Sirian's Map Info Reference

[tofof]

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.

I'm the one who asked about deserts, Spin. Rather than changing the grain, as was suggested, when I went into CvMapGeneratorUtil.py I found that, to my surprise, deserts were set to 35% coverage while plains were only 20%. I too was annoyed at the desert/tundra thing. I think I see the problem the devs ran into - the northern borders of mongolia and khazakstan (both basically desert) are at the same latitude as the southern border of alaska. I guess what breaks immersion for me is that desert/tundra isn't so much defined by latitude as by geocentric region. Yes - in asia, there is desert that far north. In north america, that same latitude is tundra and the nearest desert is 1000 miles south.

So, my fix - It's crude, but I'll be refining it further. (This is around line 1000 in the mapgenerator python file, in the terraingenerator function).

def __init__(self, iDesertPercent=25, iPlainsPercent=30,
fSnowLatitude=0.7, fTundraLatitude=0.6,
fGrassLatitude=0.1, fDesertBottomLatitude=0.15,
fDesertTopLatitude=0.4, fracXExp=-1,
fracYExp=-1, grain_amount=4):

I moved the desert latitude further south (it was at .2-.5, now it's .15-.4), dropped the amount of desert by 10%, and raised the amount of plains by 10%. The desert has a slightly smaller region in latitudes, which keeps it from getting even more 'patchy' with the reduced coverage percentage.

Even if you're not a programmer, these numbers are easy to understand. Oh - latitude is 0.0 at the equator and 1.0 at the poles, so a latitude of .5 is the same as 45 degrees on a globe.

Hope this helps you.

 

[spincrus]

Thanks totof, you have been very helpful.

I have also noticed, that around the same lines, there are the necessary information to be edited in order to change the amount of increase/decrease of desert/plains/mountains latitudes when the climates are switched.

I'm beginning to understand things a little bit.

 

[ChewieOz]

Just wanted to add that I also had the same map randomly generated twice. I had all the default options both times - the only difference was a different civ and difficulty level. I played and quit early a number of games in between (about 5 or so). It is exactly the same map though - I can post the save games if you like. Opposing civs are also the same (and in the same spots) and as far as I can tell, resources are the same or very similar.

Edit: Nevermind - I noticed this was already reported here http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=135551 . Yes I had the same map there SuperBeaver showed btw.

 

[Craig_Sutter]

Hello,

I don't have the game yet, but am anxiously awaiting it. I would like to create a scenario with a fixed map with starting locations and cities, but that randomly generates resource placement. I don't think the random placement of resources is possible using World Builder save file, so some sort of map script is needed.

My question is, can map scripts be created that will always generate the same terrain? Yet randomize other factors. Can I simply input terrain coordinates according to type rather than have them generated, or do the scripts require that terrain only be randomly generated? Can map scripts be used to create specific starting locations and even cities? How much can the scripts do, or are we required to create our own scripts to do these things?

Thank you.

 

[Sirian]

1. can map scripts be created that will always generate the same terrain?
2. Can map scripts be used to create specific starting locations and even cities?
3. are we required to create our own scripts to do these things?
Thank you.

1. Yes
2. Yes
3. Yes

 

[jpinard]

Sirian - thanks for all the feedback and time you've put into this website and the game.

Several people including myself are working on slightly (or massively) larger map sizes. I've noticed even with a slightly enlarged map that has just a few more width x height tiles than "Huge" - there is no ocean whatsoever. Not only that, but the game takes about 40x longer to generate the random world.

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=134418

For example, it only takes my computer about 5 seconds to generate a "Huge" Pangaea map. But if I make a new class of map sizes (lets call it Superhuge) that increases the width by 2 and the height by 2, it takes 4 minutes to generate. Not only that, but when I look at the map, there is no ocean. Can you give us some insight as to whats going on?

Also, has Firaxis figured out the random map generator problem?

 

[jpinard]

sorry double post

 

[Commander Bello]

Sirian, in your reply to Aussie_lurker's question about map sizes you point out that Civ4 maps are actually of almost the same size or even bigger than the maps of Civ3.

