Quick Civ V map grid question

[primem0ver]

How is the Civ V map/hex grid organized? Is the point of the hexes to try and make an actual globe (like a soccer ball) with each plot approximately the same size (equal area)? Or are there still the same number of hexes across the top as there are at the equator, resulting in a doughnut (or cylinder) shaped world?

 

[beetle]

Civ5 maps, when they wrap, only do so left to right -- so the worlds are cylinders. For all maps, each plot is the same size (equal area). For all maps there are the same number of hexes across the top as there are at the equator.

I think the point to the hexes is to resolve the game board dilemma with squares: Either you permit diagonal movement -- which is easy to exploit, since units can then move ~40% faster -- or you don’t -- in which case unit movement feels really constrained.

 

[wayneb64]

Hexes where an upgrade to squares which did not do a good enough job breaking up the 'battlefield' into even sections. Movement did not work well enough as well as many other things.

 

[primem0ver]

Thanks for answering my question guys.

Beetle, I think you misunderstood what I mean by "equal area". As drawn they are equal area. However that is not what I mean. I mean equal area on a REAL planetary surface.

If there are the same number of tiles across at the equator as at the poles, the tile does not represent an equal area on a real planetary surface. The distance across the top of a tile at the pole is MUCH MUCH smaller than the distance across the top of a tile at the equator because the actual distance across the top of a map of a real planetary surface is zero. Which means that every tile at that latitude (of 90 degrees) has a top boundary that is zero length in the real world.

Unless this change in horizontal distance with latitude is compensated by a distortion of the vertical distance as well, the area of each grid plot is going to be different from any other grid plot that is not at the same latitude.

 

[beetle]

The illusion of working with a planet I think is a thinner veneer in V than what we had with IV (and III, and II). It definitely is something VI could improve upon!

If there are the same number of tiles across at the equator as at the poles, the tile does not represent an equal area on a real planetary surface.

I understand that. Planets in Civ5 are cylinders, not spheres. (Also, the top and bottom of the planet cylinder are not accessible.) If you want to argue that Civ5 maps to a sphere, I guess you could assert that, as you move north and south, the area covered by each hex gets smaller. But that leads to the problem then that all units, whether by air or land or sea, all move slower proportionately to their latitude!

There have been some threads trying to estimate the square area of a hex. My intuition is that these kinds of discussions are are bound to result in frustration. 1UPT is an abstraction that works within the game and its parameters. Trying to relate these game elements to the real world I don’t think will work any better than extrapolating an immortal leader to mean human lifespan.

 

[ThorHammerz]

Does anyone know/remember if Civ V (or IV, or earlier versions) supported the North-South wrap as well?

 

[Plumfairy]

Does anyone know/remember if Civ V (or IV, or earlier versions) supported the North-South wrap as well?

I'm pretty sure that Civ V has never supported North-South wrap.

Previous iterations of Civ have supported a North-South wrap. Did Civ IV in particular? I think so, but I wouldn't bet money on my recollection.

 

[primem0ver]

Technically off topic but another basic quick question about Civ 5. Is there an event engine where random events occur? Like there was in Beyond the Sword for Civ 4?

Back on topic:
It really irritates me that Civ5 converted to hex without going all the way to create a global (spherical) map. It isn't that much of a step further to create one. The only difficulty it presents is handling finding locations (which I resolved myself using a hash map). A standard for creating an equal area grid already exists that uses hexes. The only difference is that there are 12 pentagons. It is called an ISEA grid and it is the same grid that a soccer ball uses.

To get it to work for Civ, graphics for a plot would need to be based on combining triangles. That way they could be used for both hexes and the 12 pentagons. Honestly, creating a globe would NOT be that difficult to do with modern computers and advanced graphics systems we have nowadays. I already have a system that works (though it does not yet make use of texture overlays) which I wrote myself. I attached some pictures of the program that proves the concept (written with another purpose in mind) in this post. EDIT: If you look at the post above mine, it shows how the hexagons and pentagons work together and where the pentagons would be position relative to the icosahedron shape. If you scroll up even further you will see an earth map that was created using this plot system. FYI this entire section of the thread is a discussion on implementing a new civ game and debating whether to use hexes or squares and points or tiles. It goes on for several pages and introduces some revolutionary new approaches.

Regarding north and south wrap. Yes... Civ IV did support doing this. It was called a "doughnut" shaped world.

 

[joncnunn]

I'm pretty sure that Civ V has never supported North-South wrap.

Previous iterations of Civ have supported a North-South wrap. Did Civ IV in particular? I think so, but I wouldn't bet money on my recollection.

The standard Civ IV maps were West-East map, however, there was one map script that instead had a North-South wrap. (Tilted Axis?)

Regarding north and south wrap. Yes... Civ IV did support doing this. It was called a "doughnut" shaped world.

The doughnut shaped world would not only have North-South wrap but also West-East. I think that was the "fantasy" script, but I may be thinking of Civ III in terms of names.

 

[beetle]

I am grateful for this thread jostling my memory.

Does anyone know/remember if Civ V (or IV, or earlier versions) supported the North-South wrap as well?

With V, when I first started exploring the options, a map with both N/S and E/W wrapping (donut/torus) was what I was looking for. So V never had it, and I would not have thought to look for it had it not been an option I used regularly in IV. I am not sure about III (or SMAC, or II).

 

[poom3619]

Civ 4 have option that make the map wrap at north/south and west/east. I.e. You will warped to south pole when you reach north pole.

