

 

[civhelp121]

Personal preference is Giant map with 8-12 AI, No Barb Civ.

I don't play the GEM or Perfect World maps either. I do prefer Archipelago, Island, Fractal, and Lakes. But I do use Custom Continents from time to time. I like Navies and finding new landmasses. I do not like starting on a crowded map.

JosEPh

I'm wondering what your opinion is production in water-heavy maps? It always seems to me due to the lack of land/hills and lots of water it takes much longer to produce anything.

Personally I'm looking for a new map type. I enjoy crowded maps at most by classical age because to me it gives more of the feel of International relations. There is few tensions between nations if each has more than enough room to expand. However I've played custom continents 3 continetns to death (any more than 3 is too symmetrical and predictable, looks odd to me, and any less than 2 isn't interesting). So a map in which there is a decent ability to increase production, has crowded civs by classical age, and gives the feeling of the map being the whole world (unlike a map, say, with a resource rich desert in the middle and all land on the edge. No planet is going to be all land or that predictable).

 

[JosEPh_II]

Archipelago with Low Sea level (gives more land and makes the archs very interesting) with either Archs or Snakey continents. On a Giant map I'll use 10 AI so that by the time you get canoes you will probably have met 1 to 3 AI. Sometime on a snakey continent or Arch setting you may have a competitor for your continent too. I use this setup because it allows the AI time to develop as an Empire before a neighbor crushes it because it got a "poor" start location. So that by the time naval units appear and begin to get used you cna have a 10 city Empire going (and so can the AI too, in fact Most of the time I find that I'm at least 3-5 cities Behind the leading AI's). By limiting the AI to 10 or even 8 (my real preference) all have burgeoning bustling Empires by the time you met them And there is still unexplored Arch and islands to still find. The Caravel race to circumnavigate the globe had always been a measure of how well I was playing. If I got it 1st then I usually had a good start. If I didn't I knew I had Serious catching up to do.

Now this map will eventually lead to some Massive wars. And these wars can last for centuries too! So all parts of your military (land, sea, and later air, but especially the 1st 2 before planes) must be developed and ready. Cause the AI Will come knocking unless you can get to it 1st.

JosEPh