18-02-2000 11:14									#1
	Scenario of the Week Club: scenario #1 Got spare money?

It's Justinian, by Carl Fritz. I think this is the best scenario by far on the fall of the Roman Empire. It not only does an excellent job of simulating the barbarian invasions, but also the counter-attack to reclaim the Western Empire lead by Justinian, the Eastern Roman Emperor. It's an excellent example of the value of a small map in a scenario. The events are great too. Enjoy! members.xoom.com/fambans/index
[This message has been edited by techumseh (edited February 18, 2000).]

	18-02-2000 13:52									#2
	Remove this text

I can't get the link to work. Anyway, it's on the Carl's Scenarios for Civilization II site. Find it on Apolyton's Links.

	19-02-2000 00:06									#3
	Get a bigger avatar today!

I think I know what`s wrong, but I`m not sure. Give this a go:

http://members.xoom.com/fambans/index

[This message has been edited by Paul Hanson (edited February 18, 2000).]
[This message has been edited by Paul Hanson (edited February 18, 2000).]
[This message has been edited by Paul Hanson (edited February 18, 2000).]

	19-02-2000 00:11									#4
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

No, I can`t get it too work either, but it`s not hard to find the site if you follow techumseh`s instructions.

	19-02-2000 01:32									#5
	Remove this text

Found it.
Downloaded it.
Playing it.

Waiting a week...

	19-02-2000 07:03									#6
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

Carl's Scenarios

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

	19-02-2000 09:07									#7
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

Can we criticize it now? And on this page?

	19-02-2000 11:47									#8
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

On this page, but wait till Thursday night to make comments, s'il vous plait. We want to give everyone a chance to play it first.

	24-02-2000 23:39									#9
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

May we start now? Or should I wait until tomorrow?

	25-02-2000 03:42									#10
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

Good question.

Oh what the hell Hendrik, let`s give our opinions now! It`s Thursday night for us!

Overall, a good scenario. The artwork is original, if not a collection of masterpieces, but good nonetheless. The terrain is also especially good. The way that plains are used to represent areas near the desert gives a good impression of the actual terrain of said areas, and it looks good. The mountains are also very nice.

Playability was not quite as good, in my opinion. I got fed up of the scenario fairly early on because there was so little happening. A few more events would have spiced it up somewhat. It perhaps would also have done better to start at a later date than it did, because the interesting bits (Belisarius` campaigns, the revolt in Constantinople) don`t happen until quite late in the scenario. And the "The garrison at .... has switched sides" events early on do get a little bit annoying, but thankfully stop after a couple of turns.

The unit stats were good. Each unit had a purpose, and although not pointed out, were quite obvious (Limitanei for defense, Cataphracts for attacking out in the field, Comitatenses for attacking cities etc.) and this was one of it`s strong points, in my opinion. Unfortunately, and this is no fault of the author`s, but the AI wasn`t particularly good at using them effectively.

Overall, a pretty decent scenario, but one that does need some ironing out. Perhaps a slightly later starting date would help.

	25-02-2000 08:49									#11
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

I've been playing as the Western Romans. At Deity, it really is "an uphill struggle"! But you CAN do quite well. Here's ten tips for success:

1) Complete that Palace in Ravenna on the first turn, or else.
2) Build barracks units in your unit-producing cities. Non-Veteran units are next to useless in this game.
3) Don't try to counterattack in Gaul (France) until you have plenty of heavy units.
4) Fortify Stilicho in Aquileia and bar the door to invasion from the East.
5) Put Veteran Limitanei from Milan in the Alp forts to north. Otherwise the non-vets will die quickly and you'll be inundated.
6) Don't waste your cavalry on offensives until you have a large force.
7) You are going to lose Gaul and England no matter what you do, so sell off your improvements in those northern cities and use the cash to buy units.
8) Try to stem the Frank/Goth/Vandal advance along the Burdigala-Tolosa-Arles line, but have your engineers build forts on the two mountain roads leading into Spain and the mountain road just northeast of Arles. Fortify them with several veteran Limitanei. Better safe than sorry!
9) If a massive barbarian invasion threatens your cities in Spain or North Africa, don't fight back. Have Diplomats and Transports prepared in a nearby city, and move in to buy the city back after it's conquered. The resulting bonanza of Noble Horse or Camelrider units is well worth the loss of a few city improvements.
10) Be wary of Original Enemy cities like Alemanni and Franks. They are full of excellent defensive units and you must have BIG armies to take them out AND secure the surrounding area to keep a counterattack from demolishing the weakened units outside the city.

