The Map.... Again

June 10, 2000, 21:32

OK, here's some of the better ideas I've come across for the map, plus a few of my own...

*Resources not represented by tiles, but by 'areas'..
*You should be able to go over the poles (not sure how to do this)
*Elevation should be more realistic.. Mountains should not be tiles but areas of higher elevation.. Movement should be extremely slow, bringing mountain passes into play...
*Landmarks should be named...

*There should be different levels in the map.. What I mean is that units such as planes should be able to fly over ground units, and subs under sea units.. Subs would have to come colse to the surface to attack, tunnels should be buildable thru one level of earth under another etc..

Of course, if Firaxis could get the spherical world to work, it would be ideal..

------------------
-Shiva
Email: shiva@mailops.com
Web: http://www.crosswinds.net/india/~shiva
ICQ: 17719980

UltraSonix · June 11, 2000, 23:45

These are some cool ideas! I especially agree that resources should be spread over an area, and that elevation should be done properly. Infact, the map should almost look like a map from an RTS game! However, a 3d engine should not be used to do this.

(Also just wanted to mention that you can already do landmarks in SMAC and so they'll probably have the feature in Civ3)

------------------
No, in Australia we don't live with kangaroos and koalas in our backyards...
[This message has been edited by UltraSonix (edited June 16, 2000).]

June 14, 2000, 11:22

And another thing..

Perhaps instead of moves per turn, units could have movement points.. Movement over different terrains could cost different amounts of points..

PS.. I've decided that the selection for the EC3 list is totally arbitrary.. I've seen millions of GREAT ideas (many of my own

) just fade away from view...

------------------
-Shiva
Email: shiva@mailops.com
Web: http://www.crosswinds.net/india/~shiva
ICQ: 17719980

Stuff2 · June 14, 2000, 15:08

I'm not sure I really understand what you mean by 'areas'.
Do you mean that resources are spread out over several tiles?

June 14, 2000, 20:35

By area i mean sets of co-ordinates..

Tiles would probably be obsolete. The map would be made up of points (co-ordinates). This way, cities could grow and shrink, resources get spread more realisiticaly etc.

One more thing, in Civ3, trees should have benefits like pollution control, rainfall control, flood control (calamities? start a thread please) etc.,so that trees aren't cut down indiscriminately..

------------------
-Shiva
Email: shiva@mailops.com
Web: http://www.crosswinds.net/india/~shiva
ICQ: 17719980

Par4 · June 14, 2000, 21:58

Whats a coordinate look like, I'm not exactly a tech person. can you describe it a little more please.

------------------
I use this email
(stupid cant use hotmail)
gamma_par4@hotmail.com
Don't ask for golf tips
Your game will get worse
HappyLand
There is no spoon,
But there is a knife

Stuff2 · June 16, 2000, 19:44

quote:

Originally posted by Sir Shiva on 06-14-2000 08:35 PM
Tiles would probably be obsolete. The map would be made up of points (co-ordinates). This way, cities could grow and shrink, resources get spread more realisiticaly etc.

Ah...I see. I think i could like this idea.

June 17, 2000, 08:13

Co-ordinate: Point, pixel if you like.. The map would be made up of thousands of pixels each with their own attributes (eg. movement cost 1 pt, 0.2 shields, 0.4 cash, 1 pollution) etc.

------------------
-Shiva
Email: shiva@mailops.com
Web: http://www.crosswinds.net/india/~shiva
ICQ: 17719980

Par4 · June 19, 2000, 01:04

Oooh I like this shiva, I like this. The idea of having land areas not end so abruptly is intriguing. A sphere globe I'm not sure of, but real changes in elevation would be a great change. So if your troops lived by the water for a long time then went up high, they'd be out of breathe

------------------
I use this email
(stupid cant use hotmail)
gamma_par4@hotmail.com
Don't ask for golf tips
Your game will get worse
HappyLand
There is no spoon
-The Matrix
Let's kick it up a notch!!
-Emeril Lagasse
Fresh Soy makes Tofu so silky
-Ming Tsai

UltraSonix · June 19, 2000, 03:01

Just wanted to repeat that Shriva's point on realistic elevation (ie need semi 3d graphics) was very good, but Par4, I think your:

quote:

So if your troops lived by the water for a long time then went up high, they'd be out of breath

is probably not very workable...

(And wow Par4 - your sig's longer than your post!)

------------------
No, in Australia we don't live with kangaroos and koalas in our backyards...
[This message has been edited by UltraSonix (edited June 19, 2000).]

Par4 · June 19, 2000, 14:01

UltraSonix you knew I was just kidding right?

