{The List-} Scenario/Map Editor *-DARKCLOUD-*

[DarkCloud]

List Updated.

[Brent]

4.0.1 Maps

Add New World Overall, Old World Overall. Large Map of the Pacific: possibly make Hawaii significantly larger than in the real world.

[DarkCloud]

List Updated.

[Jarred]

More miscillainious than anything else and more a Civ III ex. pack desire than Civ IV since I can see all of these being implemented...

Concept for consideration-"Coalitions"-when objectives are met by a civilization, such as the defeat of Nazi Germany in 1945, the nations are allowed to squabble again, affectively ending the alliance.

How to reach an alliance objective:

Utter destruction of an atagonistic party OR
the dropping out of a specific party

For instance, if civ a loses x% of its starting territory, it should be allowed to sue for peace; however, peace can only be agreed upon by a resolution by the allied nations; for instance, a popup would come up "Russia Desires to sue for peace"-then the human player can meet with the members of the locked alliance and make deals with them in order to get them out of the war; this of course would be a calculation to sign of the other allied power's desire to sign a peace treaty against you as if you were the one suing for peace against it and it alone. If every member of your coalition agrees to allow the enemy out of your coalition's targets, then you can make peace with the former enemy and speak on behalf of your coalition. Of course, x% doesn't mean that your opponent drops out of its coalition, but it simply gives the ability to drop out of its coalition...furthermore though, this peace deal should include the ability to have a power join their own coalition-we will not make peace unless you join our locked alliance against this power (s)...similar to the way France acted in World War II-it only rejoined the allies after it was liberated, yet rather than face complete destruction, it did negotiate with Hitler...

Adding another nation to a coalition-if it makes MPP with every member of the coalition as well as a neutrality pact, it is effectively part of the coalition-it could solidify the position through a "Diplomatic Victory" style vote among the members of the coalition on whether to be admitted or not. The trigger would be to a nation in the coalition "Allow Entry to coalition"-if the nation agrees, a vote follows...this could be also the way to end the wars, if nations of the coalition agree; if there is dissent, the nation makes its demand and that must be part of the peace deal and the country can take it or leave it. For instance:

Human---America AI 1---Germany AI 2---England AI 3---USSR

Germany offers: 800 gold TO USSR, 100 TO AMERICA, 300 TO BRITAIN in exchange for peace. The computation for the AI is WITHOUT FIGURING IN THE COALITION IS AT WAR AND ALLIED if it would sign a one on one peace treaty; if one nation disagrees but peace is signed because a certain amount agree, then it could turn relations hostile;

How to remove a country from a coalition:

Destroy trade relations, no common embargoes...the human could on its own force the coalition's hand in letting it out without a loss of territory, true, so this option should not be availible to the human in a time of war. But let's say a power in the coalition bullies other coalition members-the members of the coalition should be able to get angry where it starts to undo ties; the idea is that the AI on its own can't get mad at the human, only through the changing of deals to unfavorible (Renegotiating peace for an amount of gold, Rights of Passage for a price, and tribute demands), and if it drops from a coalition, it could seek peace with the opposing coalition.

Neutrality Pacts-Civilization (including your own) is bound by rules that it has agreed it will not and can not attack you or your coalition...this can expire...these can be in addition to MPP, for instance, Country A has pact with B, B has pact with C, A at war with C, B, having a neutrality pact with both can not enter but not violate any pacts; whenever the AI signs therefore a MPP, it signs a neutrality pact, which means it can not activate this alliance and take sides because one enemy kills another unit, or an ally invades an ally's territory...why? Because the AI too stupidly does not respect its MPP to aid another country...

Embargo Pacts-Embargo ALL resources, Embargo Luxury resources, Embargo Strategic Resources; this the AI would not know how to use, but if you could lock it into a civilization from the editor...furthermore, this might be useful in multiplayer games-I don't want this nation to get oil, but I want access to its silks...I don't want this civilization to get any more luxuries, but I want access to its oil...

Exporting technology-if you're a nation getting battered by certain weapon aircraft and you shoot one down, you should be allowed to study the weapon and then the advance should be cheaper for as long as you posess the wreckage of the plane, BUT the wreckage costs maintanence...

An option for Civ 2 style unit hurting ratio to movement-weaker units should not be able to move as fast.

