It's 2015 and the United States is seeing its' sole superpower status challenged from several quarters. In the Far East, China is rapidly growing, forcing neighbouring nations to form protective defence pacts to deter Chinese regional ambitions. A pan-Arab nationalist revolution has swept away the hated dictatorships of the Middle East and has drawn other Muslim nations into its' fold. A more assertive European Union now spans the European sub-continent.

In this Scenario I've tried to simulate the near future of 2015 where the US will face both China and the EU as new rising superpowers. I've tried to model very closely real world civilisation size, development level, technology and military strengths in this scenario within the limits of the Civ game (hey, I just wanted to know who might end up on top ... I would hate to learn Mandarin Chinese for nothing) :)

You can play any one of 14 sides in this game on a HUGE 180x180 ultra realistic Earth map and you don't have to use Civ3Edit to do that ... just chose one civilisation as normal when you start the game.

Apart from some renaming and tweaks of some civilisations - no other rules or unit character stats have been altered. All victory conditions are enabled.

Certain nations are in locked alliances at the start of the game (eg America, Israel, Iraq and the Pacific Defence Pact)

Get the scenario at --

www.geocities.com/muffins4brains/WorldWar3-2015

one good job!
why is Iraq not part of the Muslim Nationalist Alliance?
why is Minsk part of Russia it should be a part of the EU?

Thanks

Iraq is not part of the Muslim Nationalist Alliance because I think that it will still be under the strong support and influence of the US by 2015.

As for Belurus, they nearly gave up and joined Russia in the 1990's. With their current economic situation and their anti-capitalist leader they are teetering on the edge of economic colapse. It's my guess that the 'White-Russian' will turn to their cousins before they embrace the Franco-German EU

Wow, this is a cool scenario. Good job muffins.

Why is Iran not a part of the Muslim National Alliance? They are already a Theocratic government today.

Which, I might add, you should do -- create special government types. Theocracy for the Muslim National Alliance (and, possibly, Israel), Beauracratic Democracy for the EU, PDP, SDP, LAC and AU, Republican Democracy for the US, Neutral States, India, Russia and Iraq (and Israel assuming not Theocratic). Obviously, China is Communist (no changes necessary).

Iran is most likely not a part of the Muslim National Alliance because they are of Persian ethnicity and not Arabic. I doubt Iran would join such an alliance because of this. They dislike Iraq and other Middle Eastern countries.

Very nice scenario. I'm gonna go and play it soon.

Thanks for all the feedback!

I didn't include Iran in the Muslim Nationalist Alliance since Iran is a theocracy and the MNA are secular nationalists. I've modelled them upon the pan-Arab nationalism that engulfed the region in the 1950's and 1960's that almost united much of the middle east under one flag. Egypt and Syria were even in a 'union' at one point until they fell out.

Also, the only nation within the Muslim Nationalist Alliance that operates any level of theorcacy or Koran-based rule is Saudi Arabia ... and they have serious problems with a disgruntled population. Everyone else - Morocco, Algeria, Egypt, Syria, Jordan etc - are secular and see Islamic fundamentalism as a threat.

For that reason I've given the Muslim Nationalist Alliance a Fascist government type (these guys are ultra-nationalists) and not theocratic.

This is also why I've been able to add the former Soviet central asian nations in the MNA (these people are Turks and Uzbeks, not Arabs).

You are right about it taking a loooong time to load.
Thanks for the warning, or I might have given up.
I have a P4 2G comp.

Looks like a great scenario.

I tried to play as the Chinese.
After three turns I was at war with just about everybody, so I quit.

I will try the Europeans next time.

dude, i just read this: http://www.geocities.com/muffins4brains/TheWarCascade.html

on your page

quality peice of work you should make THAT into a Civ Scenario!

Originally posted by Esca
You are right about it taking a loooong time to load.
Thanks for the warning, or I might have given up.
I have a P4 2G comp.

Looks like a great scenario.

I tried to play as the Chinese.
After three turns I was at war with just about everybody, so I quit.

I will try the Europeans next time.

:worship: All hail Esca and his 2G machine! :worship:

took 2minutes to load on mine... :)

It reaches 66% on "configurating scenario"
It already shows the map. Then, it just stops. After 5 minutes, I found out that it has stopped responding.
Im running on 733mhz. How long should it take?

it hasnt stopped responding, its working realy hard to work stuff out.

733mhz is realy "slow" for a scenario of this size, leave it on over night "loading"

Originally posted by Jabronyo
It reaches 66% on "configurating scenario"
It already shows the map. Then, it just stops. After 5 minutes, I found out that it has stopped responding.
Im running on 733mhz. How long should it take?

I've got a 1Ghz PC and it takes 15 minutes to configure the scenario for me. Your computer hasn't crashed or locked up, it's just got a huge map with lots of cities, resourse access, culture and stuff to work out first. Just give it time.

Playing as the Europeans, I found that I could not make any modern weapons, apart from Tow infantry.
No tanks no infantry, only riflemen.

I had all the required technology.

It takes too long between turns for me. I am, reluctantly, going to have to give it a miss.

oil!

That's a good idea of scenario Muffin !!! :goodjob:

About my few remarks...
- Be careful with the African alliance, it's a quite large civilization that could have a truely big power.
- If there's a way for you to not build setters, it would be quite great to avoid a "colonization" of Siberia and Northern Canada.
- According to me, Khartoum and Muqdishu should be in the Arab alliance. Both Sudan and Somalia are members of the Arab League and Sudan is even controlled by the fundamentalists today !
- I would create the city of Kano in Northern Nigeria and the city of Bouaké in Norther Ivory Coast. Both contolled by the Arab League. Tensions are increasing in both countries between muslims in the North and christians/animists in the South.
- I would put Abidjan instead of Freetown simply because Abidjan is the main economical power in the region.
- I would let Minsk as Russian and put also Kiev as Russian. There are really few chance Ukraine and Belarus will be part of the EU in 2015. Moreover, those countries are diplomatically closer to Moscow than to Brussels.
- I would put Central Asian countries in locked alliance with the US and not part of the Arab Alliance.
- I would put the city of Papeete as French and the Guam as American. Those place are strategic in the case of a war in the Pacific. Maybe also another one near Madagascar with the Reunion Island.
- The US should control the city of Panama. Well I know it's independant but the canal is actually controlled by the US and it could be very important for Americans to get it.
- Instead of George W. Bush as a president of the US, I would maybe put Jeb Bush. Well of course there are few chance but it sounds cooler to me ;).

Okay. The point of these remarks are just to make the scenario even better ! I think yours is pretty well thought for now and I consider that's great ! Once again, great job ! :goodjob:

Another thing is that no one is currently in war at the beginning of the scenario... there are few chance the AI will attack the first so if you don't want the human player to be constrained to declare War, you should put few countries at war.

