"Invasion of the Babarians"

World 200 AD Szenario

We're writing the year 200 AD. While the Roman Emipre reached its top in territory growth (capturing Mesopotamia and Dacia), its tired and unmotivated (civil wars paralysed the empire every few years) forces are attacked in the north and east by homeless Germanic-, Sarmatian- and in the south by Persian/Arabian "Babarians" trying to pillage their way through the civilized provinces wealthy landscapes. They, themselves, are on the run - fleeing because of the pressure of asian riding hordes of the steppe empires (Chanats) in their backs, a horrible deathly wind, blowing from the far, far east. So the attack on rome's borders is the only hope the tribes of the northeast european regions will survive this bloody era of the "invasion of the babarians" and finally find a save place to settle down.

In the south-east, India and China -two large cultural blocks-, get the chance to stop their inner conflicts and unite their own countries buerocratic infastructures in peace, after many years of civil war and border conflicts. China nevertheless has yet to face the agressive increase of the nomadic riders of the north. To avoid this frightening threat, the great wall recently has been build.

Japan is rising in power as well, praying to the gods of the wind that a mongolic invasion fleet may never reach their islands
(In fact, in history such a fleet was send by Kublai Khan in the 13th century and it was destroyed by "the wind of the gods" - jap.:"Kamikaze").

Meanwhile in the west, 2 major american cultures, Maya and Nazca collide with each other (in North America there are also 6 minor tribes). Allthough in real history -around 200 AD- they havent been as strong as I made them in this scenario, they still are far behind the other civs, making playing the native american civs quite a challenge.

The black continent, however, is attached to the Bantu Empire.
Technically not very advanced yet, they are ready to control the deepest and wildest nature of inner africa for a long time on...




Playable Civs are (11):

EASY - Romans
Contra: high maintenance costs, at war with all neighbours, some weak spots Pro: good military and civil infrastructure
(Limes, Hadrians Wall, Defense System of Syria/Palestine, high religious output if player converts to judaism or chris.), far in tech

EASY - Chinese
Contra: high maintenance costs, no offensive military power Pro: good military and civil infrastructure (Great Wall, rice)
At peace with india and japan (this peace generates trade, if player agrees to open border in negotiations) also there is possibility to choose the same religion like one of them (Buddhism/Taoism) to allie closely.

AVERAGE - Tartarians
Contra: Not many cities, bad civil infastructure Pro: Keshiks, Keshiks, Keshiks

AVERAGE - Japanese
Contra: "small" empire, a bit behind in tech Pro: won't easily be attacked, can settle australia if player is skilled

AVERAGE - Indians
Contra: not many military units, a bit behind in tech Pro: wont easily be attacked, can settle australia if player is skilled

AVERAGE - Sassanides
Contra: "small" empire, no state religion Pro: can soon capture Babylon (as it in happened history as well) if player is skilled, AI of india wont declare war on you, Persians first one inventing the islam after a couple of turns (hopefully;if they use the given, free phrophet wisely!).

HARD - Germans
Contra: at war with every neighbour, a bit behind in tech. Pro: Lots of axemen (use them wisely!)

HARD - Sarmatians
Contra: behind in tech, at war with every neighbour, not many cities/settlers Pro: military is average, 3 (different) free missionaries available at start
(due to the historical story that a khazar emperor (of the 3rd century ad) invited missionaries of all big religions to explain them to him and then chose judaism as state religion afterwards [reason:he didnt want to be the bad guy for any of the bigger, against another fighting religions he didnt chose])

VERY HARD - Mayans
Contra: behind in tech and buildings Pro: Jaguar Warriors, high culture (because of their "fiests")

VERY HARD - Nazca Culture
Contra: behind in tech and buildings Pro: good expansion possibilities (South America)

VERY HARD - Bantu Empire
Contra: behind in tech, buildings, no coastal city, weak civil infrastructure Pro: good expansion possibilities (Africa)



Features:

-Historically correct names of some units and of cities (tribes). Tried to relate the size of the armies to each other.
-slightly modificated world map (greenland now got 2 grasslands f.e.).
-some hidden gimmicks to make you laugh (won't tell you here, hehe).


