[BTS] Realism Invictus: Rushing Industrialism [128x80]

[Enyavar]

This is my concept of a map I call RIRI (Realism:Invictus: Rushing Industrialism)

Spoiler What's it about? :

Easy: I like Realism Invictus, but in my playthroughs I didn't get to fully enjoy the late game. There are two main reasons:
I always liked "real world" maps. It feels much better to control "half of Asia" than be "master of two huge unnamed continents". But I experienced a few problems with the out-of-the-box R:I world maps (~20.000 Plots, ~60 players --> just not playable with my computer). There was also too much focus on ancient/medieval civilizations in the distribution - of course, starting in 4000 BC this makes very much sense, but how do I get to play the Americans, for example?
So, I played a few random maps, then started with the Crusaders Map. That is a magnficent one, so I yearned to build my own first world map. Looking at all the existing maps, I wanted to do something different, too. A new strategic perspective, so to speak.

Second reason, R:I wasn't fully enjoyable for me: Even in harder difficulties like Emperor (where the start is usually a challenge for me), I eventually gain the upper hand. Always before the Industrialism age. That results in not much challenge afterwards anymore, as I'm running away with my civilization and can easily stomp the other cultures.

Sure, I could start the game in a later era (like I'm going to do in this game), but that means that early wonders aren't available.

So, LO and BEHOLD, Enyavar's RIRI map:

FEATURES:
- "Realism:Invictus" Szenario map with 31 playable factions and 5 NPCs.
- Size 128 x 80 (huge)
- Faction borders of roughly around the year 1800
- Somewhat realistic tech level of around the year 1700-1800
- Most if not all wonders from previous eras already built.
- No modded changes (some civs and leaders have altered names, but this is only superficial)
- Beta-tests with all factions to ensure they are playable as intended. No completed playthroughs, though.

Spoiler The map :

As you can see once loading it, it's clearly distorted. That is nothing new if you ever played the Crusaders map. If you know the shape of the continents, you can probably find everything after a while. My orginal intention behind this concept was to provide a topologically accurate map of the northern hemisphere, a so called polar projection. After creating Europe in the center of the map, I worked around and constructed the rest; the further south, the more discrepancies. Still I think that most of the Earth's topology has been preserved, and think that this map is an acceptable one for the Industrialism/modern age.
Description: Europe is basically middle Center of the map, the North Pole/Alaska and Middle Asia find themselves top center. Top left is North America, bottom left is south america - both tilted to the east. Bottom middle is Africa (tilted to the west) and Middle East. Top right you find Southeast Asia and Australia (not only tilted, but actually rotated to the west). In a gross attempt to have less "empty ocean", I combined the Indian and the Pacific ocean and placed Hawai'i, New Zealand and Antarctica in the bottom right.
All that then got an East-West wrap which means that Australia is "close" to North America, and New Zealand is "close" to Madagascar. I know there will be critics, but in my opinion there is a lot of ocean between these land masses either way, whether you draw a Mercator or a polar projection. All in all, I'm pretty comfortable with this map and its geostrategic balance.

The plus factor (I hope) is that this world map will not crash mid-game, a common problem with the Huge world map. It has only 50% as many plots as the Huge world map. Europe is blown up (and I wish now I had blown it up even more) much like in the prefabbed maps; the other land masses were mostly rendered smaller. Central Asia and Sibiria has been greatly reduced.
The resouces density is certainly higher than in the R:I world maps.

Note: The map is pretty new and I may change things once I playtested some more (I'm playing out-of-the-box R:I 3.3). For my convenience reasons, I refer to this one as version 0.68. I know that this it needs more testing, but with the (final?) R:I version 3.4 already announced, I'm first waiting for the newest R:I version before making more changes. After all, there may be new mechanisms, units, leaders, civs and flags...

If non-R:I modders wish to adapt the base map for their own mods, I also included a bare map - without any resources, units or map features (reefs, hot springs, islands, reefs, oasis, forests, swamps...) because some of these are exclusively used in R:I.

Spoiler The Factions :

So, what is the geostrategic situation in a map that is set in the year 1800? Well, first of all it's already populated and developed, but not as much as you'd expect. The average technology level is very backwards and there are some anachronisms. Most improvements even in middle Europe still need to be built, there are still huge swaths of forest and jungle everywhere, and the map isn't entirely plastered with paved roads. Knowing the human players and the AI, this will change soon enough. For a short time, this means you get the "frontier" experience.
The global era is still "early Renaissance", but a few countries do have certain advantages. Tech-leaders are nearly done with Renaissance: A few already improved plots, many already built buildings, ready-to-deploy troops. I balanced the various empires a bit against each other, so the obviously strongest ones (Britain, Spain, USA, France, Russia, Germany) have their drawbacks as well.

I don't know how to make challenging 1800s barbarians: They always start with zero tech, so I gave them insane amounts of barbarian ships and lots of mediaval units. Good luck against them, muahaaha teehee.

The Empires in the Scenario Loading Screen are roughly ordered by their known techs: That means that the tech leaders are England, USA, France and Germany, the least developed playable civs are Fulbe and Sotho.

