forum.freeciv.org

I am having problems withe the size of the map in the game's 2.5.0beta1-GTK2 version. I play mostly "island based" and "Depending on size of continents", but I get very small islands -big enough for 3/4 cities, only.
And that's where I noticed that Tiles & Pixels are not the same. In 2.4.2, with x/ysize of 128x256 TILES would give me a nice 256x256 pixels largish map. Not so in 2.5.0(etc.)
Is there a most benevolent member to tell me how big is a TILE in both pixels and kilometers, miles? You are so kind

I'm not really sure what you mean here. A pixel is just one dot of color, and have no mechanical effect ingame whatsoever. Each tileset has their own X by Y pixels for each tile. (For example amplio2hexbig is 128x64 pixels per tile, though it is actually narrower due to isometry.) And this would not change between versions, since it's art. I have no idea where miles and kilometers would even enter into the equation.

Are you sure that it's set to generate a map based on the size you indicate, and not a number of tiles per player?

If the OP means tiles instead of pixels, what are the values of settings "mapsize" (the master switch that tells how the other settings are used) and if it's FULLSIZE: "size", PLAYER: "tilesperplayer" and player count, XYSIZE: "xsize" and "ysize"? These should work the smae in 2.5 as in 2.4.

I will answer what I understood from Cazfi's post:
mapsize (or player, which ever it is) is set to"width and height", xsize to "128" and ysize to "256".
They ARE the same in both 2.4 and 2.5 BUT when I copy the radar map into a paint software (PSP) the maps come up 256x256 pixels.
Thus, my question about Tiles vs Pixels.
As for km/miles size is just a curiosity.

Arbogast wrote:when I copy the radar map into a paint software (PSP) the maps come up 256x256 pixels.
Thus, my question about Tiles vs Pixels.

What is the value of the 'topology' setting ("Map topology index") in the two cases?
For topologies other than rectangular (iso, hex, iso|hex), each tile is represented by at least two pixels in the minimap/radar map, to approximate the required grid layout (with a "brick" pattern). If you have different topologies in your two games, that could explain the difference.

Arbogast wrote:As for km/miles size is just a curiosity.

Best not to think too hard about this, as many aspects of the spatial and temporal scale of Freeciv don't quite add up But probably on the order of a hundred miles, I'm guessing -- quite large.

JTN wrote:Best not to think too hard about this, as many aspects of the spatial and temporal scale of Freeciv don't quite add up

Absolutely agreed!

But when we immerse ourselves into a gripping freeciv map I am sure that most of us imagine a correlation to the real world. For the scenario maps one can judge the game distances compared to the atlas, but for those randomly generated it's up to our imagination I tend to think 10 miles/kilometres per section of road, but ignore the fact that there is a ridiculously short distance between the poles!

<edit> Now I've thought about it I realise it's probably much more sensible to think in terms of 100 miles/kilometres per section, but that just proves the truth of JTN's words that it's best not to think too hard about this!</edit>

My "Map topology index" settings are "wrap East-West" and "Iso" in ALL cases.
As for the size of tiles I'm talking about "Map width in tiles" and "Map height in tiles" in order to understand why my xsize of 128 TILES becomes 256 PIXELS. Only reason is of trying to find the largest map my machine can handle with acceptable time delays when "turn done".
Anyway, Thanks you guys.