Moreover, if it's about China/Arab Alliance vs USA, you should put the EU in the locked alliance. I really don't see how the EU could choose the side of China.

The EU (apart from Britain) and China were both against the invasion of Iraq. As was Russia.

So it is concievable that they might form an alliance.

Thanks Marla! I really appreciate the feedback. :goodjob:
Yeah, I realise that leaving northern Canada and Siberia empty would attract lots of AI settler activity but I was attempting to reflect real world populations within the scenario and was constrained by Russia’s and the Neutral Leagues’ tiny populations. As a rule, a city of size 12 equals 20 million of population in the real world in this scenario so Russia equals only six cities of size 12. Had I spattered Siberia and Canada with, say, 10 cities each of size 1 to fill up these areas then it would have had the effect of an artificial boost for these civilisations – one settler requires 2 population to build so 10 small extra cities would equate 20 free population points. In any case these areas are largely empty in real life and are ripe for colonisation!
Yup, I took a liberty in giving the central Asian nations to the Arabs but it’s hard to guess who will dominate the region in 11 years time. The Russians, the Americans or the Muslim world? A bit of an each way bet.
As for Panama, I gave control of the Panama canal to the Latin Americans since the Panamanians kicked the US out and shut down their big base there in the late 1990’s (’98 or ’99, I forget). I think the Panamanians were a little shirty about getting invaded and all. :D
And lastly, I intended this scenario to be more of a simulation rather than a mission. It’s not a “US vs China” scenario but more of a “play any nation of 2015 and deal with their problems within the wider world” scenario. :thumbsup:

Firstly, I'm just going to thank you for this scenario, it's good to see scenarios created with good political knowledge and intelligence.

Before I get started though I'm going to say that I haven't played your scenario yet (But I did visit your website, job well done :goodjob: by the way. I read some of your welldone articels and your WWIII 2015 scenario page) so this is purely a comment which is made on an assumtion of what you have created here...

One of the nations in your scenario is the "Muslim Nationalist Alliance", which if I am correct is an Alliance between the arab nations and some Islamic cities.
I don't mean this as an offence to your scenario (which I'm certain you must have worked hard to develop), I will simply point out this:
Based on what I've seen here you have potrayed a large number of Arabic nations of being purely muslim. A muslim nationalist alliance is possible, but extremely unlikely seeing as religon is a major reason why the arabic nations remain divided in the first place.
I point this out not because I think these are your beliefs on what the world will be like in 2015, but because many arabic christians may (I'm not saying they will) get offended by calling countries such as Lebanon, Syria ect. a part of a Muslim Alliance seeing as a great and large number of Arabs are dedicated christians.
I am not one to speak on behalf of arab christians but I do recommend you change the name of that particular nation due to the fact that you are specifing a particular religon to a group of people, and in turn using it as an identity.

Thanks once again for your hard work, your articels interest me so I will check back on your website.
Thankyou.

Originally posted by anzacborn

I point this out not because I think these are your beliefs on what the world will be like in 2015, but because many arabic christians may (I'm not saying they will) get offended by calling countries such as Lebanon, Syria ect. a part of a Muslim Alliance seeing as a great and large number of Arabs are dedicated christians.

Rest assured, the overwhelming majority of Christian Arabs are already offended by their current governments.

There are probably plenty of Australian Greens who deeply resent being led by your PM, Howard.

Point is they're too small to do anything about it.

Originally posted by anzacborn
I do recommend you change the name of that particular nation due to the fact that you are specifing a particular religon to a group of people, and in turn using it as an identity.

:confused:

Islamic nationalism is a viable political reality. See the OIC-Organizatoin of the Islamic Conference.

Being a christian (although not an Arab-Christian) myself, I am not offended. Simply because these countries are 99% muslim, so the name is quite appropriate.

Not to get too OT, but this is an intereseting article:

http://www.washtimes.com/national/20031203-113839-9531r.htm

Main point is that the overwhelming majority of American Arabs are Christian. Most are simply fed up with being treated like 2nd citizens. Result=Arabia is becoming even more Islamic.

Article also highlights the problem of using racial profiling to weed out Islamic terrorists.

anzacborn

The "Muslim Nationalist Alliance" wasn't my first choice of name for that civilisation/nation. I wanted to call them the "Arab Nationalist Alliance" at first (wanting to simulate pan-Arab nationalism) but I added the central asian republics to them in a later version of the scenario and ... somehow ... the "Arab, Uzbek, Turk etc Nationalist Alliance" didn't sound so good :D

The common thread throughout all these countries is that they are Muslim so I used that in the Alliance's name. A better name is needed, I agree, and I'm open to suggestions.

No suggestions like "Nationalist Alliance of Muslims, Christians, Jews, Satan worshipers, one-legged lesbians and dolphins" please :lol:

Originally posted by Rita Poon

Article also highlights the problem of using racial profiling to weed out Islamic terrorists.
Every solution has a negative side to it. The point is that it is effective. You have to way the costs vs the gains, and see if it is worth it. My opinion is: It is worth it.

Now back to the scenario :goodjob:

WW3 in 2015, hmm... Sounds like a John Titor reference to me.

If you don't want the AI to colonize Siberia and north Canada then just change the setting in the editor to not allow cities in tundra. If any cities are already in tundra change them to a hill or grassland. Then those regions stay barren and wild.

Id like to see a scenario where Countrys like britain , Usa , austrilia , canada join to form some kind of alliance , and leave britain out of the EU.


There dosnt seem to be much surport for the Eu constitution here ( the forrunner to the union of all the states in the EU)

Its more likly that the countrys would join together as they share common heritidge and have the same belifs

I'm British and I support the EU to the hilt!

Fully united Europe with a united military, foreign policy and President? Yes please!

Europe is a growing power and is predicted to eclipse the US within the next couple of decades as the globe's number one power - and I want Britain to be a part of that.

The EU's economy already overtook the US's economy in terms of shear size in 2003 and it hasn't even expanded into Eastern Europe yet.

How about if I do a scenario for 2024 where the EU RULES THE WORLD! **evil laugh** :lol: :lol:

i was thinking of something like that Muffins...

Either that or Germany Wins WWII scenario......

Originally posted by muffins
I'm British and I support the EU to the hilt!

Fully united Europe with a united military, foreign policy and President? Yes please!

Europe is a growing power and is predicted to eclipse the US within the next couple of decades as the globe's number one power - and I want Britain to be a part of that.

The EU's economy already overtook the US's economy in terms of shear size in 2003 and it hasn't even expanded into Eastern Europe yet.

