Beginning Scenario-ing

[Cyclotron]

Greetings - I hardly feel worthy posting here, but I had a few questions on your noble trade:

As a long time player of Civ2 Scenarios, I've always been really impressed with how fun they can be, and I've been thinking about trying my hand. I had an idea for a new take on an old subject.

I know I've played several scenarios on the Punic Wars, especially the famous second one, but all the scenarios inevitably place you as either Carthage or Rome. My idea is to play as neither - a scenario taking place in the First Punic War, the dispute over Sicily, with the player taking the role of Hieron II (or Hiero, to the Romans), ruler of Syracuse, who might be considered to have started the first Punic War. The player would start with only a corner of Sicily, and have limited military power: A combat hero unit, Hieron himself, and a supply of cheap but mediocre settler-warriors (to simulate urban levies, and the limited manpower of the city). Syracuse would have to contend with their nearby mercenary-raider opponents, the Mamertines, and the conflict would likely expand quickly, with the Syracusians forced to take sides between the two great powers and fight it out on the island against superior forces. Historically, Hieron chose the Carthaginians but then switched sides - the scenario would aim at having the player confront that same choice, and maybe come to a different conclusion (or the same one).

The new idea (which might have been done before, I'm not sure) would be to have "science" replaced by "bribes." Basically, a fraction of your trade would be used to bribe, give royal gifts, provide lavish entertainment, and otherwise grease the wheels of diplomacy. The "advances" would become diplomatic breakthroughs - through events connected to discovering the advances, you would gain mercenaries, access to wonders, or even start a war. For example, early in the game you could pursue a politically strong marriage with your "diplomacy money," and be rewarded by Shakespeare's Theatre (renamed, of course) to symbolize how the marriage has secured your political position at home against unrest, yada yada.

I have a few other ideas for it, though unfortunately I'm out of the country, so I'll have to sit on the idea for a few months. In the meantime:

- What map should be used? The action will mostly take place in and around Sicily, but I want to make Rome and Carthage strong, which seems to require that I include more of their lands in the map... but I don't want to take the emphasis off Sicily.

- How should the "tech diplomacy" mesh with the real diplomacy? It wouldn't make sense to have a "Roman alliance" tech, since in actuality the Romans might declare war on you, and there aren't any script commands to force an alliance. Which brings us to the final question...

- Such a script-heavy scenario seems nearly beyond the capabilities of Civ2-FW, which is what I use. I've heard a lot on here about TOT and MGE and their benefits and drawbacks, but I'm afraid to say it's all left me a bit confused. I'm willing to fork over some dough for an upgraded Civ2 that can make a scenario like this more feasible, but which should I get, and how do I get my hands on it?

- Okay, one other final question: If I wait around until I finally get home and can do this thing, will Civ4 have converted you all and made this forum empty?

[duke o' york]

To the last question, no.

Civ 3 didn't manage it, and we'll just have to see how Civ IV handles the fancy graphics, etc against quality gameplay hurdle.

I suggest that you have as large a map as possible, (giga, obviously), with Sicily bang in the centre. You can stretch Italy as far north as Rome, which will make it harder for the Carths to take, and include the north African coast as a thin strip along the bottom as a base for the Carths. Give all players the entire world view at the beginning, and set Rome at war with Carthage. The player knows that the two massive powers will be coming straight to Sicily as it is the bridge between the two nations, and must prepare accordingly. Hell, you still have five civs left, so establish some smaller states on Sicily itself for the player to conquer/trade with while waiting for the mighty legions to arrive and all the time having to decide who to side with.
Sounds great fun already, and there are tonnes of suitable unit graphics I'm sure that other designers will let you use.

[Mercator]

Originally posted by duke o' york
I suggest that you have as large a map as possible, (giga, obviously), with Sicily bang in the centre.

I think that's generally a bad idea. Only make the map as large as it needs to be. To keep the focus on Sicily you can probably keep the parts of Italy and North Africa to the minimum needed for enough action. You could perhaps give Carthage and Rome one or a few super cities (think Barad-dur in Harlan's LOTR) to give them plenty of production power without the need for them to have their entire empire on the map.

But what exactly will be the goal for the player? The diplomacy idea is nice (though it might be hard to implement, as you said) and the idea of making the player take a side is a nice twist, something different. But that doesn't make a scenario yet. Should the Sicilians simply try to survive? I guess the scenario would end if either the Romans or the Carthaginians are destroyed, but what then will indicate how well the Sicilians did?

As far as Civ2 versions is concerned. The only thing MGE has over FW is a bit more memory space for events (and multiplayer, of course). So if you want a more powerful Civ2, go for ToT (have a look here for a comparison). I'm not sure if you should expect too much from that improvement though. The biggest obstruction is still the AI and that hasn't changed (much). With ToT, if you know a bit of C++, you also have the option of CSPL though.

