The game needs better civ spacing

[Willem]

Originally posted by Sirian


So you still haven't tried my suggestion!

I give up.

Right, I missed the random part.

If there are two continents, the split for a standard sized game is going to be 4-3 or 5-2, and you are acting as if 5-2 is some kind of absurdity.

My original post was prompted after playing a Large map and getting 7 civs on one continent, leaving 2 on another. Sorry, but that strikes me as an absurdity and not at all balanced.

Finally, you're now saying that it isn't even about the SPACING, which is the original complaint in the thread.

Well it is about the spacing as well, but the distribution was my main beef. I think it's a bit much when I have another civ start just 8 squares away from me. In civ 3, there was set spacing for each civ, which I could adjust and did. Is that not possible here as well?

So where would I find the map sizings if I wanted to make some changes? I find Standard maps kind of small but my system won't handle Large. I was thinking maybe I could come up with something in between. Where would I look for that?

[Willem]

Originally posted by Sirian
SOMETIMES?!? You're complaining like you see it all the time.

And yes I do see it all the time. Almost every game I play on Standard maps, I end up on a small continent with just one other civ. And I usually end up dominating the land mass, ending up with a weak opponent. Large maps were better, but unfortunatley my computer won't handle them. My last game ended up crashing my system.

And I'm not sure if I like the idea of random continents. If I end up with 6 of them, there'd be a very good chance that I'd end up on one all by myself, which would be even more boring.

[Enigma_Nova]

Well, My computer can handle it. Just tell me the map settings and I'll play the game for you.

[axi]

I had my settler start two squares from the next one a couple of games back, although we were on opposite sides of a bottleneck round a large lake/sea/harbour thingummy. The number of civs was pretty high for the map size though.

I started a huge map on Prince with Rome with the standard amount of civs the other day and I end up 2 squares from Tokugawa.

Friggin Tokugawa! And on Prince he gets 2 warriors to boot.

The fun thing is that the kick-ass spot to found your city is 1 square away from my settler towards where Tokugawa is. If I move, tokugawa founds and I' m kicked away from the sweetspot. If I found, he gets half the specials!

[Urban Ranger]

He may have two warriors, but they may not be in place to prevent your warrior from capturing his capital.

[Sirian]

Originally posted by Willem
I find Standard maps kind of small but my system won't handle Large.

Then you're stuck.

The irony of civ spacing is that turning it UP will actually end up DECREASING the minimum spacing between civs.

(Say wha--?!? WTF?)

I know that sounded wrong, counterintuitive, so I'll repeat it just for emphasis.

The irony of civ spacing is that turning it UP will actually end up DECREASING the minimum spacing between civs.

What will occur is that the first X civs placed on the board will be more widely spaced, but then there won't be enough room left to continue to place civs at these intervals. So the game will HAVE TO fit the leftover civs in somewhere, and by definition it will cram them in to locations based solely on distance from other start points (dramatically lowering the average land quality for the late-placed civs).

What you end up with (instead of what you WANTED) is that some civs will have one of these "jammed in" neighbors, who will be a lot closer than the typical neighbor because he was jammed in there in between two other civs, while some other "lucky" civ will have tons and tons of room in which to play. Then if you are the civ who got jammed in, or any of his neighbors, then you're actually going to be CLOSER TO some of your neighbors than you would have been on a setting with LOWER natural civ spacing.

Bottom line is that there is only X amount of room, and the game is already optimized to divide it up properly, but that process does not "figure out all locations first" but just starts to place people.


Soren added an effect where "crow flies" distance is ignored in favor of "walking distance" so that you can start in the equavalent of South Florida and be just across the strait from someone who started in the equivalent of the Yucatan peninsula.

For civs who are physically on different land masses, distance is ignored COMPLETELY.

I wrote a different start plot finder for the Archipelago map, which ensures minimum distances on the Tiny Islands and Archipelago settings (does not ignore distance for civs on different land masses).

However, some of these scripts have more land plots than others. (Continents is among those that actually has the least, on average. Custom Continents, on average, has a lot more land per civ.)

I've already optimized the minimum distances between civs. At standard settings and number of civs, the min distances between start points are set LOW ENOUGH to prevent a need for the "jam in" effect. If you add extra civs, though, you risk pushing in to that effect on some scripts.


The bottom line is that it is NOT POSSIBLE to increase civ spacing unless you also increase the total amount of land while keeping the number of civs the same. Larger maps with the same number of civs, or the same size map with fewer civs, or map scripts that naturally average a higher amount of land plots per civ. Those are literally the only three possible ways to increase spacing, and you have rejected all three solutions.

To say that you can't run Larger maps, only want "natural" terrain, and don't want to play with fewer civs, is to admit that you have a problem that nobody can possibly help you to solve.