What you should know:
I started this from the scratch (first time experiencing working with the Worldbuilder), using the earth18civs map as setup.
My Motivation to do this very hard, long work (especially making enquieries about historical sites and the nongenerics of those)
was the (as I think) a bit too thin delievered 1000 AD scenario I found ingame.
This may be ok because not all civers are civfanatics, but I wanted tha real ****, so I went on this epic working trip ;)

Another reason, to be true, was the annoying ignorance of most civ4 online player to join my legendary -earth,18civs pw is "X"- matches.
(they seem to prefer blazing cton more than epic games of historical depth).

I hope to see some people playing this scenario in the net someday :) thats all ;)





Editorial Notes:

Known bugs:
-Cities improvement for maya, nazca and bantu still missing, cities all size 1, military allready there, though.
-If AI is playing either rome or china it leaves the strategicaly important fortifications at its borders. But anyway:this scenario is created for intelligent humans, not for stupid AI!!!
-some remaining german names?
-Kyoto too far south, due to the size of japan and the gamerules for cities. thinking about remapping japan a bit...
...more realistic
Version 2.0 will hopefully be available in a few days.

Thx for ANY feedback!

Try it, taste it and have fun consuming it!


EDIT:

some more bugs found:

-Timeline is set to start 200 AD but the turns cost 40 years each (like if it would be 4000 BC). I will change the game settings to 5 or 10 years for each turn.

-Requested to set agressive AI and raging babarians! Would be boring if not ;)

-I will change diplomatic settings slightly so there cant be a early peace between germany and rome (-51 wasnt enough Oo,
having experienced a peace between them (both AI) 15 turns after the beginning of the scenario).

I forgot the files ;)

In your great wall screen shot, it looks like Kyoto, Japan is to far south.

In your great wall screen shot, it looks like Kyoto, Japan is to far south.

thx. even without watching your avatar I know youre right; the reason to let this "mistake" happen was the limited space in japan, so kyoto had to be more to the south... trying to fix that in v_2.0

many of the chinese city names u have are still modern chinese cities - for 200 ad u mite want to change canton to nan hai or panyu. for xian u shud change it to chang'an. instead of seoul, go to around modern day pyongyang (further north) and change the city name to lolang as well as jiaozhi for modern day hanoi. yen for beijing, wu to subsitute shanghai/wuxi. loyang instead of hwang ho.

many of the chinese city names u have are still modern chinese cities - for 200 ad u mite want to change canton to nan hai or panyu. for xian u shud change it to chang'an. instead of seoul, go to around modern day pyongyang (further north) and change the city name to lolang as well as jiaozhi for modern day hanoi. yen for beijing, wu to subsitute shanghai/wuxi. loyang instead of hwang ho.


Thanks very much; allthough I studied lots of roman places, the asian regions were still sort of black boxes for me :)


BTW: Anybody played the scenario yet? ;)

Regarding dc82's comments: Pyeongyang would indeed be a better choice than Seoul (which is way too far south on the map anyway, and wasn't called Seoul in 200 A.D.), and it was actually around (and called Pyeongyang) in 200 A.D.

I am conflicted about calling it Lolang. Lolang was not so much a city as a commandery established by China to exert influence on the Korean peninsula. I would prefer Pyeongyang, but if the city starts out in China's possession... sorry, I can't bring myself to say it. ;)


EASY - Chinese
Contra: high maintenance costs, no offensive military power Pro: good military and civil infrastructure (Great Wall, rice)
At peace with india and japan (this peace generates trade, if player agrees to open border in negotiations) also there is possibility to choose the same religion like one of them (Buddhism/Taoism) to allie closely.


Sorry if I'm misunderstanding, as I don't have Civ yet and haven't been able to play the game, but are saying that China could adopt a religion from Japan (Taoism?)?. Buddhism was transmitted to China from India, but the flow of religions between China and Japan was the other way around (i.e., China -> Japan). Also, Taoism is a Chinese religion, not a Japanese religion. If anything, Japan should be in a position to adopt new religions to form closer relationships.

Again, sorry if I've misunderstood, but it sounded a bit weird.

Regarding dc82's comments: Pyeongyang would indeed be a better choice than Seoul (which is way too far south on the map anyway, and wasn't called Seoul in 200 A.D.), and it was actually around (and called Pyeongyang) in 200 A.D.

I am conflicted about calling it Lolang. Lolang was not so much a city as a commandery established by China to exert influence on the Korean peninsula. I would prefer Pyeongyang, but if the city starts out in China's possession... sorry, I can't bring myself to say it. ;)



Sorry if I'm misunderstanding, as I don't have Civ yet and haven't been able to play the game, but are saying that China could adopt a religion from Japan (Taoism?)?. Buddhism was transmitted to China from India, but the flow of religions between China and Japan was the other way around (i.e., China -> Japan). Also, Taoism is a Chinese religion, not a Japanese religion. If anything, Japan should be in a position to adopt new religions to form closer relationships.