[Cyclotron]

On map size, I've been leaning towards Mercator's view. I don't want the war to shift to a big war in Africa or Italy; I want the action to stay where the protagonist is. I think I may leave out Rome itself, and instead have one of the colonies of Rome in the "boot" of italy be the Roman capital and super-city. No fighting actually occured on the Italian peninsula, and Rome was not even the least bit threatened in a real way. As much as I would like to have Rome itself in, I'm just not seeing it right now.

By the way, what is a gigamap?

Originally posted by Mercator
But what exactly will be the goal for the player? The diplomacy idea is nice (though it might be hard to implement, as you said) and the idea of making the player take a side is a nice twist, something different. But that doesn't make a scenario yet. Should the Sicilians simply try to survive? I guess the scenario would end if either the Romans or the Carthaginians are destroyed, but what then will indicate how well the Sicilians did?

Well, I was considering several possible wins, which would have to be realized by the player:

- Syracusians (protagonist) hold every city in Sicily. Syracuse has become a major power and can now afford to act independently of either power. This will be very difficult, as the only "good" units that Syracuse will get will be through events, i.e. mercenaries and reinforcements.
- All Sicilian cities are held by either Syracuse or Rome, and Syracuse and Rome are allied. This represents an allied victory over the Carthaginians.
- The reverse; all cities on the island are held by either Syracuse or Carthage, and those two are allied.
- (this one is a maybe) Greek Triumph: All cities on the islands are possessed by either Syracuse or the Greeks (another faction, see below), and these two are allied, representing Syracuse's new position as protector of the Greek colonies of Sicily. Both Rome and Carthage will have to be driven out for this to happen.

The general idea would be that both Carthage and the principal Roman city would be guarded by a super-unit and totally untakable; the destruction of one side would be impossible to achieve.

Incidentally, the civs at present:

- Syracusians, the protagonist
- Senate and People of Rome
- Carthaginians
- Greeks (representing the Greek colonists of Sicily, who made up nearly all the "native" population)
- Mamertines (Campanian mercenaries turned to banditry in northeastern Sicily and the toe of Italy)

...which leaves me with two slots. I think they will go to these two:

- Epirotes. King Pyrrus was just being expelled from Italy when events on Sicily between the Mamertines and Hieron II were developing; having a short-lived Epirote civ on Italy for the Romans to clean up would delay the big fight on the island for some time, letting the protagonist develop a little and take on the Mamertines before SPQR gets seriously involved in Sicily.
- Storms, whose only purpose would be to make storm "cruise missle" air units (using the sub flag to only attack ships); the fortunes of the First Punic War (which was actually decided by sea power) turned on the weather, and this would be a "wild card" thrown into the mix.

...that seems like all I would need.

So if you want a more powerful Civ2, go for ToT (have a look here for a comparison). I'm not sure if you should expect too much from that improvement though. The biggest obstruction is still the AI and that hasn't changed (much). With ToT, if you know a bit of C++, you also have the option of CSPL though.

I unfortunatly don't know C++. Would you still recommend it?

[Mercator]

Originally posted by cyclotron7
By the way, what is a gigamap?

It has been found out that maps can be larger than the 10,000 maximum Microprose set. In FW and earlier the max is 10,922 ("oversized" maps), in MGE and ToT it's 32,767 ("gigamaps"). You'll need a utility like MapEdit to create those bigger maps.

Well, I was considering several possible wins, which would have to be realized by the player:

Ah, I see. That's even more focus on Sicily than I thought. The allied victories might be hard to realise except with house rules or hand-calculated scoring.

I unfortunatly don't know C++. Would you still recommend it?

Yes. In scenario creation possibilities it is superior to any other version. I don't think anyone has actually ever used CSPL either.

Now you only have to find ToT some place. That will probably be hard. Rummaging through bargain bins and looking on eBay is the best advice I can offer. Oh, wait a minute, there are actually sites where you can download and buy ToT.

[Cyclotron]

Originally posted by Mercator
It has been found out that maps can be larger than the 10,000 maximum Microprose set. In FW and earlier the max is 10,922 ("oversized" maps), in MGE and ToT it's 32,767 ("gigamaps"). You'll need a utility like MapEdit to create those bigger maps.

Wow, that's quite big. I hope I'll have detailed enough paper maps to actually make so many tiles interesting...

Ah, I see. That's even more focus on Sicily than I thought. The allied victories might be hard to realise except with house rules or hand-calculated scoring.

With the exception of an almost successful but ultimately abortive attempt by the Romans to strike at Carthaginian Africa, all land warfare occured on Sicily. The scale was quite simply much smaller than in the second Punic War, which would have to involve Iberia, Gaul, Italy, Africa, etcetera.

I don't think the victories will be too hard to determine, but they are of course house rules (except the first, all-Syracuse win, which would be easy to replicate with objective scoring). That doesn't seem without precendent here, however. There would be no objective points to count; you would just have to be sure that no more non-allied cities existed on the island. This would be a lot easier if it were possible to disable the build city command, but I don't know if that can be done.

Yes. In scenario creation possibilities it is superior to any other version. I don't think anyone has actually ever used CSPL either.

Now you only have to find ToT some place. That will probably be hard. Rummaging through bargain bins and looking on eBay is the best advice I can offer. Oh, wait a minute, there are actually sites where you can download and buy ToT.

