• If you have a mod, tool or prefab, please use the Resources section. Click Mods at the top of the forums.

teragon maps

i made a 16K map 2 days ago on the latest Teragon so it does work. 

that being said with a few tweaks i have made and changing the errosion limits, rivers and widthadjustments it took over 5 hours to finish the map. 

16K is a huge area ,the map was sparsely populated with the wilderness POI limit set to 450. i got some large cities ( i also increased the max size) . 

i tried to show a map but the damn forum wouldnt let me post it.... i have posted the previews of maps before so i have no idea what the issue is. i even shrunk the map to 25% still wouldnt load....

 
looks like the images have to be under 1000 pixels wide! so my first 16K map.  not really a good map. it has some big cities but too far apart. need to find a balance with size and distance.... might try a 12K next.

preview small.jpg

 
Last edited by a moderator:
spud42 said:
looks like the images have to be under 1000 pixels wide! so my first 16K map.  not really a good map. it has some big cities but too far apart. need to find a balance with size and distance.... might try a 12K next.

View attachment 29814
Click to expand...
Yeah, you would probably want more cities for a map that size.  I really like how the rivers are looking with the latest version.

5 hours isn't bad at all for a 16k map right now with Teragon.  Current optimization puts 16k at about 4 times the time of 15k.

 
i have a 5800X  8core 16 threads @4.35GHz. there are sometimes when all cores are pegged at 90%pluss... other parts of the generation 1 core at 100% is used and that core changes every 30 seconds or so...  just did a 12K map i kind of like it but again i cant upload the jpg! i shrunk the image to 1000 pixels on max dimension but nope forum wont let me add it...  error code 200

i give up.. i tried to up load the same image in a new post and this time it worked?? and it joined the two posts into one!! lol

preview small.jpg

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Yes, some commands are single-core and some are multi-core.  Some commands will use as much of the resources available as it can, while others don't need as much.  This means you can max a single core or max all cores, depending on the command, while other commands won't max anything (with a decent computer).  Even with the best possible computer, you'll probably still be maxing cores because it will use everything it can to get the command done more quickly.

spud42 said:
just did a 12K map i kind of like it but again i cant upload the jpg! i shrunk the image to 1000 pixels on max dimension but nope forum wont let me add it...  error code 200

i give up.. i tried to up load the same image in a new post and this time it worked?? and it joined the two posts into one!! lol
Click to expand...
My suggestion to avoid this problem is to screenshot the image and just paste it here instead of uploading the entire image.  Yes, you can't open it up to as large of a size by clicking on it in the post, but if you don't need that, it is far easier.  You can open the image on your computer and either use Print Screen to copy the entire screen or use Windows Key + Shift + S and highlight the area of the screen you want to capture (so you don't get things like your taskbar in the screenshot) and then just Ctrl-V into your post.  Always works and easy to do.  :)

 
preview small.jpgteragon 49-1 roads.JPG

slight anomaly on the road bridges. Maybe there should be a minimum distance between bridges.  No biggie but not a bad map..

preview small.jpg

i like this one a bit better.. 12k map

 
With the A22 diary opened and the few vague comments from faatal about RWG. Does it look like any changes are going to affect this current version of Teragon? I realise that it could be anywhere from 6 months to a year before we see A22 released, despite the 2024 release hoped for by TFP. 

I am currently on day 106 of my current playthrough and starting to get bored. life is too easy..lol  I am going to play the last map i posted recently on the next playthrough. going to hold off making any more maps till A22  most likely..

 
spud42 said:
With the A22 diary opened and the few vague comments from faatal about RWG. Does it look like any changes are going to affect this current version of Teragon? I realise that it could be anywhere from 6 months to a year before we see A22 released, despite the 2024 release hoped for by TFP. 

I am currently on day 106 of my current playthrough and starting to get bored. life is too easy..lol  I am going to play the last map i posted recently on the next playthrough. going to hold off making any more maps till A22  most likely..
Click to expand...
There isn't anything I've seen that would suggest any problems but until they either give more information on changes or we try it ourselves, I can't say for certain. The stuff I've seen about RWG changes relate to things like enabling burnt forest or moving wasteland to the center... i.e. things that don't matter for Teragon as they don't actually change anything that affects third party maps.

They made a couple changes for A21 that requires some changes in Teragon, so it is possible that could happen again.  But I wouldn't expect it to take much time to make those changes, if any are needed.