As for my sig, I've been watching food network tv too much lately

------------------
I use this email
(stupid cant use hotmail)
gamma_par4@hotmail.com
Don't ask for golf tips
Your game will get worse
HappyLand
There is no spoon
-The Matrix
Let's kick it up a notch!!
-Emeril Lagasse
Fresh Soy makes Tofu so silky
-Ming Tsai

jdlessl · June 20, 2000, 23:53

Ok, I like that area-ed resources. Overlap of those areas would make for excellent complexities. A totally round map would be tough to do, but I'm sure there's some programming wizards who can come up with something. It'd be very realistic, anyway. But slower movement?!?! It's already a crawl! The Mongols could cross their empire inside of a year, but in the game it takes centuries to move units an equivalent distance. Normal infantry can march thousands of miles in the time it takes a game unit to go just one hundred.

For movement, something entirely new is needed. A system that allows units to move at a realistic speed but not allow them to 'be everywhere at once'. Like a supply line or communications limitations. The latter would be appropriate for pre-telecom eras: You give units orders and as soon as they're a certain distance from one of your cities, an AI takes control and tries to execute those orders and return to a friendly city. Any other ideas?

Jared

UltraSonix · June 21, 2000, 03:05

Hmmmm...

Maybe a 3d-world (as in round, spherical world) could be done. It would still have tiles, but to acommodate the true-round world, the tiles have to be changed, ie tiles are different in different places. So the end result would be that on the default zoom for a normal size map, you'd see that the ground curves slightly so that the centre of your screen seems closer to you (it's a bit hard to describe). Zooming out would be you'll eventually be able to see half the globe, but with the result that everything's really small and things at the edges are hard to make out. Once you zoom out enough you'll also be able to see clouds, large cities, some wonders, etc, and it'll just be like what movies often do (like in the end of the Matrix)

The main problem that this round world poses is that small maps would look weird, as the world would be very small and any particular area being shown in the screen would look unacceptably curved.

I know that this almost requires a 3d graphics engine, but I'm still against having one. Anyway, here's some more food for thought.

------------------
No, in Australia we don't live with kangaroos and koalas in our backyards...

Par4 · June 21, 2000, 09:37

I'm against anything too big my system will be minimum requirements in a few months. So a 3d world, maybe but I ain't got no money to upgrade

I bought a kayak

------------------
I use this email
(stupid cant use hotmail)
gamma_par4@hotmail.com
Don't ask for golf tips
Your game will get worse
HappyLand
There is no spoon
-The Matrix
Let's kick it up a notch!!
-Emeril Lagasse
Fresh Soy makes Tofu so silky
-Ming Tsai

Steve Clark · June 21, 2000, 09:46

Someone recently said that there are a number of civers, esp. from the Civ2-Strategy forum, who could play Civ WITHOUT graphics. For you youngsters, strategy games from the late 70s and early 80s were text-based. Remember, the AI does NOT need graphics to play and in a sense, neither do we. When it comes down to it, all we really need to know are the production numbers of the cities and the attributes of the units. For example, you have three 3/2/1 units going up against two 1/2/2 units on a hill. The program will determine the outcome and tell you the results. What they (and the terrain) looks like is irrelevant to game play. Obviously, nowadays that would not appeal to most gamers, including me. But my point is that the graphics are just for visualization and cosmetics, the game engine is all in the numbers.

UltraSonix · June 22, 2000, 02:15

Ah... Graphics do matter, just slightly...

If you want to play text only - fine by me, just lets me play a game with semi-decent graphics.. (Loki I know you're watching this...)

------------------
No, in Australia we don't live with kangaroos and koalas in our backyards...

Father Beast · June 22, 2000, 05:35

ummm.. just a quick thought.
you can make a spherical world with the civ2 square system. Consider that each line of squares represents a latitude position. at latitudes closer to the poles, there would naturally be less squares in the circle of squares. this transition would be made by the odd triangular square. this might make for some interesting effects on city radii and stuff

June 23, 2000, 11:51

Overlapping resources would be cool!!!!

------------------
-Shiva
Email: shiva@mailops.com
Web: http://www.crosswinds.net/india/~shiva
ICQ: 17719980

June 23, 2000, 11:53

So, any chance of getting this topic on the EC3 list??

------------------
-Shiva
Email: shiva@mailops.com
Web: http://www.crosswinds.net/india/~shiva
ICQ: 17719980

MidKnight Lament · June 26, 2000, 09:53

EC3 is over. It was sent to Firaxis long ago.

- MKL

St Leo · June 26, 2000, 19:18

*Resources not represented by tiles, but by 'areas'..

Nah.

*You should be able to go over the poles (not sure how to do this)

There are some goofy solutions, but I would prefer if things were left as they are.

*Elevation should be more realistic.. Mountains should not be tiles but areas of higher elevation.. Movement should be extremely slow, bringing mountain passes into play...

