Vinland Map

[Cyclotron]

Hello Scenario League!

I found myself re-opening Civ2 after a long hiatus. I’ve tried making scenarios before in years past, but none of them have gotten past the planning stage, probably because I was just too ambitious for my own good.

Nevertheless, for some reason I have been possessed by the desire to make a scenario based on the “expanded” Norse colonization of the Americas. “Expanded,” in this case, means “counterfactual, but based on history” – the player will hopefully not abandon the effort quite as soon as the Norse actually did.

The reason I’m posting this is because I’ve gotten further with it than most of my scenario ideas; specifically, I have a map. I’d like to post it and perhaps garner some feedback on it, if you’ve be kind enough to look it over.

I made the proportions of the map to encompass all the places west of Greenland that the Norse did visit, and some further areas that they may have visited or could have visited given a more permanent presence. Though Newfoundland is usually described as being the best fit for the “Vinland” of the sagas, some less popular (or downright fringe) theories have placed Vinland as far south as Massachusetts/Rhode Island. As a result, the map goes all the way down to Long Island. I also stretched it out far enough west to allow the player to sail longships into Hudson Bay. Though there’s no evidence for that route whatsoever, it seems at least plausible that the bay could have been discovered by subsequent journeys.



A few notes:

• The map’s jungle is a stand-in for boreal forests.
• I’m worried that the terrain is a little too “clumpy,” especially in the north. Huge expanses of unbroken tundra and boreal forest are, however, fairly accurate for the region as far as I can discern (unless one of our Canadian posters wants to set me straight).
• I decided to make navigable (ocean) rivers, since it’s inconceivable that I could make a Viking scenario without river transport. This leaves me, however, with river terrain that I don’t have a use for. Any ideas on how to utilize that, or should I just leave it out?
• I thought about making some rivers come close to intersecting so that the Norse could put down a settler to make a “portage” allowing their ships to cross. It would have to be a very important portage, because I plan on making settlers event-given (not buildable) for the human player. On the other hand, portages generally aren’t towns, and I’d like the player settlers to be used for actual settlement-building, so maybe that’s not a good idea.

PS: The map was made in ToT's editor.

[Harry Tuttle]

Interesting. Who are you seeing as additional opponents in the scenario? Will there be a "nature" opponent? Native Americans and Inuit?

[Cyclotron]

Interesting. Who are you seeing as additional opponents in the scenario? Will there be a "nature" opponent? Native Americans and Inuit?

Native Americans are definitely be the primary opponents. We don't know a whole lot about political and linguistic groupings of North American native groups in the 11th century, but I am working on a list.

The Dorset (pre-Inuit people of north-eastern Canada) are definitely going to be in, but later on the Thule culture (proto-Inuit) came and swept them away and reached as far as Greenland. I'm probably going to handle the Thule migration with Barbarians, though it happened several centuries after the start of the scenario (around 1007) so it depends somewhat on the end date I choose. I've been thinking about 1408, the year when we have the last known written record of the Greenland Norse before their disappearance, but that would make for a really long game!

The Beothuk (inhabitants of Newfoundland) are also going to be a main rival. They're probably the ones that the sagas refer to most of the time (though we can't know for certain - the Norse called them all "skraelings" indiscriminately). Geographically limited but powerful enough to be an early threat (the sagas said they had "catapults," interestingly enough).

It gets less certain from then on out, but at present I'm thinking of including the Wabanaki people (inc. Mikmaq, Maliseet, Penobscot, and other residents of the New England/Maritimes area) and some kind of Cree super-group, of which the Innu (on the coast) may or may not be included in. The Iriquois will also probably appear on the southern edge of the map.

But that's 6 civs at most (including the Norse), so I presumably have room for a "nature" civ if I'm inclined to do it. I assume that would be like roaming storms, sea ice, and that kind of thing?

[Harry Tuttle]

I assume that would be like roaming storms, sea ice, and that kind of thing?

Yeah pretty much. Maybe some "goods" units that could be captured or destroyed for cash.

