New Scenario: "Atomic Eagle" - Page 2

curtsibling · June 14, 2003, 14:33

Quote:

Originally posted by Cyrion

Didn't we??

Morally, perhaps.

In terms of chocolate superiority, without a doubt!

Mike K. · June 14, 2003, 19:05

Quote:

UK produced 24.000, USSR 75.000 and the USA 88.000.

Are you still certain the war was not already lost in 1939?

Considering the Soviet Union and United States were neutral parties until 1941, yes I am certain.

Quote:

Hitler wanted to secure Lebensraum. This space was meant to end at the Volga-Arhkangelsk Line (following the Volga River up to somewhere between Yaroslavl and Gorky and the this line was planned straight towards Arkhangelsk).

The war in the east was also meant as an ideologically motivated crusade against Bolshevism, hence the infamous 'Commissar Order' (immediate execution of Communist party officials embedded in the Soviet Army). Hitler would not tolerate the continued existence of the Communist apparatus.

Harry Tuttle · June 15, 2003, 17:07

Alright folks, enough with the history lesson. As Curt said, this is a scenario thread, not an opinion thread. If you want to discuss what-if questions please use some other thread, or head over to the Colosseum thread at CF. Historical commentary is great, but I'd like to make some headway on this scenario before the seasons change, again.

ANYWAYS, as for missions, I think the capture of the Middle eastern fields would be a good strategic mission. A nice battle between the Brits and (as Churchill would say) Nah-sties, would be a good start. I could put a time limit on the mission, with the deadline bringing with it British reinforcements, or something that would make the taking of the oil fields extra hard. Thank you Curt.

Some other mission ideas: A race to capture some Uranium mines in the Congo, a race to capture an allied agent, and a secret unit mission that would uncover a hidden unit unatainable through regular means.

Any other ideas???

curtsibling · June 15, 2003, 19:32

Derailing the the Allied jet effort?
Maybe a secret facility in Miami or on the coast.
And you have to use one of your super long range jets to get it and bomb it.

The jet could have a large range to represent it's mission.

Or maybe a mission to capture tech from an allied airbase in greenland or some remote spot.

Cyrion · June 16, 2003, 04:04

Quote:

Originally posted by curtsibling
Derailing the the Allied jet effort?
Maybe a secret facility in Miami or on the coast.
And you have to use one of your super long range jets to get it and bomb it.

The jet could have a large range to represent it's mission.

Or maybe a mission to capture tech from an allied airbase in greenland or some remote spot.

Those sound like excellent ideas!

Harry Tuttle · June 16, 2003, 13:56

Good ideas Curt, I think I'll use them. I think a good spattering of jungle, arctic, and desert missions would be fun. Well, I'm going to finish up the map in the next few days and start laying down some cities. I should also be making some headway on some new unit graphics. I'll post an exerpt once I have a decent amount.

Also, I'm thinking of going the "strategic resource" way and eliminating the tundra and the swamps to make room for some oil fields and maybe a grain belt or uranium mine square. What do you guys think?

Harry Tuttle · June 17, 2003, 22:23

Update: The map is almost ready for some criticism. I've taken all the swamp and tundra terrain out of the map so strategic resources can be used. All I need to do is add the hills and mountains and I'll post it up here for everyone to see.

Till then...

Harry Tuttle · June 18, 2003, 22:53

Ok, got a new job this week, so I haven't been able to make as much progress as I've wanted. Here's the new map, minus the hills and mountains. As I talked about, the swamp and tundra have been eliminated and will be replaced by an oil and grain terrain square once I have placed the cities.

Palaiologos · June 19, 2003, 15:20

Perhaps a historic thread would be suitable for apolyton also, wouldn't it?

And sorry for the irrelevant comments Harry.

Harry Tuttle · June 19, 2003, 19:44

No problem Palaiologos, I just thought the thread was getting to far off topic.

Harry Tuttle · June 21, 2003, 13:23

Well gentlemen, here's the map, complete with elevation. Let me know what you think.

New File:

Harry Tuttle · June 28, 2003, 20:55

Little Update:

1. Retooling the map so that it is more accurate. I'm sure a good many Europeans on the forums found a few lakes where they shouldn't have been, and a few peninsulas where their grandmother's home is.

2. Working on finding a decent wav editor so that I can put actual mission briefings in the game. Your commander will keep you abreast of the enemies movements and plots through actual voice communication! I think it will be a nice addition.

One more thing I was thinking about. Does anyone know if there is some way to create a "console" program to run alongside Civ2 so that little extras like pictures and sounds popup at certain turns? Maybe just a Visual Basic program where a player can click a button to keep the little extras in synch with the scenario. Or maybe a beefed up program that can also act like a BAT program, closing Civ2 and updating the events and units file at certain points in the game? Anyone ever tried this?

Harry Tuttle · July 1, 2003, 21:03

Ok, latest version. European cities have been marked by jungle terrain (which will be removed once the cities are actually placed). Tomorrow, I'll make a go at the rest of the world's cities. The terrain has been redone with the realistic placement of a few Asian rivers, and a Westernly movement of the Urals. Here's the latest.

curtsibling · July 8, 2003, 05:09

How is it going, Harry?

Harry Tuttle · July 8, 2003, 19:50

It's going ok. The cities are almost entirely placed and the missions have been hammered out. I could have a complete graphics set by now, but I want to make a few more custom units.

I've decided that I will indeed release this monster in three parts. A Nazi Germany single player scenario will be the first installment, followed by an American, then British version. The missions will differ for all the installments, giving a unique perspective for all three sides.

