 |
|
Sarsstock
|
|
Steph this one looks great, I'll have that finished title for ya sooner than later.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Exile
|
 |
of the Benighted Realms
Sep 2000
time: 23:16
|
|
World War one is a great subject for Civ2 and this scenario is a very refreshing simulation of that conflict. After looking at this briefly, some things came to mind;
The MAP; Innovative, detailed, and very large. Mapmaking is my own worst weakness and has repeatedly deflected me from scenario projects, so I'm always delighted to see a good map. The novel orientation is good, but if one is going to use this approach, then why include so much of the world that wasn't involved in the conflict? The allocation of terrain helps to channel the efforts of the combatants, but there is so much useless terrain/area on the map. If one is going to use an unusual map orientation, then why not use it to exclude useless areas of the world and narrow the focus of the scenario to the theatre of war? The question that comes to mind is, why was this orientation used? There might be a good reason. The terrain graphics were well-chosen and present a nice consistency and texture.
The UNITS; Very nice unit set. I especially liked the multiple-figure infantry graphics. There are a number of Fairline units here, and that kind of quality goes far toward making a scenario enjoyable. The variety of infantry unit types is demonstrative of considerable research/knowledge of the period/conflict, but I feel that this approach is a trade-off. It seems as if the air units', and, to a lesser extent, the naval units' variations were limited due to the allocation of infantry units to many of the slots. The naval graphics are exemplary, but a little too similar in appearance. While this may (or may not) be accurate, some graphic differentiation might make the ships easier to identify. IMO, the "Ship of Line" should be renamed "Predreadnought." There are a number of units that can attack aircraft. Did you intend for so many units to actually have this capability? If you're going to create a German language version of the scenario, then do so. If not, please spell it U-BOAT.
The ICONS; Superb. This is a great icon set, one of the best I've ever seen, though it might be helpful to change the pedia.txt on some of the improvements and wonders. The People graphics are great.
The TECH TREE; Very well done. It captures the very limited military/mobilization technology race that occurred during the conflict. Almost everything makes sense and adds historical flourishes. What is the French "Oriental Army" tech? What are the Austrian "Honved" troops?
Needless nitpicking; Why are Britain and France two different powers? Was there ever a chance that the two would part company? Stackable sea terrain sounds good, except that ground units that are aboard ships get left on sentry in the middle of the ocean when the carrying ships are sunk. Otherwise, the selection of stackable terrain is good. I like the little haystacks, but dislike the little cows. I liked the capitalization of the national capitals. It's a nice touch, obvious, and I should have thought of it, lol. I don't like the little smiley-face-things that indicate urban unrest. They do stand out, but so do other graphics that are more in harmony with a scenario like this one. The city placement was good overall, but there are a few that are mysterious. Shouldn't Gibraltar be on a mountain square? In a map of this scale, it'd be a nice touch. I like the little telephone/telegraph poles that are with the railroad graphic, but dislike the little houses with the red roof-- It's distracting. The orientation of Italy and Sicily in this map reminds me of an old medieval map I've seen. Nothing good or bad about that, just an observation. The flags are good, but too static. The trenches terrain is a great idea and works well, but why not alter the underlying terrain to more of a dark, no-man's-land look, rather than the pastoral green of a grassland square?
Overall, a very good scenario with great graphics in every category and a novel approach to the conflict.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
jim panse
|
 |
Anvilvania
Oct 2002
time: 06:16
|
|
Thank you all for the initial feedback, I will now present some of the answers for you 
quote:
Typo found: On the readme, at the end, you mention that your "Nichname" is jim panse |
Thank you for that one, I already changed it 
quote:
Just a few points:
*Darken the terrain with richer colours - Makes the cities and troops stand out better.
*Give all cavalry and artillery units higher attack - They are nearly useless as they are.
*Have some 2nd Reich units unable to deploy on the first turn -
Hit the space bar and send most of the German city units to wait next turn.
PS
I can tweak around with the terrain, if thou wishes! |
Well Curt, I if you want to take a go at those terrains, please do so. IŽd be delighted to see what you could to with them
I already increased the artillery attack value. Only the cavalry units will remain as weak as they are.
@ Exile: Thank you very much for this more than awesome feedback! If there were more superheros like you out there
About the MAP, this one is some kind of 'test run' for further use of that map. Anyway, I understand your point about the inclusion of all those territories no-one needed in World War One. Well, Rotating the map 45° brought that with it Sorry but I have no better explanation.
