Sirian's Map Info Reference

[AsnoT]

soooo, why is it that i can finish a game on a huge pangea map and epic speed in 11 to 12 hours? (3 games done now, all in under half a day)

a huge map in civ3 takes days (if not weeks) to play. i would guess it is that factor more than actual plot numbers that makes people think "oh, this is small".

 

[Sirian]

soooo, why is it that i can finish a game on a huge pangea map and epic speed in 11 to 12 hours? (3 games done now, all in under half a day)

a huge map in civ3 takes days (if not weeks) to play. i would guess it is that factor more than actual plot numbers that makes people think "oh, this is small".

Not having to burn hours on micromanagement? For starters.

Not spending tons of time checking (on every turn) for diplomatic deals, because the AIs are no longer willing to sell everything all the time?

Fewer AI-AI wars, so less time watching them move their units around the map, one at a time, with huge stacks of them? Not having to watch AI units ignore your borders and march across your lands all the time?

Better interface?

Fewer cities to manage (cities more widely spaced, and not as many of them going as early in the game?)


Those are some of the bigger reasons why Civ4 will play faster, none of them having anything to do with map dimensions.


That's good, though, right? The measurement is fun/hour not hours/game. We made sure you have LOTS of map options to explore, because we knew you'd be able to finish more games. That's a fair trade, right?


- Sirian

 

[vbraun]

I really like the Maze map. Nice work!

 

[Aussie_Lurker]

Fewer AI-AI wars

Ummm, can you define 'fewer' Sirian? I have always enjoyed the idea of AI's going to war with one another-and will probably enjoy it even more now that I can send them to war myself ! The only thing I don't like about them is when you have to watch every last move made by the AI's involved.
In all other respects, though, I 100% agree with what you say about WHY games are now probably shorter in terms of hours !!

Yours,
Aussie_Lurker.

 

[AsnoT]

Not having to burn hours on micromanagement? For starters.

Not spending tons of time checking (on every turn) for diplomatic deals, because the AIs are no longer willing to sell everything all the time?

nope, never did diplomacy at all, just killed everyone off one by one, and i cheated on pollution and roads. it's VERY nice not to have to do that any more, i'm all with soren's article in the manual regarding stacks of workers etc.

Fewer AI-AI wars, so less time watching them move their units around the map, one at a time, with huge stacks of them? Not having to watch AI units ignore your borders and march across your lands all the time?

gee, who has "show enemy moves" turned on?

Better interface?

the interface is very nice, and will be even nicer once the mouseover problem is fixed, but not an issue with tiime (i did NO micromanagement in the civ3 city interface anyway)

Fewer cities to manage (cities more widely spaced, and not as many of them going as early in the game?)

i know the designers try to get us from building urban sprawls, but i happen to like em and still build em, at least on warlord level an entirely feasible strategy.

That's good, though, right? The measurement is fun/hour not hours/game.

no, it's fun/game, which in a longer game is evidently higher.

We made sure you have LOTS of map options to explore, because we knew you'd be able to finish more games. That's a fair trade, right?

sorry, no, it isn't. if i had a CHOICE to play short or long games, it would be.

EDIT:
it probably comes down to having a strategy (or way of playing) that comes all the way from civ1. (wake settler, R, wake settler, etc etc) and plastering huge continents with evenly spaced cities all maxed in civ2/3
creatures of habit.....

 

[Sirian]

Aussie's got a question? You've got to be kidding me. I've never seen that happen before.

Ummm, can you define 'fewer' Sirian?

Yes. In Civ3, once any two civs (one of them an AI) declares war, any and all of the other AIs can be bought in by either side on the extreme cheap.

This often has a cascading effect leading to extreme dogpiling. Civ A attacks Civ Z. Civ A buys in Civ B as an ally. Civ B uses the cash he got from Civ A to buy in CivC. CivC uses the cash he got from B to buy in D. D buys in E, E buys in F. Now there are SIX CIVS fighting poor little Civ Z, all bought in to the war by passing the same cash from one party to the next. By the time Civ Z gets Civ A to make peace, Civ E or F may buy Civ A right back in to the war!