[Cyrion]

Nevertheless, for some reason I have been possessed by the desire to make a scenario based on the “expanded” Norse colonization of the Americas. “Expanded,” in this case, means “counterfactual, but based on history” – the player will hopefully not abandon the effort quite as soon as the Norse actually did.

Excellent! This is a scen I have been wanting to do for a while! but as it is so far down my "to do list", I'll be happy to play yours, and of course provide some support (if you need it ).

The reason I’m posting this is because I’ve gotten further with it than most of my scenario ideas; specifically, I have a map. I’d like to post it and perhaps garner some feedback on it, if you’ve be kind enough to look it over.

From your preview, your map looks very good!

[*]The map’s jungle is a stand-in for boreal forests.[*]I’m worried that the terrain is a little too “clumpy,” especially in the north. Huge expanses of unbroken tundra and boreal forest are, however, fairly accurate for the region as far as I can discern (unless one of our Canadian posters wants to set me straight).

Maybe you can remove mountains and use it for the boreal forests: that might add to the diversity?

[*]I decided to make navigable (ocean) rivers, since it’s inconceivable that I could make a Viking scenario without river transport. This leaves me, however, with river terrain that I don’t have a use for. Any ideas on how to utilize that, or should I just leave it out?

Definitely: a Viking scen without navigable rivers wouldn't be interesting

And then you could use the rivers for the minor streams (usable for irrigation)

[*]I thought about making some rivers come close to intersecting so that the Norse could put down a settler to make a “portage” allowing their ships to cross. It would have to be a very important portage, because I plan on making settlers event-given (not buildable) for the human player. On the other hand, portages generally aren’t towns, and I’d like the player settlers to be used for actual settlement-building, so maybe that’s not a good idea.

Good idea about the portage: using settlers for it is the easiest way to handle that, and then it makes for some "strategic" locations to build settlements on (which makes it easier to center some hard events around those points without being too "linear" )

And making the settlers event-given seems perfectly right too avoid an unrealistic overpopulation of the area!

So please go on, and yell if I can be of help!

[Cyclotron]

Maybe you can remove mountains and use it for the boreal forests: that might add to the diversity?

Using mountains for the boreal forests would be helpful, as a variable-tile terrain (like regular forests already are) would be more useful in the plentiful boreal forests than in the mountains, which I have few of.

Or do you mean scrapping mountains entirely and using two different terrains for boreal forests?

And then you could use the rivers for the minor streams (usable for irrigation)

Could work, though I don't know where I'd find a useful map of minor tributaries in Quebec. I'll be on the lookout, though...

So please go on, and yell if I can be of help!

Actually, I do have a dilemma I've been trying to think up an answer to. What's the possibility of introducing some kind of "emergent civ" that comes into play later than the start date? I mean, I know it isn't literally possible, but could I give them a city on a secondary map (this being ToT, after all) and only give them access to the main map once a certain date comes around? I'm considering making the Thule a real civilization (and removing the Dorset as one), but they didn't show up until around 200 years after the scenario start. How easy/difficult would this be to implement? If it works, how could I give the Thule a real kick in the pants and have them expand aggressively in the areas I want them to?

Actually, sorting out the end date is something I really need to do posthaste. I was originally thinking about 1 turn/season, but that's way too short if I'm going that far (800 turns until the Thule arrive!). If I'm going that far, let alone to 1408-ish, 1 turn a year will be more than enough.

[techumseh]

Actually, I do have a dilemma I've been trying to think up an answer to. What's the possibility of introducing some kind of "emergent civ" that comes into play later than the start date? I mean, I know it isn't literally possible, but could I give them a city on a secondary map (this being ToT, after all) and only give them access to the main map once a certain date comes around? I'm considering making the Thule a real civilization (and removing the Dorset as one), but they didn't show up until around 200 years after the scenario start. How easy/difficult would this be to implement? If it works, how could I give the Thule a real kick in the pants and have them expand aggressively in the areas I want them to?

There's a simple trick for this. Place a settler of the "emergent civ" in a corner on an ocean square where no one can get at it. When you want the new civ to spring to life, create it's units by events.