About the UNITS, I have changed your suggestions about the names of the German sub and the Ship of Line I think I shall stick to this set of units chosen since there were not too many differences between those ship types in WW1.
The ICONS and the PEOPLE are the rightful property of His Imperail Majesty Curt Sibling
About the TECH TREE, it took me long enough to accomplish it in a at least acceptable way. Civ 2 is not very good when it comes to realism but I think the tech tree is not the worst.
Some techs, however, seem to have no real sense but those techs trigger military operations in remote areas like Mesopotamia or the famous Gallipoli expedition.
Ah, almost forgot one thing: The Oriental Army tech ... well, please try it out as France (or try Google typing Oriental Army WW1 or something like that. You should be able to find out about that tech )
The ENGLAND & FRANCE thing. Well, It should be quiet difficult for France to withstand Germany alone. I fear, however, that this feature will only be of real sense in a MP/PBEM game.
About the TERRAIN thing. I am not really content with the trenches terrain. I am glad you like that feature and I do think it is not the worst idea in that scenario. I will change it definitely, though.
quote:
It needs a sound file. |
I am working on that. I also posted in the BETA release post that two things would be still missing - the Pedia.txt and the Sounds
quote:
On turn 1, the French go broke and sell off two improvements in two different cities. Was this intended? |
Nope. I have to fine-adjust that.
quote:
Also on turn 1, a British city on the upper nile starves and loses a population point. Was this intended? |
Same as the last point. Look above.
About the EVENTS, yes, I intended to make the Greeks enter the war on the side of the triggerattacker. Greece had a relative of Wilhelm II as king and was supposed to be on the German side of the fray ...
Ok, thatŽs it for now, more soon
|
|
| |
|
|
|
jim panse
|
|
Anvilvania
Oct 2002
time: 06:16
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Exile
I've found some things that are curious, so I'll point them up here. Some may be problems, some may not.
1.) Ammunition plants are Hydro plants. Were you aware that cities that do not have either a river or mountain square adjacent won't be able to build them? You can correct this with CivCity, though it'll take a little while to convert every city to "can build hydro." |
Pollution added in an 'Anti-war riots' sense
quote:
2.) You might consider taking away Malta's coastal status with CivCity. As things are, it'll grow to absurd population levels very rapidly. |
Done
quote:
3.) If there is no pollution in the scenario, why build a Forces Mail Service? |
See point 1.)
quote:
4.) Stock exchanges; An actual stock exchange isn't something that can be built during a war. Consider naming this improvement something else. |
Stock Exchanges renamed to 'Victory Bonds'.
quote:
5.) The Ballistics Centre wonder. Is it already built somewhere? The Wonder list in the scenario doesn't show that it is, and yet I can't build it, even though I have the correct tech. |
I looked again after it. Should be working though ...
quote:
6.) Mass War Production versus Ammunition Plant. Once again, if there's no pollution, having both of these in the scenario seems redundant. Is there another reason for doing so? |
See points 1.) and 3.)
quote:
7.) The London City wonder. Is it supposed to be obsolete and non-functional at the beginning of the game? |
Should be working now 
quote:
8.) The Krupp wonder is also obsolete at the outset. Is this correct? |
See point 7.)
quote:
9.) Why do the mines move? (lol) Is there some other way you can represent mines, minelaying, and minesweeping? |
Fixed also that
Again, thank you again for the feedback. Yours has been more than constructive, Phenix!
NEW VERSION AVAILABLE!
Follow this here LINK
Last edited by jim panse on 04-11-2004 at 20:38
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Exile
|
|
of the Benighted Realms
Sep 2000
time: 23:16
|
|
Ok, I've been considering making a WWI scenario myself for quite some time, but, after seeing yours, Stephan, I've decided not to do so. The situation is very much like putting together a good American Civil war scenario; after seeing Nemo's, why bother? Yours is simply too good to top, even in its beta stages. I honestly don't think that any effort on my part could improve on this scenario.
What took you so long? 
After playing this one extensively for a few days, I've decided that the Cavalry is good. It's ability to "see 2" is reason enough to keep and use 'em. And, once again, more kudos on this map. By itself, this is a worthwhile accomplishment. The more I play on it, the more it seems like a map that can be used for other scenario situations that center on Europe and the Mediterranean. Did you make it? Will you make maps for me? 
I'm an impatient man, so I've already made some adjustments on my copy. Largely, however, the changes I've made are things that you're going to change. Took away the mines movement, removed the obsolete status of the two wonders mentioned, and changed several of the ship graphics so that I could tell 'em apart.