Of course, this doesn't mean that a save made for A21 will work in A22.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
yes, that is obvious. TFP always recommend a new map and game for the new alpha. an old certainly wont work with the change to armor alone. you would get a heap of null reference errors..lol

 
Here is my newest map. It's 10k, I have been tweaking the settings to get a really varied landscape and heavily dithered biomes. The results are very natural blending of the desert > wasteland > burnt forest > forest > snow.

If anyone wants to play this map let me know. I just started a play through and I started 7k away from the trader in my spawn. 3 days just to get to him. I play 3x spawn on easiest setting to it's a lot more zeds, but each has less hp. Makes for a more "Action" based game in my opinion. Well. Here it is. The city in the NW corner is probably the best city I have ever had in random gen in terms of size and layout. This is 3km per side!

image.png

 
spud42 said:
do you have bridges off? that road looping around the river is mad! lol
Click to expand...
No on the bridges being turned off. I have the radius of the rivers to be much wider than normal so they often don't catch the crossing lol

I do like the bridges, but I also like how natural the rivers and lakes blend into the surrounding landscape so it's a trade off. If you tighten the radius, they usually come back.

 
warmer said:
No on the bridges being turned off. I have the radius of the rivers to be much wider than normal so they often don't catch the crossing lol

I do like the bridges, but I also like how natural the rivers and lakes blend into the surrounding landscape so it's a trade off. If you tighten the radius, they usually come back.
Click to expand...
That is strange because bridges can span any width river you have unless you have the max bridge length value set really low.  By default, they should have no trouble spanning that river.  It's also strange that your river has a gap in in near the end where your road goes.  And even at the other end along the south edge of the map, the rivers aren't going to the edge of the map, which isn't normal either.  Not sure how that happened but at least you like the results.

Btw, might be on an older version of Teragon.  v0.48.0 added an option that allows rivers widths to change, which can make for some nicer looking rivers.  Of course you may just have the Create Rivers command set to use Fixed Width Rivers.

 
Riamus said:
That is strange because bridges can span any width river you have unless you have the max bridge length value set really low.  By default, they should have no trouble spanning that river.  It's also strange that your river has a gap in in near the end where your road goes.  And even at the other end along the south edge of the map, the rivers aren't going to the edge of the map, which isn't normal either.  Not sure how that happened but at least you like the results.

Btw, might be on an older version of Teragon.  v0.48.0 added an option that allows rivers widths to change, which can make for some nicer looking rivers.  Of course you may just have the Create Rivers command set to use Fixed Width Rivers.
Click to expand...
I don't believe it's the width that is the issue, it's the lack of deep cut to trigger the bridge is what I am thinking. The slope isn't severe enough to trigger a bridge. In my testing, until the slope got to a certain degree the bridges didn't appear.

 
warmer said:
I don't believe it's the width that is the issue, it's the lack of deep cut to trigger the bridge is what I am thinking. The slope isn't severe enough to trigger a bridge. In my testing, until the slope got to a certain degree the bridges didn't appear.
Click to expand...
Ah, I see what you were saying.  It's a good reason to have Enhance Shoreline enabled.  :)

 
I have a custom Heightmap in gimp that is 16 bit grayscale and would like to know what the correct Export settings are so that the file is compatible with Teragon. Any help is appreciated.

 
HB_H4wk said:
I have a custom Heightmap in gimp that is 16 bit grayscale and would like to know what the correct Export settings are so that the file is compatible with Teragon. Any help is appreciated.
Click to expand...
It looks like Gimp updated and the Export dialog has changed.  There used to be an option relating to transparency that you needed to make sure was set to not export transparency but I don't see that now.  The main thing is to export it in 16bit without any alpha channel.  Gimp likes to include alpha channels, so be sure it doesn't.

 
when you export as a PNG file , in the middle of the export menu is a dropdown list. default is automatic pixel format .

If yo click the down arrow you get a list it contains 16 bit GRAY as well as 16 bit GRAYA.

I think the 16 bit GRAY is the onw without the Alpha channel.

 
Ah... I wasn't looking at PNG.  That's why it looked different.  When exporting, there is an option to save color values from transparent pixels.  That's the setting that determines if an alpha channel is saved.  The dropdown may also work, but I haven't tried that.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top