 |
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
Mercator
|
 |
Sorekara no Nanimo
Jan 1970 time: 06:25
|
|
quote: Originally posted by WarVoid
Knowing ahead of time what everyone will be working on will allow me to research the necessecary information prior to the contest deadline. And I personally think the codes and hush-hush bit was a bit stupid and unnecessecary. |
I think the codes can go too.
But how about having a history overview included as a requirement. That is, the senario creator should also give a reasonably detailed description of the (historical) situation etc.
I think scenarios should mainly be about playability, innovation, and then a fair portion of historical accuracy. But this is Civ2, historical accuracy will always be limited or a scenario would become too rigid. Besides, most likely a lot of the players don't know nearly as much about the subject as the scenario creator.
So what I'm saying is, the scenario creators should provide the historical information to the judges, then the scenarios will be judged using this information (perhaps also the quality of the information itself) and "simply" the overall goodness of the scenario, regardless of historical accuracy.
This will give the scenario creators a little leeway, but also force them to do some decent research. Apart from that, it will allow players to enjoy the scenario, even if they don't know the exact historical setting, and prevents a situation where a scenario can only be won if you do exactly what really happened.
And... No WWII please.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
EmuGod
|
|
quote: Originally posted by St Leo
How about the Russo-Japanese War (1904-05)?. It's Asian, industrial, 2 player, cool, and it's never been done before.
|
I once thought about creating a scenario about that, but it would only be a 2 player scenario, unless China was added, and it was a short war.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
WarVoid
|
 |
Scenario League
Apr 2000 time: 05:25
|
|
I did not compare Sengoku Jidai to TRON, or Little Ice Age to Asiento. Or any other such comparison in-between. Each was judged independently based on the SDC's criteria of requirements.
Historical Accuracy
PBEMability
Replayability
Gaming Ability (Fun factor)
Luxuries (i.e. Readme, notes, events, etc.)
Originality (including graphics as well as design)
Extended Game (i.e. modified city.txt, pedia.txt, menu.txt, etc.)
All these factors were considered. But it was streamlined by it being set during the Age of Sail. The general era confines the scenarios to a single category of history.
As with Granicus and Bulge, you have to hugely immense differences. One requires you to research Phalnax tactics, for instance, while the other requires you to research WWII tank warfare.
Lucky for me I know quite a bit about both feudal Japan and the Age of Sail otherwise it might have taken me longer to insure the best judgement. The last thing I want to do is judge someone's hard work unfairly.
Now on to what's been discussed since I last posted, I like the idea of including a historical addendum to the readme file of the scenarios. This would help immensely.
Again, as for code names and such and secrecy over the scenario you design for the contest, I see absolutely no point to it. You have the choice to keep it secret or not, but as far as the contest goes I think it's unnecessecary. Announcing what you are designing does not obligate you to post pics for others to premptively steal your work. It allows you to maybe get a little help, something which is needed when doing an SDC scenario. And it may prevent overlapping and allow a more varied selection of entries (i.e. we won't get two Bulge scenarios).
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:25. Apolyton Time is 00:25. |
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
|
|
|
|
|
|