Fall of Rome scenario

[Saint Marcus]

For some time I've been working on a Fall of Rome scenario, and I'm making good progress. At the moment, I've completed 80% of the first playable beta version.

The scenario is set in the early 5th century AD and runs till the end of the 6th. It will feature various German, Roman, Persian civs, as well as the Huns, all with their own units of course. There will be new units, resources&luxuries, improvements and a new tech tree. Complete with a pre-set map with cities and units. All in (my attempt to write) Latin (as I previously posted here). And all historically accurate of course (though playability comes first).

Before finishing and releasing it, I want your input. Does anyone wish to contribute anything to this scenario? Ideas, art, historical insights, or anything at all. Please post it here, or e-mail/PM me in private. I'm open to any suggestions.

[Saint Marcus]

no one has any ideas to put in a fall or rome scenario? no one at all?

[jsw363]

Do you distinguish between the Eastern and Western Empire? How are you going to do the leaderheads? I think that it would be important to distinguish between all the different nationalities in the Empire. Perhaps there would be Greeks, Phoenicians, Germans etc. all living in Roman cities.

Is it jsut going to be a map of Europe? I think that Byzantium extended far beyond Europe, so that might be a factor to consider in map size.

What kind of starting point do you have for the scenario? It's usually best if you have one critical moment in the development of the Empire that spawns this situation for the player to navigate.

[Saint Marcus]

The scenario does feature a seperate West Roman and Byzantine Empire. Sadly, I can't make them pre-set allies until PTW will be out.

Also, sadly, I can't set different nationalities for citizens in the cities with 1.29. If you now how, please let me know though.

The map will be El Mencey's map of Europe, 100x100. Part of Russia and the Middle East are included, thus giving room for a Persian (and Armenian) civ, and creates a good spawning ground for barbarians (who won't be limited to warriors and horsemen). ICS will be avoided of course, by making certain areas inaccesable to settlers, or by simply removing settlers from the scenario althogether.

The scenario starts around 420-440 AD. Parts within the Empire were already settled by Germanic tribes (Sueves and Vandals in Iberia, Visigoths in Aquitania, Huns in Dacia). Briton was already "independent" from the Empire. In 410, the Emporer of the west granted Britain the right to defend (and in practice govern) itself. Historically, around the time the scenario starts some important developments will lead to the end of the west. Genseric will lead to Vandals across the Gibraltar Straight, Atilla the Hun will start his reign and begins his conquests, the Anglo-Saxons will start to invade Britain, etc.

I was thinking about setting the scenario back to an earlier date, however this will lead to a lot of historical inaccuracies. For instance, in a Civ3 scenario, set in the last 4th century, the Visigoths will never end up controlling Aquitania if they start Dacia, without occupying all the land in between as well.

General problems a player will face, other than foreign civs: corruption, unhappiness/riots, cash flow problems, etc. As it should be. And not only the Romans will face these problems. Most of the German kingdoms weren't too stable either during these days.

[GePap]

Well, One way to have the Germanic tribes be very active while limiting the Romans and byzantines to defensive actions might be to make settlers cheap, and make sure Rome and Byzantium make no settlers. hat way, the only way for the Romans, Byzantines, to remain in power is to keep cities or retake cities, while the Germanic tribes get a momentum advantage. This is assuming you let anyone build settlers and extra cities.

You could also deny the settled civs. the ability to get an Golden Age by taking the flag of their UU. I don't know if you also have considered the nationality resource idea, ttying certain resources to ceratin areas, so only those that own certain pieces of land get to build certain buildings and units.

HOw many civs will you use anyway? You have mentioned the Western and Eastern Empires, Vandals, Saxons, Visigoths, Huns, Sassanids (persia) and Armenia. Will you have the ostrogoths, Angles, Jutes, Lombardians, and so forth? Also, what of the northen areas and the south? If you allow for city building, the A.I. might try to fill them with lots of useless cities. making city building on pine forest impossible might keep city making down.

