Raise the svg limit to 4mb or allow for a selected few to break the limit

I'm posting here a request I made on Uservoice: https://warlight.uservoice.com/forums/77051-warzone-features/suggestions/47700728-maps-raise-the-svg-limit-to-4mb-or-allow-for-a-se

I do not make this proposal lightly, I thought over it for long and gather experiences from mappers to corroborate it.

The point is this: we have other limits for the maps - 1000 bonuses, 4000 territories and 3500x2500 px as max size. We strive for them, although the best maps are no doubt smaller, considering the average WZ player plays competitive games.

Despite this, those few of us who want to make big maps, beautiful, rich in variety and content, are usually choked by the 3mb limit, not because of excess - online communities have perfected numerous ways of reducing size - but because we cannot reach the other limits we have without making a work of poor quality.

So, you can either have a small beautiful map, or a not so good one big. And that's a pity.

I do realize this may impact performance (of this I am no expert) and may spark a rise in less polished maps. But considering (1) that maps are becoming rarer by the day; (2) that inexperienced mappers usually, makes very heavy maps because of the lack of polish (7-10 mbs even), rather than going just a bit over it; (3) that many gifted mappers have dropped from publishing splendid works because of the limit; I do expect that you wouldn't see a growth in unpolished maps nor the same complaint for the 4mb limit.

Also, beautiful maps are a splendid advertisement. Personally, and I can say the same for many a WZ player, I got hooked up to the game by them, so I consider this request a win-win.

Otherwise, if there was a way for experienced or gifted mappers to submit bigger maps to the editor in some workaround - all through the screening from the managers of the game - it would be awesome all the same. The goal here is to make better maps, not finding a way to work less.

What do you think about it?

Great idea, hoping we can get can answer to this

Would love the option to have detailed, larger maps.

Good luck but "Would love the option to have detailed, larger maps. " isn't entirely true because of newer map makers might not have taken steps to reduce the file size by removing unneeded details from not simplifying territories or by keeping actual photos in the map.

Yes please!

Currently map makers have to choose between either a big map or a detailed map, and with a bigger limit it might become possible to do both!

I agree entirely

Same

As a map maker, I think mb limit should be 4mb

this forum thread is now highlighted :)

cmon Fizzer, make it happen!

I've often wondered why the largest maps are often the most boring in terms of detail and aesthetic - now I know why!

This should absolutely happen!!!

None of my maps have been larger than 2MB. The huge map of the world by me for example is 1.6 MB.

Long time no see Belgian

I'm not saying it is impossible to make a huge map within the 3mb limit or below!

On the contrary, I know gifted mappers such as Belgian are able to produce essential and very playable designs, enriched with cool art, within the actual limit.
Yet, the amount of detail ends up being reduced to the lowest terms, and although square, neat borders are great for political divisions, many geographical elements result very stylized. So, my question is, why should the aesthetycs of a map, alongside the many many innovative ideas for bonuses and gameplay, should be left out of bigger maps?

What extra map details are you adding to make the map size > 2 MB?

Gameplay:

- Mountains: either impassable or with mountain passes or even Mines inside
- Sea tiles: which usually mean sea territories + anchors if you want to have only few territories as ports
- Special bonuses: negative ones - cultural/ethnic related - gameplay related
- Legend
- GM slots, territories and bonuses
- More complex shapes for territories, to allow more connections, thus strategy (square boxes allow only limited ones)

Aesthetics:

- Context related elements (ice in the poles, trees near forests) to make the map more intuitive
- More realistic shapes: rivers, islands off the Coast, etc. that add character to the map, making players get more immersed in the setting

And this is what comes to mind in a whim: the number of possibilities is infinite and I'm not stating that all maps should have these features (nor everyone of them), but why preclude them to wishful mappers.

This is also why I am asking alternatively for a workaround - the goal is not being more lazy but the maps get new features even on bigger sizes.

Last point I want to stress out is that my experience within the mapper community tells me that allowing for a higher limit will let the most gifted mappers to produce wonders much more than risking inexperienced ones from producing less polished stuff (as of now we are trading security for quality).

Edited 2/9/2024 05:42:11

I think it’s a W if it can be implemented in a way that doesn’t affect performance noticeably.

Given that a normal internet speed is now 100+ MB/sec for most people, and that devices come with a minimum of 8 GB memory, I'm sure that 1 MB extra will be bearably noticeable.

Increasing map limits is a TON of work to do, since I need to make sure that the biggest maps load quickly on all devices. Some people use low-powered mobile devices, and it's my job to ensure that Warzone provides a working experience for everyone. This means I have to do a lot of work in optimization. I've literally spent at least 8+ months of my life on optimizing the map rendering code to be as fast as possible to support big maps. For that reason, there always has to be a strict limit on map sizes.

Thank you very very much for your reply!

That's what I was afraid of and against which I won't ever complain: the performance of the game, for all players, is paramount and I cannot deny that it would always take precedence (I hope my message didn't sound unsensitive about the issue).
My only question is if a selected few cases, properly vetted before any presentation, could be provided with a workaround (vehiculated through official channels) or the automation of the editor prevents any of it: I want to underline that I am not talking about maps of mine, at least for the moment. What I'm thinking about - and it's something the mapmaking community has yet to organize around - it's a sort of pre-screening for maps which are above the limit (minimally), with artistic or gameplay value, that cannot find a way to fit: this has not been uncommon in my experience.
[I'm not trying to insist and I understand the point is that some user would have problems loading the map, if it were over the limit: I only consider a waste when mappers drop from publishing a nice work because of the limit and I'm trying to find a way to avoid that without compromising the other basic and perhaps more important elements of the game itself].

Edited 2/12/2024 20:26:43

I've literally spent at least 8+ months of my life on optimizing the map rendering code to be as fast as possible to support big maps.

How far are you done with that? Can't wait for the next update to drop!

Also, a little sad the limits cant be increased, but I guess that will be for a later time when the definition of a low-end device meets today medium-end device.