You are doing some nice maths there, which look good.

Yet, you have completely confused me.
You give the example of Civ3 huge maps with 160*160 tiles. According to my maths, this results in 25,600 tiles. You state that only 12,800 of them are usable.
Could you please explain this in more detail to me?

I understand that you are referring to the tilting, which makes one Civ3 tile being rotated by 45°. So, at the orthagonal, a Civ3 tile is ~1.42 longer than a Civ4 tile.

Nevertheless, the conclusion from your explanation would be that rotating a given tile by 45° makes it consume 100% more space - as otherwise you would have considerably more tiles available in Civ3.

Any explanation for this, please?

 

[Sirian]

Sirian, in your reply to Aussie_lurker's question about map sizes you point out that Civ4 maps are actually of almost the same size or even bigger than the maps of Civ3.

You are doing some nice maths there, which look good.

Yet, you have completely confused me.

This is one those things where a picture is worth a thousand words.

Please open up the Civ3 editor, generate a standard map randomly, then turn on the grid numbers for the plots and see how they are numbered. Then with this picture in mind, try rereading my explanation and math. Generate a Civ4 map and turn on the grid, and see the difference in how the "map width and height" are numbered and counted. Hopefully this will clear up the confusion.


- Sirian

 

[Sirian]

Several people including myself are working on slightly (or massively) larger map sizes. I've noticed even with a slightly enlarged map that has just a few more width x height tiles than "Huge" - there is no ocean whatsoever. ...

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=134418

... Can you give us some insight as to whats going on?

I responded.

 

[kalder]

Hi Sirian! Firts of all I would like to thank you for your job and for the nice guide you provided.
However I definitely agrees with Grotius: I REALLY miss the possibility to have a "standard" random world. I mean, it is clear that you phocused in offering a wide variety of MP-fun world settings. In a certain way I miss the good old Civ2-Civ3 possibility to totally randomize you outcome so that I could expect anything from the world generation.
What I'd like is quite simple: it's like the actual "archipelago" script, but without the "archipelago" forced option. It could be just question of changin the script's name (e.g.: standard world) and to add a couple of big-landmass option to the landmas setting. (I don't to be misunderstood: I do not think you should actually change the game, just wanted to give an idea of what I mean in "civ4 terms").
The answer you gave to Grotius does not satisfy me at all and seems odd to me: why should I choose tilted axis to get a random world, instead of having the possibility to choose a "standard random world"?

I hope you'll reply

Many thanks

 

[Sirian]

Well, I always thought that the differences between the map scripts were too great to justify a "true random" on the scripts.

Oasis is hugely different from Mirror; Maze is nothing like Lakes; etc.

Some maps have significantly different game balance; not all maps even HAVE a sea level or climate option, many have custom options specific to those maps. These elements are all lost to any attempt to randomize.

It was an oversight not to provide a random script that offers the classic choices and ONLY those. Sorry about that! I thought of a lot of things, but that one wasn't among them. Sorry.

You guys can make one yourselves, though. A good scripter can code it and test it in under and hour. Someone will probably do it for you sooner or later.


- Sirian

 

[Adam7Eight]

I'll definately be looking for something like that- a random option that only chooses between regular 'ol archipelago, continent, and pangaea maps.

But, I do enjoy the custom_continents maps. I've gotten a lot of varied worlds with it so far. I'll be sticking with that for the time being.

 

[kalder]

It was an oversight not to provide a random script that offers the classic choices and ONLY those. Sorry about that! I thought of a lot of things, but that one wasn't among them. Sorry.

You guys can make one yourselves, though. A good scripter can code it and test it in under and hour. Someone will probably do it for you sooner or later.

- Sirian

You don't have to apologize! I did a great job!!
I hope that someone will mod that.

Btw, I do not propose to add a script. I'd rather think that the actual Archipelago and Continents scripts are complementary in a certain way...IMHO it would be better to merge them in one standard/classic world script highly customizable

 

[TheBozz]

Well, I always thought that the differences between the map scripts were too great to justify a "true random" on the scripts.