How about if I do a scenario for 2024 where the EU RULES THE WORLD! **evil laugh** :lol: :lol:

You use muffin , as ur on screen name , so i doubt anyone cares what u think :p

well atm i dont think the EU is something good, but, i feel once it gets going the EU will outclass the USA in many ways and it will be a BIG shame if the UK isnt apart of that.

But i want to keep my £ :(

anyway this isnt a political forum ;)

great scenerio! i'm playing as the MNA and its feb of 2017. I've conquered Iraq, Iran, Israel (the axis of I's!!), the turkish part of the e.u., the E.u. cities of Sophia and Bucharest, I am now producing modern armors and mech infantries and I might conquer a large chunk of europe. i'm also in communism, researching space flight (in 10 turns it'll be done) and playin on regent (or was it monarch? one of the two). the key is to not care about the gpt you're losing. :) i'm losing nearly 400 gpt. i'm at war with nearly the whole war (the africans used to be my only friend, then i declared war on them for cutting off my only supply of rubber) and eventually i made peace with a lot of places but then got rubber from indonesia. fun scenerio! good work!

first of all, great work on your scenario, I only had a quite look in the editor, so only 2 question/comment
-Maybe you should reconsider reuniting North and South Corea... I think even in 10 years, unless there is a military conflict, North Corea will be on the chinese side, not on the South COrean Side..
-you should check south east Asia, countries like Indonesia have a huge Muslim population, even though they are not part of your future Muslim leage, they probably would be allies...
-also, Sri Lanka should not be part of India, and Dacca is the Capital of Bangladesh, a Muslim Nation, it should not belong to India....

but As I said, I know how hard it is to make a good scenario, so I can only say: great work....

its korea......

thx Overlag, always hard to figure it out... C for half the languages, K for the other half...

ah sorry didnt realise English wasnt your first language....

no prob... actually english's my 4th... the problem is the same confusion spreads to all the other languages...

Originally posted by Overlag
its korea......

The Koreans spelt it "Corea" during the Japan/Korea world cup a few years ago. All their football shirts used "Corea".

Also ... I promise you that if Bush gets re-elected then he WILL invade North Korea. He's been following the strategy from the Neo-Con think-tank PNAC almost to the letter. Inflating the military budget, leaving the ABM treaty, developing national missile defence, developing "bunker-busting" mini-nukes, naming Iraq, Iran and North Korea as enemies (the Axis of Evil), invading Iraq ... PNAC recommended them all and Bush did them all.

Korea is next on PNAC's (and thus Bush's) "to-do" list. :D It's what his "bunker-busting" nukes are being developed for (to decimate Korea's 3 million man army as it sits in its bumkers) and what Bush's 10 "inteceptor" missiles are for in Alaska (to shoot down North Korea's nuclear response)

I wouldn't like to be living in California if Bush wins the election

Well, I'm not American and therefor won't be able to vote, but I sure hope Bush won't be reelectec... I mean, even Americans aren't that crazy-.
Anyway, I don't think that with the mess the US has on its hands in Iraq it is anyway close to be able to start a massive war with North Korea....
but hey, it's your scenario and your Vision of the world in the future, so I really won't argue about it, as long it is fun playing the game....

Originally posted by muffins
I'm British and I support the EU to the hilt!

Fully united Europe with a united military, foreign policy and President? Yes please!

Europe is a growing power and is predicted to eclipse the US within the next couple of decades as the globe's number one power - and I want Britain to be a part of that.

The EU's economy already overtook the US's economy in terms of shear size in 2003 and it hasn't even expanded into Eastern Europe yet.

How about if I do a scenario for 2024 where the EU RULES THE WORLD! **evil laugh** :lol: :lol:

1. "Europe" is a continent. Saying it is the world's number one power is like saying North America is the world's number one power. This is the same for economic size, the European Union has, not sure exactly, approx. 15 countries in it. The US is ONE country. For Pete's sake, this is like comparing apples and oranges.

Your union is doomed to fail for the same reason the first US constitution failed. You need a more cohesive federal system. I understand some countries don't want to dissolve their culture, but it will be necessary or it will fail.

Good luck!

2. You guys might want to build a few planes, tanks, and boats if you want to eclipse the US militarily. Oh, and after that, get the balls to actually use them (Britain is the exception).

Ruiner... the US wasnt one country, it took time to build it up as the way it is now.... as you've already said. I think the idea of the EU in the long run is something like the united states of europe...like the USA......

Originally posted by Overlag
Ruiner... the US wasnt one country, it took time to build it up as the way it is now.... as you've already said. I think the idea of the EU in the long run is something like the united states of europe...like the USA......

It will take a LOT longer for the independent nations of Europe to approach the level of cohesiveness the US states have.

I didn't mean for my post to sound rude, I guess I was grumpy. I get a little tired of all the anti-US comments. It seems like people can't complain about the weather without bringing GW into the discussion (I've voted for him in state and national elections). I realize he's controversial, but as far as 50% of Americans are concernerned (you know, the people he's suppose to look after) Al Gore wasn't any better.

I understand the rest of the world is annoyed that American policies effect them, but this is the world we find ourselves in and GW is simply following a diplomatic style as old as governments themselves and perfected in 17th century Europe, realpolitik.

yeah! i blame bush for our weather!!!!!! arrg ;)

Originally posted by ruiner


I get a little tired of all the anti-US comments.

So ... when did being pro-EU become anti-US hmmmm? :rolleyes:

Well, most of the population predictions I have seen show that the US will pass the EU in terms of population in a couple of decades - most of the EU has birthrates well below replacement level, while the US has a birthrate right about on replacement level, and a lot more immigration than the EU. That, and most of Europe is unwilling to fund a military as large as the US, so I don't think they will be long term threat to US power.

China on the Other hand, is the one you should look out for.

No India will be the next Superpower! By 2027 we'll have the 3rd best economy in the world and our military is pretty big at least a million. China has 2.2 million men while the U.S. has 1.4 million. India's poplation is more than a billion now.

True, India is also a potential great power in the making - in purchase parity terms they already have the worlds 4th largest economy. I see the great challenge of American foreign policy in the next 100 years will be to play the India and China off one another, to keep US domiance in the foreing arena.

The U.S. has no dominance in the area the U.S.'s time as world power is coming to an end. The next world powers are either going to be India or China. Or both. That may cause some conflict in the future.

Originally posted by DreadCthulhu
Well, most of the population predictions I have seen show that the US will pass the EU in terms of population in a couple of decades.

Current US population = 270 million

Current EU population = 374 million

EU population after entry of Eastern Europe and Turkey (May 2004 and 2007) = 550 million (you Americans will have to breed like bunnies to overtake that) :D

And if they get the rest of Europe into the EU after 2007 then we could see an EU with a population of 800 million ... just 40 million short of the entire population of both North AND South America.

