Welcome to Giant Earth Map (GEM)!

[Bastian-Bux]

As it is: forget it.

If Firaxis should decide to make a patch that makes Civ 4 fully compatible to a 64 bit system, then it might be possible. But they won't do so. GEM is barely playable as is, anything bigger ... no chance.

 

[Jabarto]

As it is: forget it.

If Firaxis should decide to make a patch that makes Civ 4 fully compatible to a 64 bit system, then it might be possible. But they won't do so. GEM is barely playable as is, anything bigger ... no chance.

What are these incompatibilities of which you speak? I've got Vista Home Edition 64 and Civ 4 runs just fine.

 

[Imperium30]

I have to agree with Jabarto. BTS runs fine for me under a 64 bit environment. In fact I upgraded to 64bit XP pro just for CIV so that I could use more than 3GB of RAM. It may not run much faster than it did on XP 32 but it's surely not slower.

So could you explain further what these problems are?

I really want a bigger map. It's sad if its impossible.

Many Thanks.

Imperium30

 

[Bastian-Bux]

Civ 4 does work with Vista and 64 bit ... but it doesn't support it. Nor does it support dual cores.

Actually Civ 4 is designed for XP on a 32 bit system. And if you use it on Visa 64, your system is only running on those parameters.

You've got a dualcore? Fine, though Civ 4 is only using one core.

You've got a 64 bit system? Fine, but Civ 4 is working in 32 bit mode only.

You've got more then 2 GB? Fine, though Civ 4 is using 2 GB (3 with a little workaround) max.

Civ 4 won't run any faster on your system then on a fast 32 bit system with 2-3 GB. Actually it works faster on XP then on Vista, because XP is using less resources itself.

 

[Imperium30]

Bastian-Bux

Well I think i may have got your news just in time. Does this mean that if I were to upgrade my processor from my current E8200 dual core to something that has more power and more cores then I am not going to see any performance gain?

That's just so infuriating.

Is there anything I could do to make things faster? I have 8GB of RAM so that means from what you said that I am not using 6 of them. How can i get it up to 3 like you said?

Is there any (possibly single core) processor you know of that I could get for my system that will significantly outperform my current processor? Perhaps there is a product that usually has commercial application that could be used?

Many Thanks,

Imperium30.

 

[Bastian-Bux]

There is a workaround somewhere in this forum that allows win 32 system to use closer to the maximaly possible 4 GB then the 2GB that they are limited to due to MS "wisdom". Just search for 3 GB RAM workaround or something lik that.

Your best chances are:

- use the best single core processor that Civ 4 supports
- use the "lightest" 32 bit system you can Civ 4 to work with (XP or even 2K)
- get that 3+GB workaround working (didn't work for me though)

All together you still won't see so much of an improvement, as there is not much to be gained this way compared to a current dualcore 64 bit system.

You might be able to get 10-15% (my guesstimate), but its not realy worth the downgrade. What worth it in any case is working with XP instead of Vista of course, as Vista is a stillborn as finally even Windows had to admit.

 

[Imperium30]

Such a rapid response. Thanks.

I use XP anyway becuase vista is such a resource hog.

I suppose the only thing to be done is to pester Firaxis to release such a 64bit patch. Probably futile but worth trying.

Imperium30

 

[Bastian-Bux]

They would be stupid to do so.

Actually if I'd be Firaxis I'd wait for the next windows to hit the stores (2009), and then decide what to do. But probably it's going to be Civ V that will be 64 bit.

 

[Adhesive86]

Here is the link

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=224178

Let me know if you get it to work, as I'm just the messenger and am clueless on these things. If you read through the forum there are people who will help though.

This will also fix any memory allocation errors. I'm trying to do this now as my maps are occasionally crashing late game, which can be annoying.

On another note, you must be a very patient civ player if even GEM isn't big enough. I love this map, but I'm currently on for a domination single player victory and getting 51% land mass is a major drag; each turn taking ages not so much with performance issues, but with empire management and waiting for your cavalry to crawl across Asia at one tile a turn with siege units in tow! Can't imagine doing a bigger map, but each to their own.

 

[Imperium30]

Adhesive86,

I would love to try that solution but the link that is provided in Slyflyer's post seems to be dead. I will try it again later.

I take your point about the difficulty of winning a domination victory on GEM or larger maps. I can see why this may bother some players. That it does not perturb me is down to the way I play the game. I have never won a domination victory on any map size. For me its almost a redundant feature of the game - like some kind of holy grail. Since the beginning of the CIv series I have always operated a wonders based strategy. In Civ 4 this amplified with several cathedral level buildings in the 3 selected cities leads to cultural victories in 90% of games. I have won isolated space race and diplomatic victories but cultural is the norm.