One note on the design:

On the first turn every city went into revolt, which is pretty annoying.


[This message has been edited by Kull (edited February 24, 2000).]

	25-02-2000 11:31									#12
	Support Apolyton

I thought Justinian was one of the most interesting little scenarios in a while. The AI really seems to work better on a smaller map. The tech tree and events together create key historical events very well. The author has done an excellent job of recreating the barbarian invasions which overwhelmed the Western Empire, using the original starting positions of the Romans and barbarians. The result of the invasions is also very historical, regardless of which civs are run by the AI. So it seems to be a good game regardless of which civ you pick.

I played 2 games, one as the Goths and one as the West Romans. In both cases, heavy cavalry was the key to (marginal) victory. As the Goths, I attacked in the west first, capturing Italy , southern Gaul and southern Spain. I then got into a drawn out war with the Huns in the east. Only gradualy did I get the upper hand by building noblehorsemen (heavy cavalry), the only reliable unit for successful attacks. At the end I had pushed the Huns back and captured the lower Volga and Caucusus regions. I had 9 points for a marginal victory.

In the second game as the West Romans, I traded space for time, giving up all of Gaul and part of northern Spain. In Italy, I managed to stop the barbarians from taking Ravenna and Rome. In Britain, I held London for half the game and managed to hold Isca against the Franks. I lost North Africa after the events driven invasion by the Vandals. By switching most of my production to Cataphracts, I was able to reconquer all of Gaul and north Italy as well as recapture London. In the last turn I made an amphibious attack to recapture Carthage, thus winning a second marginal victory.

I found both games to be fun and challenging. Justinian has very good historical accuracy, and seems to make a good game regardless of which civ you play.

	25-02-2000 15:41									#13
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

First of all I must say that this was a very challenging scenario for me. The relativly weak defenses made it quite difficult for because I normally tend to fight defensive wars with few but well planed counterattacks to win enemy key cities. So I really had to change my strategy here.

First I played with the East Romans and immidiatly lost Nikopolis within 2 turns. but was able to secure the remaining parts of my Europeaen posessions. Then I was stupid enough to get into a drawn out war with the Persians. I had significant success in the beginning but then was driven back to were I started and lost Dura Europos. However, I could hold on to the rest.

After several turns of military build-up I advanced under heavy loses to Phasis which I held for 11 turns when it was destroyed by strong Hun attacks. I then fortified in the Caucasian mountains, where I stayed all the remaining time.

During the same period I was preparing to retake Dura Europos and to move on Seleucia.
Both goals were not reached but the enemy had to suffer heavy loses.

A few years later Dura Europos was destroyed in my third Persian War but I was again pushed back. Antioch was under constant threat of being overrun but held. I then concentrated on keeping the small coastal region of the Holy Land.

A long pause followed when I started an offensive to reconquer Nikopolis and I actually advanced to and took Sirmium. When my adance was halted and a deadlock developed between me and the Goths. For the remaining time a war of nutrition began between me and the Goths who captured Sirmium one turn before the scenarios ended.
All counteroffensives into Goth territoty failed. Largest succes was the unsuccessfull siege of Visigoths and Sarmizegetusa which was removed by Goth reinforcments from Italy which was by this time was under basicly total Goth control. Also Vandal raids made me lose many valuable troops.

Under lose of many ships I tried to take Italy with only marginal succes. Rom fell to me. Which I was able to keep under a huge effort. Regium I took shortly and recaptured.

Then it was all over. I lost Belisarius who had defend Italy almost totaly on his own.
Just to be saved by the bell.

Later I played as the Goth and that was sure a lot of fun. Italy was a piece of cake. I captured everything from Rome southwards to Regium with a single Noblemen. Also I moved into France and against the East Romans and laid a decade long siege upon Constantinople and Thessaloniki.