The 'big' regions of the world (China, India and Europe) are powering up their economies and are going to challenge the global status quo.

Well, American birth rates are rising right now, while in Europe, they are on the decline; the United States is also is receiving a lot more immigrants, who themselves tend to have a very high birthrate.

Here is an article orginally from the Economist, about this trend - http://www.drabruzzi.com/half_a%20billion_americans.htm
which predicts by 2050, the US will have a total population of ~400-550 million and rising, while Western Europe's popultion will be at 360 million and falling.

And this site http://www.iiasa.ac.at/Research/ERD/DB/data/hum/dem/dem_2.htm

predicts that Europe's total popultion will be around 625 million by 2050, and dropping.

Also note that the US has a higher per capita income than any European country not named Luxemburg. Currently, the US is at $36,000 per person, while the larger European economies (Germany, France, the U.K., Italy, Spain, ect) are around $20,000 - $26,000 per person. Assuming this trend continues, the US will have an economy larger than Europe's in a fairly short period of time, and nearly twice the size of the EU(current countries anyways) by 2050.

I totally agree with you, Cthulhu, I was not trying to dismiss your figures. I was just trying to interject some perspective. I’ve seen the figures myself.

Europe as a whole is predicted to grow until 2030 to 2040 where the population will gradually drop to 700 million (I’ve always included Turkey in European figures). My own country, Britain, is predicted to go from 59 million today to a peak of 64 million in 2040 and then drop to 61 million by 2050. Big deal.

As for the GDP figures you might want to factor in the Dollar’s 40% devaluation over the last two years against the now mighty Euro. A European GDP per capita figure for 2001 of $26,000 would have to be revised upwards 40% - to $36,400 - to get actual value. Plus, worryingly, the reasons for the Dollar’s fall (the US trade deficit and governmental budget deficit) are actually getting worse.

50 years is a long time to predict economic trends, especially when the Dollar’s role as global reserve currency is under threat (who’s going to buy Dollars or US government bonds when their currency slumped 40%?). Too much can happen in 50 years in this changing world to make meaningful predictions. India was predicted to become a major superpower just decades after gaining independence in 1947 … that didn’t happen.

In any case, by 2050 I’m sure that other democracies OUTSIDE Europe would have joined the European Union. Perhaps if you Americans act nice we might even let you in too :D

wow this is a good scenerio. the possibilities it offers are awesome!good job!

You seemed faily convinced of your own argument so I won't try to dissuade you any further.

However, i'd like add that making a 50 year prediction based upon currency valuation data gleaned during a two year recession is DEFINITELY illadvised.

Originally posted by muffins
I totally agree with you, Cthulhu, I was not trying to dismiss your figures. I was just trying to interject some perspective. I’ve seen the figures myself.

Europe as a whole is predicted to grow until 2030 to 2040 where the population will gradually drop to 700 million (I’ve always included Turkey in European figures). My own country, Britain, is predicted to go from 59 million today to a peak of 64 million in 2040 and then drop to 61 million by 2050. Big deal.

As for the GDP figures you might want to factor in the Dollar’s 40% devaluation over the last two years against the now mighty Euro. A European GDP per capita figure for 2001 of $26,000 would have to be revised upwards 40% - to $36,400 - to get actual value. Plus, worryingly, the reasons for the Dollar’s fall (the US trade deficit and governmental budget deficit) are actually getting worse.

50 years is a long time to predict economic trends, especially when the Dollar’s role as global reserve currency is under threat (who’s going to buy Dollars or US government bonds when their currency slumped 40%?). Too much can happen in 50 years in this changing world to make meaningful predictions. India was predicted to become a major superpower just decades after gaining independence in 1947 … that didn’t happen.

In any case, by 2050 I’m sure that other democracies OUTSIDE Europe would have joined the European Union. Perhaps if you Americans act nice we might even let you in too :D

Originally posted by ruiner
However, i'd like add that making a 50 year prediction based upon currency valuation data gleaned during a two year recession is DEFINITELY illadvised.

What 50 year prediction? With GDP I was talking about today . In any case there hasn't been a 2 year recession (ie negative growth) and a recession would have little effect upon the strength of a currency.

The Dollar is devaluing because the $500 billion trade deficit and $550 billion US governmental budget deficit are exporting $1 trillion worth of Dollars into the global currency market - causing oversupply - not any recession.

anyway... the £ is good... no "recession" here :)

Seems like a lot of work was put in to this scenario.
I only have one concern.

George Bush is still the president of USA and it's 2015! :king:
Oh well, It is almost impossible to predict future leaders so I'll leave it at that.

I'm sure that Bush's followers will have him declared 'Emporer' and have his presidential opponents shiped off to Camp Delta for not being patriotic enough to support the current president. :D

A two-party democratic system is only one party away from a one-party state.

All hail our Glorious Leader George W Bush!
:worship::worship: :king: :worship::worship:

i can't seem to open that page where to download from..

Originally posted by KoRnEa
i can't seem to open that page where to download from..

That's Yahoo for you. It seems to work now though.

Corea looks much better than Korea anyday :D

i seem to have a problem when trying to load this scenario. i try to the US, and it goes through all of player configs, than suddenly freezes, and i have to ctrl-alt-delete out.

i'm running on a pentium 4 2.4 ghz, have 512 mb of ram, am i missing something?

Originally posted by rabidweasel
i seem to have a problem when trying to load this scenario. i try to the US, and it goes through all of player configs, than suddenly freezes, and i have to ctrl-alt-delete out.

i'm running on a pentium 4 2.4 ghz, have 512 mb of ram, am i missing something?

The scenario is huge and has a hightly developed map (roads, ports, airports etc) so it takes the computer a little time to configure. Your PC has not crashed ... just give it time.

On my crappy 1Gz PC it takes 15 minutes. :D Go and make yourself a cup of tea or something while it configures

You may think i´m wrong, but Brazil has an Larger chance than EU or India, and even China to become the next World Power,
Brazilian Population Doubles every 30 years, in 1970 Brazil had 90 Million people, now we got 200 million! and by a prediction by the UN Brazil will reach 500 Million citizens by 2040!, also Brazil has the 5 biggest territory in the world 70% of the alluminium in the world! 99 % of Niobium( a very strong metal that can olny be cut with diamonds), also grows it´s oil production in 200% per 40 years!!!! in 1960 we produced 50 of our needs in oil, now we produce 150%, meaning we export oil, and the governamment owns PETROBRAS THE WORLD LARGEST MARINE OIL COMPANY IN THE WORLD, also the olny one able to drill up to 1.5 km underwater! AND AMAZONIA, WITCH IS THE RICHIER MINERAL RESERVE IN THE WORLD, IS BRAZILIAN!!!! , Brazil produces 60% of the bovine exports!!, Also got advanced research in Transgenics and Bio-Technology!

