Another scenario contest?

[DarthVeda]

Originally posted by kobayashi
We will be submitting a joint entry - and we intend to win.

You don't have a prayer

[WarVoid]

Alright, so here's what I have for the official rules

Official Rules of Scenario Design Contest Number Five

1.) All entries must be received before December 1st, 2002.
2.) All entries must be include two zip files (if applicable); one containing the scenario files, the other containing sounds.
3.) All entries must be e-mailed to SDC. An e-mail listing a URL where the scenario may be downloaded from is NOT acceptable.
4.) The e-mail for SDC #5 is arcticor@aol.com
5.) Zip files must not be larger than 1.5 megabytes in size.
6.) All scenarios must reside within the SDC #5 theme; the Age of Sail, between the years 1500 Anno Domini and 1801 Anno Domini.
7.) Maps and resources provided by Scenario League are NOT required for use by designers. These are supplementary items only intended to help amateur designers only. All designers are free to use their own designs.
8.) The scenario MUST be designed on the MGE (Multi-Player Gold) of ToT (Test of Time) Civ2 platform.
9.) The scenario must be designed for PBEM (Play By E-Mail) in mind.
10.) Questions and comments about SDC #5 can be e-mail to warvoid@aol.com

Anything I missed or should add/remove?

I have been compiling some resources which i'll post later in a new thread. Mercator's bloody map site seems to be down permanently... grrrr...

[Frank Johnson]

Someone explain what PBEM is different from a normal multiplayer scenario? Do you not use events or something?

[Case]

Will scenarios that are playable either as PBEMs or single player games get bonus points over scenarios that are only playable as a multi player/PBEM game?

[hardjoy]

Originally posted by Frank Johnson
Someone explain what PBEM is different from a normal multiplayer scenario? Do you not use events or something?

They're not particularly different. Events can still be used, but typically not events designed with a single player in mind... but you wouldn't want that in a mp game either. The only difference I can think of, is that a pbem does not have to be played to the end in one or two sittings. And you never see your opponent move. Preferably a good pbem scenario should also be a good multiplayer scenario, IMO.

Btw, Warwoid, is that 1.5 mb limit for both sounds and scenario zips? -or for each zip? I assume its the total size limit, but I could be wrong.

[techumseh]

The issue of teams should be spelled out; ie. is there a max number of persons? Are teams to be registered in advance? When is the deadline for this?

The rules usually provide for the issuing of code names to entries by a contest administrator so that the judge doesn't know the names of the entrants. In the past the role of judge has been offered to the winner of the last contest, though in light of Warvoid's initiative in getting this contest going, I'm sure no one will object to his being the judge.

Contestants have traditionally been encouraged to keep their participation secret, as well as any details about their contest entry. This is to avoid scaring off less experienced contestants and to avoid disputes about who had what idea first.

[Case]

Originally posted by techumseh
Contestants have traditionally been encouraged to keep their participation secret, as well as any details about their contest entry. This is to avoid scaring off less experienced contestants and to avoid disputes about who had what idea first.

oops

[kobayashi]

Why don't we just call it a multi-player scenario to avoid confusion. The entires will be tested as 'live' games anyway. So how about dropping the word PBEM.

Another suggestion is to specifiy a minimum of X of the tribes must be playable by humans such that they have roughly equal chances of winning. (perhaps X=3 )

Also would like clarification on the teams thing. It has been mentioned that 9 months is more than enough time for any advantage from having more than one designer to disappear. WillemO and I are making one together for the experience, not because there is any advantage. However, if teams are not allowed, I would like to know ASAP.

[Mercator]

Originally posted by WarVoid
I have been compiling some resources which i'll post later in a new thread. Mercator's bloody map site seems to be down permanently... grrrr...

Yes I know, sorry... The university server is giving problems. I got plenty of maps (much more than on the website) on my PC so just let me know what kind of maps you're looking for and I'll send you some sort of compilation.

[Willem_van_Oranje]

Originally posted by kobayashi
We will be submitting a joint entry - and we intend to win.

You can say that again!!

Originally posted by Fiera
I'm al for team work being allowed. I mean, if the scn creators don't mind sharing the prize , where's the problem?

There's a prize to win?

Originally posted by kobayashi
However, if teams are not allowed, I would like to know ASAP.

Yes! Me too!!! I really can't find a reason why this should be prohibited, as stated before: no one makes a scenario entirely by himself. People want to use Mercator's maps, byhat they colaborate, one may use units and other graphics from the SL download page, by that there is colaboration, one sure uses some ideas from other scens (I think), playtesters say what's good and bad and make suggestions for improvement, that's colaboration.

[Jay Bee]

For the third and last time: this should be SDC # 4, not 5.

[BeBMan]

Another question: can designers who take part testplay other works for the contest? Just curious...

[our_man]

Warvoid, about the rule regarding only MGE/ToT being acceptable platforms; why can't FW entries be allowed? I do have a copy of MGE, but it's really buggy on my computer, and so I'd prefer to use FW.

Working multiplayer scenarios can be designed using this platform - for example Kobayashi's ZWK. The only major differences in the two version is the bug which prevents MGE from recognizing objectivex3 cities, and the describe.txt.

Please allow the use of FW - there is no reason that I see that it should not be allowed. I promise I'll avoid using objectivex3 cities (hell, I might leave out objectives altogether).

One final question, the theme is the Age of Sail. Does this mean that the scenario has to have something to do with naval warfare, or does it just have to be within the timeframe?

[BeBMan]

Originally posted by our_man
Warvoid, about the rule regarding only MGE/ToT being acceptable platforms; why can't FW entries be allowed? I do have a copy of MGE, but it's really buggy on my computer, and so I'd prefer to use FW.

Working multiplayer scenarios can be designed using this platform - for example Kobayashi's ZWK. The only major differences in the two version is the bug which prevents MGE from recognizing objectivex3 cities, and the describe.txt.

Please allow the use of FW - there is no reason that I see that it should not be allowed. I promise I'll avoid using objectivex3 cities (hell, I might leave out objectives altogether).

One final question, the theme is the Age of Sail. Does this mean that the scenario has to have something to do with naval warfare, or does it just have to be within the timeframe?

It should be no problem if you use FW, MGE Players can play it too...

And about the topic, Warvoid wrote earlier in this thread, that the scn should have both - naval warfare and ground combat...

[Case]

Here's a few books which may prove useful:

'Naval Warfare in the Age of Sail' by Bernard Ireland.
Published by HarperCollins in 2000. ISBN: 0 00 414522 4

'The Illustrated Companion to Nelson's Navy' by Nicholas Blake and Richard Lawrence.
Published by Chatham Publishing in 1999. ISBN: 1 86176 090 6

'The Rise and Fall of British Naval Mastery' by Paul Kennedy
Published by Penguin Books in 1976 [a new edition came out in 2001 as part of the Penguin Classic History series]
ISBN: 0 141 39047 6

The last book is paricularly useful as it covers the geographic, economic and military factors which allowed Britian to build and sustain her navy.

In addtion, all the novels in Patrick O'Brian's excellent Aubrey/Maturin series have interesting technical essays at the end.