The reason i want a bigger map is that I want a longer (I would also want a speed slower than marathon) and more realistic game. Even on GEM Britian can only accommodate 2 -3 cities. This means that a player choosing England must expand quickly in order to stand a chance. In a crowded Europe that's pretty tough to do. If Britain could hold 8-9 cities I feel the CIV would be more viable.

Imperium30

 

[Imperium30]

Sorry my mistake that link ( http://www.ntcore.com/exsuite.php ) was not dead at all. It transpired that I can only access it via a proxy server. For some reason known only to themselves the Chinese government seem to have blocked this site. Life behind the Great Firewall of China is often like this. Anyway I got the software and followed the process outlined but discovered that the box that I was supposed to check was already checked (app can handle > 2gb). Therefore I am no further advanced than before.

Thanks for the advice though.

Imperium30.

 

[Lone Wolf]

Just out of curousity, for what reason the area around Tenochtitlan on the map is alll tundra?

 

[Jabarto]

Just out of curousity, for what reason the area around Tenochtitlan on the map is alll tundra?

I think it's to simulate altitude.

 

[Imperium30]

LoneWolf,

I recall reading previously a post by Kai that said that the distribution of mountains and tundra was linked to the relative elevation of the terrain.
There are vast areas of Tundra in GEM. There are also many mountains. Whilst the distribution of these terrain features is accurate (from a certain point of view) it compromises the staring positions of several CIVs including the Aztecs, Incas and Persians.
You can always edit using the WorldBuilder function.

Imperium30.

 

[Lone Wolf]

The link between mountains and elevation is how it should be, but what tundra has to do with elevation? Well, the higher the colder, of course, but is Cuidad de Mexico really so high that it's surrounded with tundra and boreal forests? You'd think that the climate of Mexico City is like the climate of North Siberia the way it is depicted in the map.

Hills and mountains simulate attitude, tundra, grasslands, etc. should describe overall climate and temperature, which are not linked to attitude alone.

 

[Bastian-Bux]

Actually the valley of Mexico has a cold-tropical climate due to the elevation of the city (2300 m / 7000 feet above NN).

Original the valley was full of lakes and swamps, and the surrounding mountains where heavily forested. So yes, this valley was a very fertile place, comparable with several of the "craddles of civilization".

 

[Lone Wolf]

a cold-tropical climate

But not tundro-borealic, I hope??!

 

[Imperium30]

From the map-makers point of view the choices are not easy as Civ affords a limited number of terrain types which must be used to represent all the diverse features of Earth. If CIV 4 included weather or temperature zones then it would be possible to differentiate terrain in terms of crop yield etc without deviating from the current selection. Alas this is not the case so we are stuck with making the map from the 6 types Civ allows us and they all offer identical yields no matter where they are in the world. I wish someone would make a weather mod.
For high altitude regions that are not themselves mountainous there are only 2 realistic choices: tundra or hills. Neither is entirely satisfactory and neither takes account of varying levels of fertility in different climates. The valley of Mexico just one example of this. Some areas of the world are just wonderous in their fertility (or they were in antiquity). The area of the Nile valley was many times more fertile than a bit of grassland around New York or Northern Europe. The depiction of it as desert floodplains really does not do it justice at all in terms of realtive fecundity. However for reasons of gameplay balance I suspect it had to be toned down somewhat.

Imperium30.

 

[Lone Wolf]

Still, Mexican Borealic Tundra is just dumb. That's just like putting Jungles in the British Isles, because jungles have a high rainfall rate, and it's quite rainy in Britain.

And what's wrong with hills?

neither takes account of varying levels of fertility in different climates.

Just plump some food resources. Arent they supposed to kinda represent fertility? I mean, if the terrain is fertile, then you can grow much more Corn/Wheat/etc. there. There's a reason why most mapmakers put some Wheat next to the Egyptian starting position, and it's not only game balance.

2 realistic choices: tundra

When I think of tundra, I think of "cold". I don't think of it as "high".


At least, can the snow-covered pines be changed to "normal" trees?


Mexican Tundra looks slightly less OMGWTFWTPT?!1? in Blue Marble, with its darker overall colors.

 

[popej]

Huyana Cupac doesn't appear to be getting 3 gold (2+1 for financial) from sea tiles. Have sea tiles been modded to have one less gold perhaps?

Any ideas?

Ta.