If you want to try an experiment, play (Civ3) without allowing yourself to buy any allies. Go to war with a civ, any civ, somewhere in the middle ages or industrial period, and see how long it takes the AIs to cascade through the dogpiling until they have all declared on you! You can do the same back to them, but you pretty much HAVE TO, because this process is completely inexorably inevitable!

Can you say, "Yuck"?


Go to the Civ3 SG forum and track down Sid Vicious and the Magnificent Seven. I was working on Civ4 when we played that game. It was an interesting reminder of many of the shortcomings of the previous AI.

Civ3 Deity/Sid is usually a case of Tortoise and the Hare. The AIs get HUGE bonuses, but they race out and squander them in near-endless wars. If the player can keep his head down, get in and out of wars of his own choice on his own timing, and buy the right allies as needed, he can play the AIs one against and other all game long. The Hares won the race long ago, but they are off napping beside the road, and here comes the Tortoise, the player, crawling across the finish line first.

Civ3 AIs all would attack. They were all warmongers! :shakehead

Civ4 has some builder AIs who tend not to attack much at all, and some warmonger AIs who are usually smart enough not to suicide against a much stronger opponent. Some games, if the peaceniks are stronger militarily, won't see much action. Other games, wars may start early and occur often, but the World War I style "everybody is fighting" wars are more rare.

A lot of Civ3 players used to ridicule the AI for its tendency to suicide itself when had ZERO chance of winning. Now it won't tend to do that, and it won't sell itself like a cheap whore to the first party to ask, so the way that wars play out now is quite different. (Not sure it's perfect, but it has rhyme and reason now).


Does that answer your question?


- Sirian

 

[AsnoT]

the more mixed terrain effect will need some playing before it can be really assessed, i think.
it looks more natural in the city view anyway, at least for someone coming from central europe where the landscape changes a lot when you move a bit to the left. or right.

maybe a FEW bigger contiguous regions of desert etc (on a biiiiig map of course) capture the real world effect anyway, and those are bound to be there on the new random maps, too.

The entire eastern half of the USA is pure grassland. Sometimes realistic can be boring!

probably the only reason why i like REALLY huge maps is that you can adequately put in appalachians e.g. without losing map proportions on a world map. or wadis in the gobi

 

[Zenith Omega 3]

I read your response to my question and I understand what you mean. I didn't see it from that angle before. Therefore, I thank you for enlightening me. I will be able to play on these maps with more enjoyment while seeing this from a new perspective.
Thanks again,

Zenith Omega 3

 

[Sirian]

I read your response to my question and I understand what you mean. I didn't see it from that angle before. Therefore, I thank you for enlightening me. I will be able to play on these maps with more enjoyment while seeing this from a new perspective.

You're welcome.

Happy Civving.


- Sirian

 

[merm]

hi! i have a question about the map generation scripts. i'm one of those people suffering from the dark terrain bug, and it would make things much easier for me if my civilization always started at or near the center of the map (this makes the fog covering the dark terrain go away). i tried modifying findStartingPlot in CvMapGeneratorUtil.py, but to no avail. is there any way to accomplish what i want?

thank you very much,
roger

 

[bullgator]

The different options for the Terra map (such as Third World or Old World Start) aren't showing up for me. Any one else having this problem?

--JB

 

[Sirian]

The different options for the Terra map (such as Third World or Old World Start) aren't showing up for me. Any one else having this problem?

--JB

Those aren't options, but descriptions. Some of the maps don't have any custom options.

Old World Start is the reality. That always happens. Third World landmasses or island chains vary by map in number and placement.

 

[Sirian]

hi! i have a question about the map generation scripts. i'm one of those people suffering from the dark terrain bug, and it would make things much easier for me if my civilization always started at or near the center of the map (this makes the fog covering the dark terrain go away). i tried modifying findStartingPlot in CvMapGeneratorUtil.py, but to no avail. is there any way to accomplish what i want?

thank you very much,
roger

Did you read the note in that file? If not, it's at the top.

