warpstorm
Yumbo? Yumbo!
You are describing a square grid with proper diagonal cost.
What type of grid system would you like in Civilization?
- Thread starter Onionsoilder
- Start date
You are describing a square grid with proper diagonal cost.
Whatever tile shape, it would be possible to approximate a better planet projection using diagonal wrap. The Northwest corner and Southeast corner are the poles and the equator goes from the Southwest corner to the Northeast corner.
In this primitive graphic the letters represent points on the edge of the map that are essentially the same point. So, if you go off the top edge at C you come back in at the left edge at the other C.
_ABCDE
A ------E
B-------F
C-------G
D-------H
E-------I
_EFGHI
Maps with this kind of wrap should be available maybe as an option.
Edited much later.
If you cut the squares into triangles across one diagonal you could do the same thing yet also stretch out the equator axis compared to the polar axis. Maybe superimpose this division just for movement, retaining the normal squares for economic stuff.
In this primitive graphic the letters represent points on the edge of the map that are essentially the same point. So, if you go off the top edge at C you come back in at the left edge at the other C.
_ABCDE
A ------E
B-------F
C-------G
D-------H
E-------I
_EFGHI
Maps with this kind of wrap should be available maybe as an option.
Edited much later.
If you cut the squares into triangles across one diagonal you could do the same thing yet also stretch out the equator axis compared to the polar axis. Maybe superimpose this division just for movement, retaining the normal squares for economic stuff.
Dragonxander PR
Emperor of the Drakons
I would like a Civ game with no grid. Aesthetically, maps would be tremendously accurate, & the spacing for improvements & cities might as well be based on a distance scale. Movement costs would also be based on distances.
Also, a grid-free map would allow for a planet to be truly spherical, adding for some interesting gameplay & realism (imagine being the first to circumnavigate the world for following the "maximum circle" route instead of the only-latitudinal trajectory used on cylinders & cylindrical maps).
Some possible drawbacks to this would be that map scripting & making would get much more complicated, & that it would take up much more RAM than the grid systems.
In the case of city placement, the space required may be based on total land area required for the city, limited also by the linear distance for the farthest lands the city controlls.
Also, a grid-free map would allow for a planet to be truly spherical, adding for some interesting gameplay & realism (imagine being the first to circumnavigate the world for following the "maximum circle" route instead of the only-latitudinal trajectory used on cylinders & cylindrical maps).
Some possible drawbacks to this would be that map scripting & making would get much more complicated, & that it would take up much more RAM than the grid systems.
In the case of city placement, the space required may be based on total land area required for the city, limited also by the linear distance for the farthest lands the city controlls.
And to represent this internally in the computer you still need a grid, just a much finer one; I think this is a lousy idea.
Dragonxander PR
Emperor of the Drakons
Well, it happens that Sid Meier's Railroads! works with no formal grid system.
frekk
Scourge of St. Lawrence
I'm happy with it the way it is.
But I'd like hexes better. Never mind about the diagonal movement being more accurate; that's not why (who really cares about that?)
I have three main reasons. The first is aesthetic. With nice graphics, things blend better, the terrain is more sort of rounded and less, well, square. Individual tiles don't look quite as discrete in a hex grid (when the grid's off). Coastlines, especially, could look much nicer.
The second is chokepoints. With a hex map, there's going to be more chokepoints - no diagonal sliding by a single tile.
Finally, there's the Big Fat Cross. It's a pain in the butt!! I know some people like nothing better than counting squares all day to determine the perfect layout for their civ. It's not my cup of tea. With a hex system, you'd have a two-tile radius in all directions, period. Much easier. And looking more like a proper radius, sort of spherical, not like a cross.
But I'd like hexes better. Never mind about the diagonal movement being more accurate; that's not why (who really cares about that?)
I have three main reasons. The first is aesthetic. With nice graphics, things blend better, the terrain is more sort of rounded and less, well, square. Individual tiles don't look quite as discrete in a hex grid (when the grid's off). Coastlines, especially, could look much nicer.
The second is chokepoints. With a hex map, there's going to be more chokepoints - no diagonal sliding by a single tile.
Finally, there's the Big Fat Cross. It's a pain in the butt!! I know some people like nothing better than counting squares all day to determine the perfect layout for their civ. It's not my cup of tea. With a hex system, you'd have a two-tile radius in all directions, period. Much easier. And looking more like a proper radius, sort of spherical, not like a cross.
Dragonxander PR
Emperor of the Drakons
I just drew a hexagon grid to check the differences between the "fat cross" & the corresponding hexagonal layout. The sqare grid works better in the sense that it allows for 8-20 surrounding tiles per city, while the hex system allows for 6-18 tiles. I find such difference to be important in the late game, but convenient on the early one (it will limit your city's growth due to lack of tiles to work), but it's also more comfortable for uniform city spacing (especially useful in maps with large landmasses).
