Great Idea for us scenario builders!

Diablo, Bro. of Mephisto · January 13, 2001, 18:00

Here is a great idea(i think anyway):

for built in scenarios, only make 4 AT MOST. the rest we can make on our own. the first one would be a easy, step by step instructions scenario, that gives us an idea of how, and all that to make our own scenario, it would show us how to change units clothes' color, up to changing city tile looks, etc etc.

the next 3 would be the 3 most major things (i think) in this world:
1. World War II
2. Rise and Fall of the Roman Empire.
3. THe American Revolution.

note to number 3, I realize that many (maybe even most) on this page are not american, or do not live in america, so you would highly disagree with me on this one as being one of the major things in this worlds history, but think about it, if the american revolution would not have happened, then america would not be, and just imagine our world without america, Hitler would have undoubtadly won World War II, Sadame Husane would be enjoying himself in Kuwait, not to mention Korea, or Vietnam. DOnt jump on me for saying these things, I am not trying to put America in front of everyone else, I am just stating the facts, but just think about a world without the constitution, without a 'free' peoples republic. actually, America WAS meant to be a republic, but it is now a demacracy, and quickly turning into a socialism.

p.s. if you disagree with me that america is turning into a socialism, I highly recoment the book: THe Freedom Factor. it will give you a birds eye on what america would be like without the constitution. This book is about a man, who is an aide to a senater, that wishes to amend more of the bill of rights. THe main character (the aide to the senater) is given a chance to see what this new amemdment will do, he is transfered to an America that has no constitution...where he learns at first hand experience, what america has become, and would have been without the constitution. it is a very good book, and I learned alot through it.

January 14, 2001, 05:56

The first two are essential. But I don't think that the American revolution would make a good scenario. Not for civ3 at least, where the focus is on building cities and engaging in diplomacy, not just on fighting battles.

Instead, there should be a colonisation scenario, in which you control one of the colonising European nations trying to establish itself in Africa. If the aspects of the game such as colonies are introduced, then you could declare independence and stuff...

------------------
-Shiva
Email: shiva@shivamail.com
Web: http://www.shivamail.com
ICQ: 17719980

Evil Capitalist · January 14, 2001, 06:34

The American revolution a major world event on a par with WW2. Don't make me laugh.

If we're including that, why not the Conquest of England? Or the Chinese Civil war? Or the Russian? Or the Turkish war of independence. All of these could be seen as more important at the time.

Diablo, Bro. of Mephisto · January 14, 2001, 20:28

quote:

Originally posted by Evil Capitalist on 01-14-2001 05:34 AM
The American revolution a major world event on a par with WW2. Don't make me laugh.

If we're including that, why not the Conquest of England? Or the Chinese Civil war? Or the Russian? Or the Turkish war of independence. All of these could be seen as more important at the time.

I've never even knew the turks had a civil war. Sure, the conquest of britain was major, but if it didn't happen, there would still be British. the chinese civil war? it effected no one except themselves, UNLIKE the american war of independence.

if you dont think America has had an important effect on the world, go back to your history books. and if you do agree that America HAS had a great effect on the world, then answer this, what is the basis of america, simple answer, its freedoms and rights, the constitution to be specific. and the constitution would not have been ratified had the american revolution NOT taken place.

St Leo · January 14, 2001, 23:07

I've never even knew the turks had a civil war.

Yes, your education system is screwed up.

Sure, the conquest of britain was major, but if it didn't happen, there would still be British.

If the American Civil War had not happenned, there would still be Americans.

the chinese civil war? it effected no one except themselves, UNLIKE the american war of independence.

Ignoring your deplorable spelling and the implications derived from the Chaos Theory, we can safely say that an Imperial or Democratic China would have resulted in a very different century.

what is the basis of america, simple answer, its freedoms and rights, the constitution to be specific. and the constitution would not have been ratified had the american revolution NOT taken place.

Your Declaration of Independence and to a lesser degree Constitution were hardly groundbreaking in its content. They borrowed from Emmanuel Kant and a dozen other philosophers most of their content. A much more important thing to remember about your Revolution is that it probably inspired the French one.

