Peace in our times

[McMonkey]

I am beginning a new multiplayer scenario for play at Civ Webring and will probably need some advice and ideas from the Apolyton community.

The scenario is based on the Fortress Europe map and begins in April 1938. The factions are: USSR, Germany, British Empire, Italy, France, USA and Eastern States (Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria and Finland). All other states will be barbarian.

I have had this multiplayer scenario in mind for some time and feel that now is the time to start work in earnest. The impetus is the current game of Appeasement and Aggression that we are playing at Civ Webring.

Although it is a lot of fun there are many bugs and the balance is not great. I think this must be due to insufficient testing as some of the bugs are glaringly obvious once you play it through a bit. For example the Soviets have Leonardo's Workshop which eventually upgrades all their infantry (150+) into Panzer-grenadiers, probably the best unit in the game!

I am sure these bugs can be ironed out and there are a lot of really good features, such as the powerful infantry and non stackable rivers. Generally it is a good scenario!

This new scenario is not a re-make of Appeasement but is certainly inspired by it. Some of the ideas I have are:

- Limited barracks, airbases and port facilities
As in John Ellis' scenarios, troops must gain experience in battle.

- Non stackable rivers and mountains
Mountains are obvious, non stackable rivers can present attackers with a natural barrier as in real life. Units crossing rivers are vulnerable!

- No road pillaging
Road pillaging can quickly turn a WWII scenario into a snails paced WWI slogging match!

- More rewards for waging war
There are some rewards in Appeasement. I would like to expand on this to promote an agressive game.

- Diplomatic house rules to try and recreate some historical situations
A lot of multiplayer games are predictable. Everyone trades and builds up their forces while picking off the independent cities unchallenged. I would like to create some house rules that liven things up a bit. IE: If Germany invades Poland then France and Britain must declare war. I don't want to dictate the players every move but there should be some consequences to their actions.

I could even create a set of Casus Belli for the Allies and Soviets. This idea will need to be discussed thoroughly to get right.

- Unique advantages for each player (Wonders/Units)
Each nation will have its own unique advantage. This can be done with the units and also the wonders. For example Britain rules the waves but by placing Magellan's Expedition in Valetta the Italians or Germans can gain the upper hand if they capture Malta.

By placing Sun Tzu's Academy in Warsaw the Germans or Russians would have a strong incentive to capture the city, especially in a game with no barracks!

The first thing I want to try and get advice on are the unit stats. I have always used stats loosely based around the vanilla game, like A6 D4.

I would like to try and use the higher type of stats (like A30 D20) seen in many scenarios. I think this would allow me to fine tune the units a bit more. I have seen them used in Appeasement and many of Eivind's scenarios but I'm unsure of where to start with them. Is it just a case of multiplying the original stats by four and then fine tuning them?

I also wanted to open a new thread to discuss ideas as I enjoy it I would also like to try and use as many good ideas from other scenarios that I can plunder so suggestions are welcome. What makes a good multiplayer game?

[Jerec]

Re: Peace in our times

Wonderful project.

Originally posted by McMonkey
The scenario is based on the Fortress Europe map and begins in April 1938. The factions are: USSR, Germany, British Empire, Italy, France, USA and Eastern States (Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria and Finland). All other states will be barbarian.

The more civs, the more diplomacy.

What purpose will the USA serve? It seems too small to be a proper civ...just a resevoir of units if Hitler attacks Britain/France?

Although it is a lot of fun there are many bugs and the balance is not great. I think this must be due to insufficient testing as some of the bugs are glaringly obvious once you play it through a bit. For example the Soviets have Leonardo's Workshop which eventually upgrades all their infantry (150+) into Panzer-grenadiers, probably the best unit in the game!

Will playtesting be by PBEM or singleplayer?

I am sure these bugs can be ironed out and there are a lot of really good features, such as the powerful infantry and non stackable rivers. Generally it is a good scenario!

This new scenario is not a re-make of Appeasement but is certainly inspired by it. Some of the ideas I have are:

- Limited barracks, airbases and port facilities
As in John Ellis' scenarios, troops must gain experience in battle.

