Scenario Design Contest #5 - Page 3

WarVoid · January 22, 2003, 19:39

The difficulty with doing a "Great Battles of History" type contest is you have no clue what people will be submitting. It could be the Battle of Granicus in 315 BC (I think that's about right...) or the Battle of the Bulge. A huge difference in concepts.

As the de-facto judge, I researched the criteria of SDC #4 to insure the winners applied historical accuracy. Opening it to such a wide theme would require me to do an immense (read: impossible) amount of research.

Unless of course we do away with the old rules;

No code names
No coded judges
Announced scenario design (i.e. you clearly sate "I am working on such and such a battle scenario")

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.

DarthVeda · January 22, 2003, 19:42

yes especially when people insert unmistakable trademarks into their scenarios

Dr. Nick · January 22, 2003, 19:54

I think that the issue of you being able to research prior does not mean that the scenario has to go public, WV. We could simply email the information.

klesh · January 22, 2003, 20:06

When suggesting a duel, I meant that only 2 human playable civs exist, or course allowing for the others to be AI or utility civs. Everyone agrees with that right?

-FMK.

Boco · January 22, 2003, 20:16

Even if you know the history behind them, how do you compare scenarios about the battles of Granicus and the Bulge? There's too little common ground. It's comparing apples and spaceships.

St Leo · January 22, 2003, 22:04

es especially when people insert unmistakable trademarks into their scenarios

I don't know what you are talking about, Japan-boy. No one could have possibly guessed that the alternative history scenario about an ice age set in the Age of Sail could have been made by the same designer who made the alternative history scenario about Venice/Hafsids/Teutonic Knights set in the Age of Sail and used the same units selection.

kobayashi · January 22, 2003, 22:49

Quote:

Originally posted by DarthVeda
yes especially when people insert unmistakable trademarks into their scenarios

Maybe that remark was directed at me? Nah..I don't think so, I've never made anything from any of the historical eras.

BTW, I support any idea that does not involve WW2 and I agree that it should be something that is not already half finished sitting on someone's harddrive.

Mercator · January 23, 2003, 07:50

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.

mordhiem · January 23, 2003, 09:20

Quote:

Originally posted by Boco
Even if you know the history behind them, how do you compare scenarios about the battles of Granicus and the Bulge? There's too little common ground. It's comparing apples and spaceships.

How did WV compare DV's Sengoku Jidai with Kobi's TRON? They are very different in structure and the way you play them. If we pick the Southern Asia option, how do you compare a scenario about the Indian Mutiny in 1857 with one about the Afghan expansion of 1747-1773? They would be played in completley different ways and the player would have widley differing objectives. The only wasy you can compare scenarios, (unless they are about the same subject, but with revealed identities that woun't be a problem) is how much fun you have playing them and how historically accurate they are. If the players provide their own histories that makes part one easier for WV and I'm sure he is capable of deciding how much fun he is having without any help.

conmcb25 · January 23, 2003, 09:29

Ditto Mordhiem!

Michael Daumen · January 23, 2003, 10:07

Quote:

Originally posted by Boco
Even if you know the history behind them, how do you compare scenarios about the battles of Granicus and the Bulge? There's too little common ground. It's comparing apples and spaceships.

And spaceships would just fly right through apples.

DarthVeda · January 23, 2003, 10:10

Perhaps it should be a rule that the scenarios submitted must not have been under construction before the contest's start date?

I'd still like a ww2 theme...

Dr. Nick · January 23, 2003, 10:14

Ditto mordhiem too!

St Leo · January 23, 2003, 10:52

How about the Russo-Japanese War (1904-05)?. It's Asian, industrial, 2 player, cool, and it's never been done before.

IIRC, Russian fleet circumnavigated the Old World, got solidly thrashed, and sailed back. End of War. No?

-bribery scenario
-ww2
-ancient through medieval Asia
-duel scenario
-replacing topical contest with general awards
-famous battles
-wars of The (20th?) Century
-alternate history
-Russian invasion of US

Now, let's put that all together. We are doing an alternate history scenario where a US that was formed in medieval South East Asia is dueling it out bribe-wise with Russians in what pundits are calling the Wilderness War II.

Dr. Nick · January 23, 2003, 10:59

Boco · January 23, 2003, 13:40

There was a land campaign around Port Arthur, as well. Was that anymore evenly matched than Tsushima Straits?

Boxer Rebellion could be interesting. Has that been done?

Glad we reached a consensus, St Leo!

Jimmywax · January 23, 2003, 14:21

Why don't we do a poll and see which is more popular. I think it is pretty clear that it is heading toward a WWI or WWII scenario, but this way there is no doubt. I myself am still hoping for the AH scenario to pull ahead.

Boco · January 23, 2003, 18:27

Seems my apples and spaceships stirred up a hornets nest...and showed I'm in a minority.

Still, if fun and historical accuracy are the sole judging criteria, why are we suggesting any themes at all on this thread? Should we have a vote as JimmyWax suggests, or simply make it no-theme-but-enclose-historical-synopsis (NTBEHS for short)

contest?

Then again why not have a poll with entries something like St. Leo's 'consensus' list, and add NTBEHS as an option?

Case · January 23, 2003, 19:01

A duel theme would allow people to make alt-hist scenarios...

EmuGod · January 23, 2003, 20:46

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 · January 23, 2003, 21:46

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).

Dr. Nick · January 23, 2003, 22:10

So what's it going to be?

DarthVeda · January 23, 2003, 22:33

We'll only need one bulge scenario... muahahahahaha !

Boco · January 23, 2003, 23:38

Nuts!

Prometeus · January 24, 2003, 11:38

Quote:

Originally posted by WarVoid
As the de-facto judge, I researched the criteria of SDC #4 to insure the winners applied historical accuracy. Opening it to such a wide theme would require me to do an immense (read: impossible) amount of research.

Got some doubts about it.

St Louis docet.

Insurgent · January 25, 2003, 17:04

Am I right to say these are the present candidates for an SDC topic:

- Great battles of the world wars
- Far East theme
- Alternate history theme

...?

mordhiem · January 25, 2003, 18:15

I thought that the 'Great Batles of the World Wars' option was more of a 'Great Battles of History' option, in that it was very free ond open. I wouldn't like it restricted to just WW2, there are only a few interesting options, and DV and FMK have pinched the best two between 'em.

kobayashi · January 26, 2003, 02:32

how about providing a map and letting people do whatever they want with it?

atomant · January 27, 2003, 07:00

can we organise a poll?
1) WWII
2) Historical Asian
3) Alternate History
4) Scrap the design contest and go with awards based on category as has been suggested somewhere in here.
5) ????

Boco · January 27, 2003, 10:44

Quote:

1) WWII
2) Historical Asian
3) Alternate History
4) Scrap the design contest and go with awards based on category as has been suggested somewhere in here.
5) ????

How about these edits?

Change (1) to "Great Battles of WWI or WWII?"
Change (5) to "Great Battles of History?"
Add (6) "Rules! I don't need no stinkin' rules" (Said right before the speaker was kicked in the jewels)?

Should we allow Alt History in 1,2,5?