Conquest of a New World - Creation Thread

[civ2units]

@MacGalleo:
Unfortunately the map only shows North and Latin America. There is no South America on this map. I also thought about to use only the american continent like I did in AWI. Maybe I should begin the scenario in 1600, but then without the Aztecs. I think I should think about that...

@GhostOfDisco:
Yes, I agree with you, the Polish should be into this scenario. My second idea was to include the Prussians instead of the Dutch. The Holy Roman Empire represent all German duchies and kingdoms during this time period. When I give the Spanish all Habsburgian cities (which would be historical correct at the beginning of the scenario) they would be too strong. Also they lost the Habsburgian Empire during the years.
My idea was, that you build up an empire with one of the main European Nations.

[fairline]

Originally posted by civ2units
I´ve decided to change my scenario idea. I will make a European scenario during 1500 - 1800 without America. In my own playtests I noticed that the Europeans didn´t start any journeys to America, with the Aztecs I didn´t have any contact to the Europeans. So it will be one big European scenario, where you can build up your Empire.

Which civs will be included?
I will use the following nations:

Holy Roman Empire, later Prussia
English
French
Spanish
Ottoman Empire
Russian Empire
and the Dutch

...and Portugal?

I wouldn't switch from the HRE/Austrians to Prussia BTW. The Prussians had no overseas empire until Bismarck's time and had not displaced Austria in importance until then either.

[civ2units]

Originally posted by fairline


...and Portugal?

I wouldn't switch from the HRE/Austrians to Prussia BTW. The Prussians had no overseas empire until Bismarck's time and had not displaced Austria in importance until then either.

I thought about using Prussia together with the HRE/Austria in the European scenario. In my conquest scenario the Portuguese will be a playable civ.
My first idea was to make three scenarios, so that you could play three centuries of conquering the New World. Each century has it´s own scenario.

What do you all think?
Should I continue my conquest scenario and use for every century one scenario or putting all three centuries together in one big? Should I use one with a part of Europe or like MacGalleo said only the American continent?
Questions over questions...

My ideas for using one big scenario:
playable civs:

Spanish
Portuguese
French
English
Aztec
Dutch (later in game, like Techumseh did with the Polish in his Red October scenario. Only when I use a part of Europe)
Ottoman Empire or a North American tribe (I would prefer the Ottomans)

Time from 1490 until 1770. I would like to use more unit and rules files like in Curt´s Dictator scenario to fit the units during this time period.
To ensure that the European Nations settle in the New World, I would give them some units and peasants via event in America.

My playtest scenario isn´t really ready, the event file is missing some important battles, also the unit attacks and defenses are not balanced. So if you say yes to my conquest scenario please make a playtest and let my know about the settings, if they are ok or should be corrected.

[AGRICOLA]

Testing Germany / Deity

I'm afraid that there may be a fundamental flaw in the scen that may prevent it from playing the way it is likely intended to play. I'm guessing at this, but I expect that players are intended to carry on low level warfare in Europe while sending expeditions to America to conquer the natives and gain great riches for their treasury. That is what happened historically. What is likely to happen in a game is quite different.

When I opened the scen, I was puzzled as to what I was expected to do. I was not interested in dividing my limited forces between keeping at bay aggressive European neighbours and building an overseas empire unless there was a promise of great rewards from the overseas venture. The lack of wonders in America suggested that the pickings would be slim unless there were huge rewards for capturing native cities, say something of the order of 30,000 gold per city. Without that kind of reward, the prudent strategy was to build up one's economy, push science to the max, wipe out everybody else in Europe and Africa and then head overseas.

So, for 30 turns, I have built just about nothing other than caravans, completed 11 wonders, fixed the economy by establishing in each German city 3 trade routes with London and researched the science needed to build most of the best units available to the Germans in the scen. I figure that Germany will go on the warpath around turn 40 by booting the Spanish out of Italy and the Low Countries.

Obviously, I'm planning a European war, followed by overseas conquest. It is definitely the best and most logical strategy but I rather doubt that it is what was intended.


OTHER PROBLEMS

Naming units as French Crossbowmen, English Crossbowmen and so on, leads to unit names showing up as "Spanish Veteran Spanish Pikemen" or "Spanish Spanish Pikemen" in the city window and elsewhere. Techumseh got around this problem in FREDERICK THE GREAT by using Crossbowmen (Fr), Crossbowmen (En) and so on.

There is a problem in the new naming convention for Library, School and University. In the description of the SETI wonder, ”Research Center" should be University.

There are additional minor problems but, IMHO, there is no point in going into them until the fundamental logic of the scen is sorted out.

[civ2units]

Thanks for the playtest Agricola.

My intend was to give the European Conquistadors many gold (I thought about 10.000 to 15.000 gold) by conquering Aztec cities. On this part I´m currently working on the events. Also the ressource gold is only available in the New World, which gives you also many money.
But I think the main problem is the european country in the scenario. Like you confirm in your playtest, the player only concentrated on Europe. When I finish this project, then definitly without Europe. It will be only an American map.