I would add a few suggestions on civ traits. The relegious trait might be too powerful, specially allowing for quick changes in government and cheap temples. You could set temples to another flag, like commercial, and deny anyone the use of Relegious, to insure that either civs keep their government form, or suffer anarchy if they try to change. In keeping corruption high, the Forbidden Palance could be taken out, or made really expensive. Also, the organized regimes should have to pay lots for troops (ie, little or no free support). You could also enable drafting of cheap auxilary units- this helps turn pop. into troops, but increase anger and unrest- somehting common for the West specially.

[Mortifer]

Well, IMO the most important thing must be the Hun invasion in this scenario. Dont forget Attila was a supreme ruler in those days. The Eastern Roman Empire gave huge ammounts of gold to the Huns, just to stay alive. Later on Attila reached even Rome, but he never razed the city. [Its a long story that why, do a research on the net.]

Also the Huns crushed the Germanic tribes. Most of the germanic tribes were slaves, later they served in the Hun army. Also I wonder how will you simulate the armies? The Huns had huge armies for example. Chonicles are saying different things about the Hun army size, but they had 700000 - 1000000 soldiers in the army. [around 450]

After the death of Attila, the sons of the mighty ruler started to fight with eachother for power...and they are killed eachother.....a few years later the Hun Empire gone.


This link will help you:

http://art1.candor.com/barbarian/attila.htm

[Saint Marcus]

I'm beta testing the scenario now. One odd bug though, it crashed when I view a certain part of the map while playing as certain civs. Very weird.

Well, One way to have the Germanic tribes be very active while limiting the Romans and byzantines to defensive actions might be to make settlers cheap, and make sure Rome and Byzantium make no settlers. hat way, the only way for the Romans, Byzantines, to remain in power is to keep cities or retake cities, while the Germanic tribes get a momentum advantage. This is assuming you let anyone build settlers and extra cities.

Good idea, I'll implement it right away. I really made it so that the Germans can't build workers, to limit the growth of their cities. Of course, they can still capture them.

You could also deny the settled civs. the ability to get an Golden Age by taking the flag of their UU.

There won't be (many) UUs in the traditional sense of the world. Though Germans won't be able to build Roman Legions, and Persians won't be able to build German Axemen. No unit will trigger a Golden Age, since this wasn't really a time a civ3 style golden age would fit in.

I don't know if you also have considered the nationality resource idea, ttying certain resources to ceratin areas, so only those that own certain pieces of land get to build certain buildings and units.

I partly implemented this. There is one resource that allows the Romans to build some foreign units as foederati.

HOw many civs will you use anyway? You have mentioned the Western and Eastern Empires, Vandals, Saxons, Visigoths, Huns, Sassanids (persia) and Armenia. Will you have the ostrogoths, Angles, Jutes, Lombardians, and so forth?

16 civs. 15 playable, one to fill up some gaps in central europe. Sadly I couldn't put in more civs, so that the Angles, Jutes, Frysians and Saxons are joined to make one civ. Same with the Celts and Picts. The Lombards, Ostrogoths, Sueves, Britons, Burgundians and Franks will also have their own civs.

Also, what of the northen areas and the south? If you allow for city building, the A.I. might try to fill them with lots of useless cities. making city building on pine forest impossible might keep city making down.

Thanks to 1.29, you can prohibit the building of cities on certain terrain. Also, by making a settler a wheeled unit, it can't cross jungle or mountains. By disabling roads or clearing of jungle squares, it can be used to create a barrier that settlers can't cross. This way, Russia won't be settled. The south is made up of desert, on which no cities can be build.

I would add a few suggestions on civ traits. The relegious trait might be too powerful, specially allowing for quick changes in government and cheap temples. You could set temples to another flag, like commercial, and deny anyone the use of Relegious, to insure that either civs keep their government form, or suffer
anarchy if they try to change.