- Non stackable rivers and mountains
Mountains are obvious, non stackable rivers can present attackers with a natural barrier as in real life. Units crossing rivers are vulnerable!

- No road pillaging
Road pillaging can quickly turn a WWII scenario into a snails paced WWI slogging match!

- More rewards for waging war
There are some rewards in Appeasement. I would like to expand on this to promote an agressive game.

With MGE size events?

- Diplomatic house rules to try and recreate some historical situations
A lot of multiplayer games are predictable. Everyone trades and builds up their forces while picking off the independent cities unchallenged. I would like to create some house rules that liven things up a bit. IE: If Germany invades Poland then France and Britain must declare war. I don't want to dictate the players every move but there should be some consequences to their actions.

I think that we didn't react from neutral cities being picked off because we couldn't react. None of the nations were prepared to back up any threats, IE they didn't have any armies capable of attacking.

I could even create a set of Casus Belli for the Allies and Soviets. This idea will need to be discussed thoroughly to get right.

- Unique advantages for each player (Wonders/Units)
Each nation will have its own unique advantage. This can be done with the units and also the wonders. For example Britain rules the waves but by placing Magellan's Expedition in Valetta the Italians or Germans can gain the upper hand if they capture Malta.

By placing Sun Tzu's Academy in Warsaw the Germans or Russians would have a strong incentive to capture the city, especially in a game with no barracks!

I would think that Sun Tzu's Academy would imbalance a game with no barracks. Didn't Eivind originally give that to Germany in Belle Epoque, and then take it out in later versions?

The first thing I want to try and get advice on are the unit stats. I have always used stats loosely based around the vanilla game, like A6 D4.

Base 'em on Appeasement.



One more thing- perhaps a house rule against air cover of land units. It seems a little too unrealistic to me, since the stacks are practically invincible if done correctly.

[curtsibling]

Great idea - Nice map!

I would go for vanilla unit stats, and give special units higher stats...

For instance, give the generic fighter the usual stats, but boost the Spitfire and Bf-109...

Be careful to avoid the AI build bug with armour, keep the stats the same as CIV2,
but boost the HP/FP rates and keep the Att/Def rates as they are.

That way the AI will build all the move two land units...I had problems avoiding this bug in Dictator7...

[McMonkey]

I will try and make the USA an Industrial giant and will probably give it additional units via events. New York will also have the Colossus and be the worlds greatest trade centre. The role play element will be important as the USA wont be a conventional civ as we know it. Will need to discuss this more.

I will probably run a quick test for each nation just to check for obvious bugs and use the PBEM as the proper test.

I will draw up an original set of events. Should be plenty of room for a multiplayer game as I won't be propping up dumb AI nations!

I will start the nations off with slightly stronger armies so they can react. Economic embargoes are another option. When you look at WWII the French and British declared war on Germany over Poland but did virtually nothing during the phony war. Hopefully a well thought out set of diplomatic house rules will represent some historical situations without completely restricting the players.

A Casus Belli is a pretext for war. IE Britain's Casus Belli for war with Germany would be a violation of Belgian neutrality. I will need to draw up a list of all my ideas and post them for critique.

Vichy France is another of my ideas. For example if the Germans capture Paris the French have to make peace and resist any allied attempt to grab their territory. They would also hand over northern France and Tunis to Germany and disband Army units in the Vichy areas. To free the French the Allies would need to capture Casablanca. Obviously this idea needs developing but I would like to add more of these kinds of rules to make the game more interesting. Spain, Turkey, Norway, Yugoslavia and Greece would also have special rules.
I don't want the Independent cities to just be sat there waiting to be gobbled up with no consequences.

I think a well thought out set of objectives would be good so that victory can be achieved in other ways that just world domination.

The idea of placing Sun Tzu's war academy in Warsaw will need to be looked at more closely. I figure that Germany will inevitably be the main protagonist in such a scenario and needs some military advantage. This also fits with my idea of the Allies wanting Poland to remain free. I will probably place a limited number of Barracks and Ports for each nation.

