What to do next...

[Turno]

OK, my scen on ancient Zhanguo China is currently goin' under a little restyling - instead of a real one, i'm going to release it as a "What if" scenario: in this scen, the Zhou dinasty ends abruptly in 403 BC instead of 256 BC as it really did.
So i had to change a few settings and to rename a few wonders... this will take me a little longer so please be patient.

As for my next projects, it seems that all of the possible colonization and aztec scenarios has been taken away...

... so, as for my next scenarios, i have a few possibilities left:

a ) a Celtic italy restyling;

b ) to complete - ToT version this time - my unfinished "Son of Dyonisos" scenario - this one is about the Bactrians and the indo-greek general Menander;

c ) another restyling of Gok - blue Turks;

d ) to finally finish the "Grown of the Britons" scenario about the V-th century England;

e ) another project of mine: "Freedom", about Macedonian kingdom after the death of Alexander.

Plenty of possibilities as you see... but too little time left for Civing now... So only one will stand. Which one should i prosecute after "Zhanguo - The chauldron wars"?

[MacGalleo]

Why not finish the closest to beta release? maybe the "Grown of the Britons"?

[curtsibling]

"Grown of the Britons" sounds great - go for it!

[Gagliaudo]

1°) d (in MGE...)
2) a
3) e
4) b
5) c

[curtsibling]

Looks like the votes are really in favour of the Britons scenario!

[MacGalleo]

Why not 1) d (in ToT...)

[fairline]

Any of these sound good. I always liked you Rome v Etruscans and Celts in Italy.

If pushed I'd go for Groan of the Britains. There aren't enough late Roman scenarios and it'd be nice to play as the Dux Britannia or Count of the Saxon Shore and try and hold off those pesky Angles/Saxons/Jutes and Frisians.

[Turno]

@ Fairline

The "Grown of the britons" started in 410 AC, three years after the last praefectus Britanniae retired the roman tropps to Gaul and became a counter-emperor as Costantinus the IIIrd... So no Comes or Dux, only a generic "Patricius Britanniae".

[Jerec]

I vote for E. Compared to the other scen sections on the Sleague site, there's a pitiful amount of ancient era scenarios.

[Exile]

Speaking of the Saxon shore forts . . .

I was looking into doing a Carausius scenario, when I stumbled onto a new archeological claim that the saxon shore forts were actually built much earlier than the saxon migration. Supposedly built by Carausius to fend off attacks by legit Roman armies. The forts' locations tend to support this view. You Brits know anything about this?

[fairline]

Originally posted by Turno
@ Fairline

The "Grown of the britons" started in 410 AC, three years after the last praefectus Britanniae retired the roman tropps to Gaul and became a counter-emperor as Costantinus the IIIrd... So no Comes or Dux, only a generic "Patricius Britanniae".

Yes the 'Groan' to Honorius (not grown btw) was 410 as a result of the legions leaving in 407 (?). However, the offices of the Dux and Comes persisted after the Romans officially left (or at any rate were reinstigated after an interregnum). Coel the Old of the Votadini is listed as the Dux from 410-440's, Cunedda ap Edern c. 450-460 etc; Natlod of Cornwall was the Comes in the 490's and of course there is conjecture that if Arthur was based on a historical figure, he was the Comes in the early 500's.

There's a strong possibility that although the field armies of the Dux and Comes were withdrawn to the continent, the limitani remained; the latter were an integrated militia by this date anyway, and were unlikely to have been happy to up-sticks and leave their famillies and day-jobs.

@Exile: The little bit I know about the Saxon Shore fortresses were that their construction was begun in the reign of Carausius (290's CE?). I thought they were built to protest the coast from German raiders though..

[McMonkey]

I recently saw a documentary based on new archaeological research that suggested that the Forts of the Saxon shore were less about defence as has always been presumed and more to do with commerce leaving Britain.

I'm no expert (I flunked out of my Archaeology degree after one term ) but I believe it is the accepted wisdom that the forts were constructed to guard against marauding raiders sailing up the rivers, however in this documentary the archaeologists have found that the forts were used to store large amounts of goods that were transported down the rivers ready to be shipped off on larger trading vessels.

I am familiar with two forts, Cardiff and Pevensey, and neither seem to have been investigated thoroughly. I know there was one dig at Pevensey in the seventies where they excavated down about twenty foot at one section of the walls (which were massive!) but not much has been done since. Speaking to the English Heritage (?) guy there I was told that lack of funding was the main cause of the lack of real understanding of what the forts real purpose was!

[fairline]

Control of trade and taxes in addition to protection would make sense; Hadrian's Wall certainly combined both functions.

[Turno]

@ Fairline
Mmmmh... maybe i can use Comes for despotism and Dux for monarchy.... and Patricius for republics....