Only the Romans and Persians get the industrious civ trait, so their workers will work faster (as they should). To make sure the game doesn't get unbalanced, other traits aren't included. I don't want lower corruption (commercial), free gov switching (religious), extra leaders (militaristic), or cheaper buildings (all, though this can be changed).

In keeping corruption high, the Forbidden Palance could be taken out, or made really expensive.

I tried this, but changed this after playing just a few turns as the romans. I then put in 2 Forbidden Palace like buildings, and put them in key cities (Alexandria and Anthioch for the Byzantines, Carthago for the West Romans). Without this, hardly any Roman city is able to produce anything of value. With these buildings in place, other areas (like Egypt and Tunesia) become more important to the Empire, as they should be. But still, just a half a screen away from these centres, corruption is rampant.

Also, the organized regimes should have to pay lots for troops (ie, little or no free support).

I implemented this right from the start. Only the biggest Roman cities support units, and support is also lower in more organised and settled "barbarian" kingdoms.

You could also enable drafting of cheap auxilary units- this helps turn pop. into troops, but increase anger and unrest- somehting common for the West specially.

Also implemented. Still no entirely sure which unit should be the drafted one. Should I make it a spearmen (for both romans and germans), or perhaps light infantry, or something else althogether?

Also, at first the people seem to be rather happy (lots of happiness luxuries and buildings). However, I included war weariness for all civs, and in particular for the Romans. Since war will be a key element in this scenario, the more you fight the unhappier the people get (which was quite true in those days). This is especcially true for the romans, who will be at war with everyone almost continuesly. So as time progresses, it will get harder and harder for the Romans to keep the people content, and will seriously weaken them.

Well, IMO the most important thing must be the Hun invasion in this scenario. Dont forget Attila was a supreme ruler in those days. The Eastern Roman Empire gave huge ammounts of gold to the Huns, just to stay alive. Later on Attila reached even Rome, but he never razed the city. [Its a long story that why, do a research on the net.]

I know, I read just about all the accounts of that event. The Huns will be the prime antagonist in the scenario, and should be a mennace to all the civs, excluding those on the British isles and Iberia. The Vandals will be a secundairy team, they, along with the Huns, were the biggest threath to the Empire. Genseric conquered Carthago and sacked Rome itself. Minor conflicts, like the Battle for Britain (between the celts, romano-celts (britons) and anglo-saxons).

Also the Huns crushed the Germanic tribes. Most of the germanic tribes were slaves, later they served in the Hun army.

The Huns are far more powerfull than just about all the German civs combined. The key weakness, in the scenario, is their reliance on resources to build units. They obviously need horses for their cavalry units, but will also need the special resource to build some of the stronger (and cheaper) ground units (the troops of conquered germanic tribes). Without resources, the Huns won't be able to build any powerful units.

Also I wonder how will you simulate the armies? The Huns had huge armies for example. Chonicles are saying different things about the Hun army size, but they had 700000 - 1000000 soldiers in the army.

An army in the scenario is just like a Civ3 army. No differences there. Of course, nothing keeps you from having 40 units on the same square invading Gaul.

The figures of 700k-1M troops under Attila at the Battle of Chalons have been greately exagerated though, though that's a discussion for some other time.

After the death of Attila, the sons of the mighty ruler started to fight with eachother for power...and they are killed eachother.....a few years later the Hun Empire gone.

Unlike in civ2, in civ3 civil wars are impossible.

However, I included the Ostrogoths as a seperate civ, and not simply a part of the Huns. This way, a human player playing the Ostrogoths will have to be a vasal and ally of the Huns at first (since you'll be no match for them anyway), and strike when you think the time is right, thus (kinda) simulating an uprising of subjugated people against the hun oppresors.

[Mortifer]

Hey can you setup the various alliances and diplomatic standings ? Or it will be only possible with the new expansion?
In that age there were a lot important alliances.

[Saint Marcus]

have to wait till PTW sadly.

[Mortifer]

Owww.
Oh well PTW will be released pretty soon.

Btw for the scenario idea. I love the dark and medieval ages.