I used this in "Red October" to create the new Polish state at the end of WWI. Polish units appear next the main Polish cities under German control and capture them. The following turn the "Negotiation/talkermask" event allows the new Polish civ to talk to other civs and conclude peace agreements.

To ensure that the new civ's units aren't killed before they can attack, make sure they move first, ie. white moves first, followed by green, followed by dk. blue, and so on, ending with the barbarians.

[AGRICOLA]

Excepting Greenland, I've worked as a mineral exploration geophysicist over the backwoods of all the area of your Vinland map. Consequently, I'm probably in as good a position to comment as anybody.

The tundra is extensive, treeless, gently rolling and semi arid with a rainfall of less than 20 cm per year. No Inuits or Indians lived permanently on the tundra. There is no fuel and the only meat has to come from the herds of caribou that migrate onto the tundra in the spring to calve and then migrate back into the boreal forest for the winter. Migration routes change from year to year.

The Inuit lived along the ocean, ate the seal and whales that abounded and travelled inland to hunt caribou in the summer. The Indians lived in the boreal forest as hunter-gatherers. They had little reason to venture out onto the tundra except to raid their ancient enemies, the Inuit.

The northern part of the boreal forest is 95% spruce and fir with some cold-tolerant birch and poplar mixed in. The southern part is mixed deciduous trees and conifers and is by far the best area for human settlement. Here is the where the bulk of the Indians lived.

I know that the Vikings used the large rivers of European Russia as trade and raid routes. Unfortunately, your map cuts off part of the best water route from the Atlantic to the center of the continent . . . the St Lawrence - Great Lakes route. Its only significant obstacles are the Lachine rapids at Montreal and Niagara Falls between Lakes Ontario and Erie. To portage a longboat past the latter would be a major undertaking.

With some exceptions, such as the Ottawa River and the northern 200-300 km of rivers flowing into James Bay, the rest of the rivers are navigable only by canoes.


Regarding portages, you can alter RULES so that settlers can transform forest etc. to ocean rather than creating a portage by building a town.

Good luck with the project.

[Cyclotron]

Excepting Greenland, I've worked as a mineral exploration geophysicist over the backwoods of all the area of your Vinland map. Consequently, I'm probably in as good a position to comment as anybody.

Wow, what incredible luck! Thanks for your reply.

I know that the Vikings used the large rivers of European Russia as trade and raid routes. Unfortunately, your map cuts off part of the best water route from the Atlantic to the center of the continent . . . the St Lawrence - Great Lakes route. Its only significant obstacles are the Lachine rapids at Montreal and Niagara Falls between Lakes Ontario and Erie. To portage a longboat past the latter would be a major undertaking.

With some exceptions, such as the Ottawa River and the northern 200-300 km of rivers flowing into James Bay, the rest of the rivers are navigable only by canoes.

That is one problem with drawing rivers straight from a map - it doesn't really give you an idea of how navigable those rivers are! I'm inclined to allow a pretty wide berth when it comes to navigability, as longships only had a draft of 2-3 feet and the Norse traders in Russia portaged around rapids quite frequently. Unfortunately, the limitations of the engine are such that I can't, say, allow canoes to use the rivers but not longboats, or allow longboats and canoes to use them but not Norse ships with deeper drafts (like knarrs). If I want any river travel, I have to allow all of it, and I see myself probably coming down on the side of allowing it all (if only for the sake of gameplay).

With regard to the Great Lakes, I considered including them in the map, but I felt that including them would be beyond what I'm aiming for with the scenario. Making the "center of the continent" available to Norse colonization isn't really what I had in mind - I wanted to keep the focus a bit narrower.

At this point, I'm starting to reconsider that decision at least a bit - in theory, expanding the map a bit farther south might be desirable (though it might require additional civs that I don't really have room for). It's something that I'll be sure to look into.

[Turno71]

I got a book at home. Its title is "Human Prehistory: a new vision" from Graham Clark. If i remember correctly, there was a huge map of Dorset and pre-Dorset settlements across Canada and Greenland. Can't do much now - I'm at work.I'll look at it ASAP i'm at home.