I got into war with the Huns whom I repulsed and succesfully drove back into the Asian steps after several early setbacks.

Some notes: There are some things about the scenario that should be mentioned.

-Ships should not be able to make shore-bombardment. They had no sufficient equipment to do that effectivly. Also their range was so limited of their catapuls and balistas it could never have reached into land for more than a hundred meters or so.

-Where did Malta go to? I think it should have been there.

-I think there should be more forest in France, Central Europe and Eastern Europe.
It's the ancients afterall.

-The wrong kind of units had the "ignore city walls" flag. I dont't see how mounted units could possibly ride up the walls of a city.

-I couldn't find any amphibious units which made capture of one square island cities rather difficult.

-Also I would have appreciated more events about important historical happenings.

-I think the defensive units of the East Romans ahould be stronger. IMHO.

To conclude I still found it a very nice scenario. It sure could have some improvement but it was nothing that really ruined the game.The only thing that I noticed is that I lost interest in it as the East Romans quite soon because I wasn't making any real progress anywhere.

Still I would recommed it to give it a try. It sure is nicely done!
[This message has been edited by Hendrik the Great (edited February 25, 2000).]

	25-02-2000 17:46									#14
	Support Apolyton

Might I suggest that you guys write a review of the scenario for the Sleague.

	25-02-2000 18:04									#15
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

Good idea!

P.S Who`s turn is it to pick a new scenario for this week?

	25-02-2000 20:03									#16
	Put an end to popups!

The next one up is Stefan, who should give us his choice next Thursday (not before). He's followed by Hendrik, Phoenix, Paul, Coug and Darth Veda.

	25-02-2000 20:36									#17
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

I liked the scenario very much. I thought the artwork is very good, for it was entirely made for this scenario. It plays well, is a lot of fun (which is the basic intention of scenarios) and pretty well-balanced.
I played it as the Persians (surprise), East Romans and Vandals, and found the Vandals, to my own surprise, the most fun to play. I had little problems wiping out the West Romans (which occured around 441).

It seems to be quite to very accurate. Although it is annoying, I found it pretty good that Roma starved off, and many cities went into revolts, as it occured in reality.
The limited amount of city improvements and units however makes it a little boring. Very soon I found out that I should build only Noble horsemen, and so I did, as I had very much money very early. I conquered territories (such as Alexandria, Caralis or Pelusium) which were beyond of the wildest dreams of the Vandals way before 476.

So, my final notes:

-The scenario is a lot of fun to play and very well-done
-The care put into it, as well as the not-so low basis of new ideas on this small map is astonishing, I think we can all still learn from it
-It is, however very easy. You can keep a very good overview of everything, which results in that you know exactly what to build and what not.

Oh yeah: I put that smiley face up there 'cause I'm happy that I played such a great scenario!

I'll look for a good one till Thursday.

------------------
Follow the masses!
30,000 lemmings can't be wrong.

We who grew up tall and proud
In the shadow of the mushroom cloud
Convinced our voices can't be heard
We just want to scream it louder and louder:
"What the hell are we fighting for?"
"Just surrender and it won't hurt at all"
-Brian May (Queen)

	25-02-2000 21:12									#18
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

I think I may've had a higher opinion of this scenario than the regular posters, here.

There are a couple of fairly innovative things that really make the game unique and enhance playability: weak defensive values; weak city walls; and switching garrisons. Together, I think these really help the capture the flow and flavor of the period. I suspect most players found that they had to play a bit differently than they were used to, as a result.

The East Romans (the recommended player) were, unfortunately, less entertaining than most of the other civs, who either had the fun of being able to engage in serious conquering right away (Visigoths, Franks, Vandals), or the extreme challenge of immediately fighting for your life at tough odds (West Romans). All of the major barbarians though (Visgoths, Franks, Vandals), but especially the Franks appeared a bit too easy - of course they were not recommended.