Depending on what nation you choose, the game will be vastly different. I can describe them more detailed in later posts, if needed. In this paragraph, I just introduce them according to the early playstyle:
-- Colonial superpowers: England, France and Spain: You get lots of disjoint colonies all over the world and need to integrate them into a powerful empire. Consolidation? Spreading further? Grant independence? Change the civics? You need to make lots of decisions, and fast, because you're running on a deficit. [Depend on the AI to fail in the decision-making, so don't worry too much about these countries being far ahead.]
-- Colonial powers: Scandinavia, Brazil, Russia: Fewer colonies, easier to manage at start. Russia has especially much room to expand...
-- Colonial offshoots: Rio de la Plata, Peru, Mexiko, USA, Brazil: You get a patch of land, good techs and have some room to expand.
-- Non-colonial powers: Germany, Austria, Poland: You are boxed in and have to find the place to expand either by conquest or by founding far away colonies.
-- Major native empires: Turkey, Maghreb, Qing China, Japan, Mysore, Maratha, Taiping, Arabia, Egypt, Thailand: They are all boxed amongst themselves. They are also severely behind in tech: Fight against each other and fend off the colonialists!
-- Minor native empires: Persia, Mongolia, Korea, Buchara, Greece: You start in severe disadvantages. Your hope is that the mighty neighbors crumble away - if so, you must seize the day!
-- Vassal states are Mexico, Rio de la Plata, Peru, Greece, Arabia, Egypt, Mongolia, Thailand. You first need to get rid of your current master!
-- Indigenous people are Egypt, Maghreb, Ethiopia, Fula, Nguni: Who cares if you're a developing country? You have lots of room to settle, so just hope that the developed world doesn't zone in on you!
-- There are minor NPC nations: "European Kingdoms" in Europe, "Various Colonies" mostly in South America, "African Kingdoms" in Africa; "Native Tribes" in North America; "Mughalistan" in Central Asia; "Indopacific tribes" in Australia; Barbarian cities in many other places. These cities are placeholders made for early conquests by the players. Use the chance early on!
- Settling in Panama can be pretty important for all factions that have harbors on both sides of the American coast. Settling in Suez is a good idea to connect the Mediterranean with the Indopacific. The AI doesn't understand such strategic details, so it's up to you to settle the places.

Religions aren't a major factor in this scenario, but I distributed them much as in reality. Most important state religions are in that order: Christianity, Islam, Buddhism, Orthodoxy, Hinduism. The rest of the religions have been spread around a bit for flavor (Judaism, Solar Cult, Zoroastrism).

Politics IS a major factor here. Many local relations are already established. Some civs hate others and won't ever be friends their "mortal enemies". For example, there is not much love lost among the American colonialists, except for the good relationships between each USA-Argentina, Mexico-Brazil and Peru-Spain. In India, Mysore won't ever be friend with Britain. And so on.

 

[Walter Hawkwood]

I have to sadly say that I can't launch this on latest SVN. That's too bad, since I'm excited about how you handled the map, and the concept for the scenario also sounds quite cool to me.

 

[Enyavar]

Thanks Walter, I think I will take my time and try to provide a new version once a stable R:I v.3.4 has been released. (No need to hurry, take your time!)

Just wanted to release the map now and see whether or not others can have fun with it. (Please tell me if and why something isn't fun, or something doesn't work, etc. So I can change it.)

I don't know why it failed in SVN, but I can easily imagine that a feature, building or unit has changed the name in the meantime, or some other detail.
If it's also incompatible with other 3.3 players, I'd like to know too, because it means I screwed up somewhere.

 

[Shuikkanen]

It works fine for me with 3.3. The map looks gorgeous!

I started as the Scandinavians and have only played around 40 turns so far. First, is it deliberate that they control 3 cities around Indonesia or is that a part of history I've missed? Second, maybe have the major cities have granaries? They start with 4-8% epidemics chance and with lots of unimproved land building them quickly isn't an option. It's rather harsh to lose nearly a third of the population in your heartland in the first 10 rounds which happened with me.

Having the privateer units with full piracy tree is bonkers provided you make sure to harbor them safely each turn. Taking down passing carracks is great fun.

It's cool that you've taken the effort to place resources in Antarctica -- too bad there isn't a way to utilize them in the game. Not without making ice settle-able.

 

[Enyavar]

Re: Settling Antarctica - whoa. That shows how much I know the game :-o
Yes, I never even tried to settle on ice because there are no resources around the poles. Which means, now that I know, I will fix it with a few tundra patches coming later.

Re: Granaries/smokehouses. Yes, that's me trying to give everyone advanced tech and then trying to slow everyone down again. I had started everyone with small cities, then I realized I needed them more and more populated. Too bad that I can't world-build-save the food storages, too. But you're right, Scandinavia should have them, just not in the Indonesian cities (explanation for these, see below). In several other cases, a declining population is very much intended.

Re: Privateers. I tried to give each player something that he can use to their advantage. Too bad that the AI uses the cheese as it was intended, not in the cheezy way of human players. So yes, your Privateers aren't a mistake. They only rule the oceans for a short while anyway.

Okay, now that someone actually tried playing with it, I'm a lot more confident.


COLONIAL EMPIRES:

Spoiler The British Empire :

is modeled with the ~1800 Empire in mind, but there are several adjustments made to just not give them too many cities: Ireland is independent, the colonies not too developed. Most importantly: England = London: the only highly developed city in the empire! The rest of their lands is scattered around the globe: 3 cities in Australia, 3 in India, 3 around Africa, 3 in Canada. Most of these don't even have Christianity! I expect them to spend a lot on maintenance first. Still, the whole Empire is made of port cities, many of them on reefs.
If you play Britain, my advice is to consolidate, while focussing on these reefs. Great Britain itself doesn't provide all resources in abundance, so it's probably not the best strategy to split off (all) the colonies. Once you have ministeries, you might think about settling other strong reef positions (Guinea, Falklands, Queensland!). Otherwise, you might think about strengthening your Indian or your Canadian power. Conquer Ireland early. Keep in mind that you're the toughest bully in the schoolyard: Nobody should dare DoW on you. Keep it that way and cancel your enemies off, one by one. Rule the waves and don't let the AI gang up on you!!
If you play someone else, you as the human player have the advantage to know that the British supreme power is very spread out and mostly consists of ships. You can probably get away with a quick conquest, then settle for peace. Sending the British Empire to a lower place on the scoreboard only improves your own chances!

