What was the reason for that? performance? gameplay? I rather like super huge maps like old times...

For what it's worth I havent rated the game yet on steam, I'm waiting to complete a game first

And from my first 70-80 turns I have a lot to relearn I am dead last in everything lol... and thats just on normal

Quoting Frogboy,

reply 3

Gameplay.   It isn't related to Crusade one way or the other.

With the changes to Crusade, I can probably make the map bigger.

That said, it's pretty disheartening seeing Crusade at 41% because people think Crusade is changing map sizes.

http://store.steampowered.com/app/527070/Galactic_Civilizations_III_Crusade_Expansion_Pack/

 

 

Whether it is Crusade, or 1,9, or whatever, a lot of users "Feel" the difference, including old time users like me.  I think it may be time to compromise with the user base on this one somehow.  If it is not a performance issue, you may as well spoil people.

Disclaimer, I play Insane mostly, although I do take smaller ones occasionally, and I would play bigger sizes if they were available.  So, don't go by me.  

Quoting Ed49663,

reply 7

Quoting Frogboy,

reply 3

Gameplay.   It isn't related to Crusade one way or the other.

With the changes to Crusade, I can probably make the map bigger.

That said, it's pretty disheartening seeing Crusade at 41% because people think Crusade is changing map sizes.

http://store.steampowered.com/app/527070/Galactic_Civilizations_III_Crusade_Expansion_Pack/

 

 

 

That is disheartening.  I think these people haven't played the game in a long time because the map changes were many updates ago.  I have had almost 1000 hours for GCIII, I have not played it in 3 months since reading about the changes coming from Crusade... I am pretty sure I will pack on another 1000 soon.  Great job Stardock!

It infurious me because if they want the same damn pre-Crusade size back, it only take them one bloody minute to copy/paste the MapSizeDefs.xml from GC3 folder to replace GC3Crusade one. It annoy me how the sodding DLC just came out not even 3 hours and these people whining about it like they are special snowflake without complete the frekken game session first. They REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE like an autistic kid and refuse to ask for fix or help, only crying out loud.

The MapSizeDefs in Crusade are the ones from 1.9, not the ones from 2.0.  Changing them to the ones in 2.0 should stop most of the complaints about the sizes of the galaxies.

For those who are more insane than the usual insane, I have something to report.  Larsenex asked about sizes larger than Insane in this post.  I did some testing then and found that the game crashed if the value for MapSizeDef for Insane was increased by 1 or more above the value of 380.  Today, Brad made a comment somewhere, I think the Steam forums, that it is possible to have larger map sizes in Crusade than those that exist.  I decided to find out if Insane could be made larger, so I made a mod and have been increasing the size of Insane maps to see how large I can go before the game crashes.  I have increased the value of MapSizeDef to 500 so far (31.5% increase) without a crash during galaxy generation.

 I tried more sizes, all the way to 1140, without a crash.  However, the galaxies looked to similar, so I tried zooming out and seeing how the bottom edge looked against the UI on the screen.  They all seemed to be the same size the galaxy with a value of 380.  I need to do some work to see if the galaxy sizes are actually increasing with values larger than 380.

Map size in current release is dreadful, especially given the number of 'recommended' AIs. For a 'Normal' map, I had an AI homeworld 10 tiles or so from my start. I am using the 'Sol' system and 'Mars' was colonized by someone else before I could even build a Shipyard. It feels severely claustrophobic.

Hello.  Even under pre-Crusade, I always used bigger maps with more sparsely-spaced celestial bodies, and I also remove half of the races and all of the pirates. 

Space is supposed to be BIG and mostly EMPTY.  It SHOULD take longer to get anywhere, especially in the early game when I haven't yet built advanced drive systems.

Plus, playing a space game on a crowded map just feels wrong.  Space isn't supposed to be crowded like Beijing, Hong Kong, or New York.

Give me room to move, don't overfish the river or overhunt the deer in the woods, and don't poop upstream from me or I'll declare war on you.  How human of me!   

Yep, I just got it on Steam.  Checking it out now...

They should fix the "recommended player" tooltip since they change map size for like 3 times already. It is misleading and create trust issue against player.

If the projected number of habitable planets were displayed based on the settings you pick it would solve so many problems with map selection/galaxy options.

Then people would at least have rough idea how long their games will last and how many empires they should roughly select.

It's been a problem well before GC3... the entire series.  I'd put money on it the only people who have a clue how many habitable planets they can expect on certain map sizes are those who have looked in the MapSizeDefs file.

But shouldn't that be the feeling for a 4x game...room to explore and grow before you conflict? If so, why isn't that the default option? Options are great, but players are typically going to gravitate to the defaults (at least until they have experience with the game). And honestly, based on my experiences with the initial released settings, I'm not surprised by the negative reviews. The game I started was beyond frustrating and I ended up just quitting out with little desire to play again.

I will, of course, try again with the new map sizes but honestly I think the default experience should be very positive and unfortunately, that certainly did not happen with Crusade.