That´s a good point with the unit names, I will change them into the much shorter form you recommended.

[civ2units]

I will continue my conquest scenario. But now without Europe to concentrate all activities on the New World. I will make three own scenarios, three full centuries of conquering and exploring of the American continent.

[MacGalleo]

It's a great news.
Here 's a map of north America which could be usefull.

[Boco]

Originally posted by AGRICOLA
So, for 30 turns, I have built just about nothing other than caravans, completed 11 wonders, fixed the economy by establishing in each German city 3 trade routes with London and researched the science needed to build most of the best units available to the Germans in the scen. I figure that Germany will go on the warpath around turn 40 by booting the Spanish out of Italy and the Low Countries.

Obviously, I'm planning a European war, followed by overseas conquest. It is definitely the best and most logical strategy but I rather doubt that it is what was intended.

Can you tweak the techs and improvements to reduce the caravan pay-offs substantially?

[EZRhino]

I agree with Agricola. When I played the scenario I found it too easy and expeditions to the Americas seemed disappointingly pointless. I do think one could easily contain 1490 to 1770 in one scenario. Many excellent scenarios have already done just that

My suggestion would be pretty radical. Start over on a new map. The map focuses way too much on Europe and Africa for a scenario obstensibly about the conquest of the Americas IMO. Lots of space is given to the effectively huge deserts of the Atlantic and the Sahara, but the Americas proper goes only to Panama in the South and the Mississippi in the West....

If you want to stay with the map you already have try to make the European aspect more interesting. The reformation and Spain's struggle for a continental empire (inc. the 30yrs war) were the defining aspects of Europe's political history in this time period IMO. The best thing to do would be to start the scenario a few years later in 1517 and add another German civ representing the Protestants i.e. Schmalkaldic League or the Protestant League plus Sweden, Denmark, Brandenburg and Saxony maybe. The Spanish would be allied to the Empire and the French, British, and Dutch would be allied to the Protestant League. Since the League and the Empire would start out at war it would be inevitable that their allies would be dragged into the conflict with a historical continental war This dynamic seems (to me at least) to be the major political axiom of the age. To do this it would make sense to sacrifice the Portuguese and maybe the Aztecs in exchange for Dutch and Protestant Germans civilizations.

Or alternately if you want to keep this map but preserve the focus on the Americas. I would drop the Portuguese and the Ottomans who were alternately either not active within the bounds of this map (i.e. the Portugese whose colonies were in Brazil, Africa and India) or not active in the Americas at all. Though I like the alt.history idea of the Ottomans setting up colonies in the Americas, more native American tribes would be essential to a realistic scenario about the colonization of the Americas. I would humbly suggest as civs (with the present map:

Iroquois (a powerful and sophisticated federation that was able to play european factions off one another on occasion. They would also include non-Iroquois, strictly speaking, Algonquian tribes like the Cree, Powhatan or Shawnee)
Sioux (or generic plains tribes including the Sioux, Crow, Santees, Cheyenne and Comanches. They were responsible for mostly containing Spanish for over two centuries before the U.S. gave them the coup de grace during the Indian campaigns in the 1850's through the 1890's)
Spanish
French
English
Aztec
Dutch (way more active in this region than the Portuguese

A few miscellaneous points. I would rename Dubrovnik to Ragusa (its old name) and it along with Belgrade should probably belong to either the Turks or the Barbarians. Vienna and Prague I think were Hapsburg back then and If you're bothering to include the low countries as part of Spain, the rest of the Austrian Hapsburgs probably should belong to them too...
I think rodeleros should be Spanish only. English and German rodeleros just seems a little to ahistorical to me. Incidentally pikemen during the renaissance tended to be used more offensively than defensively (at least until Gustav Adolphus's linear formation when Muskets usurped that role). Here are some old notes on units I made for an age of sail scenario I started making years ago, if you're interested

Infantry
;Grenadier-very expensive 1&1/3mv musketeer /w better attk but no pike flag
;Pike tercios-upgrades to->Musketeer-inexpensive heavy attack & decent defence all arounders w/ pike flag
;Fusilier-VERY expensive heavy defensive inf. HP3+
;Irregulars-1mv alpine fanatics, 1hp, good def. poor attk. (Riflemen by events only)
;Civil Guard-Cheap defence 0mvmt. riot police?

"Cavalry"
;Rodeleros-upgrades to->Dragoons -2mv 2hp lower attack but ignore pike role of line infantry
;Lancers-upgrades to->Curissiers 2mv 1hp high attack shock cavalry
;Hussars-4mv 1hp low attack scout role

Artillery
;Falconet-upgrades to->field gun(mobile art) 1mv 2hp good attack-upgrades to->2mv, 2hp LOW DEF! "mobile art."
;Culverin-defensive art.
;Mortar-missile flag, ign. walls high attack

Naval
;Sloop-fast, low def, sub attack (pirates)
;Latina(pinnacle? early transport/trade ship)carries 2, med, no attack obs. by Brig
;Galleon-upgrades to->Frigate-carries 3 heavy warship, very slow-upgrading to->med speed, grossly expensive
;Packetship-transport only carries1, but very very fast, expensive
;Brig-medium-heavy warship, med speed, carries 2
;Ship of the Line-very slow, high def& attack, carries 3,

[/endgeek]

[civ2units]

Thanks for the map MacGalleo, but I will go with my map I used for AWI. On this map I have Latin America (for the Aztecs) and a little part of South America.