Well, I'm sold. Maybe this means I'll even be able to start work before the next calendar year.

[Stefan Härtel]

Wow, that's quite big. I hope I'll have detailed enough paper maps to actually make so many tiles interesting...

You don't have to put it in that size. If you use the standart "large" map size for a map of Sicily that is already very big. Bigger is not always better. As you said, the bigger the map, the more detail is necessary, which is not always possible to do. Not only is it often hard to find this much detail (I would be able to help you there, I have lots of cartographic material on ancient Sicily), but it sometimes just isn't there. You don't have to put every single village on the map. That would become tedious to the player.
Giga Maps are only interesting if the scale your scenario is very large, global for example. Some people think differently, I know, and that's fine with me. I personally think that you should be very careful when lowering the scale of the scenario. Is it really worth blowing up the size of the map to have 15 tiles between Rome and Ostia only to find out that you have to increase a units movement rate to 10 so the whole thing gets playable? Just a thought.

Apart from that, I highly support this scenario idea. Years ago, I made a little scenario based on the First Punic War that was purely Roman/Carthaginian (I think it had a Greek civilization in it to represent Syracuse), but I never released it because it was just too simplistic (i.e. nothing spectacularly new, it was basically just two major civilizations at war with each other, which was starting to get boring in those days).

[Cyclotron]

Thanks for the explanation, I'll have to think about what I want the scale to be.

Originally posted by Stefan Härtel
(I would be able to help you there, I have lots of cartographic material on ancient Sicily)

That would be most excellent.

I have good info on cities and political divisions already, but comprehensive geography has eluded me so far.

About your earlier scenario - Do you have any graphics from that which you would be willing to share? I'm decent at altering Civ2 units to look like new ones, but as for original content I simply have to admit that I'm not a graphic artist.

[Broken_Erika]

Originally posted by duke o' york
To the last question, no.

Civ 3 didn't manage it, and we'll just have to see how Civ IV handles the fancy graphics, etc against quality gameplay hurdle.

that and the fact that civ2 is so open with the units stored in gifs and the rules easy to edit

[Mercator]

Originally posted by Cyclotron
This would be a lot easier if it were possible to disable the build city command, but I don't know if that can be done.

It is possible to prevent the AI from building cities. The only way to prevent the player from building cities is either by not letting them build settlers, or by instituting a house rule.

[Cyclotron]

Well, since the basic player miltiary unit is going to be a settler, I guess it's house rule time. I hope I don't have to make too many of those!

Thanks for all of your input. I'll see about getting ToT and getting this piece of work started.

[duke o' york]

Just ensure that the AI can never get either the settler or engineer units, and make a clear list of house rules on the intro screen.
Loads of scenarios have house rules and recommended civs to play so it's hardly a major problem for players.

[fairline]

Always a joy to see a prospective new ancient scenario

Good luck with this one - nice to see you're taking a different slant from the traditional Rome or Carthage as the protagonist.

Originally posted by Cyclotron
Thanks for the explanation, I'll have to think about what I want the scale to be.
...About your earlier scenario - Do you have any graphics from that which you would be willing to share? I'm decent at altering Civ2 units to look like new ones, but as for original content I simply have to admit that I'm not a graphic artist.

I have a few unit and people graphics for this period if you want 'em, and I'd be glad to make up some new ToT versions if that's the platform you decide to use.

[Cyclotron]

I'm 99% sure I'll use ToT, especially because my copy of Civ2-FW is a few thousand miles away. I would love any unit and other graphics assistance, though I would likely want to modify a lot of them somewhat, if that's acceptible. I'm still working on a unit list, but it's going to feature primarily a lot of hoplites and similar spearmen. The Greeks are going to have them as their bread and butter, and the Syracusian Heavy Infantry will be the same, as well as the Campanian Foot (Mamertines). The Carthaginians will have Libyan phalangites, and the Epirotes phalangites of their own - only the Romans won't have units based on greek hoplites (though you might consider Triarii to be Greek heirs).

Speaking of which, it seems odd to have different troop types in the Roman Consular armies be different units - the Romans would never attack with, say, Principes only. Perhaps they should just have one "Maniple" unit or the equivalent, with Funtidores and Auxiliary Cavalry for backup?

[fairline]

Sounds good - I'd add Numidian cavalry to the Liby-Phoenician phalanx and also Carthaginian light troops and Sacred Band. Not sure to what extent Iberian troops were used in the First Punic War but they were the backbone of later Carthaginian armies of course.

Personally I'd stick to having velites, hastati, principes and triarii for the Romans as it adds a little variety and authenticity. BTW, there were no auxiliary cavalry in the sense of the later Rebublican and Imperial armies; the Roman legions had patrician equites at this time (300 per legion IIRC) while the allied Italian legions provided a substantial number of cavalry of their own (600? per legion).

Take what you need from this lot. Most are earlier Greek with Corinthain helmets which are no use to you, but there are a few Successor, Roman and Etruscan units that might fit the bill.