Crises of the New World Order updated

Panda · June 23, 2001, 10:18

I've just spent the last couple of weeks playtesting and tweaking, and I'm now quite happy to announce that version 3.0 of this scenario is available to download.
http://www.btinternet.com/~aplivings...rio/crises.htm

I can't update my site anymore

Mao · June 23, 2001, 14:29

erm...I'm playing as India and I just lost a MiG-27 because it was lost in a storm...and the irony is that it was next to the coast!!!

Panda · June 23, 2001, 19:46

Well that's a new one, and another neat cosmetic feature ditched. Use the attached rules.txt while I investigate (the zips have been updated).

Shaka Naldur · June 24, 2001, 10:38

Andrew what do we have to download??
there are four or five zip files...

could you send me a copy of the rules??

miguelsana@mixmail.com

I have a little problem downloading it

Panda · June 24, 2001, 12:07

Shaka, what you need depends on what you want. As an absolute minimum you will need Crises1.zip, which are the main files. Crises2.zip is city sound effects, if you want those; Crises3.zip is unit sound effects, and Crises4.zip is diplomatic sounds (which you'll only hear if you have the diplomatic screen option active). Crises5.zip is just an upgrade for previous users.

The ever-so-slightly amended Rules.txt atatched in my post is in both Crises1 and 5 zips.

What's the little problem downloading?

VietMinh · June 24, 2001, 17:19

Will give you feedback as I paly it.

echopapa · June 29, 2001, 23:39

If we weren't so picky, and so determined to put together a completely accurate scenario, this stuff would never happen...

You missed "Jeursalem".

And, as neat as the idea of having the Allies and Rebels secretly allied is, it presents a problem. First of all, this means that Allied cities are immune to terrorist attack. Considering Jerusalem, er, "Jeursalem" (sorry, couldn't resist) should probably be the target of some terrorist attacks, that's a bad thing. Additionally, if any player goes to clean up on the rebels, the Allies may jump in to help.

I still think that you should put in North Korea, and surround it with powerful defensive units so the Chinese player doesn't blow it away immediately. Better still, you could make the Chinese allies of the Rebels, considering that China generally has good relationships with a lot of rogue states.

Panda · July 1, 2001, 08:56

Michael, I sent an e-mail to you on 20/05/01 covering this:

Quote:

I have also been rather sneaky in fixing an invisible alliance between the Allies and barbarians. This means that the Rogue units don't turn on the Allies' UN Peacekeepers on turn 1 and so they can be more neutral. However this does mean that having events where Rogue Insurgents or Terrorists pop up and target Allied cities, especially Israel [are redundant]. Making Israel a neutral country would be missing the point, so the only thing I can suggest to compensate is an intifada event and forcing them both to go to war. How does that all sound?

That's worse than "Toyko"

As a design trade off, I think forcing this alliance was a good thing: the Allied nations in the real world are rather insular, and I wasn't happy with the massacre of UN units on turn 1. The only terrorism events affecting Allied cities were in the Philippines and Israel, and these are never going to affect the human player so I thought better to drop them. The intifada event would be a possible solution if you were really concerned.

I think the concept behind the events should not just be "are they accurate", but also "do they affect gameplay" / "challenge the human player". So, again, another reason to focus away from the Allies as the human player is unlikely (?) to choose to go to war with them and take over the cities in question. But I know that other's opinions will differ.

I must say I like the idea of an alliance between the Chinese and Rogues and the reinstatement of North Korea. I suppose there are enough free city slots to make this possible, and the AI shouldn't be in a hurry to fill them. But what would happen when the human player played as the Chinese? What would your position be? Should I change the events away from the rewards for killing Rogue units to another theme?

[crap: I don't want to do another release.]

echopapa · July 1, 2001, 13:21

One way to deal with the massacre of UN units could be to make them Rogues themselves. Yes, yes, I know, but it kinda makes sense - after all, they aren't really under the command of any particular country. Another tactic could be to increase their defense abilities drastically, but remove any possibility of attack. That way, EU and US players can use their UN peacekeepers to block Rogue units from moving (especially if the rogues don't have "Ignore Zones of Control). And I know it's all about balancing game play, but it does create a problem when a US bombing run on Havana sparks a Canadian invasion of the US.

The emphasis on ridding the world of rogue nations works fine for the US and the EU, but it doesn't seem consistent with the real-life policies of Russia, China, or India. Their goals should probably be economic (pass the US or EU in GNP) or military (become the second military superpower).