I will also post the proposed stats for inspection along with a list of proposed units. I will adapt my existing Fortress Europe MGE tech tree to save time.

Got to go out and buy a new chicken for the back garden but will probably post some of this stuff this afternoon.

[Ecthy]

Q: why do we need a million zillion WWII scenarios? How about some mor ediversity like in the good ol times?

[McMonkey]

Go on then, make one

I have made one set in the Ancient world, a Napoleonic one, and have a Balkans Wars 1913-13 in a semi developed state. There are also Fantasy, Colonization, American Civil War, Gallic Wars and 15th century scenarios currently in development to name but a few!

I agree that there are a lot of WWII scenarios about but I wanted to create a specifically multiplayer game to suit my own tastes and hopefully those of the guys at Civ Webring. I also had many of the elements to hand, such as the map, graphics and tech tech from Fortress Europe and figured I could build this fairly quickly.

Well they are my excuses anyway

[McMonkey]

@Curtsibling
I'm afraid this is a purely multiplayer affair so considering the AI should not come into it. Thanks for the advice though

Regarding the stats, I have never tried using the higher A/D system before but I think it works well in scenarios I have played. I think it will give a bit more scope to define certain units capabilities. I have always used the lower A/D system before and it works fine but can be tricky to fine tune sometimes and units tend to be a bit samey. I will need to test it out though to see if it is worthwhile.

[McMonkey]

Forgot to mention something "new" I discovered when altering the map with cheat menu. I decided to do away with the Orchard terrain and use the square for an Industrial resource to ensure that key cities had high shield production. I also needed to remove all farmland and replace it with irrigation to help me control food production. Unfortunately when I built the original map I put farmland all over the place because it looked nice without really considering what it would do to population sizes. When I started using the cheat menu I found that instead of repeatedly pressing Control+Shift+F8 and picking the option you can hold down those keys and just click on the map and the selected options (IE Irrigation+Road+Fortress) would appear. This made the whole process MUCH quicker.

I expect you all know this already but if like me you were in the dark it is a neat new trick.

Oh, and I got me a new chicken. They don't get on just yet but I'm sure they will learn to live together

[McMonkey]

Unit stats

Using the Fortress Europe stats as a basis and multiplying them by four I have come up with the basis for my ground unit stats.

ROAD MOVEMENT MULTIPLIER=3

INFANTRY
Cost 6 A32 D24 HP3 FP2 M2 (Alpine, Ignore Walls)

Good defence, good at city assault, relatively cheap. Paras will be a bit more expensive and British/US Infantry will have Marine flag.

MOTORIZED INFANTRY
Cost 8 A32 D20 HP2 FP2 M4 (Ignore Walls)

Good defence, good at city assault, moderate price, mobile.

CORPS ARTILLERY
Cost 12 A40 D8 HP2 FP4 M2 (Ignore Walls)
Poor defence, excellent city assault, very expensive.

ARMOUR
Cost 10 A48 D16 HP2 FP3 Move 4 (Ignore ZOC)
Good attack, moderate defence, expensive, mobile.

HEAVY ARMOUR
Cost 12 A56 D18 HP2 FP3 M3 (Ignore ZOC)
Very good attack, good defence, very expensive.

I will need to test these stats to see how they work out. With the higher A/D stats I will be able to tweak the various nations units and unit types to clearly define each type of unit.

I will need to look at cost to make sure each type of unit is worth building and to avoid rush building of the better units being too cheap.

Your comments are welcome.

[fairline]

Who's pinched the red cresty-thing off your new chicken's head?

[McMonkey]

I think that will grow as it gets older. Its only 9 months old and according to the internet is a stately bird so it may end up the size of a small Ostrich. Thats why the other chook looks worried

I have had another thought about this scenario. If I start in 1938 the Spanish civil war will still be going on. I wonder if there would be a way of representing this in game?