Thumbs up on real mountains (they just look cool), thumbs down on slow movement.

*Landmarks should be named...

I have nothing against labels.

*There should be different levels in the map.. What I mean is that units such as planes should be able to fly over ground units, and subs under sea units.. Subs would have to come colse to the surface to attack, tunnels should be buildable thru one level of earth under another etc..

A better solution would just have the game end in 1900.

------------------
St. Leo
http://ziggurat.sidgames.com/ http://www.sidgames.com/forums/
[This message has been edited by St Leo (edited June 26, 2000).]

UltraSonix · June 26, 2000, 23:12

quote:

*There should be different levels in the map.. What I mean is that units such as planes should be able to fly over ground units, and subs under sea units.. Subs would have to come colse to the surface to attack, tunnels should be buildable thru one level of earth under another etc..

Come to think of it, this doesn't seem like a very good idea after all... I mean, how would you be able to show it on the screen?

------------------
No, in Australia we don't live with kangaroos and koalas in our backyards...

June 27, 2000, 11:03

Perhaps a more isodiametric map, showing a 45 degree rather than 80 degree angle with the surface, would help..

------------------
-Shiva
Email: shiva@mailops.com
Web: http://www.crosswinds.net/india/~shiva
ICQ: 17719980

Adm.Naismith · June 30, 2000, 19:33

About the world as a true globe, I'm for it. I can see there are some trouble representing it on a a tactical map (and in other threads there was lot of suggestions about it).

But tonight (2:20 AM now) I was just thinking that the map is NOT the territory.

I mean, I usually travel by car with flat road map still the earth is a globe (well, it is, isn't it?

).

True, in my car travels I'm not limited by some "squares grid", but the point is that if we can divide the whole strategic view of the world (as a globe) on a somewhat stretched tactical representation (as a flat map with a grid of squares or hexagons) we can probably be OK.

Sure, zooming in & out will be a problem, so we should limit the whole thing.

Well, may be I'm probably just too tired to write a clever post. Better I go to sleep now.

------------------
Admiral Naismith AKA mcostant

TheLimey · July 1, 2000, 14:55

A pixel with its own descrete attributes?

Do you have any clue how much memory that would take?

Game turns would take months to complete.

The only way it would work, were if you were to have a grid (like now) with the area delinated within it having certain attributes. Certain entities would have coordinates (as a superset of the grid coordinates.)

The more I consider this, the more impractical it seems.

Az · July 1, 2000, 17:04

Hey I've read all this stuff and I say that the world should be made in pixels and ... oh that has just poped up . units as polygons ? well because you cant say that units are point-size bodies ( kinda reminds of physics class ) . units will engage in combat ... and lets say that you make preset moves and destinations and then you press on the End turn button and ONLY THEN things occur .

Hey anyone here played the remarkable game , conquest ? if you did , you probably know what I mean .

------------------
Prepare to Land !
[This message has been edited by Dalgetti (edited July 01, 2000).]

Az · July 1, 2000, 17:21

forget about all that crap that I said higher . well maybe except that CONQUEST thing .... GLOBAL CONQUEST , that was the name IIRS....

July 2, 2000, 00:06

Someone could think about how to work it out..

But the main idea of the post was the continuous resources thing, layer thing, elevation/movement points etc..

PS. Adam, do you watch soccer?

------------------
-Shiva
Email: shiva@mailops.com
Web: http://www.crosswinds.net/india/~shiva
ICQ: 17719980

Adm.Naismith · July 2, 2000, 16:07

Shiva, I see you start the thread about resources on more than a square and so on.

I suppose that Alpha Centauri concept of Special landmarks is a step in the right direction. If you work tiles inside the special area you gain a bonus. It add some reason to try to control some world area, by army or by trade.

Last but not least, with special landmarks there is no need to introduce a "pixel-level" resource map (with all the memory and CPU time consuming).

About the map, the problem is that in a regular square grid we can't have a continuos reproduction (I mean, a scrollable one) of a round world on a flat screen (or piece of paper), if not using some kind of Mercatore or other correct but unpratical way to draw the thing.
It's time to try something different?

I suppose you refer to me as Adam (in fact my real first name is Marco (same of english Mark).
My nick name Admiral Naismith is the name of a fiction character from Science Fiction books of Ms. Lois McMaster Bujold. But that's another (off topic) story.

To answer your question:
yes, I watched some soccer (football for european) games, I've just finished to see italian players losing the final match of Euro 2000 against France team.

Why do you ask?

------------------
Admiral Naismith AKA mcostant

July 7, 2000, 11:42

I'm a big fan of Italian football and the Italian team..

I like Juventus..

------------------
-Shiva
Email: shiva@mailops.com
Web: http://www.crosswinds.net/india/~shiva
ICQ: 17719980