Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Civ 5 Will Let You Import and Convert Civ 4 Maps

Posted by Soulskill on from the backward-compatibility dept.

bbretterson writes "From an interview Bitmob conducted with Civilization 5 Lead Designer Jon Shafer: 'You can import Civ 4 maps into the world builder and convert them into Civ 5 maps, including all the units and cities and stuff on it — the conversion process will just do that for you automatically. We're hoping that the first week Civ 5 is out, people will use that function and port all of the Civ 4 stuff over to Civ 5, so everything will be out there already.'"

12 of 142 comments (clear)

  1. Square to hexagon conversion by Maian · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Civ 4 map plots are squares. Civ 5 are hexagons. I don't see an easy conversion process that won't produce real not-just-semantic map differences (e.g. how to convert diagonal waterways where in a 4x4, one diagonal is water and the other diagonal is land, and ships can travel through the water diagonal?)

    1. Re:Square to hexagon conversion by Z00L00K · · Score: 1, Interesting

      What probably would be more interesting is ability to create, convert and design your own custom units.

      --
      If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, then the first woodpecker would destroy civilization.
    2. Re:Square to hexagon conversion by Shrike82 · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Yeah this was my first question too. Nothing in the article about it, but it hesitantly alludes to the fact that the only things confirmed to "carry over" will be cities and units. So this could very well be an approximation rather than a conversion. Cities roughly in the same place, land masses roughly the same size and shape, rivers running the same general course and touching the same cities etc.

      Units will be interesting though. If you import a map with huge unit stacks they'll have to be spread out to conform to the new one-unit-per-hex requirement. Suddenly a stack of doom will become a huge traffic jam across your civilisation!

      --
      You can advertise in this sig from as little as £99.99 a month!
    3. Re:Square to hexagon conversion by ivucica · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Hexagons? What are they doing to Civ? :D

      I wouldn't be opposed to Civ5 having both hexagon and square modes. That would solve the conversion problem, too.

    4. Re:Square to hexagon conversion by sjwt · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Try looking at how the game Elemental, War of Magic development is going, that might be more your cup of tea.

      Its been developed with the Mod tools, and they are realeasing them with it, its currntly in a true Beta, you know the kind where one can post feedback, and sugest changes that are more then cosmetic or extreamly minor.

      --
      You have 5 Moderator Points!
      Which Helpless Linux zealot/MS basher do you want to mod down today?
    5. Re:Square to hexagon conversion by Thiez · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Wow, that diagram was actually really informative. In hindsight it's amazingly obvious :D

    6. Re:Square to hexagon conversion by Yvanhoe · · Score: 3, Interesting

      In Civ4 going from (0,0) to (1,1) was possible through a diagonal move. In your conversion, this becomes impossible. This can have real importance in the game. A diagonal waterway in Civ4 will appear as non practicable in Civ5.

      Going from a 8 neighborhood to a 6 neighborhood bears implications that are interesting but make conversion non ideal in most cases. If what you want is a nice map of Italy that looks about the same in Civ5, this is fine. But in the random map you loved so much in Civ4, some straits will disappear, some part of the sea will become lakes and just don't count on roads to be correctly converted.

      --
      The Wise adapts himself to the world. The Fool adapts the world to himself. Therefore, all progress depends on the Fool.
    7. Re:Square to hexagon conversion by suomynonAyletamitlU · · Score: 2, Interesting

      If I were doing it, I'd "render" the terrain, then re-divide it into the new hexes , and infer the new tiles by the contents of the new grid, including cities, rivers, bonuses, etc. I don't know whether that would work cleanly, but it gets rid of that problem, at least; what used to be in 1,1 is still geographically close to 0,0, even if cell contents get moved, merged, or divided. Further, if a waterway runs between diagonal squares, it's likely that the corresponding hexes will also be contiguous.

      I have no idea whether they're going to do something like that, though, and it might take a heck of a lot of tweaking before that method became viable.

  2. Well my only wish... by g4b · · Score: 4, Interesting

    My only wish about civ is, that I can turn down graphics more, than in part 4.

    It should really get a more heatfriendly graphics mode.

  3. Linux support by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    I love Civ, and I've got the anthology + Civ IV expansions. Thing is, they all currently run under wine (with no-cd patches), mostly.

    I hope (but not too highly), the same can be said for Civ V. 2000 bonus points for no DRM. I would buy it then.

  4. Anyone remember SimCopter? by PPalmgren · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Its not exactly the same, but I remember enjoying SimCopter a lot because I could take SimCity 2000 maps and load them up in SimCopter and fly around them in 3D. The nostalgia feeling of loading my best cities and being able to play in them was fantastic. I could see people not wanting to lose their custom maps in Civ4, and this is an excellent solution.

    I loved loading up a SC2000 map with the army base and stealing the army chopper. This was the closest thing you could get to 3D GTA at the time.

  5. Re:Game Speed by dingen · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I like the illusion that the AI is actually doing something. I wouldn't surprise me if there is a built-in delay, just to let the player feel like a bit like stuff is happening between turns.

    --
    Pretty good is actually pretty bad.