Project a pseudo-spherical thing into 2D surface without distortion is a mess. If anyone really want to represent spherical area as it is. The area in everywhere but equator would look very strange.

The most practical way to represent of spheric planet would be 2 additional pole region with left-right wrapped rectangular map with warp-point between different side of a pole.

I prefer the abstraction the game gave with simple rectangular map anyway.

 

[LeeS]

CIV III I don't remember the map script name that was used as an in-game option, but in the World-Builder equivalent it was just two check-boxes X-wrap and Y-wrap if I recall that you could set when generating a pre-made map. Essentially, with Y-wrap turned on the "NorthPole" row of tiles and the "SouthPole" row of tiles were treated as being adjacent along the Y-axis, which is what lead in-game to the feeling (especially when watching the mini-map) of being 'teleported' from North Polt to South Pole and vice versa.

I never played around in CIV IV with a Y-wrapping effect when choosing my world-types. (And in CIV 4 there was no independant WorldBuilder that could be run outside of the game environment that I ever discovered)

 

[ThorHammerz]

Civ 4 have option that make the map wrap at north/south and west/east. I.e. You will warped to south pole when you reach north pole.

Project a pseudo-spherical thing into 2D surface without distortion is a mess. If anyone really want to represent spherical area as it is. The area in everywhere but equator would look very strange.

The most practical way to represent of spheric planet would be 2 additional pole region with left-right wrapped rectangular map with warp-point between different side of a pole.

I prefer the abstraction the game gave with simple rectangular map anyway.

Actually, the resultant 3-dimensional object from a North-South & East-West wrap would be a a torus.... a.k.a. a donut.

Imagine: performing a single bi-directional wrap (of any direction) on a rectangular sheet would result in a cylinder. Now if you were to wrap it again (perpendicular relative to the first wrap's orientation), you are essentially bending your cylinder until the 2 ends touch one another, thus resulting in a torus.

The 4 corners would touch one another where the donut connects to itself (on the second transformation... i.e. when you connect the 2 ends of your cylinder together).

You can do this (sort of...) with any piece of paper (medium sized sticky notes best) to try it out as a proof-of-concept (although your "cylinder" will be flatted/crushed on the 2nd transformation xD... you can still see how it would work if the sheet of paper was perfectly pliable).

 

[dino_yoshi13]

Maybe having the map wrap both directions should be special for the donut map script then

 

[beetle]

which is what lead in-game to the feeling (especially when watching the mini-map) of being 'teleported' from North Pole to South Pole and vice versa.

Civ 4 have option that make the map wrap at north/south and west/east. I.e. You will warped to south pole when you reach north pole.

It is interesting how people find the E/W wrapping natural, but N/S wrapping disorienting. It must because of what we get used to with video games, paper maps, and globes.

I prefer the abstraction the game gave with simple rectangular map anyway.

With the ice-locked poles, I agree that it works very well. Still, there are many maps where I would like to fly/rebase over a pole.

One rationalization (which has the hexes being roughly equal-area and the world being spherical) is that Civ5 planets are mostly ice. The map shows only the middle 25% channel between two huge impassible and barren polar regions.

 

[Socratatus]

I understand that. Planets in Civ5 are cylinders, not spheres. (Also, the top and bottom of the planet cylinder are not accessible.)

This has always irked me somewhat, though I`ve never bothered to mention it. It would be nice if Devs took the extra time out to make a truly global-type map. Also, we should be able to set a colony on ice scapes such as the poles once the Tech gets high enough, for research or military stations. But, no big deal. Features like this would stamp Civ 5 as an inprovement. Maybe Civ 6, if they don`t play stupidly safe like with BE.

 

[Solutionfinder]

I remember that in some later patch in Civ IV you could actually zoom out to see the entire earth which was kind of cool...but you couldn`t move over the top or bottom. Still it was much easier to navigate the globe.

 

[poom3619]

It is interesting how people find the E/W wrapping natural, but N/S wrapping disorienting. It must because of what we get used to with video games, paper maps, and globes.

I don't find it disorienting (and didn't intended to sound so). I just find it a bit game-y

This has always irked me somewhat, though I`ve never bothered to mention it. It would be nice if Devs took the extra time out to make a truly global-type map. Also, we should be able to set a colony on ice scapes such as the poles once the Tech gets high enough, for research or military stations. But, no big deal. Features like this would stamp Civ 5 as an inprovement. Maybe Civ 6, if they don`t play stupidly safe like with BE.

I would prefer, as I said, two separate circular map representing the pole in addition to flat rectangular map we already have, since we shouldn't explore it until late-game anyway, or maybe Goldberg polyhedron as suggested here. But I find that it can be wasteful when we simulate and render a hundred tiles with nothing but roaming polar bears and penguin for most of the game...

I just realize that making the poles playable can bring interesting interaction if we have "really warm" climate.

 

[joncnunn]

I think this all comes down to the Civ series uses the classic mercator projection for worlds combined with cutting off everything "too close" to the poles by considering it impassible ice cap and not really caring if its sea ice or land ice.

The "Ice age" scripts decrease the height by changing that range in both Civ IV & Civ V.

And Civ V's "Titled Axis" makes the cut off points asymmetric. (That map represents a world where
1) The world is tidally locked to the sun. (Similar to how real life Moon is tidally locked to Earth)
2) The axis angle is such that its near the Southern pole.