------------------
St. Leo
http://www.sidgames.com/hosted/ziggurat/
http://www.sidgames.com/forums/

Adm.Naismith · January 15, 2001, 04:22

I think I can post here again my humble suggestion I already wrote on the CTP II forum about the same subject:

quote:

I see almost every proposed scenario focused on war. While I agree that fighting (in games) can be very fun, I think that limiting CTPII (or any CIV like) game as a wargame is not making great use of its engine.

I support ideas as Cold War, Napoleon, or after Nuclear exchange Fallout-like, still I would like to see some scenario where war is not the main backbone.

Just to suggest some themes:

1) run to the moon (discover the needed tech on appropriate tech tree, with or without other countries help, and having enough production points for enough time).
It could be a variant of the Build the starship to Alpha Centauri, but starting right in modern era (after WWII).

2) italian renaissance (some little states deeply involved in trade, diplomatic move and limited fights, while arts and sciences grow to industrialization)

3) age of explorations (some limited and dedicated exporer units must survey - and survive to native encounter - every square of the globe)

4) save the earth (quickly solve a scenario where production is growth so high that pollution is almost out of control. Tune down production, improve eco-enhancement, clean up polluted area and save the world from global warming, trading and treating with less developed country to join your efforts)

5) world peacekeeping (stop every war using diplomacy, money or - as a last resource - your U.N. peacekeeping forces

- in a defined turn limit, with the limit to free back every city you conquer in a few turns - you can't conquer the world just to force the peace)

May be my suggestion are a bit crazy and have some limits to be implemented in an interesting way, but I would like to suggest a different point of view about common scenario approach.

------------------
Admiral Naismith AKA mcostant

Deathwalker · January 15, 2001, 04:36

OH please, no American reolution, it's no more improtant than the Russian or any other. The world war's yes, rome yes. But lets try an pick ones that had a lot of countries involved, E.G. Napoloan, Axlenander the great or others.

------------------
I have walked since the dawn of time and were ever I walk, death is sure to follow

Cannes · January 15, 2001, 05:18

On a historical note.
I must totally disagree on the fact that USA were essential in bringing Hitler and nazi germany to it's knees. After the winter of 1943 Germany no longer had any (read no) chance of beating the sovjet of union. I don't know what the teach you americans in history classes, but they are totally warping WWII and who played the larger part of the victory against germany (did anyone wisper commy fear?)

New Yorker · January 15, 2001, 14:18

[quote]Originally posted by Deathwalker on 01-15-2001 03:36 AM
OH please, no American reolution, it's no more improtant than the Russian or any other. The world war's yes, rome yes. But lets try an pick ones that had a lot of countries involved, E.G. Napoloan, Axlenander the great or others.

i agree, even though i am an american, but the American
Revolution is just as important as any other major revolutions, russian, french, etc.

the Napoleonic Wars are far too important to be left out & if you think about it, the Napoleonic Wars was the first world war & if that is true, then world war three had took place

--------------------------
New Yorkers are true americans cuz they come from all corners of the globe

Steve Clark · January 15, 2001, 16:05

There are not many American Revolutionary War games that have been developed. The Revolution scenario that came with FW(?) was one of the best scenarios I've ever played and had wished that someone would've done a more advanced version of it.

Even though my interest and bias think the ideals that were fought over in the American Revolutionary War (liberty and freedom) were the best of all such wars, it shouldn't be a priority for a Civ3 scenario. The scenarios should consist of the following basic goals:
winning a war against an enemy
conquering all enemies militarily
conquering all enemies economically (or other factors)
first to reach a place/AC
maintain the peace or just survive

That way, scenario developers can get an idea of the methods and mechanics of developing custom scenarios.

St Leo · January 15, 2001, 22:35

There are not many American Revolutionary War games that have been developed. The Revolution scenario that came with FW(?) was one of the best scenarios I've ever played and had wished that someone would've done a more advanced version of it.

I played it once (as Brits) and couldn't get a Major Victory because one of the objective cities got destroyed.