A Country that according to the SOVIET UNION, owns 70 % of the worlds oil (YES, I MEAN IT, ACCORING TO THE SOVIET UNION 60% OF THE OIL IN THE WORLD IS IN AMAZONIA AND 10% IN THE COAST OF BRAZIL!)just cant be beaten if it develops in the current rate!

a big population isnt everything.......

Sometimes a big pouplation can be a problem.

for countries like brazil that are in debt by 10000millions........

I have no doubt that Brazil will become a global power. However, they've got a lot to do to catch up with China, India and the US. As long as they can grow their economy fast enough to provide the rapidly growing population with jobs then they can do it.

With your oil you might want to invest in a bigger military or the US might send in their Imperial Storm Troopers and take it for their own. :D They don't seem to like other nations having their own oil :lol:

Originally posted by muffins


The scenario is huge and has a hightly developed map (roads, ports, airports etc) so it takes the computer a little time to configure. Your PC has not crashed ... just give it time.

On my crappy 1Gz PC it takes 15 minutes. :D Go and make yourself a cup of tea or something while it configures

Crappy? thats better than my computer that has 0.7gz :)

Originally posted by Sarevok


Crappy? thats better than my computer that has 0.7gz :)

:eek:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
for countries like brazil that are in debt by 10000millions........
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Brazil does not have a debt bigger than 300 millions, adn in the same thinking, we can all stop paying the external debt to USA, it is not that hard to the entire MERCOSUL(an economical block just like the EU formed of Brazil Argentina Chile Uruguay Paraguay Venezuela(in 2004) Bolivia (in 2004) and Cuba ( in 2007) ) stop paying USA, USA may be a strong power, but cant go war in the entire south america without opening serious gaps in its defenses, and econnomically, usa cannot survive without the south american food exports (yes, Mercosul produces 70 of the oranges , 50 of the beef, and 30 of the milk eaten by USA), USA might go to war with us, but it would be fun to see usa with rationamment for the first time and how its people would deal with it :D , also toguether Mercosul has a large army of over 3 million man ( about 1 million brazilians 800.000 argentina 200.000 venezuelans 500.000 paraguay urugay and bolivia 400.000 cubans 350.000 chilenos and others that i forgot) it is not an army to be underestimated and surely to be respected and wich should avoid an US invasion without nuclear weapons ( i´m not counting USA trowing nukes at amazonia :nuke: ) so the debt is no concern for Brazil.

Originally posted by muffins


The scenario is huge and has a hightly developed map (roads, ports, airports etc) so it takes the computer a little time to configure. Your PC has not crashed ... just give it time.

On my crappy 1Gz PC it takes 15 minutes. :D Go and make yourself a cup of tea or something while it configures

ok, thanks alot.



i would just like to add, and i have no facts or research to support this opinion, but brazil importing 50% of america's beed and milk doesn't sound right to me. i live in northern michigan, and quiet literally, there are more cows (both of the beef and milk varieties) in my county than there are people.

as for brazil (or any other country for that matter) just ignoring and not paying their national debts, i don't think that's feasible. it was mentioned somewhere in this forum that one of the bigger reasons the american dollar is loosing ground against the euro and the pound is because of america's large (5 trillion plus) and growing national debt. if the dollar is losing ground just because this sizable debt exists, what would happen to other countries who simply refused to pay?

dude Brazil EXPORTS 50 of the MEAT, not milk, also Usa do produces lots of meat, but since the disease problems with your meat, brazilian canned meat became 50% of the US meat consuption, and apears to be holding this mark, i do belive that this mark is going down in a short time, but i do not belive that US will retake the exports to Asia that Brazil took during this period, also about the debt issue, Brazil would not suffer such problems, since:

1- Brazilian economy and currency is connected with EURO, not Us dollars
2- If Brazil and the rest of Mercosul stops paying the debt, it would broke many big investors, inutilizing a possible economical answer
3- i´m talking of a future of 20 or 40 years, not the present chaotic economy

The governments of most countries get the vast majority of their loans via the issue of governmental bonds. Any country that does not or cannot honour these bonds will no longer be able to sell their bonds and thus get no more loans money. It would aslo cause a crash in that nations currency as the globes investors rush to dump their governmental bonds from that nation.

Just look at the Argentinean currency crisis back in the 1990's. The government was heavily in debt and showed no signs of trimming its borrowing. International investors feared that all the Argentinean governmental bonds that they held would be impossible for the Argentina government to repay and there was a mass sell-off of Argentinean bonds.

The Argentinean currency crashed by 60% almost overnight, no-one would buy new Argentinean bonds anymore (meaning that the Argentineans had to slash their spending) and the country entered a major economic crisis.

As for America, their national debt is expected to reach $7.4 trilion this year (when their entire economy is 'only' worth $10 trillion) and the IMF warned in January that global investors may begin to fear that these debts will become unpayable and might sell off US bonds, causeing a Dollar crash and global economic chaos (since the Dollar is also the globes currency of choice when it comes to trade).

thanks for the clarification. i hope someday, when i grow up, i can be as well informed as you guys are.

and by the by, excellent job on the scenario. you where right, it just took a long time to load up, but i had alot of fun. the nuetrals declared war on the EU, and I went to them with an alliance with the EU against the neutrals, and took over canada. LOTS of fun, although i'm still unsure of where to use my nukes...

You may think i´m wrong, but Brazil has an Larger chance than EU or India, and even China to become the next World Power

-At least when you consider natural resources, but reality is different.


Brazilian Population Doubles every 30 years, in 1970 Brazil had 90 Million people, now we got 200 million!

-Which can or cannot be a good thing. Anyway, demographic growth is decreasing and is close to 1,2%/year, instead of 2,5% in the 70´s. This will give you 40% growth in 30 years.


in 1960 we produced 50 of our needs in oil, now we produce 150%, meaning we export oil,

-Not true, we produce around 90% of our oil comsumption. We export some oil and import some oil too.


and the governamment owns PETROBRAS THE WORLD LARGEST MARINE OIL COMPANY IN THE WORLD, also the olny one able to drill up to 1.5 km underwater! AND AMAZONIA, WITCH IS THE RICHIER MINERAL RESERVE IN THE WORLD, IS BRAZILIAN!!!! , Brazil produces 60% of the bovine exports!!, Also got advanced research in Transgenics and Bio-Technology!

-However, our economy is virtually stagnated in the last 20 years, our enterprises, public and private are being sold to foreign owned ones in one of the worse denationalization processes ever seen, our public debt is soaring, sucessive agreements with IMF has crippled our economy. We are in a process of relative de industrialization in which the share of agriculture in our GDP is increasing (due to decline of other sectors and agricultural growth), our universities are being destroyed, our health system is close to collapse, purchasing power of our workers is declining. Sorry to tell you, but, despite our potential wealth, we are declining in relative terms compared with other nations.