Nobody can fit fifteen ounces of water in to a ten ounce glass. Natural terrain is the least land-intensive, since the Earth is more than 70% water, and of the less than 30% that is land, almost half of that is useless, jamming all the world's civs in to what amounts to 15% of the map!)

Unless you are willing to bend a bit, or you get a stronger computer, you're stuck. ... Sorry.


- Sirian

[Tommar]

Re: The game needs better civ spacing

Originally posted by Willem
I just started to play a Continent game on a large map. In no time I ran into 7 of the other 8 civs in the game. In Civ 3, I could pretty much expect to find half of the civs on one continent and the other half on another, with maybe the occasional small continent with only one civ.

Plus, I find it annoying as hell to come across another civ just a few squares away from where I start. I don't like getting into early wars, I simply can't afford the troops, but that situation leaves me with no choice. Civ 3 had spacing in the editor that you could adjust to your liking, but in this version the civs just get plopped down anywhere.

And sometimes they end up in really ridiculous locations. No civ should have to start in the ice packs with only Tundra for miles around. It just makes for a weak civ in the game.

There are solutions for this in game (Hint: custom, pangeia, select the number of Civs you want)

Perhaps a little bit of work, since you are correct, settings are not remembered.

But a lot less work than coming here to whine about it.

[xxFlukexx]

Yeah, adding in more AIs doesn't change the map size at all, so effectively you control the amount of "elbow room" you want inbetween civs by selecting how many AIs you want in the game through custom game.

Now if you want to complain about the AI spacing, you need to post something like this: (balanced, standard, normal amount of AIs, medium sea level)

China is screwed:



English has tons of room:





It might look like I (I played the Incans, city named Cuzco) have some room to expand to the south but Rome and Spain just beelined to box me in so I had to found 3-4 cities then attack rome very early. But the point is that if I was in China's starting position (up in the peninsula to the north) then it would've been game over for me, especially on Emperor which I like to play. No river up there and a small desert, ugh.

I'm not so mad at the AI spacing as much as I am mad that the game was a total bust for me. I got Hindy and the Oracle and got Confy then crippled Rome before they could get copper/horses/iron. But China and Isabella kept declaring war on me even though I had good military and we were brothers of the faith and open borders and good trade relations. I am guessing that because I was the only one bordering China, it just declared war on me regardless of everything which is imo very lame.

[Tommar]

I have found that no one will declare war on me if I've got the military lead, so far.

In a game that has 10 or so AI's, I pretty much have to be in the top 3. If I drop to 4, someone will declare war on me in a heartbeat.

I much prefer to build. But have found that in order to be left in peace to do so, my military ranking needs to be quite high, too.

[DrSpike]

Willem, just remove one civ and see how it goes.

[axi]

By the way, is the human player always first in turn? Can no AI found a city before I do? IIRC, in civ2, one wanted to play a "white" because they played first.

[TheHateMale]

I'm pretty sure you always go first.

Or rather, if you set up a custom game, it probably goes by the order in the list.

[Forwarn45]

What will occur is that the first X civs placed on the board will be more widely spaced, but then there won't be enough room left to continue to place civs at these intervals. So the game will HAVE TO fit the leftover civs in somewhere, and by definition it will cram them in to locations based solely on distance from other start points (dramatically lowering the average land quality for the late-placed civs).

Thanks for the insight. This seems to be correct in my experience - particularly in the last game where I added a couple civs to the mix for fun. I like a crowded map.

Although it doesn't hurt the game too much for me, I'd like to see an adjustment to the algorithm for spacing in one of the patches. Instead of cramming in the leftover civs after the first civs are placed widely apart, why not diminish the spacing for everyone in the initial calculation so that the civs are ALL spaced more fairly - even if that means close together on some maps with lots of civs?

[Willem]

Originally posted by Sirian

Unless you are willing to bend a bit, or you get a stronger computer, you're stuck. ... Sorry.

Well I've resigned myself to restarting the game if I find myself on a small continent with just one other civ.

Incidentally, I found the WorldInfo.xml and created a map size about halfway between Standard and Large, adjusting some of the other value accordingly. So far my Medium map hasn't crashed my system. I was going to run with 8 civs, but after your explanation I might just stick with 7.

I'm having a great game BTW. There were 3 civs on my continent, including me, but I had contact with one of the civs from the other continent since he was across the bay so to speak. It's exactly the kind of game I was hoping on playing.

I think you misunderstood my request for that file. I wasn't looking for a spacing fix, I just wanted to play a bigger map than Standard. And yes, I intend to upgrade my processor this year, when I can afford it.

[Cort Haus]

Perhaps a little bit of work, since you are correct, settings are not remembered.

But a lot less work than coming here to whine about it.