[Saint Marcus]

I think I'll wait with the realise till PTW comes out. Unless someone has a way to make the AI more likely to declare war on other civs. Right now, not even the Huns seem to want to fight. Almost all wars have been caused by me (directly or indirectly). Another problem, the German tribes are terrified of the Romans. In Civ3 terms, the Romans are of course extremely powerful. Many resources, luxuries, cities and units. As it should be. In the early 5th century AD, the Roman army was still by far the largest in the known world, numbering some 600,000 in total. Of course, they had to defend a vast territory so that the number of troops per square mile was far smaller than that of the Germans. However, in Civ3 the AI doesn't see it that way. Since the Romans have the biggest army, nobody declares war on them. I need to wait till PTW to force civs to declare war (most likely through pre-set diplomacy and events).

Btw for the scenario idea. I love the dark and medieval ages.

Thanks! As do I. It's one of the most fascinating periods in (European) history.

[Mortifer]

Yup I think its wise to wait for PTW, and finalize settings in that.

[Saint Marcus]

I fixed the bug that made the game crash, and am now playing as the West Romans.

On the first turn I declared war on the Huns, Lombards, Franks, Burgundians, Ostrogoths and Vandals.

Africa: The Vandals conquered the city on the African side of the Gibraltar Straight, and raised every single city right up to Hippo Regius. This is quite accurate, the Vandals only held the cities near Carthago, and the rest fell back in tribal hands. So I'm now battling them near Hippo Regius, and I think I can hold out the siege if nothing drastic happends.

Iberia: The Vandals aren't very active here, which is the way it should be. I teamed up with the Sueves and slowly managed to take some cities back, as did the Sueves. Also historically accurate.

France: I quickly lost all territory in the north of France, and Paris was under siege by the Lombards, Burgundians and Franks. It costed a load of money and tech, but I did manage to get the Visigoths on board, who ended the siege near Paris before making peace with my enemies. I really can't spare any resources now, so Gaul is on it's own. Should any of the German tribes launch another offensive against Paris, it will surely fall. Another nice thing to note, the Burgundians automatically go after the South East of France! This is exactly what they did in real life, but I can't see why they are doing this in the scenario, instead of invading Paris (like the other tribes).

Balkans: The Huns and Ostrogoths quickly managed to take the Balkans and moved into Italy itself. Luckily, the Visigoths helped me out and kicked the Huns and their lackies out of Italy, and they even managed to retake two cities. One was later destroyed by the Huns, the other culturally flipped back to my side (and instead of giving me just one spearmen, I got one heavy infantry unit for free!). The Visigoths made peace with the Huns, and I don't know what strenght the Huns have left now. I managed to get the Armenians to fight the Huns, which opened a nice second front and may be the reason the Visigoths managed to push the Huns back. Time will tell.

Other civs: The Byzantines and Persian try to stay neutral in the various wars, and no matter how much I offer them, they refuse to go to war with the Huns.

General problems: Corruption is extreme. Only a handfull of cities is usefull for producing some of the stronger units. Unhappiness is a ***** too. As is keeping my cashflow positive. All as it should be. I've lost a lot of resources too, and can't build "allied" units any longer, and I don't have the production to produce some of the stronger offensive units. I'm pretty much limited to defending the cities from sieges.

All in all, the AI is doing pretty well.

[Mortifer]

Sweet! I cant wait to play with the scenario.
Of course I will play with the Huns
Hey I think you should make a topic on the CivFanatics boards and make a link to this topic, so the peeps there will know about this upcoming, very good scenario!

[Saint Marcus]

I made some small changes, and started again.

this time I allied with the Lombards, instead of the Visigoths, against the Huns.

The result was quite interesting. The Huns didn't invade Italy right away, but move through lombard territory to Gaul! Just like they are supposed to!

The Vandals are a tad more aggresive in Africa now, and without visigoth assistance the Franks and Burgundians manage to occupy most of Gaul (as they should).

for the first time, I love the Civ3 AI!