------------------
St. Leo
http://www.sidgames.com/hosted/ziggurat/
http://www.sidgames.com/forums/

Dom Pedro II · January 16, 2001, 00:42

Not that I want to get TOO involved because its an OT topic, not a Civ 3 topic, but no matter what the farther back in history you go, the more important individual event tend to become. For example, a turning point in the Middle East or the Mediterranean in the early BCs had world wide consequences that we can feel to this day.

January 16, 2001, 12:05

The ultimate scenario to show off all the intricate new diplomatic and gameplay options would be Middle East, 1948-Present.

Diablo, Bro. of Mephisto · January 16, 2001, 18:17

I know that the Germans (NOT nazis, nazis are NOT a nationality, they are a political party) had no chance against the Russians. But it was there own mistakes that brought them defeat. The main cause for the Germany losing the war was Stalingrad. there they lost more then 200,000 troops in less then a month. But if americans weren't around, who would have stopped the Japs from winning the war. We were the ONLY country besides Australia, New Zealand, and CHina (australia and new zealand did almost nothing, so technically they werent part of the war) that fought the Japs.

ps. I forgot to mention that the Americans were also the ones that stopped Sadam Husane.

pps. why make scenarios just because they involved 3 or more different countries even though they had nothing major. sure, I know the nepoleolic wars were major. But the american revolution is most likely the number one reason why the americans and british are not best friends any more. and it was the most major thing happening at the time.

ppps. By the way, our constitution and declaration of independence were taken from other historical stuff...I know that!, you think I'm stupid? You think I dont know my own countries history.

But, it is because of those two documents that america is what it is today. since when has any government in the history of the world been as long lasting, and successful as the american government. sure, there are lots of governments around the world that have lasted much longer then americans', but since when were they 'good' governments, giving the people what they freely deserve.

Brent · January 16, 2001, 18:23

what's wrong with playing against only one computer opponent?

Diablo, Bro. of Mephisto · January 16, 2001, 18:27

quote:

Originally posted by St Leo on 01-14-2001 10:07 PM
I've never even knew the turks had a civil war.

Yes, your education system is screwed up.

Sure, the conquest of britain was major, but if it didn't happen, there would still be British.

If the American Civil War had not happenned, there would still be Americans.

the chinese civil war? it effected no one except themselves, UNLIKE the american war of independence.

Ignoring your deplorable spelling and the implications derived from the Chaos Theory, we can safely say that an Imperial or Democratic China would have resulted in a very different century.

what is the basis of america, simple answer, its freedoms and rights, the constitution to be specific. and the constitution would not have been ratified had the american revolution NOT taken place.

Your Declaration of Independence and to a lesser degree Constitution were hardly groundbreaking in its content. They borrowed from Emmanuel Kant and a dozen other philosophers most of their content. A much more important thing to remember about your Revolution is that it probably inspired the French one.

1. You dont live in the United States, that much is clear.

2. I said nothing to do with the american civil war. I dont know why the hell you said that, pure stupid.

3. so what if it inspired the french one? our revolution was a great example, why the hell wouldn't someone have the right to break away from tyranny? The french government was collapsing, they needed a new form of government. And the american government was the best to choose from, I promise you that.

ps. you know why most other nations despise the United States? because they know we have something they do not...freedom. freedom of speech, religion, freedom of the press, etc. etc. etc. The number one reason for hatred is jealousy.

Brent · January 16, 2001, 18:33

Diablo, you know I respect you, but I don't think we Americans ought to act superior to non-Americans. I think some forums have guidelines against that sort of thing.

Sirotnikov · January 16, 2001, 19:03

Diablo, I disagree with many things you have said, but it isn't the topic here. The simple reason why the american civil war is a bad scenario as one of the major four is that it is too local and too war-like. There are no other paths.

The only scenario I play besides WWII is a scenario I download two years ago from apolyton called "The 20th century". It starts in 1918 with Germany, Russia, League of Nations, China, Japan, USA and Brittain.

Why is it so good?
You simply start and play each nation the way you want. The data was pretty accurate historically and the nations are just beginning to develop themselves. Most often I played germany and started a WWII or russia and started WWII as well

.

