 |
| |
|
|
BeBro
|
 |
of the Krauts
Mar 2000
time: 06:13
|
|
Thanks for all comments 
I just sent the corrected fourth Roman events to all of you.
Ok, I´ll do the following: I´ll make a reworked version of the scn that includes...
-corrected spelling
-some techtree changes (e.g. for more happyness)
-some terrain changes/improvements (e.g. royal highway, more other roads/irrigations around some enemy cities etc.)
-reduce trade a bit (no more trade bonus for hills)
-improved events (perhaps the BC thing saves enough space to create more enemy units)
-the events set (I think also four files) for the Macedonians/Phoenicians
I´ll finish these things next weekend, so you can relax a bit now...
If someone has more suggestions for the new version, feel free to post it here. 
BTW, one tester has suggested that I make only the Romans playable now, and release a separate scn for the Macedonians. I think it is a good idea, but currently I´ll try to make that extra events for the other civs. But I plan to make such a game a bit harder, because when you play as Macedonians/Phoenicians, you´ll face a Roman war machine that receives heavy support via events...
Warvoid, some questions to you:
-How many turns you needed to finish the game?
-Do you found the later game too easy?
-Should I increase the tech paradigm?
KhanMan, currently I have enough testers, but when I´ve finished the new version next weekend, it would be good when some people play the other playable civs, so I´ll contact you then...
------------------
Civ2000
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
BeBro
|
|
of the Krauts
Mar 2000
time: 06:13
|
|
Shadowstrike, I think the Quinquereme tech would be a big advantage for the Romans, probably too big for a Human player...
VietMinh, I made Spartans available, because Hellas was under the Spartan hegemony 386BC. However, I mainly named all Greeks after a known polis (Spartans, Athenians Thebanes) because I want to avoid that all Greek units are only "hoplites". Remember also that in the 4th century BC more and more Greek hoplites (also Spartans) became mercenaries who fought in many different countries.
For the Macedonians, my goal was not that the Macedonians conquer the complete Persian Empire as Alex did. I know this isn´t accurate, but in my eyes, it´s much better for the game - it would be a bit boring when the Romans meet only Macedonians in the east. In my tests the Macedonians conquered nearly the half of Persia (sometimes more, sometimes less), slower as Alex did, but I think this is ok.
It´s also better when you think about the Hellenistic period with its different Hellenistic realms, so when the Romans advance eastwards, you can consider Macedonia, Egypt and Persia as "Hellenistic" (I know, I know  , but with the civ2 limitations...)
Ok, the next days I´ll probably be busy with other things, but I´m still optimistic that I can finish the improved version next weekend.
Edit: just read your last post, Shadowstrike. Thanks for that hint, I´ll change this in the upcoming version
------------------
Civ2000
[This message has been edited by BeBro (edited November 26, 2000).]
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
SCDARS
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Prometeus on 11-26-2000 04:24 PM
Yup, carthaginian spelling for Cagliari was Karalis...
|
Are you sure? If I recall correctly, the Carthaginians never wrote vowels - at least when writing Punian/ Phoenician
I am also very confident that very soon Caralis will switch sides an become a Roman city...
However, Bernd, if you want further correction, referring to my maps (I checked 4 or 5 different ones) it's "Hadrumetum" and not "Hadrumentum".
But, without wanting to hurt you, Prom., I must say I don't think that things like names significantly downgrade the scenario or its historical accuracy...
I still enjoyed playing the less accurate older German versions, and I think things have improved since then -at least you can't irrigate forests anymore
Really good work, BeBro!
You always have to compromise between history, playability and opportunities offered by Civ2.
Just imagine the "horrible" fact that Alexandria is already on the map at the beginning of the scenario - even with two wonders... But on the one hand, you simply can't force the AI to found a City named "Alexandria" at this location in 332/331 and to build the two wonders in the proper time, on the other hand Alexandria became a very important City you couldn't leave out in the scenario, so you can't get around placing the city there...
I hope Civ3 will introduce an event like this.
P.S: One suggestion I would consider is adding a kind of King's Road in Persia to allow the Alexander a faster and more effective expansion. Of course you must be careful not to give the Persians to much trade by those roads...
Edit: Just saw that Civfan has posed this suggestion earlier, so I'm not the only one demanding this...
I also would be pleased to see the next (German or English) beta version soon...
[This message has been edited by SCDARS (edited November 27, 2000).]
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
BeBro
|
|
of the Krauts
Mar 2000
time: 06:13
|
|
Prometeus, I know, the Thebans used Sarissas earlier then Macedonians
For Caralis, if both spellings are possible, I´ll stay with the "C" to indicate that this is mainly a scn which should be played from the Roman view...
Shadowstrike, Romans should concentrate on their land forces (as in reality ), however a good warfleet makes a lot of things easier, it´s of course also needed to capture the islands.
I have to think a bit about these Carthaginian ships, I think the submarine flag for all warships isn´t the best solution, lets see...
Ingo, the king´s road will be definately in the next version, also the corrected Hadrumetum...
------------------
Civ2000
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
BeBro
|
|
of the Krauts
Mar 2000
time: 06:13
|
|
Yup, Shadowstrike, but please wait until you´ve played the updated version. For the testing, if you are low on time, its not a problem, of course the real life comes first
Ok, I finished all changes except the events for the other civs. Changes are as follows:
-some terrain changes, including the king´s road in Persia
-"destroyed" Aquileia, using Opitergium instead now
-improved (I hope )events for the Romans
-techtree changes that should be better for the happiness, some others that should reduce the one time trade bonus
-changed Marius army reform, it upgrades your Legions only once now (more realistic)
-fixed the Caralis/Pentere thing
-improved spelling, e.g Phoenicians, I changed also some unit names, hope I made no new errors...
-introduced a second units file ( ) as well as a second rules file for the Romans, these files are automatically generated when you change to the 4th Roman events, they have three new enemy units...
I´ll enjoy some free time now , sending the scn to the testers tomorrow. I hope I can finish also the other events tomorrow, if not, I´ll do this in the next days. So, if I make no stupid errors, the release should be possible soon.
BTW, I love these christmas smileys
------------------
Civ2000
[This message has been edited by BeBro (edited December 02, 2000).]
|
|
| |
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:13.
Apolyton Time is 00:13. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
26-11-2000 05:59
, it looks more Latin so, but what is the correct spelling? 
. I'm recicling a lot of pics for my Chan Kuo... 
|