1500: The Era of Sails - Conquests version

[luiz]

This is the much improved Conquests version of my old "1500" scenario.

The year is 1500. The european sea powers are begining their expansion through the world. Portugal is still the greatest power of Europe, but Spain is on the rise and will quickly claim that position. France, England and the Netherlands are the other 3 powers who also want to build a colonial empire in the New World and stablish trade routes with the Orient.

The 5 sea powers produce a new unit, the Colonist, instead of the Settler. The Colonist only costs 1 population instead of 2.

This is how the world is divided:

Spain
Portugal
France
England
Netherlands
Republic of Venice
Holy Roman Empire
Scandinavia
Russia
Ottoman Empire
Sultanate of Egypt
African Nations
India
China
Korea
Japan
Aztecs
Incans
Mayans
Iroquois

The human players are the 5 Sea Powers, but it's easy to change it by using the editor.

TROUBLESHOOTING
For some unkown reason, it may occur that the leader of whatever civ you choose be named Louis XII, the leader of France. To fix this, load the Editor and select as the Human Player ONLY the civ you want to play as. No need to this if you're playing as France, of course.

Have fun!

This is version 1.1

Changes from version 1.0:
-Fixed Upgrade Tree
-Fixed mayan and incan units
-Renamed Croatia and Wallachia to Sarajevo and Bucharest
-Removed St. Petesburg

Version 1.0 removed after 19 downloads

 

[amadeus]

First to download

 

[luiz]

Let me know what you think once you open it

 

[amadeus]

Naming cities countries is a big no-no, for starters.

St. Petersburg (Russia) was founded in 1703, 203 years after your scenario starts, so that should be scrapped.

Croatia and Wallachia could be renamed. Croatia looks like it's about where Serajevo would be and Wallachia should be (if you are keeping with English-spelling of names) Bucharest.

Wasn't Scotland independent of British rule until 1603? James VI of Scotland took over as James I of England (and if I recall) hence unified Britain into the United Kingdom.

I believe the Peace of Westphalia granted the independence of the Netherlands, and that was in 1648.

Siam has been independent since the 13th century and there's no city there.

How's that for starters?

 

[luiz]

Originally posted by rmsharpe
Naming cities countries is a big no-no, for starters.

Well, but it can be pretty usefull. Take Serra Leoa for exemple. There was no actual city controlled by the portuguse there, but rather many portuguese forts and trade posts. The same applies, to a lesser extent, to Angola. At least in these cases I'll stick to country names, though I already changed Croation and Wallachia.

Originally posted by rmsharpe

St. Petersburg (Russia) was founded in 1703, 203 years after your scenario starts, so that should be scrapped.

My bad. Consider it gone

Originally posted by rmsharpe
Croatia and Wallachia could be renamed. Croatia looks like it's about where Serajevo would be and Wallachia should be (if you are keeping with English-spelling of names) Bucharest.

Yeah, I should definately rename Croatia. But are you sure Bucharest existed in 1500?

Originally posted by rmsharpe

Wasn't Scotland independent of British rule until 1603? James VI of Scotland took over as James I of England (and if I recall) hence unified Britain into the United Kingdom.

Yep, Scotland was independent. And as you can see in the scenario, there are no scottish cities at all . (Newcastle is an english city)

Originally posted by rmsharpe

I believe the Peace of Westphalia granted the independence of the Netherlands, and that was in 1648.

That's true, but the Netherlands had many independent periods before that. In 1500 the Netherlands and Flanders were one independent country.
Check this pretty map of Euope in 1500.

Originally posted by rmsharpe

Siam has been independent since the 13th century and there's no city there.

What Siam? I placed no city there

Originally posted by rmsharpe

How's that for starters?

Good.
Check the 1.1 version

 

[amadeus]

I'm going to be going to bed here, but Bucharest was founded in 1459 by none other than Vlad the Impaler.

 

[Mobilize]

I downloaded and of course, before I play, I look over the map and tweek it.

Scandivania should be split into Denmark and Sweden. During the 1600s and 1700s Sweden was one of the most powerful nations in the world. Norway should be Denmark because they have always been much closer to eachother than Denmark and Sweden have. On the other hand, Finland and Sweden have been rather close in history so a combination of those two might be nice.

I would also include Siam and perhaps Indonesia... Siam for sure because they were a rather formidable empire in Southeast Asia. Indonesia wasn't as united.