The British (or no-one else!) are getting the circumvention bonus in most of the playthroughs (Make sure to only circumnavigate in second round, if you play them!). They have by far the strongest Navy after the Barbarians; even several Frigates. They also got the Seamanship Doctrine. So, their fleet is really the backbone of their military. Victoria lacks the seafaring bonus, however. Their land-based military is otherwise individually strong, but few and scattered. If they wish to conquer more land, they'll need to build lots more troops, as well as ferry them around the globe. There are lots and lots of reefs within the british grasp, so they should take full advantage of their unique improvement.

Britain is the owner of Big Ben, Stonehenge, Rime of the Ancient Mariner, Sceptical Chemist, Principia, Hamlet, Globe Theatre (in London) and the Superior Seamanship Doctrine (in Edinburgh) --> Lots of very useful wonders, but all in one basket.

Spoiler The French Empire :

is pretty strong, especially on the land, their holdings modeled after the French Conquests under Napoleon. That means, Napolean currently has half of Italy as his dominion, also a foothold in Africa (Algiers). Otherwise, France doesn't rule the entire continent, because after all the conquest of around 1806 was only very temporary in nature. Their homeland includes three fully developed cities, but no ministeries so far. The colonies are especially poorly developed, except for Sicily, Palermo and Algiers, which are probably good starting points to colonize Africa: Not nearly as strong, the Maghreb is a good candidate to vassalize or conquer.
A weak point is that there is no religion in their home cities (French revolution made laicity popular, and of all the empires, Napoleon's France is THE country where I hope they might consider a cult of personality later - a too-late-game civic I never encountered in world maps before. Not to mention ever played for its strengths before.
The French Artillery is beginning full fleshed (most other armies don't have any siege units from start, but France starts with darn fine siege units.)

France gets a glimpse of "French Indochina" with Thailand as a unwilling vassal. It's pretty hard to keep them, unless you quickly acquire more territory and don't lose what you possess at start.
France gets oversea colonies in America. Playing France, you may consider granting them independence and thus balance your treasury.
If you play someone else, you as the human player have the advantage to know that the French supreme power is very spread out and is focused in Europe-Algeria. You can probably get away with a quick conquest. Sending the French Empire to a lower place on the scoreboard only improves your own chances!

France is owner of Versailles (in Algiers), Periodic Table, Mont St. Michel (in Bordeaux), Liberté Leading the People, Notre Dame, Engineer Corps Doctrine, Encyclopédie (in Paris) --> 6 pretty useful wonders, 7 if they activate Christianity.

Spoiler The American Empire :

led by Jefferson only consists of the Eastern Seabord, at the start. I had the thirteen colonies in mind, so they didn't have time to settle the continent. Yet. They are ready for an explosive expansion phase with a ready-to-go settler and a gaggle of strong soldiers. They are severely disliking all the spanish derivative empires of South America, with the exception of Argentina (Rio de la Plata).

America is already in possession of the statue of Liberty and the Difference Engine (in New York). They also do have the Patriotic War Doctrine (in Virginia) and American Gothic (in Carolina). Most of these wonders are too early for the 1800 scenario, and America doesn't have all required prerequisites. But this is intended as a balancing factor to ensure their later strength. America's start troops are equipped with Motherland I! --> 4 extremely strong wonders

If you play USA: French and British colonies in North America are ripe for your conquest, afterwards there are still the natives. They only have medieval techs, so you have much room to expand.
If you play someone else: The USA don't usually dare to challenge France or Britain, but that doesn't mean that they are a pushover. I observed them to conquer several Indians cities just as intended. Though maybe for the sake of balance, I should tone down the Indian bows quite a bit, while giving them more horses.

Spoiler The German Empire :

is surprisingly small, even though I modeled their homeland after the Second German Empire of 1870, when Germany was united under Prussian rule. Their colonial status is that of the 1800s: None (as they were still fragmented states by then). However, they have a very strong infrastrucure (all the available ministeries, most of the current technology) and a ship with two soldiers and a settler to go wherever they may find some land to claim. Germany's start troops are equipped with Maneuvre Warfare. Their weakness is that they are boxed in between developed nations, much like in history. Either an aggressive colonialism is in order, or an early World War.

Germany is the owner of Sonata Cycle, Semperoper, Brandenburg Concertos, Kosmos and Physica (in Berlin); Maneuvre Warfare Doctrine (in Königsberg); Melancolia I, On the Revolutions of the Heavenly Spheres and Der Ring des Nibelungen, (in Köln) and Hanseatic League (in Hamburg) --> 9 useful wonders

If you play Germany: Your settler can easily find Africa and found a colony there. The soldiers that accompany the settler will be good for defense and conquering another city --> if you don't botch the job, you can create a strong German Africa before other powers join in.
If you play someone else: The AI usually botches that job. Don't expect them to create powerful colonies. But the mainland Germany is dangerous enough, don't challenge them if you're not prepared for a major whoop-ass. Bismarck tends to be aggressive anyway, better befriend him.
PS NOTE: Just yesterday, I realized that the Germans get way too strong. I took away all their jails, as nobody else has jails either. I'll do some other balance, too, probably.