Because I will make a conquest of America scenario, I don´t use a part of Europe. I will use the following civs in my first scenario (from 1500-1600):

Three Native tribes (Aztecs/Mayas/Iroquois) and four European Nations (English/French/Spanish/Portuguese)
All civs will be playable.

I like your suggestion with the Protestants in an own European campaign EZRhino.
Maybe I will make after conquest a own European scenario during this time period.
Also thanks for your units suggestions.

[civ2units]

I think I can realize more historical correctness, when I split the big scenario in three own scenarios. In each scenario you will get a chance to play a game with the Natives.
Because the Dutch began in the 17th century with colonialization of the New World, I will include them in my second scenario from 1600-1700. Also the Mayas will be replaced by the Sioux.

[AGRICOLA]

Originally posted by Boco
Can you tweak the techs and improvements to reduce the caravan pay-offs substantially?

There is not much room for reducing caravan payoffs and still keep trade worthwhile. The following are the relevant parameters for caravans carrying non-demand commodities ( I have yet to deliver a demanded commodity ):

Cost of techs - initially ~1500 flasks, increasing to ~1800
Caravan Vienna -> London - ~200 gold and flasks
Caravan Vienna -> Paris - ~100 gold and flasks
Caravan Vienna -> German city - <50 gold and flasks

Vienna is the German city with the most trade arrows, most other cities have about half the number.
For comparison purposes, London, Paris and the German city have been doctored to have the same number of trade arrows. Actual bonuses from Paris are about 50 gold and flasks.

Transports can move caravans from Hamburg to London in 1 turn.
There are no roads between Germany and France.

Domestic trade does not pay; Paris is a break even proposition; London is the only destination that offers a modest profit.

[MacGalleo]

Originally posted by civ2units
I think I can realize more historical correctness, when I split the big scenario in three own scenarios. In each scenario you will get a chance to play a game with the Natives.
Because the Dutch began in the 17th century with colonialization of the New World, I will include them in my second scenario from 1600-1700. Also the Mayas will be replaced by the Sioux.

I think you don't need to split your project in 3 scenario. There are probably some Veteran scenario designers who agree to help you to make a very good scn.
But 3 scn instead of 1 can be a good deal for players...

[EZRhino]

Originally posted by civ2units
I think I can realize more historical correctness, when I split the big scenario in three own scenarios. In each scenario you will get a chance to play a game with the Natives.
Because the Dutch began in the 17th century with colonialization of the New World, I will include them in my second scenario from 1600-1700. Also the Mayas will be replaced by the Sioux.

I don't think the French or English succeeded in establishing any colonies until the 17th century as well. Jamestown was the first successful English colony and in was founded around 1610 IRC. Quebec was one of the first successful French colonies and it was founded around the same time. You should also reconsider the Portuguese and the Maya IMO. The Portuguese had no colonies in the area of this map and the great Mayan city-states had collapsed and been reclaimed by the jungle hundreds of years before Cortez got there. I agree with MacGalleo though, you could easily fit all three time periods into one great scenario!

Originally posted by civ2units
I like your suggestion with the Protestants in an own European campaign EZRhino.
Maybe I will make after conquest a own European scenario during this time period.
Also thanks for your units suggestions.

[civ2units]

I think I should make one scenario beginning in 1492 with the landing of Columbus in the New World and end it in 1650. My suggestion was to have four, or five European Nations which has their main city on an alone square in the ocean. This city will represent their homeland. They will get from time to time reinforcements. I thought about to begin in 1492, with no colonies in the New World. Every nation has the same possibility to conquer the new country.
The main problem is like EZRhino said that the North Europeans, mainly French, English and Dutch in the 17th century began to colonies America. But when I begin in 1600, there is no chance to play with the Aztecs, because the Spanish conquered their little Empire in the beginning of the 16th century. I didn´t really know that the Mayan culture was dead over hundred years before Cortez arrived Yucatan.
With the Portuguese, that´s also a problem, they settled mainly in Brazil, then in Africa and Asia. They didn´t have any colonies above Brazil during this time.
When I play with four European Nations (Spanish/French/English and Dutch) I have three free civs for the Natives. One will represent the Aztecs in Mexico, the another one the North-East American tribes like Iroqouis, Mohawks, Mohicans, etc...) Who should be the third nation? Should they represent the plain tribes like Appache, Cheyenne, Sioux, etc...?
Or should I give Portugal a chance of settle in the Nothern Hemisphere of America?

I thought about to make a serie of scenarios about the American continent. Now I begin with the colonialization, my AWI scenario will take part of the birth of the United States. Maybe later I will include a Civil War scenario...