Announcement

**Timeline** · August 25, 2001, 18:19

Edit: What the heck happened to this post?! It was supposed to go on the bottom, but instead ended up here! lol

Well, its kind of hard to design a scenario for a game that hasn't even come out yet
What you've planned looks good though.

In the meantime, I recomend that you have a look at Andrew Livings 'Crises of the New World Order', which IMHO is the best scenario covering the contempary world.

Yep, I have it! Just downloaded it a few days ago, and it is AWESOME. I think I would aim for something similar except maybe not so story driven. His is a scenario where you have definite objectives (create new world order, target rebels, etc), I want mine to really be where you can decide your own destiny. Although I have heard warnings against it, I really want to create a scenario that has no time limit, no dead line. For me, when a scenario has a time limit, it just becomes a score game or a race to conquer the world. I want to make it so you can play out the scenario with as few restrictions as possible.

As far as it being hard to design a scenario for I game that hasn't come out yet, just look at all the info above. That has taken about 2 months to get together, and that's how far ahead I am because of starting early. There is no such thing as starting too early when it comes to scenarios. I was just hoping to find some people here who may be interested in helping out: laying out the work that will be involved, deciding if they would want to do it, discussing aspects of the project, and so on. I wanted to do all this before the game comes out, when there is gonna be a whole swarm of people who want scenarios, and a ton of designers who are all-of-the-sudden deeply involved in their own projects.

BTW I have a question for you: what do you think it is that makes Crises of the New World Order so great? Is it the all new terrain, unit, and city graphics? Or, is it the design and layout of the scenario? If the latter, then is it good because of the realism, game balance, expanded tech tree, or other?

I know you could say all of the above, but please try to be specific. I know that when it comes to Design, Game Balance, Diversity, I could do a great job. But I think the thing that makes people play scenarios, and *keep* playing them in some cases, is . . . new and good looking graphics. That's the area I need help. At this point, if I were to do this alone, I could make an average scenario but with absolutely no new graphics. With a graphics person working with me, we could add new units and techs, even maybe some fresh city graphics, which would enhance the scenario a lot.

Well, I am all open to comments on what I have said, but go easy on me

.

**Timeline** · August 25, 2001, 20:08

Wow, I am surprised no one has responded yet. Maybe there isn’t that much interest for this scenario after all . . .

Doesn't anyone want to help me?

**Case** · August 25, 2001, 20:23

Well, its kind of hard to design a scenario for a game that hasn't even come out yet

What you've planned looks good though.

In the meantime, I recomend that you have a look at Andrew Livings 'Crises of the New World Order', which IMHO is the best scenario covering the contempary world.

**Timeline** · August 26, 2001, 18:18

bump

**Timeline** · August 27, 2001, 07:21

You gonna answer my question Case?

**Case** · August 27, 2001, 19:20

Originally posted by Timeline
BTW I have a question for you: what do you think it is that makes Crises of the New World Order so great? Is it the all new terrain, unit, and city graphics? Or, is it the design and layout of the scenario? If the latter, then is it good because of the realism, game balance, expanded tech tree, or other?

What I like is the 'storyline' of the scenario (eg how it's structured) - you really get the feeling that you're the leader of one of the major contempary powers. This is achieved mainly by the way Andrew balenced the military forces and productive capabilities of the civ's.

All the new units are great, and this, along with the tech-tree and the wonders, also greatly adds the scenario's 'crediability'.
I have to confess that I don't like the terrain graphics though - too many dark colours.

**Case** · August 27, 2001, 19:25

BTW Timeline, I like the contrast in our signitures - I've got words of wisdom from America's greatest president, and you've got a typical quote from Dubya, who's well on the way to being one of the worst presidents.

**Timeline** · August 27, 2001, 21:00

Yes, their’s a major contrast there in our quotes

. I try not to worry too much about George ‘Dubya’ (more than is necessary), his term is already almost half over, and most people here admit he won’t be re-elected. The thing to hope for now is that his associates and staff can keep him from causing an International Incident, Civil War, Global Warming, or some other major crises before election season.

A friend of mine from Europe said this over in the Civ III forums:

This looney should be :banned:

Unfortunately there is all too much truth in the last statement

About CNWO, hmm, interesting what you said.

What I like is the 'storyline' of the scenario (eg how it's structured) - you really get the feeling that you're the leader of one of the major contempary powers.

By ‘storyline’ do you mean the events, rebel uprisings, and things like that (i.e. Things that were programmed to happen in the event.txt)? What do you mean by ‘structure’?

This is achieved mainly by the way Andrew balenced the military forces and productive capabilities of the civ's.

All the new units are great, and this, along with the tech-tree and the wonders, also greatly adds the scenario's 'crediability'.

So here you are saying that the units, techs, wonders, made the scenario more realistic, and therefore made you feel more like you were a world leader?