Spoiler The Austrian Empire :

is also small. Actually, this is the Hungarian Empire, but with Maria Theresia as a flavor leader and an Austrian flag. Their infrastructure is notably less developed than that of the German neighbors, which makes their expansion a challenge. Germany and Austria were designed to be particular close friends in this scenario, while the rest of the European factions are more or less neutral to each other at the start. This is of course biased because of WW1 - earlier in the 1800s these two empires had been at war with each other. Several times. No Civ scenario can really recreate history.

Austria, like Germany, gets a settler on a ship in order to start something in Africa. See that poorly defended Lybian coast? See it? Eh, the starting position isn't too great. I guess that Austria will need to be strong inside Europe.

Austria-Hungary is owner of Stradivari Violin, Tosca, Two New Sciences and Leonardo's Workshop (all in Triest), just by coincidence. This ensures that Triest won't switch to Rome within the first rounds. The Austrians also have the Nomadic Lifestyle tradition, boosting their cavalry (Also all their riders start with Chivalry and Born in Saddle Promotions).

Spoiler a word on 'other European civilizations' here :

I didn't include Italy in this szenario. Rome is the center of the "various territories", Northern Italy is dominated by Austria, southern Italy is dominated by France. Italy, like Germany, was only united much later as well, so it's not part of "world 1800". As Rome/Italy has its place to shine in other scenarios, I threw it out of the scenario to have more place for other nations. Note however, that there are lots of world wonders in Rome, including the Holy City!

I also didn't include the Netherlands in this szenario. The Dutch and their East Indian Company were a major factor in the world, yes, but because of placement problems in Europe, the city of Amsterdam belongs to the "various territories" and is only a placeholder for early conquest. Same goes for Switzerland (i.e. Geneva). However, the Dutch colonies have partly made it into the scenario under the disguise as Scandinavians: see below.

The Celts/Ireland, the Fins, the Kaukasians, the Serbs and several others also didn't stand a chance to be included as single factions. I wanted to keep the scenario small enough to handle! So, drumroll for the owner of all the mentioned above cities: King Philipp XIIYZ, placeholder king for Europe. Invade at will - he has more or less the same technological advances as Spain. Look out for fortresses. If someone conquers Rome, this is often his wakeup call to submit to that person. If you really need a certain European city, be sure to capture it early enough!

Various Europeans are the owner of St Peter's Cathedral, Statue of David, Apostolic Palace, Church of the Nativity, Pantheon, Sistine Chapel, Colosseum, Trajan's Column and Theatre of Dionysus (all of these in Rome, naturally). They also own Kachkar (in Baku), Historia Plantarum (in Serbocroatia), Book of Kells (in Dublin), a settled great merchant and On the Fabric of the Human Body (in Geneva) and a settled great scientist (in Amsterdam)

Spoiler The Russian Expanse :

has been shrunk considerably when I designed the world map; for balance reasons. So I didn't give them their entire vast Empire on a silver plate, despite the historicity of Russia ruling entire Sibiria, and Finland, and Ukraine and Poland in 1800. Still, their core Empire is there and they are in a strong position to capture Finland, Karelia, Georgia and Azerbaijian (a.k.a. minor territories), Poland (see below), Bukhara (see below) or Mongolia (see below), as well as resource-heavy Sibiria which is currently ruled by pushover Barbarians. I think (hope?) that I gave the Russians the strongest continental army standing in Europe. The overall military of a few other countries is still larger, naturally.
There are far away Russian colonies too, in Alasca and Wladiwostok.
An important factor is the orthodox religion: Russia is surrounded by small territories that are ready to accept orthodoxy, but all the other major powers are Christians. It might get hard to relate to them, until they abolish state religion.

Note that Russia is owner of Non-Euclidean Geometry, War and Peace (in Moskva) and The Kremlin (in Wladiwostok) and Hanseatic League in St. Petersburg. ALL baltic countries get the Hanse. I hope this works. At least one of them could use Guild Civic and then it's a rather nice wonder... But the AI wouldn't listen to me ...
For maintenance reasons, Kremlin makes Wladiwostok an important position for the Russian colonial empire, you could try to build a city cluster around that spot. The Russians also have the Nomadic Lifestyle tradition, boosting their cavalry.

Spoiler The Scandinavian Empire :

is the first really unhistorical entity I'm proudly presenting here. I took the liberty to lump together Sweden-Norway and Denmark, thus creating a strong although not very historical major power in Europe's north. It is little known and overshadowed by the larger colonial empires - but seafaring Denmark DID have colonies, and not only Greenland and Iceland, too. Look it up, but don't get too fixed on historical facts, because more so than with the other colonial empires, I needed to move places around. For more on that, look up "other Europeans", a paragraph above.
Long-winded story cut short: Scandinavia has the burden of three far-away colonies and according resources in East Asia. Since the historical Danish colony didn't fit into "my" India, I simply told myself that the Dutch East Indian Company (see above) that ruled Indonesia in the 18th century, could be placed under Scandinavian curatel. Voilà: Scandinavian East India Company in Java and Celebes. Please don't bash it too much, I was just trying to balance the scenario with another colonial power.

Scandinavia is the owner of Wayang (in Batavia), the Statue of Odin (in Bergen) and Hanseatic League in Stockholm (ALL baltic countries get the Hanse here, see also Russia and Germany.)
However, all of their starting ships get some early unique seafaring promotions, despite them not having the according wonder. They also have the Melee Tradition. It's nothing that totally turns the tables but reflects the Scandinavian background (vikings), as Charles John isn't even a seafaring leader. The privateers are either sunk in no time, or they hurt you financially without providing benefits.

Spoiler Brazil :

Okay, straight forward: this is the Mayan Empire, disguised as Portuguese and ruling in South America. At the moment, they got an English leader (chosen both for fitting traits and looks to be fended off as Pedro II). However, their territories are genuine, although Brazil was definitely larger already than I chose in this scenario. Actually, in the time of the 1800s Brazil and Portugal were a united kingdom that was ruled from either Brazil or Lisbon (depending on which period you're looking at). On my map, Portugal got axed away because of, you guessed it, placement problems. So, no Portuguese empire, but an independent Brazil that even gets to rule over two Portuguese colonies: A close one in West Africa, and a far-away one in Macao. Portuguese-India was considered at one point, but then I decided to go with the British-Indian power struggle without involving even more factors. Instead, I included them in the South American power play (see below): They dislike all Spanish colonies, except Mexico.

Note that Brazil is the owner of Cristo Redentor (in Rio; ahistorically early, but balancing the fact that they don't get anything else.

Spoiler Spain + South America :

This one was difficult to design, I admit. So, in 1800 the Spanish Empire was already pretty broken. How better to show this than by making them the strongest power in points, and then quickly fall apart? I split Spain up into four and a half new Empires, which all more or less share the same technologies. Which means they are doing okay, but lag behind significantly behind the tech leaders, i. e. all previously mentioned civs. These four Empires severely dislike each other. America and Brazil are also included in this blame game.

Spain proper, also has Kuba and the far away Philippines. This Empire might be hard to defend and mirrors how the Spanish fell apart in that time. Spain gets along with Peru, however.
Mexico is the Mexican Flavor empire, but with the Aztec leader Benito Juarez, who actually was a Mexican anyway. They do have a compact core empire and thus might expand easily. They are at the start a vassal of Spain, but are designed to break away - and early at that. They get along with Brazil, however.
Rio de la Plata (i.e. Argentina) is the Spanish Empire (again!) with a renamed Mexican Leader. They do have a compact core empire and thus might expand easily. They are at the start a vassal of Spain, but are designed to break away - and early at that. They get along with the USA, however.
Peru-Bolivia means the Incan empire, simple as that. They do have a compact core empire and thus might expand easily. They are at the start a vassal of Spain, but are designed to break away - and early at that. However, they are the only of these vassals that get along with Spain.

This is also a good spot to mention the "Various Colonies", placed under the control of a dubious governor named "Menar". This guy is present mostly in central and southern America, but also at other places in the world. If you wish to get his cities, politely bring an army and knock at his doors. He has more or less the same technological advances as Spain, but virtually no improvements. Look out for fortresses.

There aren't that many Spanish world wonders, it seems. Or I just missed them in the scenario editor menus.
Spain is the owner of Surrender of Breda (in Barcelona)
Peru is the owner of Nazca Lines (in Lima) and Gate of the Sun (in Sucre)
Mexico is the owner of Codex Borgia (in Ciudad de Mexico) and Chichen Itza (in Vera Cruz)
Rio de la Plata doesn't own any wonders. I hope their fertile land and other factors give them enough of an edge to succeed.

Next post is on native empires.

 

[Enyavar]

previous post was on the colonialist empires.

NATIVE EMPIRES
From here on down the list, we have "backwater" empires and kingdoms. While there isn't a different status, and they clearly aren't "minor kingdoms", in this scenario I assigned them less technologies. Before you start the industrial revolution, you first need to hurry through the renaissance. Leading these countries might be fun IF you're up to a major challenge.

Spoiler Poland :

is the only European country that I moved down to a "native" status. Or, "up" to a native status, because in the year 1800, they were actually off the map already. Here, they are back and are challenging the Russian Empire by defiantly clinging to their holdings. Only Warszawa and Lwów were actually polish territory, Kiew and Odessa are rather (Ukrainian)/Russian in nature. (And in fact, I gave them 50/50 starting culture of Polish/Russian, so that Russia can easily claim them back and vassal Poland.) Playing as Poland sure will be a challenge, even though you get to be one of the more tech-advanced nations in the "native" category.

If you play Poland, make sure to build up your military and be on the lookout for invading armies. Keep a strong culture, or the others will crush you with theirs. Probably capture Minsk and even Tiflis, so that Russia doesn't get it.

Poland is the owner of the Voynich Manuscript and Copernicus Observatory (in Warszaw).

Spoiler Japan :

is assuredly not under any foreign influence and there are no major threats for them in the area: It should be easy for their numerous cities to develop in peace. For that reason, I didn't give Japan the advantage of lots of technologies, they need to speed up their research before getting into the big game. However, to become a leading nation, they will need to get off their islands, for example because the mass of industrial resources are hidden elsewhere. Mutsohito isn't one of those recluse isolationist leaders, but the buddhist religion makes it difficult to have open border treaties with the mostly christian Colonialists. All in all, I think Japan is pretty favored in this scenario.

Note that Japan is the owner of Tea Ceremony, Tsukiji Market, 36 Views of Fuji (in Tokyo) and Rashomon (in Hirosaki). They also get the soon-to-be obsolete Melee Tradition for all it's worth.

