Interesting idea.

I believe storage would hardly be an issue. Here's why.

1. The 3 MB per map Richard suggested earlier, where does that number come from? Maybe nicely designed maps with fancy background images? A computer generated map would be much smaller in my opinion, the SVG file maybe around 100 KB for a 100 or so territories is probably a very reasonable estimate. In a test map I just created I got as low as 59kb. Territories like in the sample map above are extremely simple in comparison to free hand drawn shapes which can have more than a 100 coordinates per path (territory) as opposed to a maximum of 20 in a simple shape.

2.Calculating the storage at a 1 to 1 basis like Richard did taking the number of games someone played and multiplying by the map size doesn't make sense. In the worst case scenario you'd have to divide the storage between at the very least 2 players, because it's only one map per game and there are at least two players in every game. In 3v3 only one map needs to be saved for a game that 6 players are playing. Say for example Taxi's games: The vast majority of his games are either 2 player games (907) or 6 player games (717 3v3 + 137 ffa). So that makes 595 maps saved for those 1761 games, or less than a third than the figure you used for calculations.

3. Considering both previous points, instead of 2 MB per map data + 500 per game data, assuming a high estimate 100 KB per map and only adding half of that (as if every game was 2 players, which it isn't) to the same 500kb game data, I reach an maximum increase of only 10% in storage as opposed to 500% like Richard did, assuming every game was on random maps.

But in fact, not every game would be on random maps. I actually doubt that random maps would be used by anyone but the most hardcore WL fans. There is some irreplaceable attractiveness to conquering real world maps that I don't really see getting replaced by random shapes.

Last but not least: Making random maps a member-only feature (not just creating games, but playing on them altogether) would greatly reduce the storage requirements again while at the same time maybe enticing some new memberships...

But I agree with you one thing Richard: It's easy to throw around numbers and suggestions when it's someone else's money :)

So, if storage was a non issue as I think it is (and could be easily offset by a few more people getting a membership), what's left is:
- Creating the program that spits out random maps (if it doesn't exist already)
- Integrating it into Warlight

The latter is entirely up to Fizzer. It should be a lot of work, but if he thinks there is public demand and/or some more money could be made he might be up for it, who knows? I'll send him a mail with a link to this thread.

Creating the random map generator? I'll put my money where my mouth is, and if everything else was sorted I'd do it myself. Provided the thing doesn't actually exist already as Nightshade said it might.

Edited 8/21/2014 14:25:34

The storage requirements could be reduced to almost zero with a good design. Say for example that the random map generator takes an initial random seed (maybe in the form of a 5 digit number). As long as the generator isn't changed the map could be generated dynamically by the players computers or sent from the warlight servers but not saved. Then the all that would need to be stored in the game data would be that initial seed.

a random map generator would make the game endlessly playable.

a big improvement for sure.