Any suggestions off the top of your head on ways I could make mine better?

**Case** · August 27, 2001, 22:21

As I was saying to a friend the other day, the US taxpayers could save a lot of money and get the same quality of government by hiring me as president, and then doing exactly the opposite of what I say

BTW, how's Hillary Clinton working out as a senator? Has she introduced legislation to have Bill Clinton casterated yet?

Originally posted by Timeline

By ‘storyline’ do you mean the events, rebel uprisings, and things like that (i.e. Things that were programmed to happen in the event.txt)? What do you mean by ‘structure’?

By 'structure' I was refering to the way that players must balence military adventures with domestic development, While still facing threats from other powers.

Originally posted by Timeline
So here you are saying that the units, techs, wonders, made the scenario more realistic, and therefore made you feel more like you were a world leader?

Yes. The scenario is very realistic, and this IMHO is the key to its sucess.

Originally posted by Timeline
Any suggestions off the top of your head on ways I could make mine better?

While having little knowledge of what capabilities Civ3 will bring, I'd recomend that the scenario shouldn't be based entirely around war and military developments - these days economic competition is far more important to the sucess of nations then military competition. This might mean a move away from deciding victory in a scenrio by counting the objective points at the end of the scenario (perhaps having the highest GDP/Capita at the end of the scenario...)

Also, this is a very ambitious project for a brand new game - I hope you realise it means that you'll have to design all the new units yourself

(I guess this is a good reason to start planning early)

**Timeline** · August 27, 2001, 23:10

I haven’t heard much from Hillary lately. I guess she won’t be in town for the state fair this time around, which is all the better for me. For me, the best politician is the one you hear the least from.

As for you running my country - be my guest! We can swear you in as a US citizen (if you’re not one already) and you can run under the Independent ticket in 2004, you will probably win too! You’ll have my vote.

Also, I could use all that data you’ll be getting from CIA briefings for my scenario

this is a very ambitious project for a brand new game - I hope you realise it means that you'll have to design all the new units yourself

Well, there is just no way I am going to get in to graphic unit design, or map making for that matter. That was the point of this whole thread, to find someone who could help me in these areas. If no one will, I will use the default unit graphics, and my poor little scenario won’t have any new unts. Same with the map. If no one’s willing to make a nice world map, then I will be stuck with the default map, which usually isn’t any good.

BTW, I think a lot of people here think Civ 3 is going to be totally different than Civ 2. Guess what? It’s not. I have been following every little bit of info that we have been getting, and intensely discussing it at the forums, and I feel I know this game very well. The developers themselves have called Civ 3 a “conservative sequel”. Well this may be bad for a player looking for something revolutionary, but it is a good thing for scenario designers, as they will not have too much new stuff to learn. Indeed, it has been confirmed by Firaxis that Civ 2 scenarios will be able to be converted to Civ 3.

To anyone reading: If you can make good maps for Civ 2, or if you are good at making unit pics for CTP or CTP 2, then PLEASE contact me as I NEED MAP MAKERS!!! And I need GRAPHIC ARTISTS! - for this project.

Timeline - signing off

**Case** · August 28, 2001, 16:20

Originally posted by Timeline
Indeed, it has been confirmed by Firaxis that Civ 2 scenarios will be able to be converted to Civ 3.

Great!

**echopapa** · August 28, 2001, 22:19

Hey, now...

I wouldn't underestimate Bush, if I were you. He's not as dumb as he looks, and I suspect that he uses his image to his advantage...

Anyway, when you make this scenario, I think that a unified Arab League would be very much contrary to current political situations. I don't expect to see Iraq and Saudi Arabia seeing eye-to-eye frequently: the Arab world has generally been split between traditionalist states (usually pro-Western and with monarchies) and reforming states (usually anti-Western and with republics). Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, and UAE are the former: Iraq, Syria, and Libya are the latter.

Also, despite the wishes of so many Afrocentrists, the idea of sub-Saharan Africa united in purpose is also counterfactual. There are so many petty squabbles between those countries that you may want to set up a "normal" sub-Saharan government, but have a bunch of barbarians running about, making it very difficult to hold on to power.

**Case** · August 29, 2001, 03:54

I've been thinkking that you may want to include a category for 'rouge' states (eg North Korea, Libya, Zimbabwe, Iraq) While these countries generally don't see eye to eye on political matters, there is a great deal of military co-operation between them.

**OneFootInTheGrave** · August 29, 2001, 06:58

There was an idea about the rouge stated going on inthe old thread but it seems that it was ditched in the last map

I still like that ide, these points (cities) should be either barbarrians, or a very aggressive civ, that has everyone else as an enemy.

Announcement

Contemporary World Scenario - any takers?

Contemporary World Scenario - any takers?

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment