I would put it differently, as "I want enough land to have nearby enemies to crush quickly."You seems to want continents with room for many land-only cities?
New terrain generator
-
Molo_Parko
- Hardened
- Posts: 200
- Joined: Fri Jul 02, 2021 4:00 pm
Re: New terrain generator
Re: New terrain generator
Is your preference for landmasses in the terrain generator driven by a desire for proximity to potential adversaries, or is there another reason behind this preference?
-
John Campbell
- Posts: 13
- Joined: Wed Jan 18, 2023 6:57 pm
Re: New terrain generator
I've been unhappy with the built-in terrain generators — Fracture seems to be the best at making actual continents, but it's bad at including islands, and it insists on putting everyone on one big continent (sometimes two) no matter how much I tell to it spread them around. tergen seems, at least in theory, to be exactly what I'm looking for in a terrain generator, so I downloaded it last night and gave it a try.
First off, there's a call to fsqrt() at line 468 that my compiler doesn't like. I had to change it to sqrtf() to get it to link.
That got it to compile, so I ran some tests to see what the output looked like. With default settings for everything but wrap (WRAPX) and topology (varied), it works fine with ISOHEX, and HEX, and square... but ISO just hangs forever. (Well, I gave it an hour, anyway, before I killed it. All the other topologies finish in under two seconds.)
And it just stops there, forever, or at least for more than a hour. Fiddling with other settings doesn't seem to help. This is kind of a problem, because ISO is the topology I actually use. (I don't like the hex tilesets.)
First off, there's a call to fsqrt() at line 468 that my compiler doesn't like. I had to change it to sqrtf() to get it to link.
That got it to compile, so I ran some tests to see what the output looked like. With default settings for everything but wrap (WRAPX) and topology (varied), it works fine with ISOHEX, and HEX, and square... but ISO just hangs forever. (Well, I gave it an hour, anyway, before I killed it. All the other topologies finish in under two seconds.)
Code: Select all
$ ./tergen ISO 1 1
Map named "ISO"
Map size: 64 × 128 Topology: 1 (ISO)
33% land
30% mountains/hills
50% tempered
50% water on land
Plate tectonics, trying 18 plates
Plate tectonics with 13 plates
-
John Campbell
- Posts: 13
- Joined: Wed Jan 18, 2023 6:57 pm
Re: New terrain generator
Also, 3.2 changed how wrapping is set in the save file, so they all default to wrapping both directions, regardless of what you set it to. 3.2 wants it on a separate line instead of in the topology line, like so:
Code: Select all
[settings]
set={"name","value","gamestart"
"topology","ISO|HEX","ISO|HEX"
"xsize",180,180
"ysize",90,90
"generator","SCENARIO","RANDOM"
"wrap","WRAPX","WRAPX"
}
Re: New terrain generator
Wait a sec. Is there a bug in backward compatibility (savegame format conversion) in the freeciv engine? What format version the savegame claims to be, when it's not automatically converted to the format where "wrap" is a separate setting from "topology"?John Campbell wrote: ↑Tue Aug 19, 2025 8:00 am Also, 3.2 changed how wrapping is set in the save file, so they all default to wrapping both directions, regardless of what you set it to. 3.2 wants it on a separate line instead of in the topology line, like so
-
John Campbell
- Posts: 13
- Joined: Wed Jan 18, 2023 6:57 pm
Re: New terrain generator
No, I think it's just tergen. The save files it produces are tagged as 3.2 (game_version=3020000), but are still using the pre-3.2 format for wrap.cazfi wrote: ↑Tue Aug 19, 2025 5:24 pmWait a sec. Is there a bug in backward compatibility (savegame format conversion) in the freeciv engine? What format version the savegame claims to be, when it's not automatically converted to the format where "wrap" is a separate setting from "topology"?John Campbell wrote: ↑Tue Aug 19, 2025 8:00 am Also, 3.2 changed how wrapping is set in the save file, so they all default to wrapping both directions, regardless of what you set it to. 3.2 wants it on a separate line instead of in the topology line, like so