Spoiler China :

was difficult to fit into the scenario. "Qing China" gets lots of technology, at least by standards of "non-european natives". Plus, in 1800, it was still one of the most important and largest empires. But I somehow wanted to build into the scenario their decline in the course of the 18th century, making them a developing country until the late 20th century. I somehow wanted to build this into the scenario, otherwise we'd get a pretty dominant China that easily rules the world. So to mirror this decline, they have highly cultured cities that are difficult to reliably conquer, and a high tech advance over their neighbors. But: not a lot of industrious buildings, not a lot of any buildings in fact, and only a token army. In some runs, this weakness will certainly cripple them. Even worse, they're "under siege" by the Taiping kingdom. Colonialists can easily move in at the chinese coast, and Brazil (i.e. Portugal) already owns Macao.
Qing and Taiping are enemies.

Qing China is the owner of The Great Wall (in Beijing), The Imperial Glory Doctrine (all their few starting units are Glorious!), Along the River (in Xi'an), The Dai Miao (in Shandong) and Nine Chapters on the Mathematical Art (in Wuhan).

Yes: A "Taiping Empire". This is only partly rooted in historical facts, because it was "only" a short-lived rebellion.

Spoiler sorry :

Having a Taiping Empire means to cement the "Chinese Civil War" into the entire scenario. In essence, this is practically the same as starting the 1800 world map with two ever-warring factions of Americans (Confederates/Union). It just isn't realistic. But the Taiping Rebellion was the bloodiest civil war in the history of ever, and China needed to be weakened at all costs in this scenario. Again, sorry.

I bumped up Taiping several stages up from being "revolting peasants". They are now a full-fledged kingdom with even more cities than China. But they get to be weak: If Qing China really takes its heart into it, they can beat Taiping, and then reclaim their glory as "middle of the world". So can Taiping, actually.

Well, Taiping is a hodgepodge of Southern China, Rebels, Taiwan, Annam/Vietnam and Tibet, with a religious mixture of Taoism, Buddhism and Christianity. They are far from being technologically advanced, and will easily crumble if poked too hard. On the other hand, if they stand the tests of time, they might develop into a pretty awesome Empire after all.

The Heavenly Kingdom of Taiping is the owner of the School of Confucius, Art of War (in Shanghai), The Mahabodhi (in Lhasa) and very fitting for Hong Xiuquan: the Holy War Doctrine (in Taipei). All starting melee units are religious.

Mongolia: Their master is Qing China. They are surrounded by lots of dangerously strong Barbarians. Mongolia only has a chance if Russia plays possum. With a quick glance to the AI, yes, I suppose there is a small fighting chance. Mongolia is the owner of the Chivalry Doctrine (in Beshbalik) and they follow the Horsemanship Tradition.

This is probably also the point to mention Korea.
Yes, they exist. Even playable.
But they're mostly a squishy target for Japan. Or potentially China or Russia or any colonial power that likes their resources and weak political position. Korea is the owner of Cheomseongdae (in Pusan)

Spoiler India :

is an important part of the scenario, in my opinion. We have in India not only the British colonies (see above), but also the backwards Mughal Empire and two playable factions (beware of all their elephants).
-- Mysore (Dravidia): Tipu Sultan is a muslim leader from Southern India and really hates the guts of the British. His army is strong in numbers, but not nearly as advanced as the British, who are weaker, however.
-- Maratha (Hindu): The hinduist Shivaji is certainly more mild-mannered and will not declare war on Britain in the first round, he is rather a potential ally (and later: vassal). He commands less men than Tipu, but has a slightly stronger economic base. He really hates the Mughal Empire.
-- The Mughal are a more medieval faction (NPC) and designed to not survive anyway. They are to provide flavor and non-improved pockets of jungle. Their last stronghold will probably be Kabul - the Afghanistan Durrani Empire is sadly NOT represented in this scenario, because I decided to keep Asia a lot smaller and thus more manageable than it really is. (There is wisdom in that sentence about the land war in Asia...) Anyway, the Mughals are my "go-to placeholder" in Central Asia. Be glad that I didn't assign them Tibet as well.
With about a dozen cities there, the situation on the subcontinent is pretty hot, culturally. How it plays out will depend on several random factors, including the neighboring Thailand that hates the Mughal, too. If you play British, you can concentrate on securing British rule in India with (n)one or two vassals. If you're playing either Mysore or Maratha, you may wish to drive the British out - make that a priority!
Maratha is the owner of The Kashi Vishwanath, Taj Mahal, Kamakhya Temple (in Varanasi), Ajanta Caves Frescoes and Vijay Stambha (in Northern Hyderabad)
Mysore is the owner of The Ganesh Statue (in Madurai), Nataraja, Aryabhatiya (in Southern Hyderabad) and Koh i Noor (in Ahmadabad)

Spoiler The Ottoman Empire :

is also an important power of the year 1800 that declined rapidly afterwards. I prepared them and their vassals to fall apart easily, but they are not nearly as instable as the Spanish Colonial Empire. They share a common religion and don't hate each other. Much. With the exception of Greece, of course.
- The Ottomans (Turcs) are technological behind all other major European powers, yet they are still included in the European open border treaty structure. This is a certain advantage they have over all of their vassals.
- The Arabs are controlling Mesopotamia and Mekka, which means economic and agronomic growth. At least, once they have built workers. Their armies are severely outdated even in comparison with the Ottomans.
- The Egypts are pretty much the same, controlling a large but noticeably underdeveloped empire.
- The Maghreb (Moroccan) Empire (actually, the Carthaginians, but styled middle eastern), are already out of the Ottoman Empire - but have France as a very dangerous neighbor about which they should definitely worry.
- The Greek... I don't know why I even included them and their severely outdated wonders in the scenario. It would have been easier to make Athens an integral part of the Ottomans or the Minor Europeans, because in comparison with the non-existant Italy, the Greek are even MORE irrelevant as "major power" in the "world of 1800". I suspect that anyone who plays the small Greek as designed in this industrial era scenario, is probably a masochist.

I'm really wondering how useful a few of the ancient wonders are in this scenario, but here it goes:
Ottomans are the owner of The Hagia Sophia, Poliorcetica Techniques, Kitab-i Bahriye (in Istanbul) and The Colossus, Mausoleum of Maussolos (in Smyrna) and Luck of Edenhall (in Halep)
Arabia is the owner of Ishtar Gate, Hanging Gardens, Spiral Minaret, Fortress Alamut, Compendious Book on Algebra, (in Baghdad); Kaaba and The Masjid al-Haram (in Djidda) and the Cyrus Cylinder (in Basra)
Egypt is the owner both The Great Library and Lighthouse, Euclid's Elements, De Materia Medica, Almagest (in al-Iskanderia); the Sphinx and the Pyramids (in al-Qahira); The Temple of Karnak, Nefertiti Bust and the Valley of the Kings (in al-Aswan); The Temle of Solomon (in al-Mashriq)
Maghreb is the owner of Muqaddimah and Blue Qur'an (in Tunis) and Asclepieion (in ar-Rabat)
Greece is the owner of the Fireships Doctrine, the Statue of Zeus, The Parthenon, Theatre of Dionysus, Mask of Agamemnon, Mount Athos (in Athénai) and The Oracle, Temple of Artemis, Discobulos (in Peloponnesos)

Spoiler The rest of Asia :

isn't that big anymore now. Here we go:
Persian Empire: Being placed in desert hills is their big disadvantage. Unless they stomp Arabia early, I can't see them as too successful. In the hands of a dedicated human player, there is probably some potential. Whoah, and they are owner of 1001 Nights and Gondeshapur (in Isfahan) as well as Kitab al Nabat and Canon of Medicine (in Tehran).
Bukharan Emirates: Just the same as Mongolia and Persia. Their military may seem weak, but they're not total pushovers. Their economy is strong than their power level would suggest, even without wonders. In the hands of a dedicated human player, there could be some potential.
Then we have hinduist/buddhist Thailand, or the Rakkanakosin Empire. This is the Austronesian Empire in a slightly different position because Indonesia is Scandinavian-occupied for some questionable reason (see above). Aside from placing Thailand where they are, I didn't worry too much about them. In the hands of a dedicated human player, there is definitely potential, especially as there are no imminent threats against them (in reality, they were about to be colonialized by France, which is why they start as their vassal).

Thailand is the owner of the Shwedagon Paya (in Rangun), Pha That luang (in Bangkok) and Angkor Wat (in Saigon)

Spoiler Africans :

will hate to hear it, but they're last in this list.
Ethiopian Empire: Even more than the others in this section, we're talking here about a development country with a disadvantage. Aside from that: Coffee country. To balance the other natives of Africa, they also get Melee and Archery Traditions. Good Luck.
Fulbe Sultanates. (yet another amalgamate; this time one of three different nations in Africa. One of them donates the leader, another one donates the nation's name, while the most powerful units are from the third. All that while it's actually Mali, and yes you can play it.) This is a development country ready for colonialist domination. Their most imminent threat is Brazil, but any other colonialist nation with settlers and/or soldiers will make their lifes difficult. As an advantage over other natives of Africa, they start with some Dahome Amazons way before having the required technology. I you play West Africa, your priorities are technology, military, settlers and throwing out all nearby colonialists. Good luck.
The Sotho in South Africa: Another development country ready for colonialist domination. Their most imminent threat is Britain with Capetown, but any other colonialist nation with settlers and/or soldiers will make their lifes difficult. I you play Nguni, your priorities are technology, military, settlers and throwing out all nearby colonialists. However, the starting units get Ways of the Land (Rite of Passage) promos. Good luck.

Actually, I played Sotho pretty far, at one point. It's pretty fun to quickly build an empire that spans from Kap to Kongo. I did that on Noble difficulty though.

West Africa is the owner of the U. of Sankore (in Timbuktu) --> 1 useful wonders
Nguni are owner of the Rite of Passage Doctrine (Fortification is even the only technology they haven't researched yet, so it's actually useful if you build lots of archers/recons. Oh look, the Impi are recon units.

I won't spend more words on the NPC factions. There are Mughal, Native Americans, European Kingdoms and Various Colonies, all mentioned sufficiently above. Finally, Indopacific tribes. That's it.

Some things I'm already resolved to change in the next update:
- More ice surrounding Antarctica and Arctica. I made it far too easy to explore the whole map.
- A sparse few tundra hills in Antarctica. Reeeeally overlooked that you can't settle on snow.
- Weakening Germany. A lot. Say goodbye to your jails, Bismarck.
- Building granaries in... [Scandinavia's 3 heartland cities], [where else?]

Things I won't or can't fix:
- The AI seemingly razes 90% of all cities when capturing. A lot of them were too close to each other, but this behaviour is just stupid.