Logistics-the only way units requiring resources to build to regenerate energy would be to be connected by road to its point; roads running through enemy territory could still be connected IF the road is free of opposing units at the end of its turn AND if the road is intact at the beginning of the turn. This would make a partisan war so much more deadly, because units would need reinforcements by air or rebuilding-a unit can be regenerated a point, perhaps more depending on how strong the bomber is, so the person has a choice-reenforce units or bomb the enemy...furthermore, ammunition must be a resource-there must be a SPECIAL MINE to supply the city with ammunition; units with no ammunition LOSE strength at a rate of X points per X turns to reflect the fact they aren't at full strength. Mined squares should be of a certain type as well and can be any where in the territory, not in city radius, but requires a colony inside the territory of mining because the square must be worked in order to supply ammunition; it provides no bonus, but it can be traded. This is important, because it makes strategic bombing very important because not only can you now cut off production of a country AND starve a country, but you can outright strangle the units. Also, food production should go to units as well when units are active (units can be put into reserve, in which minimal support is needed), something like one food or a colony outside of territory specifically for the army; failure to give the army food will cause weakening or desertion. Furthermore, grain would limit the size of an army, and Grain and Ammunition embargoes can destroy a country's economy if allowed, but it also would make war for a breadbasket valuable, and furthermore, if you were in an agricultural region, lack of production wouldn't be as unbalanced, and you'd eventually obtain a urban/agricultural combination. Furthermore, unhappiness should come after long term starvation-therefore if the army needed food and material causing starvation and 'inflation', it would cause riots at home if the war lasted too long, regardless of the government in any government. Therefore, war can not be entered without consideration.

Unit and Improvement builders, similar to SimCity SCURK and BAT...

Different strengths in different weeks/months...for instance, the reimposition of Alpine Troops as a winter unit.

Spy Planes and Spy Units to get information about troops located in a specific area within enemy territory not in cities...spy sattilites should also be able to get information and be very costly, but there should be no chance of an international incident and they are very limited in their scope...

[Jawn Henry]

Muli-tiered maps

I'd really like if they put back the ability to play on multi-tiered maps, like in Civ2ToT. It might not be realistic to have them permanently fixed together (teleporting from one hex brings you automatically to the same numbered hex on any map you can go to), but it's an acceptable fudge to realism, so we expand the game.

JH

[Brent]

Have sets of related scenarios, like where the main difference is map size.

Release the game with two disks, to have more room for scenarios.

Have some information about some specific scenarios in the manual.

When making a map, be able to set coastlines and then use the setup options to determine terrain.

Have more information about the editor in the manual.

Release a book with suggestions of things to do with the editor, such as civs with traits, cities, and leaders.

With each new expansion, include updated versions of previous scenarios.

Include a map with Earth's coastlines, but all of the land is grassland.

Let scenarios have simpler graphics than the main game to allow space for more on the disk.

Civs in most scenarios would have no individuality so you can have many civs that aren't in the main game. Be able to mix civs from different scenarios with traitless versions of civs from the main game.

Be able to alter city lists but still be in the hall of fame.

[Brent]

A map to include:

The arctic ocean, with significant parts of North America, Europe, and Asia, with the Inuit, Scandinavians, and Russians.

Another map to iclude, or more than one:

The world as seen on old, inaccurate maps.

[DarkCloud]

The world as seen on old, inaccurate maps.

That's actually quite an interesting map idea!

[Brent]

Be able to type dialogue and civilopedia text directly into the editor.

Maybe the main game would be simple for newbies, but have more complicated scenarios and be sure these scenarios are eligible for the hall of fame and such.

Make sure there are well- made scenarios for the real world and parts of it, with starting locations assigned.

Include official scenarios with major rules variations.

Have an editor wizard. Have it tell you how balanced civs you create are. Let it tell you how well your tech tree flows, and point out loose ends. Have it decide which scenarios are hall- of- fame- worthy.

[DarkCloud]

Include official scenarios with major rules variations.

Do you have any specific ideas for these rules variations?

Have an editor wizard. Have it tell you how balanced civs you create are.

ah, so fact checking/map verification- good idea!
any idea on how to mathematically figure this out? Would the computer weight the powers for each civ with certain points for Offensive/Militaristic vs. Merchant/Expansive?

Let it tell you how well your tech tree flows, and point out loose ends.

I personally would like the game to generate a flow chart that could be printed out or displayed on a website- sort of like "THE SIMS" viewer for families. Where the tech tree would be fleshed out and diagramed.