This was very open ended and very not easy. You had a great number of options. You could wage war or be isolationist and build Space ships. WWII was always started (because of attitudes, not because of events) by China and Japan and then germany and the league of nations.

In Civ 3 there could be more civilizations so there would be france spain and more countries. If rebellions are possible, events could be programmed so that new nations will form in india, the middle east, south america and africa from nations who were previously under imperilistic control.

This is the best scenario i can think of.

tniem · January 16, 2001, 21:43

The biggest thing that Diablo said in his original post was to keep the number of scenarios created by Firaxis down. The rest can be made by those that want to play them. Firaxis should only do a few very important scenarios with mulitple ways to win.

Evil Capitalist · January 17, 2001, 04:44

quote:

Originally posted by Diablo, Bro. of Mephisto on 01-16-2001 05:17 PM
ps. I forgot to mention that the Americans were also the ones that stopped Sadam Husane.

Sorry to burst your bubble, but several other nations contributed to the offensive. I'd like to see how far you'ldve got without Saudi help.

quote:

pps. why make scenarios just because they involved 3 or more different countries even though they had nothing major. sure, I know the nepoleolic wars were major. But the american revolution is most likely the number one reason why the americans and british are not best friends any more. and it was the most major thing happening at the time.

Brits and yanks not best friends. You say we don't know about your history. If you knew about your history you would realise that since George Canning's spell as foreign secretary Anglo American relationships improved dramatically. Unless you noticed you did help us out in two world wars.

The arguement that nothing else major was happening at the time is completely irrelevent. It would justify any scenario from Kosovo to the War of Jenkins' ear.

quote:

ppps. By the way, our constitution and declaration of independence were taken from other historical stuff...I know that!, you think I'm stupid? You think I dont know my own countries history.

But, it is because of those two documents that america is what it is today. since when has any government in the history of the world been as long lasting, and successful as the american government. sure, there are lots of governments around the world that have lasted much longer then americans', but since when were they 'good' governments, giving the people what they freely deserve.

Try the British government. Emancipated slaves before America. Allowed women the vote throughout before America IIRC. Also made its people the richest and most powerful in the world.

Adm.Naismith · January 17, 2001, 09:07

Please, please, don't trash a good thread!

Ladies and Gentlemen, back on track!

Current interesting points are (I'm adding some just now):

- Firaxis releasing just a bunch of scenarios; > do you like/dislike? (downloading later can be expensive and tiresome)

- Main sources of others scenarios you'll like more:
from fans on Apolyton or Firaxis official site (at least one new every month for a year to keep the game fresh) > Fans or Firaxis?

- Scenarios on the box must be:
mainly around war,
peaceful development and diplomacy
or a mix of the two?
> Suggestion on scenario subject are welcome, nasty disagreement are not

Mark and DanQ can make a poll to rate the resulting suggestions, keep the guns reloading for that moment

My humble opinion.

------------------
Admiral Naismith AKA mcostant

tniem · January 17, 2001, 23:36

Adm.Naismith,

I prefer the game be able to allow scenario creators to be fans. Firaxis does not have time to make countless scenarios. They need the time to make Civ III a great game and then begin working on whatever the next game is.

Fans have time to make scenarios, test them, and then distribute them. I think that the Apolyton community will produce more scenarios than Firaxis can hope to, and the Apolyton community will do it for free while Firaxis making them will cost money.

Diablo, Bro. of Mephisto · January 18, 2001, 00:31

quote:

Originally posted by Evil Capitalist on 01-17-2001 03:44 AM
Try the British government. Emancipated slaves before America. Allowed women the vote throughout before America IIRC. Also made its people the richest and most powerful in the world.

Your talking completely about britain years ago, how about today. I know the british have a good government, I personally think they have a great government, its just that look at the america what it is TODAY.

p.s. Most americans back then disagreed with slavery. it was mainly the southern states that wanted it.

I know the saudis helped! It was thanks to them that we had airbases in saudi to help out...dah!

