Any interest in a RMG?

[Zentar]

I think there is already a RMG out.

[Gandalf Parker]

There are a few out already.

But one thing that would make ANY map generator worth looking at is if it can create wrappable maps. If you could work in a tiling routine to match the edges then everything else would just be gravy.

[Ballbarian]

Creating wrappable maps would definitely be a plus, but first and foremost, only continue to work on it as long as it is enjoyable.

[Agrajag]

Gandalf Parker said:
But one thing that would make ANY map generator worth looking at is if it can create wrappable maps. If you could work in a tiling routine to match the edges then everything else would just be gravy.

It would actually be quite simple to make wrappable maps, since the algorithm in use lends itself well to that. It would take a bit of thought since I made some mistakes last time I tried it, but not much work.

Ballbarian said:
Creating wrappable maps would definitely be a plus, but first and foremost, only continue to work on it as long as it is enjoyable.

I'm sure most programmers will agree that a lot of things are enjoyable to program, and yet have a lot of parts that aren't enjoyable. One commonly cited example is GUI work, which isn't a lot of fun, but is important if you want people to use what you made.
And of course, working with the "as long as it is enjoyable" system would mean the whole thing takes >x10 more time (if at all completed)

EDIT: thanks for the replies btw.

[llamabeast]

If you can do wrappable maps I think it would be very useful.

[Agrajag]

Wrappable maps are in.
Since this was a longstanding bug with my code, I wanted to fix it regardless of whether it was going to be used for a RMG. (which turned out to be the result of a value being 1 more than it should have been )
Attached is an example of a wrapping map. (I tiled it so it would be obvious that it does indeed wrap properly)

So how does this change things for people?
(Note, the algorithm can only generate square maps. This is not a problem if you want a none-wrappable map, since you can just cut out some of the square and you get a rectangle. But for wrappable maps, you will lose wrapping in one direction or another [or both, if you want to]
So basically, that means that the restriction is:
1) If want a map that wraps around both edges, it has to be square.
2) If want a map that wraps around one edge, it can be a rectangle, but will only wrap around the rectangle's shorter side)

[Gandalf Parker]

Interesting. The fact that a rectangle will only wrap one way is actually a plus. In some of the serious map conversations it was brought up that the wrapping isnt realistic to a globe. The most realistic "wrap" would be that west-west wrapped, all of the northern would connect to each other (polar) and all ofthe southern connect to each other. Your rectangle arrangement makes that really easy.

It also reminds me that I found a really cool utility that would make a spinning globe GIF out of a map. I was going to use it on the leading webpage for the next monstrous Dom3 game I setup.

Something else that comes up...
I take it that you plan the same limits? 1500 provinces? Smaller maps people can provide to the community but the really monstrous ones are usually generated. One thing that can be a problem is the "grouping" of terrains. People tend to want grouping to be water vs land (large continents and large bodies of water) but small grouping of all other terrains. In other words they want each nation to to have easy access to each of those terrains. Small chance of landing in mountains surrounded by mountains, or landing in waste surrounded by waste, etc. Is there a controllable variable for the "shotgun" effect of each terrain seperately?

[Gandalf Parker]

I just noticed something in rereading your initial post. Keeping the segments of the program separate. Thats wonderful! Does this mean that it can be used to try to make logical provinces on a found image? Thats going to allow for some very interesting maps from people as lazy as I am.