So, in the end, I also spent most of my efforts as the West Romans. I focused on Britain rather than Italy (losing most of that for a time), since I found I could make Britain a more secure base. Despite the Saxons superior ships, the AI is hopelessly incapable of prosecuting a successful naval war. As Kull intimated, the key to success as the West Romans is having diplomats available to lead your counterattacks (preferably on boats) and lots of money (hmm...actually sounds kinda historical, doesn't it?). Sell off improvement and have dips available by turn 2, especially if you want to keep Britain.

The small map appeared to work well, despite my overwhelming personal preference for huge maps. I managed to play several games most of the way through, and I'm sure that was due to the smaller map.

A few reactions to Hendriks's comments:

- In a two-year period, even pure barbarian cavalry could successfully beseige all but the strongest fortified positions; after all, they did. Generally, only strong fortified positions with coastal supply were able to maintain themselves once the germans got control of the hinterland (and in the game these cities are incredibly vulnerable to counterattacks and bribe-backs). So I think its appropriately consistent for cavalry to the ignore city walls also, both historically and from a game play perspective. A pity CivII doesn't have two or three shades of city walls, though...maybe in CivIII.

- Ships making shore bombardment - I guess I never really thought of it as shore bombardment for these types of vessels, but rather as the marine contingent (or even sailors) that could often land by surprise and defeat garrisons in ports and harbors. This was fairly common in ancient naval warfare, but the "navy" couldn't really hope to control the entire city or its environs for any length of time without significantly larger forces (represented in my mind by an accompanying/occupying land unit).

- More forests - would certainly be more historical, particularly in central, eastern Europe, but it'd probably affect game-play poorly; swamps might be more appropriate, and would let the owning player (theorectically) turn the areas into grassland versus plains. France is probably okay...it was one of the most productive pieces of the empire until this round of invasions. Some event-driven way to show the reversion to forests/swamps in Gaul after the "barbarians" took over would be interesting (e.g., ChangeTerrain after Lutetia is conquered), but since it was so gradual, it might be unfair to change it before an counterattack could be mounted. CivII also doesn't really allow the representation of an overpopulated, but undercultivated region like central Europe supposedly was at this time.

- Stronger Byzantine defenders - I kinda like the fact that the western and eastern units are virtually identical. That's probably reasonably historical. But some way to represent the Byzantines success at defending themselves would be nice. I notice Trapezus in on a hill. This works well. Maybe just adding some hills/river to key cities like Constantinople, Ancyra, Thesolonika? On the other hand, though, from a game balance perspective, I thought the East was already little too easy (compared to playing the west, at least), once you got used to the fact that you really needed to think a bit differently and engage in an offensive defense of your turf.

By the way, Hendrik, I noticed you had been talking about a late Byzantine scenario, and I was looking forward to playing that. Has it been shelved?

For the designer, one possible bug - Theodosius' Code (The Republic). I'm confused why this slot is used. If the intention is to allow the Byzantine player a one-time option to switch to Republic, it didn't work for me. What it did do was allow me (as the Franks) to steal Theodosius Code, and get a one-time option to change to Republic. I'm not sure how useful this would be, or how historical (I guess I could probably argue either way on that), but more importantly, I wonder if it's the designer's intent to allow this option. The next time I play, I plan to do the West Romans again, again trying to focus on Britain, but this time, I'll try to focus even more on ships, caravans, dips and money, and see if I can steal and become a Republic (and if I can win that way). "Valentinian the Great, Restorer of the Republic"?

This Scenario of the Week idea is great. IMHO, though, you guys might be better off if you truly do it weekly, to maintain your momentum. You risk losing steam/interest if it's bi-weekly. I would think people could be posting on/debating this one, while playing the new one. Certainly my interest would be maintained.

	26-02-2000 10:16									#19
	Support Apolyton

RobRoy...

- I guess I just can't help myself by accepting that cavalary is so strong. I do realise that it can besiege cities with notable succes. Resupply from the sea sure was a very important aspect of the time.

- Well, in my opinion it could be better realised if all war ships can carry one or two units. Then make these amphibious. Now one can attack cities and units from the sea using troops. Ships then don't have the need to be able to engange in shore-bombardment.
At least that is the way I chose to do this in my scenario that's coming up.