Again, sorry if I've misunderstood, but it sounded a bit weird.


i'm not as familiar w/ korea - checking a map of the han dynasty, they put down lolang, again i'm not as familiar w/ ancient korea.

taoism is def. a chinese religion/philosophy - it was spread to japan but def. didn't originate there - native japanese religions would be more along the lines of animism, shintoism, etc.

This looks a great scenario, but ...mmm...i have started and what army is at Rome? Lions and bears?

There are some wonders that were not builded until 1000 years after the scenario begining, like Notre Dame.

I think Salomon temple wasnt there becouse was destroyed by romans before year 200, right? And what happened with the Great Library, the Ligthhouse or the Colosus, i am not sure of their destroy date, but...

Last for now, why dont change Cannae by Jerusalem and make it Holy city for Christians and Jews?

I will continue playing, i am taking fun. Great work.

This looks a great scenario, but ...mmm...i have started and what army is at Rome? Lions and bears?

There are some wonders that were not builded until 1000 years after the scenario begining, like Notre Dame.

I think Salomon temple wasnt there becouse was destroyed by romans before year 200, right? And what happened with the Great Library, the Ligthhouse or the Colosus, i am not sure of their destroy date, but...

Last for now, why dont change Cannae by Jerusalem and make it Holy city for Christians and Jews?

I will continue playing, i am taking fun. Great work.

In rome, at the start, there are 2 lions, a bear and a skirmisher (+a defense legion). Can you guess why? ;)

About Notre Dame: I guess, if I included it, it was to balance the culture output of germany and rome near the rhine border. But:
If AI is playing rome, they generate great prophets, engs etc.

To my defense I have to say, I DIDNT include the salomons temple!
Didnt disable the possibility to build it on the other hand, too...
Great Library was burned to its ground later, by invading islamic arabians, the lighthouse was destroyed in the 13th century by an earthquake and the colossus as well in the 3rd century by earthq..

Cannae isnt Jerusalem, there is no city cannae in this scenario (!?)
The city lieing in palestine is Gaza, du to its strategically important position. But all wonders etc you have to see as if they were built in the provinces (Pannonia, Gallia, Britannia etc.)there.
During the roman time in palestine and after the destruction of sal. temple, 70 ad by tiberius (that followed various jew revolts), jerusalem lost its dominating status and the diasporra began.


EDIT: thinking abouth adding some earthquake events :)))

You are right about the wonders, and yes, it is Gaza, but why dont make Gaza then, holy city for Christians and Jews?

Regarding dc82's comments: Pyeongyang would indeed be a better choice than Seoul (which is way too far south on the map anyway, and wasn't called Seoul in 200 A.D.), and it was actually around (and called Pyeongyang) in 200 A.D.

I am conflicted about calling it Lolang. Lolang was not so much a city as a commandery established by China to exert influence on the Korean peninsula. I would prefer Pyeongyang, but if the city starts out in China's possession... sorry, I can't bring myself to say it. ;)


I just included a south corean city because, creating the scenario I made enquieries about the japanese culture at that time for Leader name and builings etc. and during that I read that they had various trade relations to south corea. To balance japan and china I gave japan this city. It wont be called seoul in v_2.0 anymore.



Sorry if I'm misunderstanding, as I don't have Civ yet and haven't been able to play the game, but are saying that China could adopt a religion from Japan (Taoism?)?. Buddhism was transmitted to China from India, but the flow of religions between China and Japan was the other way around (i.e., China -> Japan). Also, Taoism is a Chinese religion, not a Japanese religion. If anything, Japan should be in a position to adopt new religions to form closer relationships.

Again, sorry if I've misunderstood, but it sounded a bit weird.


Well, its like that: China posseses Lhasa (in history there was a marriage with a tibetian princess to get close relations to tibet) - holy city of buddhism
(and the possible state religion of the indian player - if he converts),
the taoistic holy city, that was invented around 3 cent. AD in todays province
xi'an, as I read, AND -last but not least- the holy city on confuzianism in todayshwangho, as it is written, the master kung was born and living there.

So china got 3 holy cities of 3 different religions.