 

[bullgator]

Those aren't options, but descriptions. Some of the maps don't have any custom options.

I completely misunderstood then! Thanks for the prompt reply, Sirian.

--JB

 

[The Moose]

Civ4 has some warmonger AIs who are usually smart enough not to suicide against a much stronger opponent.
- Sirian

Might that be Montezuma (Atzecs)? He's been attacking me out of the blue in almost every game........luckily, I could put him in his place most of the time

 

[spincrus]

First, as a long time Civilization veteran, from the days of Civ2, I always wanted an option such as Terra. I think that's genius, and I would like to congradulate you on that one.

However, I have one complaint. On a second thought, it's two complaints:

1) There are too many desert tiles in too many weird locations. Even right next to a tundra. Yes, deserts aren't always necessarily hot, any open area without considerable plant growth is classified as a desert, but the graphics annoys me. I'd like to see more plains rather than deserts, and deserts focused on certain key areas. More like big spots where all desert tiles are concentrated, rather than small spots scattered throughout the map.

2) Sometimes, in the Terra map mode, even though sea levels are set to low, there are sometimes areas that consist of single-tile islands (a mini in-game archipelago) and my settler can spawn on one of them, whereas my warrior on another. It's not a "bug", but it's rather annoying.


Other than that, great job on everything.

 

[Sirian]

First, as a long time Civilization veteran, from the days of Civ2, I always wanted an option such as Terra. I think that's genius, and I would like to congradulate you on that one.

However, I have one complaint. On a second thought, it's two complaints:

1) There are too many desert tiles in too many weird locations. Even right next to a tundra. Yes, deserts aren't always necessarily hot, any open area without considerable plant growth is classified as a desert, but the graphics annoys me. I'd like to see more plains rather than deserts, and deserts focused on certain key areas. More like big spots where all desert tiles are concentrated, rather than small spots scattered throughout the map.

2) Sometimes, in the Terra map mode, even though sea levels are set to low, there are sometimes areas that consist of single-tile islands (a mini in-game archipelago) and my settler can spawn on one of them, whereas my warrior on another. It's not a "bug", but it's rather annoying.


Other than that, great job on everything.

Your settler will -always- spawn on the continent in Terra. Your scout or warrior getting stuck out on island is rare. Sorry about that! You can pick them up later, though, after you build your first galley (which you could consider doing sooner rather than later if you have islands near your start! Probably some resources out there.)

The desert question was answered earlier in the thread.

Thanks for the compliments on Terra.


- Sirian

 

[spincrus]

Oh my, I usually don't do the "not reading anything written before and just posting straight ahead" thing, sorry about that

I'll mod the Python file and make sure there are larger patches of any sort of tile.

 

[Ozymandous]

Not having to burn hours on micromanagement? For starters.

Not spending tons of time checking (on every turn) for diplomatic deals, because the AIs are no longer willing to sell everything all the time?

Fewer AI-AI wars, so less time watching them move their units around the map, one at a time, with huge stacks of them? Not having to watch AI units ignore your borders and march across your lands all the time?

Better interface?

Fewer cities to manage (cities more widely spaced, and not as many of them going as early in the game?)


Those are some of the bigger reasons why Civ4 will play faster, none of them having anything to do with map dimensions.


That's good, though, right? The measurement is fun/hour not hours/game. We made sure you have LOTS of map options to explore, because we knew you'd be able to finish more games. That's a fair trade, right?


- Sirian

Don't forget he said "epic speed" to which means the time to research, build improvements and build units/builds is less than it would normally be as well.

That's like saying "why does it take only one hour to drive from Washington to New York when I drive 90 m.p.h. as opposed to three hours if I drive 30 m.p.h.?"

 

[theos]

Don't forget he said "epic speed" to which means the time to research, build improvements and build units/builds is less than it would normally be as well.

Isn't epic speed the setting that slows down research and building?