But if america didn't help out, it would have taken the other countries alot longer to defeat Husane. We were the ones that sent in the majority of the troops.

to the rest of you: sorry to get off the subject. I just think that firaxis should make one scenario to show us all how to operate the new editors, then a couple more so we can get the feel for scenarios in civ3.

Brent · January 18, 2001, 15:48

Well, to put my foot partway into my mouth, From what I hear the British only decided to be friendly to us was fear. They saw what we did to the Spanish, and didn't want to be next. This view is probably not too fair, since it comes from Americans.

More scenarios mean a better whole product, which is more important than the release date. Maybe base all the ones in the original game on the ones in MGE. I do think Firaxis should sell an additional set of scenarios in the stores, because some people don't have access to the fan ones. I personally would likely be unable to create good, historically accurate scenarios, depending on the editor. I think once the main Civ3 is finished, it would be fine for them to spend additional time making more scenarios. Civ3 is their flagship, and without knowing what they'll do next, I don't have anything to be impatient about.

Diablo, Bro. of Mephisto · January 18, 2001, 20:20

quote:

Originally posted by Brent on 01-18-2001 02:48 PM
Well, to put my foot partway into my mouth, From what I hear the British only decided to be friendly to us was fear. They saw what we did to the Spanish, and didn't want to be next. This view is probably not too fair, since it comes from Americans.

More scenarios mean a better whole product, which is more important than the release date. Maybe base all the ones in the original game on the ones in MGE. I do think Firaxis should sell an additional set of scenarios in the stores, because some people don't have access to the fan ones. I personally would likely be unable to create good, historically accurate scenarios, depending on the editor. I think once the main Civ3 is finished, it would be fine for them to spend additional time making more scenarios. Civ3 is their flagship, and without knowing what they'll do next, I don't have anything to be impatient about.

I thought you said you dont want me putting us americans above other quote, 'non-americans', now look at yourself.

tniem · January 20, 2001, 17:13

quote:

Originally posted by Diablo, Bro. of Mephisto on 01-17-2001 11:31 PM
I know the saudis helped! It was thanks to them that we had airbases in saudi to help out...dah!

But if america didn't help out, it would have taken the other countries alot longer to defeat Husane. We were the ones that sent in the majority of the troops.

Defeat Hussein??? He is still there.

My country, the U.S. did nothing in the Gulf War. It was a war to maintain cheap oil. It ended with us leaving their leader as the head of their government. What did we accomplish?

Never again say that the U.S. proved anything in the Gulf War, we didn't. And Hussein is still there smiling as his people die off.

chrispie · January 20, 2001, 18:48

Had to have my say in this thread...

I mean, little thing known collectively as 'The Industrial Revolution'....heard of it Diablo? That literally created the world as it is today, a tiny bit more important than a revolution in one country I think, regardless of who it involved.

Of course there is also the British Empire, that'd come 4th in my list of world changing events.

Diablo, Bro. of Mephisto · January 20, 2001, 23:53

tniem,

I realize he is still there, you are right about that, but we did do one thing, we drove the Iraqies of of Kuwait.

also, Yin26, if you read this, please delete this thread of mine, its got to be quite...bloody.
[This message has been edited by Diablo, Bro. of Mephisto (edited January 20, 2001).]

Brent · January 21, 2001, 02:39

Well, at least I was talking about the fairly distant past, and I only did it once! I do have a good deal of respect for the UK, and I'd like to hear their view.

tniem · January 21, 2001, 17:07

quote:

Originally posted by Diablo, Bro. of Mephisto on 01-20-2001 10:53 PM
I realize he is still there, you are right about that, but we did do one thing, we drove the Iraqies of of Kuwait.

If you mean that we bulldozed Iraqis than you are quite right. We do not know how many we killed in the war because we dumped sand on their heads.

The 'war' was so one sided that construction crews could have been used to win the 'war.' I do not think this proves that the U.S. is so strong nor would necessarily have taken our allies longer to defeat him had England, France, Germany, and others participated.

Should the U.S. have gotten involved? IMHO I would say yes, but it is something that we should never brag about nor use to say we are so great. War is a terrible thing and when it has no end result or sucess than it is pointless and those that died did so for no gain to anyone.