I simply say: if china changes his state religion from confuzianism to taoism, japans AI will likelier allie with it; if china converts to buddhism and can bribe india (if they dont do it themselves) giving india silk or a tech to do so too, their relations will grow.

You are right about the wonders, and yes, it is Gaza, but why dont make Gaza then, holy city for Christians and Jews?

you cant do what is allready done. start a game as romans and see :D

I did it, i have played some turns as rome, the harder barbarians are the african ones with his camels. No big problems on German and East frontier. I am attaking the sassanid persians.

But i dont understand you, Christianism and Judaism dont have holy city.

I did it, i have played some turns as rome, the harder barbarians are the african ones with his camels. No big problems on German and East frontier. I am attaking the sassanid persians.

But i dont understand you, Christianism and Judaism dont have holy city.

Oh, I thought I put it into Gaza, will have to check and maybe fix it.

Relating german and sassanidian "weak" armies:

the ai plays so stupid, I am sorry.
If it were humans -and I tested it with some friends-, there is quite a chance, that those stacks of axemen in north, south and south east germany get rome some difficulties (do some unexpected moves, get backup by wandalian forces because their threat of sarmatian neighbours fighting the mongols is timed-out for some turns - what makes them available for an attack on the limes [reminds me of the Ardennen-Offensive in 1944 hehe] - and then suddenly unite to a huge stack //+the 7 axemen in ireland and scottland arent without importance as well, if the german player uses his ship near iceland to transport irish warriors to England, unite the irish and scottish axes to one army (+rushing some more by slavery)

the sassanides, however should -as humans- be able to conquer positions behind roman lines and thus to pillage lots of roman territory if romans armies go for recapturing babylon, which will fall to ANY human player (though not to the AI as it seems) after the first turn.

I have to say it again and again, in this state, v_1.0, the scenario is mostly no single-player but a multi-player scenario.

I never liked single player of civ 4 anyway, because I think the AI is no fun if it doesnt represent learning intelligence.

I was able to calculate the moves of the AI very soon very accuratly what means that its now boring to me. Humans, on the other hand, always got different profiles, that you have to discover to calculate their actions and so be able to win.
+ experienced civ-players learn to extract your own strategies as well what makes it even harder.
This is much more fun.


So, people -please- play this scenario MULTIPLAYER!

its CERTAINLY a THRILL!!!!!

--->Call your friends, post them the link of this *.zip attechment via irc or whatever, tell them where to extract it to, meet them in the lobby, press the "new scenario" button and have lots of fun!!!-its easy, isnt it?:rolleyes:

I recommend, however, if you play it single player not to chose romans or chinese. It would be too easy.

K, i will do :D

i'm not as familiar w/ korea - checking a map of the han dynasty, they put down lolang, again i'm not as familiar w/ ancient korea.

Well, that makes sense, seeing as it was a Chinese map. Given the current Chinese attempts to swallow up great chunks of Korean history (I'm talking about Goguryeo here), I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if they showed ancient Korea as belonging to China.

I just included a south corean city because, creating the scenario I made enquieries about the japanese culture at that time for Leader name and builings etc. and during that I read that they had various trade relations to south corea. To balance japan and china I gave japan this city. It wont be called seoul in v_2.0 anymore.

Having trade relations is not the same thing as having enough cultural influence to claim a city. Balance or no, that is an egregious historical error. Setting aside what I said above (to dc82), considering the lack of a separate Korean civilization, the Korean city should definitely go to China. That at least has some historical basis (China did have significant influence on the peninsula, just as the various Korean nations had influence in China). It just boggles the mind that a 200 A.D. scenario would give Japan control of the Korean peninsula. That didn't happen until the late 19th/early 20th century, when Japan defeated both China and Russia and cleared the way for their colonization of Korea.

So china got 3 holy cities of 3 different religions.

I simply say: if china changes his state religion from confuzianism to taoism, japans AI will likelier allie with it; if china converts to buddhism and can bribe india (if they dont do it themselves) giving india silk or a tech to do so too, their relations will grow.

Ah, OK, I understand what you mean now. They have a choice of three different religions for which they would still have the holy cities. OK, that makes sense.

My Buddhist history isn't really up to par, but I wonder about the decision to give China the Buddhist holy city. Buddhism officially entered China in 67 A.D., and I'm wondering if a century and a half of history is enough to give them the holy city. Asoka adopted Buddhism as the royal religion in India in the 3rd century B.C., and in 200 A.D. it was still prospering. If it were a thousand years later I would say, yeah, definitely give the Buddhist holy city to China. But 200 A.D.? I don't know....