I also have this other idea: how about an hex-grid map in which workable city borders extend up to an almost 3 tile radius? To better understand it, check the diagram I include here. The basic radius is in dark green, the 1st expanded radius is in dark red, & an optional workable radio for the hexagonal grid is in blue (although it's not necessary for the map concept). That adittional radio expansion would add up to a total 30 workable tiles for a city, whereas the 2-tile radio in the hex grid would allow for 18 (cultural expansion would become more important, & it could be a nice add-up for the single city for human players challenge). For those who may want to know how many tiles a full 3-tile workable radio, it's a total of 36, perhaps too many (unless the maps were enlarged, that is).
Now I'm kinda understanding better why would most people here would prefer an alternate hex grid.
Attachments
frekk
Scourge of St. Lawrence
How many tiles are workable is not a big issue ... that just requires a little balancing of the numbers to account for having 2 fewer tiles.
Colonization does away with a whole 12 tiles from the usual city radius, but it's balanced to handle that.
I don't like the 3 grid radius shown above because it wrecks easy uniform placement of cities, a principal advantage of the hex system. With a 2-tile radius, all your city radii can interlock with no gaps, and it's really simple to do. It's basically just a larger grid of new hexes.
You could have a 3 tile radius that maintains the overall hex shape, with an equal distance of 3 tiles in all directions. Or 4, or 5. Like here you've got a shape that would give 5 hexes in all directions and maintains the good, interlockable shape:
http://g.imagehost.org/0916/hexmap.gif
It doesn't really matter exactly what the radius is - 1, 2, 3, whatever, as long as it's equal in all directions.
Colonization does away with a whole 12 tiles from the usual city radius, but it's balanced to handle that.
I don't like the 3 grid radius shown above because it wrecks easy uniform placement of cities, a principal advantage of the hex system. With a 2-tile radius, all your city radii can interlock with no gaps, and it's really simple to do. It's basically just a larger grid of new hexes.
You could have a 3 tile radius that maintains the overall hex shape, with an equal distance of 3 tiles in all directions. Or 4, or 5. Like here you've got a shape that would give 5 hexes in all directions and maintains the good, interlockable shape:
http://g.imagehost.org/0916/hexmap.gif
It doesn't really matter exactly what the radius is - 1, 2, 3, whatever, as long as it's equal in all directions.
frekk
Scourge of St. Lawrence
It has one, it's just incredibly tiny and doesn't make itself apparent to the player. The program needs it to be able to calculate areas and distances.
MosheLevi
Prince
I think that Hex grid should work better for CIV 5.
I find diagonal movement confusing at times.
I think that with Hex grid the BFC should allow for 3 tiles in all direction (up to 36 tiles).
However, cities should still be limited to 20 tiles.
This will allow players to spread their cities further away from each other and have more options on which tiles to work on.
That will also add more flexibility because players can then switch back and forth between food tiles and hammer tiles.
Players will also have more room to exchange tiles between two near by cities.
This will add more strategy to the game…..
I find diagonal movement confusing at times.
I think that with Hex grid the BFC should allow for 3 tiles in all direction (up to 36 tiles).
However, cities should still be limited to 20 tiles.
This will allow players to spread their cities further away from each other and have more options on which tiles to work on.
That will also add more flexibility because players can then switch back and forth between food tiles and hammer tiles.
Players will also have more room to exchange tiles between two near by cities.
This will add more strategy to the game…..
MosheLevi
Prince
Different player group. Rectangular also makes it much less complicated and easier to understand. With the rectangular pattern, it's easy to tell where your units are and what's next to them. It's harder to using a hexagonal grid, if you've ever played chinese checkers you'll know what I mean.
MosheLevi
Prince
I think that whoever is smart enough to play Civ 4 is more than capable to deal with Hexagonal grid.
Naokaukodem
Millenary King
- Joined
- Aug 8, 2003
- Messages
- 4,298
The numpad is of no use, except "cheating" in multiplayer. PLus, there's a mean to use numpad with an hex grid, with counter-momentum as i explained years ago in some topic.
frekk
Scourge of St. Lawrence
Numpad? I don't use it much anymore, but for those who do, it wouldn't be hard to adapt to something like:
T,Y
F,(G - centre),H
V,B
The numpad thing doesn't seem to me to be reason enough to block the implementation of a new feature.
I'll warrant that there may be other problems, or people might just not like it. I'd agree that it really ought to be seriously beta tested before implementation was even considered. But I don't think people would really have a very difficult time with it.
T,Y
F,(G - centre),H
V,B
The numpad thing doesn't seem to me to be reason enough to block the implementation of a new feature.
I'll warrant that there may be other problems, or people might just not like it. I'd agree that it really ought to be seriously beta tested before implementation was even considered. But I don't think people would really have a very difficult time with it.
Similar threads
