Modern Scenario

[kormer]

Well like I said, I was up till 3am just trying things until it worked. It kept crashing on me whenever I loaded more than 8 civs on your map until I think I export/imported the map and started over with 16 civs. After that I *think* I added cities, but deleted settlers of the specific nations that I wanted to use. Also, I never set any starting flags. There is a box called player choice that has all the civs on it, keep it on player choice and you should be able to choose which civ you are.

Status update: I'm adding city improvements now, this is taking quite a while to do. I should have that and units added before this weekend, then we can do some real playtesting and balance out the sides.

[jkadabomb]

Southeast Asia sounds like a good idea to add. Also I hope your scenario will work with the diplomacy/frenzy mod. That would make things interesting. When you have an alpha or beta copy ready I will be glad to test it, also if you have the map I will take a look at it and see if I find any mistakes. Email it to me at jadlakha@houston.rr.com

[jkadabomb]

Nevermind, I am an idiot. I should have payed attention to the fact that the alpha is at omnigod's webpage. Also there is a link to my email already anyways. Boy has it been a long day. I will check out the alpha and give you any suggestions I have when I actually have time to play it.

[kormer]

I agree with you there on the canadians. I decided to sacrafice true city placement in favor of better gameplay, for example I moved toronto quite a ways west so it wouldn't scrunch into the other cities. My atlas only lists cities greater than 200,000 not including metro areas, so I didn't know what to add in newfoundland. I gave iceland to the Europeans, although with just a fort and an airport there. If I put a small city in greenland would it be appropriate to give iceland to canada? Correct me if I'm wrong but I believe greenland is technically part of denmark.

As for the forts...what do you expect from a half-ass project from activision? If you know a better way please share it.

[OmniGod]

I believe it is a part of denmark still, thus the proper owner would be Europe. IMO as for Canada, I'm not sure about game play over city placement. Nations including the US and Europe are very closely packed. Toronto is somewhere between Sudbury and Sault Ste. Marie in your map, IMO those are important Canadian cities for production and trade. I am going to start on the colonization scenario again. As for the fortress frenzy, I think I have a better solution, but I'll give it a try before I post anything on it... better to be cautious then give false hope

Rich
[This message has been edited by OmniGod (edited January 16, 2001).]

[magma12]

kormer, The Capital of Thailand is Bangkok the 2nd largest is Chaing Mai. We do have a place in history too.
The only country in South East Asia that is not conquest by the west. Lao, Combodia, part of Vietname, Malaysia,
Burma used to be long to Thailand.

[kormer]

Magma, sorry for leaving you out. Bankok will be included in the final version.

[Jonny]

Just an idea:

You might want to give Libya to the "bad boy muslim civ", if there are any cities there, because they run under a socialist republic/communist government.

Jonny

[jkadabomb]

KEEP NUKE TECHNOLOGY IN THE GAME!!!!! I read the read me and it said nuke technology would not be in the scenario. I say keep it. Since research has been slowed then it will take a while for nations to get it anyways. And plus nuke building should be allowed by the nations with nukes already. Any country that can develop alot of technology can research nukes, and this should remain that way in the scenario.

[kormer]

Jonny, I do agree that libyia would probably fit in better with the "bad boy" muslim civ better. The only thing is there isn't anything in lybia, its just miles and miles of desert. For geographic reasons it made more sense to put them in the "good guy" muslim civ rather than have one "island" city in the middle of the enemy. Also the same could be said of pakistan and khazakstan going to the bad boy muslim civ so it all balances out.

JKadabomb, let me clarify. Countries that currently possess nuclear weapons will have nuclear weapons in the scenario. Certain of those countries may not have the technology to build more nukes though. For example, the only reason pakistan has nukes is because china gave them nukes. They are estimated to have no more than 30-40 nuclear devices compared to the US's 10 thousand. Their technology in producing nuclear weapons is not very sophistcated, and only takes place with the aid of chinese "supervisors" While more slightly more advanced, similar arguements can be said of india as well. You will start with enough nukes for a war, but not enough to wipe out the world.

Also the reason for not including nuke technology from the beginning for certain nations is because its in a bad spot on the tech tree, if someone wants to fix the tech tree then that would be different. I'll have to check, but I think india will only be 1 advance away from nuke technology so don't fret about it too much

[jkadabomb]

Oh, thank you for clarifying. Actually I thought you totally excluded nukes from the tech tree. I didnt know that they could still be researched even though you dont start out with em at the beginning. Well thanx for the clarification. BTW how do you install the scenario and have you fixed the pollution problem?

[kormer]

Just go into the main ctp2 directory and unzip it. It should be something like c:\program files\activision\ctp2, mines in a different place though so I'm not sure.

Status update: Pollution has been added to the game, I'm nearly done placing city improvements and tile improvements for everyone. After that I'll place units and release a beta version to be playtested, possibly tonight, tomorrow for sure.

[OmniGod]

update then?

[magma12]

Thanks

[GAMEOVER]

You all sound extremly racist in discussing this new mod. The entire African continent as barbarians, am I the only one theat sees this as dripping with racism. The entire world is embroiled in conflict(middle east, idonesia, india, balkans, etc.) ANd many nations though not in out right civil war face internal social and politcal strife (US included)! So I think we should avoid steryotyping the African continent as barabric, and coem to realize that though not as powerful militarily as their western counterparts they have a rich and storied culture and history.

WE should also avoid "good" and "bad" guys when discussin countries.

just my 2 cents