Importantly for a WWI scenario, I have a good graphic to use as trenches terrain, though I can't recall where it came from. I've already instituted it in my copy, and if you'd like to see it, I'll be happy to send it along for you to examine. The trick here is that I had wrestled with how to use this combination of trenches graphic/terrain/unit capabilities, but had not been able to come up with a satisfactory solution. You solved the same problem I had posed for myself except for having a good graphic for the trenches. I've mused often about how it would appear in a scenario. After inserting the graphic into yours, I wasn't disappointed.
Ok, about the pollution; Stephan, no player is going to build an improvement unless it serves some actual game purpose. While the scenario contains the "no pollution" flag, no one is going to build pollution-reducing improvements. It's certainly a nice touch and captures the spirit of a WWI game, but it remains superfluous. Is there something that I'm missing here? Are you including this purely as an atmospheric feature?
Um, I've already made a sound file. But I do look forward to seeing your interpretation--mine is just a stopgap measure until the authorized version appears.
What are the new numbers for the artillery?
About the Greeks; My copy of A Short History of World War I by James L. Stokesbury states that the Greek situation was complex. While the monarch of that young state was a relative of the Kaiser, he was also a relative of most of the other major crowned heads of Europe. The monarch WAS pro-German, but the Prime minister was pro-entente, and all of them cordially hated the Turks, and this last factor was decisive. As long as the Turks were allied w/Germany, it was VERY unlikely that the Greeks would have committed their armed forces on the side of the central powers.
My sources indicate that the German troops using the Hutier tactics of infiltration were called "Stosstruppen," but then, my command of German is sketchy nowadays, at best. This is a trivial issue though.
Ok, now for the naval critique; The numbers for the units and the strength totals seem accurate, BUT;
The Armored cruiser and Light cruiser were DEFINITELY different ships. Google "World War One Naval combat" and take a look at Darren Milford's site. Lists of tonnages for ships are available there and even more detailed lists are available on linked sites. Light cruisers are small ships, for the most part simply very large destroyers. Very often, these ships were used as leaders of destroyer squadrons. Armored cruisers were much larger, heavily armored, and considerably better armed than lights, and were of a similar size to capital ships. Developments in propulsion technology (the steam turbine engine) made these ships obsolete by the outset of war, though no one was sure of that at the time. Here is the trick; Battlecruisers are FASTER than Armored cruisers. This fact is what made them obsolete. Superdreadnoughts were, at this time, characterized by very large guns (13.5 inch or better, and most carried at least 15 inchers), but also better speed. Oil-fired engines were just beginning to come into use. I really do sympathize with your statement about the AI throwing its ships pointlessly against port cites. That is a problem, I've encountered it myself, but I can't think of anything that could ameliorate this difficulty, other than to eliminate the subs and give all ships the sub flag. This is, however, quite a radical step, and I don't advise it at this stage of scenario development. I merely point it out. The only justification for this would be the idea that submarine warfare was not a military weapon primarily, but instead an economic weapon, and, as such, might be better represented in another way. I dealt with it in AoW by giving Britain the Adam Smith wonder, then obsoleting it when Germany received the "Submarine warfare" tech. This effectively simulated the effects of the submarine campaign and had the beneficial effect of clearing unit slots AND the making the "sub flag" available to ships so that they wouldn't suicidally attempt to bombard random hostile ports.
Btw, I am really enjoying this scenario.
Last edited by Exile on 05-11-2004 at 00:22
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Sarsstock
|
|
My god exile, you truley deserve the title.... "King of playtesting".
I too like the map, to my knowledge Steph did make it himself. I was privilaged enough to be given previews of it at different stages of development, and I knew right off the bat it was a map that though might seem hard to use at first, would eventually embraced in little time.
My question for Steph is whether or not you will use this infantry style as your prefered style from now on? Its a great style and I can really see it fitting into future WW2, WW3 scenarios. I can even see it fitting into Civil War or Hundred Year' War scenarios.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Catfish
|
|
Wollongong, Australia
Aug 2000
time: 14:16
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Exile
Ok, IIRC, it seems that, if you assign scoring by objectives within a scenario, it disables the building of new wonders. Can anyone verify that? |
It's only the case if you count wonders as objectives as well.
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:16.
Apolyton Time is 00:16. |
top of page
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
29-10-2004 12:42
Attachment: 
Man, I never thought of the upload function here. Stupid me 
|