My Buddhist history isn't really up to par, but I wonder about the decision to give China the Buddhist holy city. Buddhism officially entered China in 67 A.D., and I'm wondering if a century and a half of history is enough to give them the holy city. Asoka adopted Buddhism as the royal religion in India in the 3rd century B.C., and in 200 A.D. it was still prospering. If it were a thousand years later I would say, yeah, definitely give the Buddhist holy city to China. But 200 A.D.? I don't know....

the slightly difficulty with buddhism or religions in asia as a whole is that it's not as cut and dry as the western faiths - the buddhism that one finds in east asia is far different than the one u find in india. in addition, in a place like china - several religions and philosophies r mixed and intertwined with one another, with almost each individual/family having their own mix of confucianism, daoism, buddhism, ancestor worship, etc.

was that a road I saw in the English Channal?:)

the slightly difficulty with buddhism or religions in asia as a whole is that it's not as cut and dry as the western faiths - the buddhism that one finds in east asia is far different than the one u find in india. in addition, in a place like china - several religions and philosophies r mixed and intertwined with one another, with almost each individual/family having their own mix of confucianism, daoism, buddhism, ancestor worship, etc.

True, which is what makes choosing holy cities (especially for religions like Confucianism and Taoism) a tricky thing. I guess it will all come down to game balance.

why not put the buddhist holy city in Sanchi, India. That is the most sacred stupa for buddhists.

As far as Gaul goes, you might consider replacing Massilia and Lutetia with Lugdunum (now Lyon) and Narbo (Narbonne) who were far more populated and important. Two of Gaul's provinciae were named after them, and Lutetia was in Lugdunensis for instance.
Strabo (http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Roman/Texts/Strabo/home.html), the Ancient geograph, didn't even mention Lutetia in his works!

wheres the great wall. I can see it :( But the scenario is pretty fun. Nice thought about putting the difficulty lvls for the descriptions of different civs.

Just a military/linguistic tidbit, limes originally referred to the roads running perpendicular to the border fortification.

As the RE became more passive in its defensive strategies, the fortifications took on this name.

Cool, huh?

(Roads used for rapidly moving own troops, ergo aggresive defense. Fortifications for slowing enemy troops, ergo passive defense).

EDIT: Therefore, your naming the border fortifications limes is perfectly appropriate for the period. Just wanted to make that clear.

Living in Korea as I do, I have heard both sides of the argument and probably several more. History is a very touchy subject in this corner of the world with things like Japanese textbooks, Chinese claims on Tibet and Taiwan and Koreans claiming to have over 5000 years of history.

As far as Koguryo goes, I think the Chinese and Koreans are both wrong. Koguryo was no more Korean than it was Chinese. It was certainly one of the most powerful nations in 200 AD though.

Here is an excellent link on the subject:
http://hnn.us/articles/7077.html

Setting aside what I said above (to dc82), considering the lack of a separate Korean civilization, the Korean city should definitely go to China. That at least has some historical basis (China did have significant influence on the peninsula, just as the various Korean nations had influence in China). It just boggles the mind that a 200 A.D. scenario would give Japan control of the Korean peninsula. That didn't happen until the late 19th/early 20th century, when Japan defeated both China and Russia and cleared the way for their colonization of Korea.


From the Asian Times:
The kingdom dates from 37 BC and endured countless battles and attacks until AD 668, when it was absorbed by the unifying southern kingdom of Shilla. For Koreans, Koguryo is more than a historical relic, it was the first and largest of Korea's three founding kingdoms (Shilla and Paekje being the other two), and a pillar of Korean identity. But despite South Korean President Roh Moo-hyun's "quiet diplomacy" behind the scenes, China's leadership has been increasingly vigorous in claiming Koguryo as its own, strongly alleging that it was governed by one of China's many ethnic minorities.

The ethnicity of the Koguryo kingdom is still hotly debated among scholars of early Korean history. Some say the language spoken in Koguryo was linguistically closest to Old Japanese. Indeed, there are those who believe Koguryo was actually ethnically Old Japanese, and still others who say the Old Japanese actually migrated from what is today North Korea and the Chinese northeast.