-Great scenario, Muffin. So good that it must be upgraded with a larger variety of military units, both modern and future. I could help you with some suggestions if you´re interested. It would involve some redesign of the tech tree too.

Muffins, you should look at the statistics in that article. While I realize that the European Union is expanding into new countries, its population still won't be as high as americas. Also, the per capita wealth of the USA is a lot more then that of the EU. So think about the implication of 550 million americans who are on average one third wealthier then 650 million europeans. Also, if Bush is still presdient in 2015, please try to get the EU to invade and help us get rid of him!

this looks like a very good job! I see a lot of work went into it! I will download, play, and tell you what I think!! Good job!

as stated, i love this scenerio, but i think you should include a new unit for the west. playing as the arabs, by 2021 I had military technology on par with the u.s. and was about to build an icbm- 10 turns. I think by 2015 the u.s. or e.u. would have a new military unit.

this is a lot like a scenario i was thinkin of, did u use ur british mind tricks to steal it from me, because these are not the droids your looking for :yeah: :lol: :joke: :clap: i enjoy smileys

Muffin I fiddled with your scenario a lot by adding a bunch of civs, placing units, changing the upgrade paths and chaing unit stats to make it more intreasting and realstic. I was wondering if I could post it?

Yeah, silver please post the changes.

Well I think I need Muffins permisson first. I'll PM him.

Good, fun scenario.

Map is very good except for my few nit-picks - tip of South America should not be plains, etc.

I would suggest change the settings in the editor to not allow cities in tundra and eliminate the constant warfare caused by the sub problem by making subs have the no-nationality setting. While all countries will try to kill them it is better than the present where everyone breaks alliances when they run into a sub.

More extensive changes would be the ps-lite mod for modern units which has many minor good tweaks. Also relooking at the numbers and types of military units for each civ.

You should save a game from one country at first move as a download. That is much faster for the pc to open for people who want to check this out.

Gary Denton

#2 on google for liberal news, I don't try harder.

I saw how someone suggested Brazil for the next world power thats interesting. However before Brazil becomes a world power it is more likely that Australia will be one of the next big ones. It is predicted that within 50 years Australia will have one of the strongest economies in the world. And unlike brazil we have little or no debt and poverty isnt a problem. With a strong economy comes a strong Military and with them comes a world power. I just think that in at least one scenario Australia is the top dog. That would be nice.

Well, since I posted some fixes above I thought I would try them out. I also added one oil to Iraq to the east of Baghdad by shifting the Tigres-Euphrates to make that country more playable and more realistic by having oil for sale.

I made modern unit changes from ps-lite mod in the editor and also no-nationality subs as I suggested above then started to play on regent as Iraq. This was a country figured to be knocked off in a few moves in the original WW3-2015 mod. For my first moves I make quick trades to secure friendships with most probable threats to increase liklihood I'll stay around. Game contines monthand then over a year with no wars.

Finally after June 2016 I decided to establish Kurdistan as a new province which gains territory from neighboring Turkey, Syria and Iran. I realize my biggest threats will be EU, Muslim Alliance and Iran. (Based on the regular game I played as Latin America last time China was gobbling up parts of Russia, and all of Iran, Iraq and Israel by this time so I had considered it as a big threat as well. This time all is quiet in the Far Eastern world.)

As the Arabs are growing annoyed I figure I might be ground zero for WW3 this time. To improve relationships with Arabs I trade military technology (Synthetics) to Africa for Recycling technology for something non-military to trade with the Arabs. No sense in immediately arming them even if I need them to stay friendly. Late 2016 - I decide to establish Kuwait as a new province even as it increases the chance of war. Didn't Saddam do this before? This gives me control over one Saudi oil field immediately and likely another in a few months.

Feb 2017 - War finally breaks out. Move 25. The no-nationality subs have prevented constant warfare and alliance breaking but unreasonable A.I.s can still defeat the best plans. Suicidal Latin America declares war on the me when I refuse a silly demand for technology. As part of the locked alliance if they attack they are at war with the powerful u.s. In the game, I almost give away some oil to Israel in the hopes they might built a sub and intercept troop ships if I am attacked.

There is no action for months. South America and I remain in a silent no-action nonwar.

The Muslims declare on Russia in October 2017. I date October and November as the begining of WW3 as nations start declaring war on both Latin America and Russia. South American ships shell Basra and my US alliances enter my war. All nations start aligning themselves against Russia and Latin America. China, at war with Russia, allies with U.S. against the Latinos.

A very long December and January as war spreads world wide. The ships from South America were raiders and not a landing force.

February - Kuwait revolts, joins the Arab league. Instead of gaining Saudi oil by my embracing Kuwait I have lost half of my previous supply and about 20% of my fairly small military which joined the rebellion.

Discontinued game to do another check. Making subs no nationality caused the game to proceed in a more realistic fashion - if you overlook Latin America's apparent death wish.

I noticed that I had forgotten the no cities on tundra change so made that change and rechecked the minor tweaks in modern units I made based on ps-lite mod. This time Iraq will build a nuclear sub to see what happens.

Play proceeded much like first time but I was in better shape when this time the first war broke out earlier - in Sept. 2016. This is still 21 turns of peace. Another suicidal weaker power - Israel - declared war on the European Union.

I move the Iraqi nuclear sub out of Basra harbor into the Gulf. It is immediately attacked by two Iranian bombers, one Arab bomber, and finished off by two American radar artillery. Hmmm, maybe I will have to add only escorted like carriers to my sub mod!

This war quickly becomes the rest of the world against the European Union, Russia, and Iran. Iraq is on the front lines. Iraq is still around a year later but Iran is about to fall.

Conclusion, war can be delayed and the scenario plays more realisticly in this mod by making subs no-nationality. In order to actually use subs escort them and they need to be noted as requires escort in Civ-edit so the AI does likewise. This is not real life, although fleets usually do have sub escorts, but makes them playable. The no tundra city building works well as does the modern tweaks to units from the ps-lite mod.

I will finish tweaking the unit fixes, I disagree with a few ps-lite values, and make a note of the changes and post the modifications if anyone is interested.

Gary Denton

Muffin I fiddled with your scenario a lot by adding a bunch of civs, placing units, changing the upgrade paths and chaing unit stats to make it more intreasting and realstic. I was wondering if I could post it?
You can do whatever you want, mate :) You don't need my permisson

@Tyrion - Australia has a lower population and GDP per capita than the Netherlands .... I don't think that I need say any more ;)

... unless you're counting the sheep as well :D

You can do whatever you want, mate :) You don't need my permisson



Thanks I posted it here http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=96305

This is a great scenerio!!!! I also enjoyed reading your articles on your website.