- I guess you are right about the forests in France. It was an important part of the Roman Empire. For the rest, perhaps make a terrian that looks like forest but will support cities well. It could then be used to replace the gras and/or plains in central europe.

- The thing about the Byzantine defense probaly is just a problem for me because I'm used to fight rather defensive wars with well planed attacks at one or two targets.
So I believe it's more a strategy problem on my part than defenses that are too weak.
Perhaps adding a few rivers or fortresses would help...

It's a good thing we don't all agree about everything. If we did what would be the use and the fun of discussing this here?


My scenario is in the last phase of playtesting. Can you wait one, maybe two weeks?
It is as you noticed about the late Byzantine Empire. It begins in 1204 and goes till 1453. A lot of new units and so. But wait and see!

I support the idea of doing this weekly. Otherwise we might lose interst too soon.

	26-02-2000 10:27									#20
	Support Apolyton

I support that idea too. As you see, most comments already come immediately. Should I choose a scenario now or tomorrow evening?

------------------
Follow the masses!
30,000 lemmings can't be wrong.

We who grew up tall and proud
In the shadow of the mushroom cloud
Convinced our voices can't be heard
We just want to scream it louder and louder:
"What the hell are we fighting for?"
"Just surrender and it won't hurt at all"
-Brian May (Queen)

	25-02-2000 23:16									#21
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

Stefan,

It's your call, but I'd say tonight would be preferable to tomorrow night, since it gives people with weekend time more opportunity to play.

But we should probably get more consensus, particularly from Techumseh, as to whether this is really the "Scenario of the week" or the "Scenario of the Fortnight". I assume there was some reason two weeks was originally suggested.

By the way, if we follow up on the excellent idea of producing (one? several?) SL reveiws for these scenarios, who has the responsibility of synthesizing comments and actually producing a review(s)? The person who picked for that week? Someone else, like the person who picked last week (since the picker probably has some pre-existing opinion on the scenario, whether or not that's desirable)? Should we be provding numeric rating input for the reviewers consideration, besides comments and should we be gearing our comments toward a review/critique? Or should each individual consider doing a review? Or is the whole review idea going to constrain comments in a certain direction? Frankly I thought it was kinda interesting to see short recounts of games, pointers, etc., and I'd hate to see those disappear if this continues.

Hendrik, looking forward to your scenario. I'll be sure to pay particular attention to how navies/marines work Feel free to e:mail the scenario if you need a fresh playtester.

	25-02-2000 23:40									#22
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

While I didn't play it as thoroughly as you must have done, I still played it, and enjoyed it. I only played it as the East Romans, but had fun playing as them. Seemed as a very accurate scenario... And at the same time it was fun to play. Excellent, two thumbs up!

	26-02-2000 06:08									#23
	Support Apolyton

"Mission Creep" - What happens when you take an idea that's simple and popular and start tacking on bells and whistles. There's a reason that phrase has a negative connotation:

1) Doing reviews for the S-League is a "good idea" but making it mandatory for any player is NOT. Likewise, reviews are supposed to be the opinion of one person, not a committee. A well intentioned concept, but you know what they say about the "road to hell".

2) The original idea behind the Scenario of the Week Club is simple: FUN! If it turns into a weekly marathon of selecting, playing, reviewing, repeat.....it will get old in a hurry. IMHO. For those who play it through quickly and want to post while memories are fresh, why not write them up in a text file and save it? Easy enough to paste the whole lot into a post at a later date.

Just my opinion.

	26-02-2000 07:42									#24
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

Right now I am playing my third game (the first two were unfinished) as the Franks and have reached AD 503. Constantinople seems to be the only invincible city, as even Clovis is no match for its walls.

IMHO, Franks are probably the easiest tribe. Their strategy consists of the simple France/Britain ~ Italy/Spain ~ North Africa/Egypt ~ Vandals/Goths ~ Anatolia/Greece and at no will they encounter any difficulty. The Huns will become annoying, but if you can hold out until they send you Attila they will no longer merit any concern.

