Anyone play a 31 civ game yet?

[Alexander's Horse]

I only have a PII 600 so I doubt it could cope with 30 civs.

[Louis XXIV]

I used to play a 16 civ, tiny map. I probably got the same result you have, except AI civs are smaller. They are closer to 3 cities, while I've been very expansionist and have conquered half the map. I've never seen the AI so willingly give into my demands

Haven't played that game in a long time, though.

[asleepathewheel]

Is it me, or does a jag warrior look ridiculous in orange.

[vmxa1]

I am dubious of no problem on a map that size with 31 civs.
Was it pangea? I can only say that with PTW on 250 x 250 with 24 civs and max water, lots of contients, it was often very lengthy.
Some turns were as long as 25 mins on a PIV 3.02 GH with 1GB.
When I dropped a new city it would take 2-5 minutes for the settler to pop up the new town after it made the squat graphic.
So pardon me if I am not so sure it was improved much. civs would have 3-400 units so wars were harsh. The system has to recalc all trade routes when a city goes away or is created.
On turns with out war or any cities changing status, it was very fast.
I can't address it in C3C as I will not be palying any of those maps anymore.

[vmxa1]

Oh, just for comparison, I played some of those turns on my PIV- 1.7 GH 512MB system and they took about an hour.

[vee4473]

Originally posted by vmxa1
I am dubious of no problem on a map that size with 31 civs.
Was it pangea? I can only say that with PTW on 250 x 250 with 24 civs and max water, lots of contients, it was often very lengthy.
Some turns were as long as 25 mins on a PIV 3.02 GH with 1GB.
When I dropped a new city it would take 2-5 minutes for the settler to pop up the new town after it made the squat graphic.
So pardon me if I am not so sure it was improved much. civs would have 3-400 units so wars were harsh. The system has to recalc all trade routes when a city goes away or is created.
On turns with out war or any cities changing status, it was very fast.
I can't address it in C3C as I will not be palying any of those maps anymore.

I think you make an interesting point, vmx.

Some people think that increasing the max number of civs AND the max map size in the game is a great improvement, and I must admit, I did too.

But, after playing games that don't even come close to the max number and experiencing, shall i say, annoying, turn lag times, I have no desire to go to the game civ limit.

I guess until the computer technology catches up with the software, they could increase it to 100 civs, but no one would play that many anyway.

unless they have a separate room housing a supercomputer.

[TheStinger]

My 433 celeron 128 Mb would explode

[Plotinus]

I was playing that massive world map with, I think, 31 civilisations on it that was in the Scenarios folder of PTW... I had to abandon it the other night (towards the end of the industrial age) because I really was waiting 15-20 minutes between moves. A shame because I was massively in the lead (in a nice change to history, I had, as the Romans, conquered not only the whole of Europe but most of West Africa, the entire Middle East including Afghanistan, and North America, as well as, rather strangely, much of Siberia and Mongolia. Very enjoyable!).

[Provost Harrison]

My P4 3GHz copes with 24 alright, there can be a couple of minutes between turns...but remember, this time increases geometrically with the number of civs. So I would expect 24 civs to stop even my system in it's tracks. I say give it a few years before you can get a system that will handle 31 effectively...

[Provost Harrison]

...but often if I am waiting a couple of minutes I will just flick to the internet or something, it doesn't seem to make that much difference and I just check back to see what is going on now and again...not a bad plan

[Stuie]

Originally posted by vee4473
i was just curious about the time between turns that others experience on a huge 31 civ game

I tried 31 Civs on a 180x180 map, and was running about 2-3 minutes between turns in the mid to late Industrial Age. My system: AMD 2400+ with 512mb DDR RAM.

I usually can only play about 30-60 minutes at a time, so that lag was too much for me. Now I'm back to 20 Civs on a 160x160 map and the game is running smooth.

[Panag]

Originally posted by Alexander's Horse
I only have a PII 600 so I doubt it could cope with 30 civs.

hi ,

it depends , it seems to work fine with an older amd 650 with one gig of ram and win98se , it all depends , ......

os is important , what you do on maintenance , what programs you have running , are there any bottlenecks on the comp , and most of all , the RAM , thats really a main key and the speed of harddrive , fsb , etc , .......

oh yeah , max time on that amd 650 ; 3.25 min

needless to say that on the 2000 + and above it takes less the a minute

have a nice day

[doronron]

I'm planning on trying el mencey's large world map this weekend. Sounds like fun, but I expect it to be slow...

[Chieftess]

I have a Win98SE, Pentium III (667mhz), 384megs RAM system, and tried a 31 civ game on TETurkhan's world map. (modded to have correct start locations, etc.). At 1990BC (on Sid level), it took a good 2-3 minutes between turns. There wasn't much left to expand except for Alaska/Yukon, Siberia, central Africa, Australia, southern South America, and the many islands. Don't know if I should force my computer to continue that game.

[The Slayer]

Play with 31 civs is the maximun expression of civin'. I mena, is great, wonderfull you can to play with that amount of civs. Unfortunaly, your PC will be slowly and slowly when the turn continue passing. I played once with 31 civs as France, I had all Europe for me and I was in the industrial age. In that time the turns delayed about 7-8 minutes. So I had to left the game