 |
|
Civfan
|
|
Toronto, Canada
Sep 1999
time: 05:20
|
|
Hi everyone. I'm doing a test of a scenario about the fall of the Roman empire. This scenario focuses on the financial difficulties the empire faced in the third century A.D after the emperor Marcus Aurulius and the barbarian hordes from the German highlands. It will also focus on civil wars and the Parthian/Sassadian empire in the east.
Game from 180 AD - 500 AD
Idea of scenario.
- Try to survival by advancing your technology to get stronger units to fight and defend the empire as well as improve its economy.
- Build up your small cities. Defend the rich cities.
- Manage the economy.
- Defeat your ememy generals.
- Find new resources to exploit. - Founding new cities
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Civfan
|
|
Toronto, Canada
Sep 1999
time: 05:20
|
|
[QUOTE] Originally posted by winterfritz
I don't understand; does this mean you're seeing whether people would like such a scenario before starting work on it?
Hello, actually I was playing around with the idea of how to depict an economic decline in this game. So from this idea I guess I'll do a scenario. Yes I wanted to know if anyone is interested in this idea too. If not I'll just keep testing for future games.
95 % finished sounds good. Complete it my friend. I'm at 1%. Map, idea of implitication is done. No units or tech tree or cities yet. Give some time.
Civfan...
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Civfan
|
|
Toronto, Canada
Sep 1999
time: 05:20
|
|
winterfritz good for ya, can't wait to try this out. I'm making my scenario a multiplayer scenario.
Its starts with a civil war.
Starts in 193 AD
You have an army of 10 Legions and auxueries and so far. Your goal is Rome. Take it and defeat remaining rivals. Establish yourself master of the Roman world and then the world.
Civs
Severus Family
Pescennius Family
Albinus Family
Parthian-Sassanids
Germans
Goths
Vandals
|
|
| |
|
|
|
LDiCesare
|
|
La Ferté sous Jouarre France
Jan 2001
time: 05:20
|
|
Winterfritz, I am no history expert, but I tend to think the way we moderns see the split is a bit exaggerated. The Eastern Empire was still the Roman Empire, and controlled lands in norhtwestern Africa that were under western rule before the fall of Rome, without need for conquest. The split was more a matter of ease of administration. The best way to represent the split would probably be to move the Roman capital to Byzantium, thus causing major corruption in Italy. Barbarians tearing teh West to pieces did the rest. Eastern armies were too busy in the east to defend Rome, and they had to wait for Justinian to retake it, but was there effectively a Western and an Eastern Empire? Western emperors were so pitiful at taht time they are hardly worth noticing. Furthermore, the Empire had been split between several rulers several times, and the Eastern Empire has been ruled by more than one basileus at a time, without ceasing to be one. Why don't you setup events that help the fall of Rome (move capital, maybe even create a new city there - change terrain can be used to erase previous city? - , make sure the east is under pressure but more worthy of defense), so the player will be too busy on the East front to defend Rome until the age of Justinian?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
winterfritz
|
 |
I'm sailing this thing to Mexico
Jan 2002
time: 05:20
|
|
Its true that there were many similarities between the two Empires, but I wouldn't go so far as to say that the split can be simulated in the way you outline. The two empires were not just seperate administratively. Both areas had large differences in wealth, customs and social structure, with the East being highly Hellenized and retaining many 'oriental' customs, while the West was more Latin. Given these important differences on every level the tendencies towards division existed long before 395 and, as you say, the Empire was halved between co-emperors many times in the fourth century.
And they were pretty far from operating coherently together, especially after the formal division of 395; though there are examples of co-operation, such as the join compilation of the Theodisian Code in the 440s, most of the time the emperors just argued and refused to help each other out of sticky military situations. So the barbarians overran the west while Constantinople looked on largely indifferently. Whether the west was ruled by a strong emperor or the weak puppet of barbarian mercenary generals doesn't matter; whoever ruled the west, it was a seperate entity from the east. In some ways this split of the empire into Greek and Latin halves was inevitable, so I don't want to eliminate it altogether; however, knowing of no way to effectively translate this into civ2 terms I'm ending the scen at 395.
But hey, thats just my opinion. I'm no historian either  I have done my best to simulate the east being far more populated and prosperous than the west, and to provide sufficient incentive for the player to move his capitol to Byzantium as soon as he can. Abandoning the west (temporarily; the objective is to keep the empire together after all ) and ruling from the Golden Horn may be an excellent idea for a hard pressed player.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Civfan
|
|
Toronto, Canada
Sep 1999
time: 05:20
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by winterfritz
Its true that there were many similarities between the two Empires, but I wouldn't go so far as to say that the split can be simulated in the way you outline. The two empires were not just seperate administratively. Both areas had large differences in wealth, customs and social structure, with the East being highly Hellenized and retaining many 'oriental' customs, while the West was more Latin. Given these important differences on every level the tendencies towards division existed long before 395 and, as you say, the Empire was halved between co-emperors many times in the fourth century.
And they were pretty far from operating coherently together, especially after the formal division of 395; though there are examples of co-operation, such as the join compilation of the Theodisian Code in the 440s, most of the time the emperors just argued and refused to help each other out of sticky military situations. So the barbarians overran the west while Constantinople looked on largely indifferently. Whether the west was ruled by a strong emperor or the weak puppet of barbarian mercenary generals doesn't matter; whoever ruled the west, it was a seperate entity from the east. In some ways this split of the empire into Greek and Latin halves was inevitable, so I don't want to eliminate it altogether; however, knowing of no way to effectively translate this into civ2 terms I'm ending the scen at 395.
But hey, thats just my opinion. I'm no historian either I have done my best to simulate the east being far more populated and prosperous than the west, and to provide sufficient incentive for the player to move his capitol to Byzantium as soon as he can. Abandoning the west (temporarily; the objective is to keep the empire together after all ) and ruling from the Golden Horn may be an excellent idea for a hard pressed player. |
Is there any special generals, the invasion of the East by the Sassadians, giving techs to the Vandals for there conquest of the Western Roman emperor Valens, aka Mounted Calvary?
It sounds good. Can't wait till its release.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Civfan
|
|
Toronto, Canada
Sep 1999
time: 05:20
|
|
A tiny update on progress of the scenario
Concepts have been developed. Its slowly moving on.
Events are under way as well as units, techs etc.
I've playtested an ideal for about a week.
Heres a small preview.
 Attachment: legion.jpg
This has been downloaded 100 time(s).
|
|
| |
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:20.
Apolyton Time is 00:20. |
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
15-07-2002 09:31
) has a similar topic. If some competition emerges, I may actually get motivated and finish mine 
)
, but there where lots of germanic tribes in Central and East Europe (for instance Goths and Vandals). And often they stay at war. A lot of them has borders at the rivers Rhine and Danube to the Romans.
|