What is really boils down to is that all 3 nations in Northeast Asia seem to have their own biased view of history unfortunately. (Koreans, Chinese and Japanese). :(

Living in Korea as I do, I have heard both sides of the argument and probably several more. History is a very touchy subject in this corner of the world with things like Japanese textbooks, Chinese claims on Tibet and Taiwan and Koreans claiming to have over 5000 years of history.

The ethnicity of the Koguryo kingdom is still hotly debated among scholars of early Korean history. Some say the language spoken in Koguryo was linguistically closest to Old Japanese. Indeed, there are those who believe Koguryo was actually ethnically Old Japanese, and still others who say the Old Japanese actually migrated from what is today North Korea and the Chinese northeast.

What is really boils down to is that all 3 nations in Northeast Asia seem to have their own biased view of history unfortunately. (Koreans, Chinese and Japanese). :(

I think one huge problem is that, modernized societies (especially) like to do is put things into boxes and categories, make things black and white. It's Chinese or it's Japanese - truth is, you had a whole spectrum - back a thousand years ago, there wasn't a clear line that separated what was Korean and what was Chinese. In fact, Chinese, Korean, and Japanese culture all have played pivotal roles and influences on one another - it's a tangled hodgepodge of cultures over thousands of years. Haha. Of course thanks to the mess of 21st century politics, no one will ever admit that. But yeah... at the end, there's still not going to be a clear answer.

At least with Civ 4 though, you can somewhat reflect that diversity - give Korea to China or Japan (pick one, anyone) and increase the culture of a neighboring city of the other nation high enough to keep it up in the air.

Excellent points. Things rarely are black and white and are usually shades of grey. :)

I think one huge problem is that, modernized societies (especially) like to do is put things into boxes and categories, make things black and white. It's Chinese or it's Japanese - truth is, you had a whole spectrum - back a thousand years ago, there wasn't a clear line that separated what was Korean and what was Chinese. In fact, Chinese, Korean, and Japanese culture all have played pivotal roles and influences on one another - it's a tangled hodgepodge of cultures over thousands of years. Haha. Of course thanks to the mess of 21st century politics, no one will ever admit that. But yeah... at the end, there's still not going to be a clear answer.

At least with Civ 4 though, you can somewhat reflect that diversity - give Korea to China or Japan (pick one, anyone) and increase the culture of a neighboring city of the other nation high enough to keep it up in the air.

Why not just put it as a babarian city as in the 1000AD seneario does? That will save us from arguing whether it should belong to China or Japan.

I am sorry to put this interesting discussion back on a simple gameplay level: if Korea wasnt Japanese Japan would be too weak.
So as its a matter of balance, I have to leave it as it is though a babarian city would be more accurate.
To give it to a new created minor tribe is too much work, so I wont try that.


Beside the jap/chin discussion,

I would like to test a new version of this scen with 4-5 people.
People who are interested please pm me.

P.S. I really have to say, sadly, that if there is no real interest in multiplayer-playing of this scenario I wont be very motivated to work on newer versions.

P.S. I really have to say, sadly, that if there is no real interest in multiplayer-playing of this scenario I wont be very motivated to work on newer versions.
I will definetly play this scenario on hotseat with my friends, but i need to upgrade my pc first, so i'll play it next week or so ;)

I'm sorry, DRJ, but i can't play your scenario on hotseat with friends, because Firaxis has f*cked up everything again :mad: Check link in my sig, if u're a good modder maybe u can help :rolleyes:

I've tryed this scenario,it isn't very bad,yes it has few mistaces but it's the best scenario for civ IV at the moment,good work bro.

ps:The barbarians are litle too strong,camel archer is very annoying.

Hmm, on the historical accuracy... mainly to do with China

200AD

Loyang was the Captital of China, the Han Dynasty, Xian, was known as Chang-An, and was found on the Yellow River, not the Yangzi. China had very little control over the Guangzhao/Canton region Shanghai was not even an important city till the 1800's (an important city during that time in that area was Jian Ye (which is modernday Nanjing), Wuhan is actually the confederation of three different cities, Wuchang, Hankou, and Hanyang which only confederated in the 1800's Peking was not named Peking, the closest important city to the current site of Peking in China would be Ji... hmm, also the pinyin name for the place confuius was born is Qufu, just so all your names are the same translation :)

Oh, and China, at 200 AD was far from unified. At 200 AD, it was about to face its greatest trials, as it fell into the Struggle between the three Kingdoms, then the Six Dynastys, before the Sui re-established the Mandate of Heaven

Sorry if Im a bit picky, good scenario otherwise :)

The Jin dynasty ruled for a while, they could always use that.