Maybe the Republicans could be represented by Russia and the Nationalists by the Dictatorships (new name for the Eastern States). The other nations could send troops and equipment to aid their allies. If for example the Germans capture a city they would hand it over to the Nationalists. Maybe the game could begin in 1936 and have a few more Spanish cities. All this would require some role playing and house rules to work as the Nationalist and Republican factions would have to be run as separate entities from their parent nation. I could even use a system similar to the Proxy war rules in Eivinds first strike scenario where each side could only receive a limited amount of reinforcements.

If the Republicans win the USSR will have a friendly nation in the west and if the Nationalists win the Germans and Italians will also have a grateful friend in Spain.

This would mean adding some extra cities such as Bilbao, Valencia and Burgos.

This may be too complex to be worth doing but is worth looking at. It would mean a lot of house rules but I for one don't mind a bit of role playing in a multiplayer game as it adds another dimension and becomes more than just a straight forward slogging match for world domination.

The Dictatorships (Eastern States) could also be split between Finland and the Central/Balkan states. IE Russia can go to war with Finland without Roumania/Bulgaria/Hungary having to be involved.

Lots to consider. Your comments would be welcome.

[curtsibling]

Originally posted by Ecthy
Q: why do we need a million zillion WWII scenarios? How about some mor ediversity like in the good ol times?

WW2 is OK, as long as the ideas are different...
McMonkey is the only person doing a PBEM game.

[curtsibling]

@McMonkey:

I was wondering why the units have such gigantic stats?
Not that this is a bad thing, I am just curious to see how
they play in-game...Battles must take a while to resolve
between certain units, and that would be quite fun!

When it comes to governments, I tend to look at the real
WW2 governments. Communism I give to the Soviets, as
it makes sense...Also the Germans get it too, these two
tyrannies are the same in many ways, so I call the govt
'dictatorship'...Monarchies I give to the lesser nations,
and rename the 'corruption' to 'expenses'.

I tend to give the republic to the Allies, and make sure the
happiness wonders and improvements are spread around.

But messing around with this could be interesting, giving
the communists republic could be good, giving them the
research boost that they always seem to lack in WW2
scenarios...At the end, it is up to you!

See what works good for each civ to make it fun to play,
and rename the govt to suit the nation...

[McMonkey]

Thanks for the ideas CS. The governments happen to be the next thing I intend to work out as they are vital for getting the balance right. AFAIK the HP/FP determine how long a battle goes on for. I may tweak these too to see how that works. Longer battles could be fun!

I have decided to go ahead with the 1936 start date and Spanish Civil War aspect. It is something new and should create a very interesting diversion in the early turns while the nations arm up for the big show.

I have had to disband cities elsewhere to make space and may add a couple more to fill in the gaps (Salamanca, Albacete, Mellila and Malaga?).

I will place quite a few units to represent the battle lines and create a set of guidelines about how the war can be wages and what foreign forces can be sent.

[Jerec]

Re: Unit stats

Originally posted by McMonkey
Using the Fortress Europe stats as a basis and multiplying them by four I have come up with the basis for my ground unit stats.

ROAD MOVEMENT MULTIPLIER=3

The bigger the map, the bigger the multiplier probably needs to be...

INFANTRY
Cost 6 A32 D24 HP3 FP2 M2 (Alpine, Ignore Walls)

Good defence, good at city assault, relatively cheap. Paras will be a bit more expensive and British/US Infantry will have Marine flag.

MOTORIZED INFANTRY
Cost 8 A32 D20 HP2 FP2 M4 (Ignore Walls)

Good defence, good at city assault, moderate price, mobile.

No Mech. Infantry? There was simply mot. infantry on wheels, and then there was mechanized infantry: a majority of mot. infantry, a minority of tanks, and self-propelled artillery. IIRC they were more mobile and powerful than regular mot. divisions.

CORPS ARTILLERY
Cost 12 A40 D8 HP2 FP4 M2 (Ignore Walls)
Poor defence, excellent city assault, very expensive.

We didn't use the Corps Artillery in Appeasement at all, except in the beginning when there was nothing else.