2.42?

[Sten Sture]

GP - what knucklehead told you that???

Okay, I meant most recent elaborate scenarios...


Get me on the phone sometime when you are downloading a 2.42 scenario and I'll walk you through the install.

[Jacobite1688]

Three days of Arthur!

Hey folks, my Arthurian "The Lost Island" scenario is all finished, minus the finishing touches. I want to add historical info to the civilopedia and try some stuff I never have done before, like playing with a GIF extractor and such. So, while it is not ready for "release" as such, it is playable. I will try to get it out to y’all who have expressed interest on Friday, so all you Americans can have it for our three-day weekend! Since it is not truly finished, it is my hope that I will get a great deal of feedback and criticisms. I hope to make one more version of the scenario incorporating some of the improvements all of you players think of in the next week or two. Only THEN will I release it.

[Jacobite1688]

Hi, This is Jacobite1688's Wife.

I just wanted to tell you all that I hope you REALLY enjoy this scenario, because my husband has spent an awful lot of time on it when he could have been in bed with me.

Have a nice night.

-Jacowife

P.S. As I do graphic and Web design, he's trying to talk me into designing units. Perhaps we can get a husband and wife design team going here ... ?

[Jacobite1688]

Well, everyone who asked about my Arthurian "The Lost Island" scenario should have got the demo version sent to them late last night. I hope this is the case, as it was the first time I attempted to send something like this. If no one got it, let me know. I have been working on it all day and have already made some minor changes. (e.g. weakening the Missionary unit to make it more simmilar to the Barbarian Leader unit. A city name error was fixed as well as some other small stuff.)

[Goingonit]

Well, I have just finished the beginning of your scen, and this is what I have to say about it:


For the first few decades, there is a continuous deficit. There is no way of getting rid of it, as your size-1 cities cannot support a market at a profit and only size 1 cities can be conquered. Try making some notable cities and some interior cities substantially larger. You could even make churches have 0 upkeep. But certainly, Eburacum and Londinium had more population than the outliers, didn't they?

Although the velites are good for the outlying cities, try some pockets of resistance. For instance, this is a King Arthur scenario: have some knights (the Knights of the Round Table) in Eburacum and that will make the start of the game much more interesting, allowing an attempt at defense in one area, although the others will still die.

Overall, speed up gameplay! As this is pretty much an all-military scenario, you should be plunged into the action almost immediately. More units for both Britons and the Barbarians would preserve the balance while making the game much more interesting.

City improvements should be placed sensibly. If certain things are more trouble than they're worth, maybe remove them altogether.

Those are just my suggestions. I hope they help.

[Hobbes]

Okay, some pros and cons and things of interest about the "Lost Island" scenario:

Cons/suggestions-
- I have no bloomin' money!! I loose money far too quickly.
- Units should have higher movement rates, or roads allow more movement.
- make some improved land to speed up gameplay (irrigation, mining, etc), maybe change the 'irrigation' graphic to look british, like a flock of sheep, for example.

Nickpicks (sorry) -

- the plains terrain looks kinda dry for Britain
- I like the mountain terrain that is used in most scenarios nowadays
- more colourful units (like the Christian horseman)!
- one final nitpick: don't like how villages and towns are represented by one house, makes map look underpopulated.

Pros-

- Overall, the graphics are very good!
- I like the ocean graphic
- I don't know much about Arthurian history, but it seems very historical.
- gameplay eventually speeds up.
- like the boarder graphic
- the "Mount Badon" terrain is cool

Pretty damn good scenario so far! I hope my suggestions help!

[Jacobite1688]

Thanks!

All the suggestions posted were constructive. Sorry if some elements seemed amaturish, but this is my first "serious" scenario. Most of the problems encountered were the same in both posts, (they also match up with my own findings) so I plan to implement ALL suggestions on some level. For example, I will start the scenario with more roads around the cities. This will increase trade and prevent the "road gaps" that result from a city's destruction. Also, while it is thought that few cities had populations above 10,000, I will increase the size of some cities. Thank you again and if anyone else has anything to add, please do so! I'll credit y'all in the read.me and send you finished copies when I submit it.

[Mercator]

Re: Thanks!

Originally posted by Jacobite1688
[...] Also, while it is thought that few cities had populations above 10,000, I will increase the size of some cities. [...]

Since population was so much smaller, you´d probably better "rescale" the population/citysize ratio to represent the differences better. I guess Londinium was a rather large and thriving city for its time, maybe that could be a size 8 or 10 city or so. You can then adjust city sizes for all other cities accordingly.

P.S. I didn´t play the scenarios obviously, I just saw the screenshot and read the thread. I think I´ll be a lousy playtester, but I look forward to playing the final version.

[Goingonit]

It's too bad you can't use the populations built in to the game. However, Mercator's idea sounds good. Otherwise, lack of money will be a very hard to remedy problem.

[Jacobite1688]

No Dough!

A major break through occured in the "no loot" problem. I have replaced Despotism with Monarchy and will rename Communism something along the lines of "Mediaeval Monarchy". Under Monarchy, all the Civs start the game making a profit. The white Roman togas have been colored, in keeping with the historical illustrations by Joseph McEwan and Roger Mann. Also, at the sacrafice of historical factors, other changes have (grudgingly) been made. For one, some city improvements have been removed beacuse, yes, they were not worth there cost. I have found that as the scenario moves away from an historical simulation, playability increases quite a bit. That is the goal, of course. I'll keep y'all updated. Suggestions are always still welcome.

[Jacobite1688]

"Real-life" events have slowed the completion of my scenario. I am now working on re-balancing it, but if it plays as good as it now looks I will be quite proud of it. It will be finished next week, perhaps. Thank you all again for your interest.

[Hobbes]

Jaco,
check this article out:

http://www.civfanatics.com/hist_realism.html

eventhough it mentions events, there is a lot of good advice on how to make a desirable scenario!

[Jacobite1688]

I saw it when Apolyton put it on the CIV II page. Thanks.

[TCO]

Originally posted by Sten Sture
GP - what knucklehead told you that???

Okay, I meant most recent elaborate scenarios...


Get me on the phone sometime when you are downloading a 2.42 scenario and I'll walk you through the install.

Thanks...but I wiped the game off my computer and gave the physical copy away.

[Jacobite1688]

At Last!

I have been sort of "off" of Civ 2 for a number of reasons the last month, but I have been still improving/testing "The Lost Island". I am now confident that it is an interesting, highly playable scenario. As this was my first scenario, I STILL want input, however, before I call it "finished" and post it. Hobbes and Goingonit, you saw the early version of the scenario and your aid has made the scenario what it is. I am going to send you copies of it and hope to hear your thoughts on the work that has been done, particularly concerning how playable it is (or isn't) now. Anyone else interested?