In another note, I already PMed him about China not being unified :P

The Jin dynasty ruled for a while, they could always use that.

In another note, I already PMed him about China not being unified :P

yeah, about 100 years before they were torn apart by barbarians >_>

Anyway, I dont paticularly mind that China is unified in the Scenario, it makes sence for it to be. I dont have a map of Jin Dynasty towns (cry) so I cant help him if he uses them (one can just use the ingame map that comes with Romance of the Three Kingdoms video game, its based around the time of 200AD, and the cities are farly accurate)

Edit, so here is how I would do it
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v622/Shardie/ShardiesChina.jpg

Xu Cheng is the Capital, because Loyang was too close to Xian... and also Xu Cheng was the Imperial Capital during the Prime Ministership of Cao Cao, who lived during that time... also Changsha should be closer to the Xiang river, but its not, cause it would interfere in the development of Jiangye Also, I decided to put Ji where it was, so it was out of the development radius of Changan

I'd suggest instead of Ji, using Nan Pi (Yuan Shao's capital city), as it was probably slightly bigger. Maybe we could try and squeeze Xiangyang in there too?

I'd suggest instead of Ji, using Nan Pi (Yuan Shao's capital city), as it was probably slightly bigger. Maybe we could try and squeeze Xiangyang in there too?

I dont think there is room for Xiangyang >_> it would be right next to Xuchang... curse these small maps! Anyway, I just pointed these corrections, at least in my mind, out, because in your original post, you wanted to make it as historicly accurate as possible

anybody think of making the civil war. that would be cool.

A lot of asian people around here. And thats good, cause I really have to confess, I dont know much about ancient Asia as far as its east of persia.

I will think about including your suggestions as accurate as possible.

Having completed christmas and new years vacation, hopefully the time has now come to do the last steps of work for version 2.0 to be released in a few days.

Shardie,
Changan is far south, the chinese didn't have any major settlement where you plot it, it is far too inaccessible from the actual chinese sphere of influence.

chinese cities are rarely well spaced, the central region is dense, there should be 2 cities in the central plains with changan west of them. like 3 dot in a line, these were the traditional central of chinese power.

Yeah, Changan should be south of where it is on the map... its only where it is now because there is a mountian there...

Changan, or Xian, as its called today, is between the great arc of the yellow river, where it heads north, and then west for a bit, then south. You could change the mountian one south of Changan into a hill, and move it there, but I would say, based on the map, no further.

Move Xuchang one plot to the West and rename it Louyang, and add one of the central plain cities, possible Xiapi or somthing similar close to the Shangdong penintular. Perhaps move Changsha one square NE, and add XiangJiang two squares north and one west...

That is, if you want accurate cities

why are there to galleys in the roman city Luteria? it has no coast and the galleys accomplish nothing

this looks like a pretty historically accurate scenario..just how i like it.

and like you i thought the in-game earth ad1000 scenario was pretty dry..
look forward to playing this one :)

just as a suggestion maybe you could put a little civilization in australia...maybe like the aborigines or somethin. give more for japan to "conquer" :mischief:

good job :goodjob:

Just one point- I don't think the Khazars converted to Judaism until the 8th or 9th century.

I have been reading Hans Delbrück's four-volume History of the Art of War, published between 1900 and 1920. An absolutely fascinating work. He says that the Romans faced a shortage of precious metals during this period, and that Septimius Severus debased the denarius to the point that it was only 50% silver. The state had difficulty collecting taxes in currency (eventually being content with collecting taxes in kind) and hence paying the legions. Septimius Severus therefore stopped paying the legions for full-time duty in forts and camps where they were not allowed to marry. Instead, he gave them land and allowed them to live on it, mustering for duty only when called. They were no longer full-time soldiers, but a militia. "And with this change the basic nature of the Roman legion was eliminated" (vol. 2, p. 216). Although they continued to call these units "legions" for the next two hundred years, they were anything but. They could not stand against the barbarians, who were full-time soldiers. The Roman armies that were any good after the dissolution of the legions were barbarian mercenaries in the pay of Rome.

So, to reflect this, I think it would be good to give Rome legions with a huge budget deficit so that it has to disband most of them. Or perhaps give them no "praetorians" and only archers and skirmishers. You're right that being Rome is easy in this scenario. Rome in AD 200 was not nearly as strong as it is in this scenario.

Japan in 200AD...now i've seen everything.