trees, map distance

[semoury]

g'day all I am an Australian been gaming a long time a lot of time playing rts, so straight to it. I think trees well there needs to more on some maps or at least denser thickets of them, secondly the maps seem to be a little small especially in the bigger games like 3v3 or 4v4, plz take this into consideration

[Gurken Khan]

Personally, I just don't play maps with sparse/no wood; since it's FOSS one could make a custom collection by tweaking the parameters.

Did you see the button that let's you choose the map size? I believe "Giant" is close to what the engine can reasonably handle.

[real_tabasco_sauce]

g'day

I suggest playing on random maps as these allow for customizing things like map size and sometimes the biome. The classic map is mainland, and most biomes are good on wood except for sudanian savannah and nubia.

Edited Friday at 16:32 by real_tabasco_sauce

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

8 hours ago, semoury said:

g'day all I am an Australian been gaming a long time a lot of time playing rts, so straight to it. I think trees well there needs to more on some maps or at least denser thickets of them, secondly the maps seem to be a little small especially in the bigger games like 3v3 or 4v4, plz take this into consideration

Depends on the map type and biome. You don't want a bunch of trees in the Sahara desert, for example. Also, there's a big difference in the gameplay experience, as far as the map is concerned, between random maps and skirmish maps. What kinds of maps are you playing?  Are you single player or multiplayer?  

[semoury]

well i dont know what the maps are it just seems a few of them lack trees, and on some the distance between enemy players is a little small. thanks for the reply's i do enjoy the game not complaining just i think in some games for rankings might need a little balancing

[Darkcity]

@semoury, Use trading mate. Also, you can use random map where you can adjust the size of the map as you need. Some maps are designed to have less wood as mentioned by @wowgetoffyourcellphone.  

[alre]

it is true that some random maps are not as reliable as others when it cames to wood distribution. we were discussing this few weeks ago, it would be good to audit the maps so that one doesn't have to stumble on the bad ones.

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

1 hour ago, alre said:

it is true that some random maps are not as reliable as others when it cames to wood distribution. we were discussing this few weeks ago, it would be good to audit the maps so that one doesn't have to stumble on the bad ones.

We should, honestly, strip out the worst 50% of maps. 

[Grautvornix]

Frankly (while I do agree that there are large differences in map quality), I am not so much in favour of dumping exisitng maps. This game delivers its fascination from

• historical reference,
• the number of Civs, and
• the diverse, beautiful maps.

Dumping the less beautiful half of them would certainly increase average quality but als reduce variety. In fact I am already missing a few maps that used to be available in A23 etc. Part of the fun as an SP is a large number of very different maps to try with different Civs.

Lastly, a bad map has at least the potential to trigger improvement.

 

Instead, could we possibly mark the 50% bad maps as "maps for proposed improvement" or would you consider this pointless/hopeless?

[Gurken Khan]

cf

 

[real_tabasco_sauce]

yeah we have been over this. Thanks @Gurken Khan. I maintain that rather than removing any maps except for redundant ones, they should be better organized. However, I tried and failed to do this, as the parts of the gui need to be refactored to do it properly.

[Grautvornix]

From an SP perspective, I should add, that constrained maps (where some resource, or space, or anything else is scarce) can be also also quite fascinating in its own way. Players need to carefully plan their build sequence and cannot just follow e.g. a standard  boom strategy.

[real_tabasco_sauce]

tree concerns addressed for random maps: https://gitea.wildfiregames.com/0ad/0ad/pulls/7319

this has been something i meant to do for a while, but this discussion reminded me.

Edited Saturday at 19:47 by real_tabasco_sauce

[Lion.Kanzen]

4 hours ago, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:

We should, honestly, strip out the worst 50% of maps. 

30%

We are taking all the risk.

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

3 hours ago, Grautvornix said:

Frankly (while I do agree that there are large differences in map quality), I am not so much in favour of dumping exisitng maps. This game delivers its fascination from

• historical reference,
• the number of Civs, and
• the diverse, beautiful maps.

Dumping the less beautiful half of them would certainly increase average quality but als reduce variety. In fact I am already missing a few maps that used to be available in A23 etc. Part of the fun as an SP is a large number of very different maps to try with different Civs.

Lastly, a bad map has at least the potential to trigger improvement.

 

Instead, could we possibly mark the 50% bad maps as "maps for proposed improvement" or would you consider this pointless/hopeless?

No disrespect to you personally, but I grow weary of this topic. I've made my case several times over several years. There are just way too many low quality maps. 

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

3 hours ago, real_tabasco_sauce said:

I maintain that rather than removing any maps except for redundant ones, they should be better organized.

Removing maps doesn't delete them permanently. bahhhh

[Lion.Kanzen]

11 minutes ago, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:

Removing maps doesn't delete them permanently. bahhhh

You send them to the map dumpster....

But where do we send them?

We should make a task type post to be able to fix the maps by brainstorming.

[Lion.Kanzen]

What about this?

https://forums.ageofempires.com/t/vote-now-1v1-ranked-map-rotation-march-22/198553

Vote out and vote in new and old maps.

[real_tabasco_sauce]

we don't have a matchmaking system. So i don't see the point of a map rotation like that.

Choosing half the maps to remove (temporarily) for the sake of organization is a bit confusing. Why not just improve organization directly like I tried and failed to do.

If some maps are deficient, just improve them as needed. It doesn't need to be some big undertaking.

[Lion.Kanzen]

36 minutes ago, real_tabasco_sauce said:

we don't have a matchmaking system. So i don't see the point of a map rotation like that.

I mean vote for maps that you do not want and include new ones.

Take a vote on what needs to be fixed and improved and another on what needs to be included.

There's a mod with maps right?

It must be beyond this forum, on social networks.

Edited Saturday at 23:24 by Lion.Kanzen

[Grautvornix]

1 hour ago, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:

No disrespect to you personally, but I grow weary of this topic. I've made my case several times over several years. There are just way too many low quality maps. 

Yep, I get your point. No worries!

[Gönndolsalv]

29 minutes ago, Lion.Kanzen said:

There's a mod with maps right?

there is the community-maps mod why don´t move the unfinished maps there? Could also be a Official Maps mod.

[Lion.Kanzen]

8 minutes ago, Gönndolsalv said:

there is the community-maps mod why don´t move the unfinished maps there? Could also be a Official Maps mod.

I didn't remember the name, it would be good to move them there.

[Gönndolsalv]

i think @andy5995is the maintainer

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

Andy has said he's not interested in taking these maps. Best to have an an official "Legacy Maps" mod. Once we've finished polishing 30 good maps for the base game, we can polish 5-10 more maps from the Legacy Maps mod and merge them back into the game. rinse/repeat. 

 

Retold has 40 well-polished procedural maps: https://aom.heavengames.com/retold/random-maps/