Oasis is hugely different from Mirror; Maze is nothing like Lakes; etc.

Some maps have significantly different game balance; not all maps even HAVE a sea level or climate option, many have custom options specific to those maps. These elements are all lost to any attempt to randomize.

It was an oversight not to provide a random script that offers the classic choices and ONLY those. Sorry about that! I thought of a lot of things, but that one wasn't among them. Sorry.

You guys can make one yourselves, though. A good scripter can code it and test it in under and hour. Someone will probably do it for you sooner or later.


- Sirian

Uhm... As a native speaker of the English language, asphinctersayswhat?

Did you just say that the differences between SET map scripts, such as Oasis, Mirror, Maze, etal; were varied enough to justify the omission of a "true random" script? This makes little sense.

I have noticed the resounding silence regarding response to queries about the lack of "randomization" in your Random Map generator. The facts, as they appear to be, are that "random" makes little showing at all in your random maps. People, including myself, are experiencing an alarming amount of "random" repetition when choosing this option on maps. How about answering the many questions about repetative "random" maps?

I am assuming the comment about user created scripts refers to an options interface?

 

[Thunderfall]

Moving thread to the Civ4 Reference and Guides forum...

 

[Thalassicus]

Do you think it'd be within the realm of possibility to create a map script that generates maps like these? (attached)

It's a quick combination of Photoshop's Clouds tool with three color ranges selected with the Color Range tool (for land, coast, ocean). Mostly land, but with water passageways seperating the landmasses (of definable width). What kind of starter point should I use...would ramping up the Continents script to 80-95% land produce something like this, or maybe archipelago on snakey continents?

 

[tHebUm]

Sirian, I've got a question that I don't think has been asked yet.

You stated that 160x128 (Or close, not exact quote) is the largest Terra map as well as the largest map in game.

There's a mod in the maps forum that allows you to generate maps up to 400x400, but they crash which is to be expected I suppose.

Anyway, my question is: Is it possible to get maps larger than 160x128 to work in game?

It seems the world is big enough for all of you guys, but personally I love and have loved the large maps in the past and have always desired bigger ones yet. I'd love to see much larger map sizes (perhaps double) and am wondering if it's possible to get that since they already have the slowing technology mods that I like .

Shame to see that the Civ team went with more speedy content this time around (Or so it seems) and didn't also allow more options for longer games as well. Epic mode currently even seems like a joke.

Also, if you programmed Civ4's random maps... then did you have any say somewhere along the maps on their size? If so and you will for Civ5 could you suggest the possibility of massive maps... like an Earth that just the UK island could support like 10-15 cities... anyway, I'd love to see a Civ map where your empire could literally have over 100 cities. I love massive scale stuff if you can't tell ... one game a month wouldn't bother me.

 

[Junuxx]

You stated that 160x128 (Or close, not exact quote) is the largest Terra map as well as the largest map in game.

There's a mod in the maps forum that allows you to generate maps up to 400x400, but they crash which is to be expected I suppose.

Anyway, my question is: Is it possible to get maps larger than 160x128 to work in game?

Hehe, yep, that's my program, Atlas (it's technically not as much a mod, really). The largest map I played on was 166x153 to be precise. Some people claimed 25000 plots was the max, but this proves them wrong I'd say (166x153=25398).

Anyway, Sirian, have you seen Atlas yet? I'm very very curious what you think of it, with you being the game's map scripter and such. Please don't take my making my own generator as a sign I don't like your work, I esteem it highly. I just liked to supplement and improve on some parts. Your map info reference has been of great use to me for this project, so thanks

 

[davbenbak]

Hopefully my question is not a technical as some of the others. Is there an easy way to delete either units or cities from a map? We all make mistakes right? I sure liked the map editor in Civ3 where I was prompted as to which features of a plot I wanted to delete (units, resource, city, etc.) Is there an "undo" button/option?