Patine's new scenario

Patine · June 2, 2003, 12:56

I know I fell dormant after introducing my Mexican Revolution scenario, though now I've made another one, this time dealing with the modern Middle East through two decades of turmoil. Let me know what you think of it, if you could. I would like to get this and my previous one in the permanent archives, so if someone knows whom I should talk to, please tell me.

Patine · June 2, 2003, 13:06

Here's the first of two zip files with the new scenario's sound.

Patine · June 2, 2003, 13:09

Here's the second one.

yaroslav · June 2, 2003, 18:57

Hi! I've played a few turns of your scen (I'll play more tomorrow when I'll have more time), and I've some questions:

A) Should have near all squares railloads? A "Moderate Arab" Tank could move from Kuwait and attack Eliat in the same turn

B) I think that Pollution has no sense in this scren

C) The alliances should be non-breakable, specially the USA-Israel alliance (with events.txt you could do that)

D) Have you consider renaming the USA to NATO?

Shaka Naldur · June 3, 2003, 07:29

where can I find the mexican revolution scenario??

Patine · June 4, 2003, 00:59

To yaroslav, you may have some valid points regarding the scenario. I'll certainly take them under advisement on my first major revision.
To Shaka Naldur, my Mexican Revolution scenario is on Page 9 by last post in descending order of this forum under 'Updated Scenario' (it says Patine as the thread starter).
Thanks for your replies and input.

Stefan Härtel · June 4, 2003, 10:16

I looked at it and have some suggestions:

-I don't really like the fact that you lumped the Iranians, Syrians, Jordanians and Lebanese into one civ. Iranians and Lebanese would be OK, since Iran supports the militant Hizbollah party. But Syria and Iran have nothing in common. Jordan should be neutral in a way.
-Like yaroslav, I don't think every square should have railroads, there are far too many on this map.
-I know this is hard work, but this scenario would work better on a better/more accurate map and accurate city placings. I was never too fond of this map, and these city placements in particular.

The idea of placing the Palestine/Israel, Iraq and Afghanistan conflicts on one map is very ambitious and very hard work. In fact, there is no real connector between these three. Iraq and Palestine/Israel OK, but Afghanistan is totally different. I'm not saying it is impossible, but not easy to do without risking several inaccuracies.
In general, this topic is very, very risky. I'm not saying you shouldn't try yourself at it, but this is a very emotional topic, and you should definately make it form a neutral point of view. I think this would at least avoid any political discussions on this particular board, which, thankfully, haven't occured (at least to my knowing).

Patine · June 4, 2003, 12:53

Stefan Hartel, I appreciate your input greatly. I only lumped Iran, Syria, Lebanon, and Jordan together as I am limited, as you know, to seven players and couldn't find a better way to fit the countries of the region into factions without creating Barbarian states, which I seriously want to avoid. I will ponder perhaps another way of organizing countries. Also, I have tried to be neutral in my standpoint, but also to reflect what each nation is actually capable of militarily. The balance is very difficult to maintain. As for railroads, I initially wanted to reflect the feel in the news of the seeming rapid mobility of Middle Eastern warfare, but I now see I went a little overboard. I certainly would like a better map for my next revision; if someone knows of a map on the net somewhere of the Middle East that's better without including chunks of Europe or Subsaharan Africa, please direct me. I thank you for your interest. I'll address a revision perhaps after my current project (which you should be seeing soon).

Stefan Härtel · June 4, 2003, 16:02

Quote:

I only lumped Iran, Syria, Lebanon, and Jordan together as I am
limited, as you know, to seven players and couldn't find a better way to fit the countries of the region into factions
without creating Barbarian states, which I seriously want to avoid.

Agreed. Maybe this point I had was a little unfair. I guess it's just my personal nature to comment on the representation of Iran in scenarios

Here are some ideas:

If you'd agree to reduce the scenario to the Mideast only (that is, exclude Afghanistan), there's a good map somewhere out there. I recall seeing it by the name of Oriente or something like that. It includes everything from the Zagros mts to Turkey, excluding anything European, and including only fractions of Egypt and Saudi Arabia (IIRC, a bit of the Gulf is included, enough for any such purpose). It's also very large. In this case, I'd recommend following civs:

Israel
Iraq
Iran (maybe together with Lebanon)
Western powers/US/NATO (represented by Turkey, but maybe with bases in Saudi Arabia and the Persian Gulf)
Neutrals (maybe Jordan and Egypt)
Syrians
Pro-Western states (propably Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Kuwait)
The CIS shouldn't be independent IMHO, maybe they could be included with the neutrals then.

Quote:

Also, I have tried to be neutral in my standpoint, but also to reflect what each nation is actually capable
of militarily.

Don't get me wrong; I think the representation of the powers in your scenario was ok, and it was as neutral as it can get, I think, at least I didn't see any preferences.

Patine · June 4, 2003, 22:19

Your advice is certainly sound and I see great potential in that faction organization. Perhaps including the Afghanistan conflict was stretching the limits of the scenario a little, though it would have been nice if an attractive way to do it could be found (maybe I'll do a separate Afghanistan scenario later). Is the map you refer to the one used in the Holy Land scenario (I'm not sure whom it's by, but I have it on a Walnut Creek collection of Civ stuff I bought in '97).

Patine · June 5, 2003, 09:34

By the way, Stefan Hartel, where can I find your scenario work. It seems we have very similar interests in scenario genre. I seem to remember seeing your name in relation to a web site while surfing once, but can't remember the address. Where's the quickest way to your handiwork. I'd also like to see yours, yaroslav, if you're still reading this and interested. Write a reply soon.

Exile · June 5, 2003, 09:41

Try the Spanish Civ2 site. Last time I looked, several of Stephan's scenarios were there. 10 of them. There should be a link at the bottom of the page.

Stefan Härtel · June 5, 2003, 11:15

Well, I do have a homepage (http://www.alexanderthegreat.de/civ2/index.html), but the links to most scenarios are broken. You can use it as reference to what I have made, though. Many are at the Spanish Civ2 site, as Exile said, but all except for my latest should be at Civfanatics (www.civfanatics.com).
My latest scenario, Lost Paradise, can be downloaded at my site, but there's also a thread about it on this board.
You will soon find that my favourite subject is the history of ancient and medieval Iran

Stefan Härtel · June 5, 2003, 11:16

BTW, yes the map I was referring to is the one from the Holy Lands scenario.

Patine · June 5, 2003, 12:36

Thanks for your help at improving what could have been an abyssmal failure. I will begin plans for "Mideast3" shortly, after my aforementioned current project. I look forward to playing some of your scenarios. And thanks also to yaroslav for your initial contributions if you're still reading this thread. I'll likely make a new thread for each new scenario I come up with. Watch for me.

yaroslav · June 6, 2003, 16:29

Yes, I'm still reading this thread. Don't hesiate to send me a BETA version whenever you want