Hints for the Franks:
-Leave the West Romans one city and then periodically demand tribute. They will gladly modernize your empire with useful techs.
-Goths are weak
-Vandals are annoying
-Huns are pesky
-Romans are puny

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

	26-02-2000 10:51									#25
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

I'd prefer if we can stick to the 2 week schedule for the time being. People have up and down times, times when school, job or personal pressures keep them from contributing. Tighter time frames put pressure on people and make it more likely that they will drop out. I've seen it too many times. So lets allow lots of time for selecting a good scenario, playing it through from a couple of points of view, and having a good discussion. If there's a few days where nothing's happening, that's OK. There are lots of other things to do in the interim.

	26-02-2000 14:41									#26
	Get a bigger avatar today!

As Kull said doing a Review for the ScenarioLeague is a good idea, however, should not be a necessity. If anyone wants to write a review about a scenario we have discussed that should be the personal matter of that individual.

One week two weeks? I have been thinking about that one and I must say I had not considered the avantages and disadvantages entirely. I have changed my opinion on this one now...

It is better as it is now I think. If in the future we notice that it is not working as well as we thought we can still change to one week rounds. It has worked the first time...

On something else:
What are we going to do about all the things we discussed? I mean if we are not going to write a review as part of this. We can't just let the points we brought up disapear into Oblivion again.

I suggest we might want to put the discussions we had about a scenario on a website for everyone to look at so people can make their own judgement about the scenario after seeing the opinions we had. If someone wants to write a review about the scenario then it is still possible and we wont be getting into each others way when discussing or reviewing.
Also it would be a nice thing to have I think.
What do you think?

	26-02-2000 19:38									#27
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

I am the designer of Justinian and I'd like to post a few comments of my own. I can see that the overall reaction is positive and I will study the criticisms and make use of them in case I ever revise the scenario.
Thanks.
There is a lot to digest here, so I can't address every issue mentioned but here are some of the issues that stick out in my mind.

Several people commented on the tactical unrealism of ships being able to bombard and cavalry being able to ignore city walls. I tend to agree with them. For me this was an issue that I considered while building the scenario. I decided to ignore reality in this case in favor of an overall strategic result.
For example, the Franks would be too weak without bombarding ships.

The scenario was designed for 1 level below diety and the cities are just barely happy at that level. So it's not surprising that cities would go into revolt on turn 1 at diety level.

So Gaul was more forested. I did not know that.

Malta. I judged that the map was too small to include Malta.

About the Theodosian Code. The intention was Not to be able to change the form of government to republic. I guess I should have used a different tech slot.

A playing hint: Because walls are so weak and offensive values are higher than defensive values you have to defend cities with lots of fortified units.

	27-02-2000 02:08									#28
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

It's good to see that you appreciate what has been discussed here!

It is a well made scenario. Especially the new Graphics do look very good and they fit together quite well.

Keep on your good work!

	28-02-2000 19:59									#29
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

So it sounds like the consensus favors continuing it bi-weekly, as planned. I'll look forward to Stefan's selection (Thursday, I gather). Hope I didn't stir things up too much.

Gothmog,

Do I recognize your name from some multi-player games last year? Have you tried this scenario multi-player?

If you are going to do an update, I wouldn't worry too much about the Theodoius Code (The Republic) tech slot. I actually think it could add a bit of potential spice to the game, even if that wasn't your intention. While it is extremely unlikely that a player will be able to steal it from the Byzantines, at a convenient time, and have both the desire and ability to prosecute wars in your environment as a Republic, it might be fun. I was just curious about your intentions - if you intended to leave that option open to the non-Byzantine players, but closed to the Byzantine, or vice-versa.

If you do modify the scenario, though, I would encourage you to review ship strengths. I like the ability of warships to engage in "shore bombardment", (I never really consider it an artillery barrage, when dealing with ancient units). But without Coastal Fortresses, and against fairly weak defensive units, both the Roman and the Saxon ships are a little too strong, IMHO, in the hands of human players. I don't know whether making them a bit weaker would handicap an AI playing those civs, though. If you decide to disallow Shore Bombardment, you might want to add more marine-type units, as Hendrik suggests. But I don't know whether/how you'd want to modify ship costs or consider unit maintenance issues.

This scenario appears to be fairly recent, I notice. Are you working on any others, that you'd care to share with us?