That would be amazing and would save hours for scenario-designers.

Have it decide which scenarios are hall- of- fame- worthy.

What exactly do you mean by this?

[Brent]

Rules Variations

The kinds of things you can do in the editor, but pre- tested and hall- of- fame- worthy.

How the Editor Wizard would Determine Things

I guess I made the suggestion because I don't know how I would figure it and hoped others would.

Hall- Of- Fame- Worthy

For instance, altered city lists would not disqualify a game for the hall of fame. Hopefully the Wizard could determine sorts of cases that are less clear.

[Brent]

Scenario idea: the Evolution of Mankind

Possible tribes: Neanderthals, Cro Magnons, Peking, Austrolopithicus (maybe), can port these tribes to main game, these tribes can split into standard civs

thousand year turns

Can briefly go through to modern times at end of scenario

Possible technologies: spoken language, cave painting, fire, animal husbandry, toolmaking, hunting, gathering, agriculture

I guess this scenario would utilize a nomad model with no cities.

[Brent]

A category of scenarios

a separate scenario for each of several regions of the world, but on a random map each time, or have an optional set real world map, preferably huge, maybe more than one size. Each can have up to 30 civs, more per region than in the main game, and uniqueness optional. Maybe even disable subordinate character features like scientific leader, especially if real world information is sketchy. Possible scenarios in this category: Americas, North America, Mesoamerica, South America, Europe, Africa, Middle East, Asia.
Another possibility, make them like conquests with technologies specific to the region. Basically the rules could be much simpler than the main game or just modified greatly or basically the same as the main game.


Europe scenario

Crimea, Etruscans, Italy, England, Thrace, Spain, Macedonians, Gaul, Franks, Goths, Romans, Picts, Burgundy, Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Russia, Byzantines, France, Castile, Aragon, Celts, Iberians, Slavs, Basques, Germany, Lithuania, Normans, Portugal, Netherlands, Ottomans, Switzerland, Austria, Prussia, Finland

Middle East scenario

Egypt, Persia, Arabia, Hittites, Mittani, Babylon, Elam, Media, Phonecia, Israel, Judah, Philistia, Edom, Moab, Ammon, Armenia, Samaria, Axum, Ethiopia, Yemen, Oman, Byzantines

[Mercator]

Um, I have to strongly disagree with pretty much everything Brent has said here.

What you seem to be suggesting is that they include dozens of scenarios and maps from the get go. And if that's not what you're suggesting, what exactly do you mean?

Do you know how much time and effort making all of that would take? This thread is about the scenario/map editor, isn't it? Not about listing all possible maps and scenarios you can think of.

I think they should include only a handful of maps and just one or two scenarios.

The whole point of editors is that we ourselves can create all those things you mentioned. So the only things in your posts that should interest the designers is that those things are possible. I.e. we should be able to create our own graphics, our own rules, our own civilizations, make civ-specific features or disable them, use an events scripting language etc.

All of the things you mention can already be done in Civ2. The important thing to know for the CivIV designers is not so much what scenarios or maps you want to see, but rather what options we think we'll need to be able to create those to our satisfaction.

I think Civ4 should be as "free-form" as possible, with as few hard-coded limits as possible. In technical terms, think Civ2: Test of Time and then add the best of Civ3 and CtP2 (and a whole bunch of other great games I missed) in terms of customisability. Have intuitive editors that are able to edit all those things. And as I said before, have "simple" and "advanced" modes:

Simple mode only works with tested values and should be enough for the rookie scenario designers. In case of a complex scripting language, the simple mode could be an easy-to-use drag-and-drop editor working only with several fixed scripting functions.

Advanced mode has no such restrictions and is to be used at your own risk. In case of a complex scripting language, all the editor needs to do is validate the syntax.

I don't think Civ4 would necessarily have a cheat mode to edit everything in-game either. I was quite pleased with the Age of Empires editor, for instance. Simply draw the terrains, draw roads and irrigation and drag-and-drop cities and units in place. That sort of thing. Then use a Civ3Edit/Civ2 cheat menu-like editor to edit rules, graphics and what not.

In case of custom file formats, it would be very handy if Civ4 also included converters that could convert them back and forth to more common file types like text files, bitmaps or AVIs.

[PresidentMarcos]

Bring back scripting! I miss the Events file.