[Cyclotron]

Well, I think I've got a reasonably good idea of which civs I want, based both on historical reality (or at least, probability, given the little we know) and gameplay. See map (attached at the end) for colors.

1. The Norse (Dark Blue). The scenario's protagonists, beginning with a slice of Greenland and the tip of Newfoundland (L'Anse aux Meadows).

2. The Dorset/Thule (Green). The Dorset were replaced by the Thule in those areas later on, though the Thule also went further into Greenland, eventually replacing the Norse in the 15th century. I'm planning on making the Dorset just barbarian "camp" units, while the Thule will be the real civ, waiting in the wings until it's their time to sweep over the tundra. They'll spawn with a host of units and settlers spread out over the Dorset region, and hopefully settle there (assuming that land is still unoccupied).

3. The Beothuk (Yellow). Inhabitants of Newfoundland, the Beothuk will provide the initial counterpart to the Norse, challenging them for supremacy in their own homeland. The Beothuk will be powerful, but lack the strategic depth or sheer population of the other major native civs.

4. The Wabanaki (Light Blue). This civ covers a group of Algonquian-speaking peoples living from Nova Scotia to around New Hampshire/ Massachusetts. I can't find much info about them in this period, but later on they would be closely aligned politically (the "Wabanaki Confederation").

5. The Cree (Orange). The Cree are a very widely spread group of Algonquian-speaking peoples; Cree languages are spoken as far west as Alberta. They include the Innu, the inhabitants of Labrador who probably had some contact with the Norse colonists historically. They'll probably be the most powerful civ on the map (and they won't be called "Cree" when I actually implement them).

6. The Algonquins (Purple). This civ covers a wide range of groups that speak Algonquin (itself a subdivision of the larger Algonquian language family). The Norse will probably only encounter them last, as they have no coastal settlements, but their interior land is quite large and they might rival the Cree in terms of power.

Additionally, one slot will be reserved for a "nature" civ that maintains certain static objective units and throws storms/ice/etc. at the other civs from time to time. I'm assuming I need an actual civ to do this, like the Exotics in the Jules Verne scenario, but if barbs can do it that frees up another slot.

This demonstrates why it might be problematic to extend the map further south, despite the attractions the Great Lakes provide. One could argue that the Iroquois should already be poking up into this map from the south along the St. Lawrence river; to extend the map further would require either an ahistorical extension of Cree/Wabanaki lands, or somehow producing another civ slot (perhaps from Nature, if they get scrapped).

[curtsibling]

This scenario concept seems potentially extremely good -

[Arthedain]

I concur, your excellency!

[Turno71]

Godthaab Fjors is correct for Viks, but you are missing Julianehaab on the eastern side of Greenland. Plus, Thule westernmost at the time was Inglefield Land, on northwestern coast of Greenland.
Got the map i mentioned scanned, but is up 25Mb and I can't upload it right now, plz gimme time.
EDIT --->A shame i lost my links to the indian tribes' history website... but i retained some printed copies, Wabanaki Algonquin, Ojibway, Montagnais, Huron, Iroquois, Odawa, Miami, Mahican, Susquehannock, Delaware and Micmac included. And tell me that old paper isn't useful...

Found it: http://tolatsga.org/Compacts.html

[Cyclotron]

Thanks, Turno. That will be useful!

I think I've just about finished the map. I've added a bunch of minor (non-navigable) rivers and extended the map a tad southwards, just enough to have Niagra Falls at the edge of the map. Jungle and mountains have been switched, so I can get more graphic variation in boreal forest areas (which are far more common on the map than mountains).

I've decided that I will have a few potential cross-river portages (I haven't yet added those to the attached map), but most potential portage sites will be around non-attackable (air) "waterfall" units blocking progress up a river. The player will have to place a city down to go around it (if they feel like using one of their precious settlers to do so).

Is it possible to make a "regenerating" stationary unit with the Delay conditional, so that 1 turn after a unit is killed, another copy of the same unit is put in its place? If that's a possibility, I could presumably use that to represent rapids or any permanent difficult water feature, though the downside would be that each rapid/waterfall would need its own unit slot.