It would be awesome if there are more scenerio's like this in the future!

*Edit

Why is America a republic? Shouldn't it be a democracy? Am I missing something here?

Thanks for all the feedback!

I didn't include Iran in the Muslim Nationalist Alliance since Iran is a theocracy and the MNA are secular nationalists. I've modelled them upon the pan-Arab nationalism that engulfed the region in the 1950's and 1960's that almost united much of the middle east under one flag. Egypt and Syria were even in a 'union' at one point until they fell out.

Also, the only nation within the Muslim Nationalist Alliance that operates any level of theorcacy or Koran-based rule is Saudi Arabia ... and they have serious problems with a disgruntled population. Everyone else - Morocco, Algeria, Egypt, Syria, Jordan etc - are secular and see Islamic fundamentalism as a threat.

For that reason I've given the Muslim Nationalist Alliance a Fascist government type (these guys are ultra-nationalists) and not theocratic.

This is also why I've been able to add the former Soviet central asian nations in the MNA (these people are Turks and Uzbeks, not Arabs).


Unlikely...Fundamentalism is very popular in the Middle East. They don't see it as a bad thing like us Westerners. Most likely Bin Laden types will gain control of the Middle East and form a new Islamic Empire, which the EU might eventually be pressured into joining, considering the growing Arab-Islamic Population there.

Somehow I doubt that europe will willingly join an "islamic empire"

I just downloaded the scenario and started a game. I like how you broke up those huge blocks of countries, Latin American confederation, EU, Muslim Alliance. It makes the game more realistic, although there are huge load times.

Unlikely...Fundamentalism is very popular in the Middle East. They don't see it as a bad thing like us Westerners. Most likely Bin Laden types will gain control of the Middle East and form a new Islamic Empire, which the EU might eventually be pressured into joining, considering the growing Arab-Islamic Population there.
:lol:
That's like saying that the US will be eventually forced to join Mexico because of the growing Mexican population in the US.

You do realise that the muslim population in Europe is a tiny minority, don't you? You do realise that they are outnumbered by blacks and asians don't you?
:lol:
And Islamic extremeists are seen as a threat by the majority of peoples across the Middle East/Arab world. Most people in the Middle East wish to remain under a secular regime and in some countries (like Turkey for example) the authorities see their duty as guardians to their nations' secular ways.

Believe me, I know what I'm taking about ;)

I wasn't refering to the Taliban way of doing things, but rather coutries where Koranic law is considered the same as Secular law, or having secular law being heavily based on the koran. In America, that is also refered to as Fundamentalism, not necessarily does that mean rule by the priesthood.

Oh, and 50 years from now the US's majority population will be Ethnic Mexicans...so Mexico and the US, will most likely become one countrie, the Dominion of Mexico.....mhahahaha! We shall have the combined power of American Capitalism and Latino Music and Food.....beware! Mhahahaha!

I am about ready to post the changes I made to this mod. The changes are some my own and some based on other mods

MOD CHANGES

2015 – WW3
to 2015 – Rogue Alliances

Land units:

Riflemen get their cost reduced from 80 to 70 shields. This is sometimes built as a basic unit for less advanced alliances without resources.

Infantry and Guerilla get their attack rating increased from 6 to 8. This helps the A.I, since it's not skilled enough in using artillery to soften up targets.

Paratroopers get their attack rating increased from 4 to 6 to match infantry more closely.

Modern Paratroopers get their attack rating increased from 6 to 8. Also, they get defense rating increased from 11 to 13 to make them good alternative compared to helicopter dropped TOW Infantry.

Increased attack rating of modern foot units makes Marines too vulnerable on defense. Marines get their defense rating increased from 6 to 8.

Modern Armor gets its defense reduced from 16 to 14, in order to make Mech. Infantry more important with its defense rating of 18.

Artillery gets airlift capabilities and airdrop and non-wheeled. It no longer upgrades to the larger and more powerful motorized Radar Artillery but is now a less expensive, less powerful, but more versatile complement.

Motorized units and cruise missiles are wheeled. You have to have foot units including lighter artillery to dig the infantry out of the mountains.

There is no lethal land bombard. Until Gulf War 1 it had always been recognized you could not completely destroy dug-in infantry by bombardment. In Gulf War 1, the American heavy bombers destroyed Iraqi elements, so I did consider having the stealth bombers the only units with lethal land bombard. I didn't do this because a main use of the bombers in the game is to destroy foot soldiers in mountains. Air bombardment does not destroy such units dug-in mountains in real life. In the game this means you can bombard units down to where they are ineffective as an attacking force but you cannot destroy units solely from bombardment.

Cruise missile cost decreased to 40 - without lethal land bombard they are just ship defense and one time use only artillery.

Tactical nuclear missiles range increased to 8. It seems to fit the map better when carried by subs. In real life the range is much greater.

Ships:

Frigate, Man-O-War and Privateer become obsolete with Destroyers, so they won't be in build queue in modern era.

I decreased the cost of Cruisers to 150 to better match other naval units.

With Conquests, bombard strength of all air units got boosted, so it seemed quite strange to leave more modern ships, like Battleship, with old ratings. That's why Destroyers get their bombard strength increased from 6 to 8, Cruisers from 7 to 10, Battleships from 8 to 12 and AEGIS Cruisers from 6 to 10.

I have recognized modern missiles like Tomahawk on nuclear subs and AEGIS cruisers represented by giving them bombard with a range and strength matching cruise missiles. The cost of these units increases by 50 to reflect this. Buy a sub get unlimited cruise missiles but see next.

Sub bug fix - submarines and nuclear submarines now are no-nationality. For the subs I have added requires escort to reflect the fact they are targets for every unit from every country. This was only necessary to get around the constant warfare and breaking of alliances with the invisible subs. In this game this means unrestricted submarine warfare has broken out with all nations denying involvement. You will need large convoys to protect your carriers and subs, but you can destroy enemy vessels or launch cruise missiles from underwater without declaring war.

Non-nuclear subs also now have the 0 range bombard strength 6 if naval units attack them. In wartime sub hunting is dangerous business.

Nuclear subs are harder to kill than non-nuclear and move faster. New defense 6 speed 6. A further increase in nuclear sub cost by 10 to 200.

Air units:

Lethal land bombardment is removed.

Jet Fighters get their bombard strength increased from 3 to 6. While Jet Fighters in Civ3 were not designed to be tactical bombers (except American F-15), considering that their attack and defense ratings are +100% better compared to Fighters, it seems logical that their bombard strength is better for same amount.

