huge map take too long?

[phunny_pharmer]

Definitely, autosave has to go.

That was a must for me, when small maps @ 4000BC did not have instantaneous moves.

I play 256x256, 16 civs, 2x Firaxis's recommended number of cities for huge, and have at least 45 cities before I go on a late-game MA rampage.

Autosave must definitely go.

[alva]

Originally posted by WarpStorm
An explanation for why this might be (I haven't tested this (I'm at work on lunch break)). In the editor, there are flags for the optimal number of cities. The computer players absolutely will not build cities beyond twice this number even to claim critical resources (this I've tested before). The number of cities for standard is much smaller than for huge. As the path finder's (the biggest time sink) time is at least partially based on the number of cities the time savings may in fact be considerable. In addition to the cities themselves, the area that will be developed will be less so there will need to be less computation. To top it off, since there will be less cities that the AI owns, there will be less units to keep track of as each unit requires a certain amount of gold. This will have the side effect of making the AI less aggressive about expanding with settlers and conquering however.

Interresting idea , are you going to check this out (if possible). Could be quite usefull knowledge.

[CivGeneral]

Civilization Count

How many Civs do you play against in a huge map player1 ? Some times the more civs there are, the longer it takes for all of the civs(and Barbarians) to make there movies once you have ended your turn.

[Boris Godunov]

I'm on a P4 1.7 ghz with 256 MB of RAM. A huge map is much better than on my old P2 450 mhz, even though it had the same RAM, so it's definitely about processor speeds.

Still, in modern era, I have to wait 1-2 minutes between turns on the huge map.

[Boris Godunov]

That's always with 16 civs, btw.

[WarpStorm]

Originally posted by alva848


Interresting idea , are you going to check this out (if possible). Could be quite usefull knowledge.

Yeah, as soon as I finish my current game. I'm also thinking of turning off map trading, but that probably deserves a separate game.

[Thrawn05]

Re: huge map take too long?

Originally posted by reefer addict
im playing my first game at 180x180 into the modern age. ive found out that if you change the standard map size to 180x180 (huge) that the turns dont take 15 min each. im close to finishing a game in two days, b4 it took two weeks to get to nationalism. maybe the slowdown is due to the label huge, not the size.
can someone else try this and see if it speed your waits on a 180x180 map thx

I think the people who complain about slow huge games have two problems: 300MHz CPUs and are trained on playing RTS rather then TBS games.

I have a 550MHz P3 and I have no problems on huge maps. I play with 9 other civs and no music. By the time I reach 2050AD, it takes no more then 20 seconds before I hear the end of turn tick sound or the improvment windows.

[reefer addict]

Re: Re: huge map take too long?

Originally posted by Thrawn05



I think the people who complain about slow huge games have two problems: 300MHz CPUs and are trained on playing RTS rather then TBS games.


ive never played an rts game, just civ. as far as the slow comp goes, thats why ive never complained about game speed. this is for those who have slow comps that would like to play on a huge map. im not saying its a bad design, just too much for my piece of crap comp to handle. i like huge maps running at the speed of a standard map, i guess that makes me a complainer