 

[Walter Hawkwood]

OK, you've inspired me to reply even if I can't run the scenario. Of course it is based on what you've written, since I didn't play it myself. First off, the general impressions.

While I understand that one has to give concessions to playability, you seem to be mixing two very different (and very fun in themselves) eras: the Napoleonic world and the post-Vienna congress world. The Vienna congress was such a world-changing event that you could as well have modeled the whole scenario on 1820-1830 era, and then you'd get rid of lots of issues you yourself are lamenting, and get some additional fun stuff in if you wish (like independent Texas). Hey, maybe even two different scenarios based on the same map?

I should also say that I'm prepared to work with you if you manage to get your scenario to run on SVN, like providing you with leaders and era-appropriate flags you'd need, because I would love to have this working in 3.4 and I'd like it to be pretty while it does that.

Now, some thoughts on particular factions:

1) England: should only have the Ancient Mariner if you shift the start date to 1830ies. I'm not sure if independent Ireland is justified in either start (you may consider making it British vassal though). You could consider making Canada a vassal of Britain, if you didn't split it off already.

2) France: why is Versailles in Algiers? In either historical era in question, you should probably just give French Louisiana to USA, since they just sold it in 1803. Unlike England, France's "gimmick" should be a strong mainland with colonial possessions rather optional (and frankly a drain on the treasury). French Indochina wasn't really a thing until late XIX century, so in either case, it is definitely not realistic to make Thailand French vassal. Depending on your final era choice, you have two different Napoleons to lead France.

3) USA: difference engine historically was built in England, and well beyond the start date whatever era you choose. Also, see Louisiana comment above.

4) Germany: if you feel Germany is overpowered, why not split off some of its cities to European minor civ at the start? That would be rather accurate. Also, I don't know if in your setup England controls Hannover at the start (or if it is even on the map). In Napoleonic era, it should.

5) Austria: I feel like you're missing a big opportunity here. We have a dedicated Austrian civ, and Hungary could be its vassal at the start. It would be a very good representation of Austrian-Hungarian tensions that went on for the whole XIX century, and allow for independent Hungary should Austria fall. By the beginning of XIX century, the Golden Age of Austria is already past, and it should pretty much be on decline if nothing drastic (like human player intervention) happens.

6) European minors: generally, I think the approach you're taking is good, but your one decision that bugs me the most is non-inclusion of Netherlands (and a rather nonsensical decision to grant Dutch East Indies to Scandinavia). Also, if you decide to shift to the post-congress time period, a playable Sardinia-Piedmont would probably be good to have (even if more challenging than other European powers).

7) Russia: dismantling Hanseatic presence was the first thing Russian tsars did when they took Novgorod. I think Hansa shouldn't be present in Russia. Also, I'd say that with the escalating tech cost we've implemented, it would be good for balance to actually give Russia most of its historical possessions at that moment, as undeveloped cities. That would ensure that Russia has lots of problems modernizing, as it was historically. Non-Euclidean geometry is only valid for Russia if you go with post-napoleonic start date, and it would probably be good to give one to Hungary too (they were discovered independently and simultaneously). War and Peace is nowhere near written at that point yet. Realistically, in either timeframe, Poland should start as Russia's vassal (with a big relationship penalty of course).

8) Scandinavia: well, historically at that point in time, neither Sweden nor Denmark should be serious contenders for domination. It would probably be best to not create an artificial colonial power out of them, but rather to turn Sweden and/or Denmark into a smaller and challenging European nation. OTOH, in Napoleonic era, Sweden should still hold Finland (should be Russian, or better yet Russian vassal in post-Napoleonic).

9) Brazil: why not base it on Portugal instead? In Napoleonic era, Brazil essentially IS Portugal. Mayans could instead become what their roster is based upon in that era, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Republic_of_Central_America

10) Spain: I think starting Spanish empire as broken is a good design decision with both timeframes.

11) Poland: see above

12) Japan: Rashomon is not even close to be written (let alone filmed) in both timeframes.

13) Other Asian powers: I applaud your decision to split China to mimic its internal instability during XIX century, but I should add that, given they have many cities, they will likely fall behind in tech anyway in current SVN.

14) India: I'd say that Koh-i-Noor at that point of time should rather be Mughal. Also, India is probably the only place outside of European sphere at that moment with technologies nearly that of Europe. Technologically, Mysore's armies were pretty advanced, and gave the British a run for their money.

15) Ottomans etc: I also doubt that a separate Greece should exist, especially in Napoleonic timeline. In post-Napoleonic, they should already be independent (though maybe still better off as minors). Maghreb is probably better represented by Berbers in current SVN.

16) RotW: I think Persia should be somewhat more advanced (at least on par with Ottomans) at that moment - Persia was desperately trying to modernize, and just got unlucky in that it repeatedly got steamrolled by Great Powers of the region. Yet, some 50 years ago at that point, Afsharid Persia was the dominant military power in Asia.

 

[BakouKai]

Hi there,

Just finished one round with your scenario and I wanted to give you my feedbacks as just like you, I like real maps ^^'

This one really gets the job done: It doesn't crash, I can run very slow very long games with only a few crashes and that's pretty lovely !
I really like this kind of "advanced" start, eventhough there are many mistakes/problems in the set up you chose. I'm ok with a semi-realistic set up.

Overall, it's an amazing job, and the stability is excellent. I think the map could be reduced a little bit more for the sake of performances but it's the most usable big size worldmap I have seen around.

Thanks for sharing!