Stealth Fighters get their bombard strength increased from 6 to 10. That way, they'll become decent tactical bombers. Cost increased to 130.

The F-15 gets its bombard strength increased from 6 to 9 with a cost of 120. For this scenario it is not a unique unit but is available to other countries with smart weapons. Jet fighters, equally good as interceptors but not good fighter-bombers, don't upgrade to it.

Helicopters are versatile - I have added bombard mission 5 0 1 and detect subs. Note: bombarding a sub is very ineffective but if you station a helicopter on a carrier or by the coast it can see them.

AI strategies:

Riflemen and Mech. Infantry get AI offense strategy flag removed. Because of their cost and low attack ratings, these units are not suited for attack. They are much better when used for pillaging or defensive support. That does not mean that without this flag these units won't attack. They'll still attack targets against which they have good chance of winning, like taking out wounded enemy units.

Wonders:

Military Academy doesn't allow building armies anymore. A.I. civilizations are don't use leaders to create armies, nor build them in cities with Military Academy. By removing ability to build armies through Military Academy, players won't have too big advantage against non-army using AI civs. You can't build them but you still get larger and improved armies. I also added +1 ship movement; Annapolis is a military academy.

Cure for Cancer makes two citizens content instead of one.

OTHER CHANGES FROM ORIGINAL 2015 MOD

No city settlements allowed on tundra.

I set time limit to 40 years and changed some leader names.

Rewrote intro to acknowledge rogue subs and WW3 war for resources about to break out.

Moved Ukraine back to Russian Federation. Added Arkhangel'sk and more units to Russia. Still need to go to my spreadsheets and convert 2002 data to 2015 and fix country military unit strengths. Redid Baltic States.

A problem with map is that it is based on Mercator project and has too much unclaimed northern Canada and Siberia. No fix for that but I gave Canada and Russia two settlers so they can be first to grab locations.

Moved Internet to Dump with most other wonders.

Changed barbarians to terrorists.

THIS IS BETA.

For example - the number and types of units, placement and lack of overseas bases for America is very problematic. I am sure if I study each Alliance that I would make more changes. I am unsure how much I will check my notes from earlier conversions ideas to upgrade units here.

(Some Excel spreadsheets on my current military conversions for Civ linked to here:
http://www.geocities.com/gary_denton/ ).

I have made no changes to the Civopedia.

The good news – I think this mod is fun playing all countries and with the wheeled characteristic actually plays like a strategic war game. Mountain passes are extremely important and digging infantry out of mountain terrain is very difficult. In the abstract - building new cities can be considered as persuading new countries and regions to join your Alliance or establishing new bases.

In real life - everyone knows Canadian areas will start giving their alliance to America just before it invades! ;)

Gary

i like the changes elemming
This is the best "modern era" scenario so far Muffins, it must be good to have two posted scenarios based on yours :)

I don't know about them wishing to stay under a secular regime muffins. In turkey for example, the government is very western and wants to join the EU, but a signifagant portion of it's population would rather keep their traditional muslim ways.

Originally based mostly on a combination of Muffins 2015, PS-Lite Mod and my changes regarding naval units and lethal bombardment the latest version eliminates many of the fixed Alliances to have less chaotic wars. Communist China and the Islamic Alliance are now seperate but both demand the Imperialists share the wealth and have a terrorist unit they can support until their demands are met.

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?p=2091227

Hello
The link to the original "World War 3 - 2015 for C3C" scenario (1st post) is broken. Can anyone put the very file somewhere?
Thank you in advance.

Hey there, congratulations on posting for the first time in 8 years, apparently (no judgment, started as a lurker myself). Anyway, let me direct you to observe the date on the latest post before yours: 2004. Much as I loved this scenario back in the day, it has long since been forgotten and allowed to die quietly. As such, the download is likely gone and the scenario has, sadly, disappeared from the archives. It would probably be better for you to move on or, better yet, create your own scenario to replace this one. (someone should, and all my meager attempts at this precise sort of scenario died in birth)

Also note that the many members of this forum's community are not appreciative of those who revive long dead threads, and are far less reserved than I have been at saying as such (no offense to the rest of you). So leave these golden oldies to rest in peace in the back pages, and look to the future.

Hey there, congratulations on posting for the first time in 8 years, apparently (no judgment, started as a lurker myself). Anyway, let me direct you to observe the date on the latest post before yours: 2004. Much as I loved this scenario back in the day, it has long since been forgotten and allowed to die quietly. As such, the download is likely gone and the scenario has, sadly, disappeared from the archives. It would probably be better for you to move on or, better yet, create your own scenario to replace this one. (someone should, and all my meager attempts at this precise sort of scenario died in birth)

Also note that the many members of this forum's community are not appreciative of those who revive long dead threads, and are far less reserved than I have been at saying as such (no offense to the rest of you). So leave these golden oldies to rest in peace in the back pages, and look to the future.

They don't have a problem with it as long as there is a legitimate question being asked. There have been plenty of old threads that have been revived to report a broken link, and usually someone who has the scenario sees the post and re-uploads the scenario in question.

Anyway, I too would like to see this scenario re-uploaded by anyone who has it.

They don't have a problem with it as long as there is a legitimate question being asked. There have been plenty of old threads that have been revived to report a broken link, and usually someone who has the scenario sees the post and re-uploads the scenario in question.

Anyway, I too would like to see this scenario re-uploaded by anyone who has it.

Thank you Commodore, I do agree with you.

I have finally found a scenario based on this one :
2015 - Rogue Alliances : http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=96797

The link is up and running.
As far as I remember, as mentioned in the thread, it is quite close to the original one.

Loki, I respectfully also disagree with you. It's fine to bump and old thread for a good reason like a dead link.

I'm glad it was bumped as I'm thinking about doing something surprisingly similary to this mod but with a little more futuristic units. I'd like the original mod too. It might save me a lot of time if I can base my mod on it. The Rogue Alliances version might do though. Thanks for the link denbourdon.

EDIT: Anyone else think it's freaky how Muffins had a pan-Arab secular nationalist movement in the mod and right now we are seeing largly secular, somewhat pan-Arab revolutions occuring in much of the middle east; the Arab Spring!

Wow, and here I thought everyone would bite his head off. I tip my hat to you, civfanatics community, you're better than I figured.

Anyway, I've remembered that I may indeed have this scenario somewhere on my old home computer. I'm on holiday right now, though, so I shan't be able to check for a month. See you then, all.

Bumping to make irrelevant comments is definitely frowned upon but if people have a good reason for the bump no one minds.

- I would let Minsk as Russian and put also Kiev as Russian. There are really few chance Ukraine and Belarus will be part of the EU in 2015. Moreover, those countries are diplomatically closer to Moscow than to Brussels.



No way!