Keep checking back for updates...

Harry Tuttle · July 11, 2003, 21:22

Update:

Terrain 1 & 2- 80%
Units - 50%
Map - 100%
Events - 70%
Icons - 60%
Cities - 0%

It's a comin'!

Harry Tuttle · July 12, 2003, 03:01

A little something to wet your palette. A group of American fighters try to fend off an attack on a petroleum field by some advanced Nazi bombers and fighters!

jim panse · July 12, 2003, 04:00

look good, Harry *pookseyesout*

Harry Tuttle · July 12, 2003, 23:35

Well, I was working on finishing the terrain, which is now 99% finished, and I thought of something. A good scenario not only should have great gameplay, but great graphics too.

Now, I know what your saying: "Duh Harry, could've told you that one", but think about it. How many scenarios out there truly take advantage of Civ 2's graphic overlay when applying terrain? Have you ever built a fortress over a mine, which is over some sort of resource? Can't quite see all three very clearly, can you?

So many designers try to cram all these nice looking graphics into their scenarios, but then have them get blurred as players build up their territory. My solution: Terrain Modules. By simply designing the terrain to seamlessly integrate any scenario can can have top notch terrain that the player can both see, appreciate, and understand without having to resort to identifying the different layers with the cursor.

Just a little something I've done with my terrain. Hope you like it.

Palaiologos · July 13, 2003, 01:03

Duh Harry, could've told you that one.

Palaiologos · July 13, 2003, 01:06

But seriously now, i am afraid i haven't clearly understood that terrain module thing.

I hope you don't mean that you will make terrain graphics simpler and cruder and thus better identifiable.

Harry Tuttle · July 13, 2003, 02:46

Not simpler really. It's all about strategic placement of your graphics. You can pretty much do this with any kind of graphic, hi-res, Nemo-esque, you name it.

Picture this: Let's say you've replaced the normal Civ2 "buffalo" resource with a custom resource called "oil fields" and the "mine" improvement with "factory". The "oil fields" consist of a a few derricks on the left of the diamond and a oil tank on the right. The "factory" improvement consists of a building with some smokestacks. The oil field looks nice by itself, but when a settler puts a "factory" on the oil field diamond you suddenly have a factory overlapping the oil derricks and the oil tank, creating a terrain diamond that is not all that realistic looking or aesthetically pleasing. Plus, the "factory" may hide the fact that the diamond has a valuable resource underneath it.

The solution? Map out beforehand how the different graphics will look when they are grouped on the same terrain diamond. Instead of having the "factory" appear smack in the middle of the diamond why not place it off to the side where the oil tank is located? When the oil field is mined the "factory" graphic will overlap the tank, creating the look of a orderly, bustling industrial area. Both the resource and the mine graphic are clearly represented, plus you have just created a schnazzy little piece of eye candy for your scenario.

You can even add another addition to this mix. Let's say you want to protect this valuable piece of property from your enemies, so you build the "fortress" improvement on the terrain diamond. Since you thought ahead, the fortress seemlessly overlaps part of the diamond, replacing some grassy area from the "oil field" and a parking lot from the "factory" without compromising the objects represented on the diamond. A few sandbags next to a derrick, a fence next to the factory and suddenly you have a cool looking fortified industrial area.

The only trick is that you have to figure out how exactly universal improvements like your mine and fortress will overlap all the terrains that you can posibly build them upon.

Bottom line: More eye-candy, easier terrain recognition, and it just looks cool.

Other ideas: For a "Vineyard"-like scenario - A "fruit orchard" terrain square containing rows of fruit trees. The mine improvement could be changed to a bunch of workers with ladders and baskets. When the improvement is built on the diamond the result would look like the orchard is being harvested and men are actually climbing up to pick the trees. In essence the new graphic would look like there is action in the orchard instead of there just being a bunch of trees.

Neat huh?

Palaiologos · July 13, 2003, 17:08

Oh..

I see.

That is a rather splendid idea actually.

good job!

Harry Tuttle · July 13, 2003, 20:44

A quick illustration from some terrain that's already been posted.

Please excuse the discoloration. I'm working without PSP for the time being so my new gifs are being a pain.

Jimmywax · July 13, 2003, 20:51

An excellent idea, but doesn't the terrain underneath now become invisible?

Harry Tuttle · July 13, 2003, 21:12

Well no, the terrain would be the oil field in the picture, and the factory would be the improvement. The way the graphics are set up in Civ2 the factory is layered on top of the oil field. Nothing is being made invisible per say, only layered upon. The pink part in the factory tile is of course the see through color used throughout the units, and terrain images. You just gotta make sure you don't cover up anything that is vital to identifying a terrain square.

Harry Tuttle · July 13, 2003, 21:50

Ok, after realizing that an irrigated oil field would look odd, I'm moving the oil fields to the glacier spot. That should take care of any graphic problems

Jimmywax · July 14, 2003, 10:12

My bad, I thought the oil feild was an improvement as well.

Harry Tuttle · July 19, 2003, 15:04

Terrain: Done, completely. It looks pretty, really.
City Placement: 95%

Does anyone know of a good, and free, sound editor? I'm going to start working on the briefings this week.

Would anyone like to propose some shields for the units? Something new and interesting?

PM me if you'd like to contribute...

Harry Tuttle · July 19, 2003, 17:39

Next Question: Should I mess with the railroads in the scenario and turn them into something that might be more fun than transportation? I could turn the railroads into suburbs, little towns. It's just something that might fill in the spaces between the cities, since it is a big map.