Perhaps you should add the Cherokee. The Cherokee were the largest tribe in North America at the time and had held off the Iroquois and their allies attempts at conquering them for several hundred years. The Cherokee played the largest Native American role in the anti-European settlement of North America. I would place their capital Tugalu (or Tugaloo) at (68,70)

Where are the Arabs and Persians, they were definantly around?

Good job, I look forward to playing.

 

[Sarevok]

ooh! a new map by luiz! Ill defitely take a look at this one!

 

[luiz]

Originally posted by Mobilize

Scandivania should be split into Denmark and Sweden. During the 1600s and 1700s Sweden was one of the most powerful nations in the world. Norway should be Denmark because they have always been much closer to eachother than Denmark and Sweden have. On the other hand, Finland and Sweden have been rather close in history so a combination of those two might be nice.

That would be true for the 1600s or 1700s, but not for 1500. In 1500 Denmark bullied Swedeb around, and was pretty much the only important scandinavian nation. In fact the most important parts of Sweden belonged to Denmark in 1500.

Originally posted by Mobilize

Originally posted by Mobilize

I would also include Siam and perhaps Indonesia... Siam for sure because they were a rather formidable empire in Southeast Asia. Indonesia wasn't as united.

Perhaps you should add the Cherokee. The Cherokee were the largest tribe in North America at the time and had held off the Iroquois and their allies attempts at conquering them for several hundred years. The Cherokee played the largest Native American role in the anti-European settlement of North America. I would place their capital Tugalu (or Tugaloo) at (68,70)

I'll consider these suggetstions, they're good

Originally posted by Mobilize

Where are the Arabs and Persians, they were definantly around?

Good job, I look forward to playing.

The arabs are represented by the Sultanate of Egypt, the most important arab kingdom of 1500. As for the persians and some other civs, the reason I did not include them is that they played little or no role at all at the main topic of this scenario(The Great Navigations).

 

[Dedin]

Nice work.
I suggest making it impossible to settle on arctic terrain. Besides that the scenario seems to be very realistic. Maybe decrease corruption a bit, that would make it a bit easier for the portugese who are addicted the most to their colonies.

 

[luiz]

Nice work.
I suggest making it impossible to settle on arctic terrain. Besides that the scenario seems to be very realistic. Maybe decrease corruption a bit, that would make it a bit easier for the portugese who are addicted the most to their colonies.

Maybe I should create a new government that allows the creation of far-away colonies with a relatively reduced corruption.

 

[The Last Conformist]

That would be true for the 1600s or 1700s, but not for 1500. In 1500 Denmark bullied Swede[n] around, and was pretty much the only important scandinavian nation. In fact the most important parts of Sweden belonged to Denmark in 1500.

In 1500, Sweden was part of the Danish-dominated Union of Kalmar. All of Sweden, incl Finland. In 1501, Sweden became independent, which lasted till 1520. A rebellion starting in 1521 led to a the coronation of Gustav Vasa as king in '23, which effectively put the Union to an end (Norway was reconstituted as a Danish province rather than a separate kingdom at about the same time).

Sweden suceeded Denmark as the leading Scandinavian power in the early 17th century.

I'd suggest having Sweden (with Finland) and Denmark (with Norway and Iceland) as separate countries in 1500 - it's strictly inaccurate, but you can't really repesent the secession.

 

[Flamegrape]

The arabs are represented by the Sultanate of Egypt, the most important arab kingdom of 1500. As for the persians and some other civs, the reason I did not include them is that they played little or no role at all at the main topic of this scenario(The Great Navigations).

I disagree. Competition with the Venitian's trade with the East was one of the reasons why Portugal decided not to stop with the conquest of Ceuta. And the Portugeuse came into frequent conflict with the Arabs in the Indian Ocean and Arabian Sea. At around this time, Islam had reached from western North Africa all the way to the Philippeans. Portugeuse discoveries in the New World were accidents and they didn't initially take advantage of it. In the year 1500, the Portugeuse were only interested in establishing a trade route around the tip of Africa to India and the East, thereby bypassing the Venitians and the Arabs. In fact, Vasco De Gama arrived in India in 1498 and set up a trade post. The Treaty of Tordesillas was signed in 1494 which divided the world between Portuguese and Spanish lands. The Spanish received all of the land to the West and the Portuguese to the East. This gave Portugal Africa while Spain received all of the new world with the exception of Brazil. Portugal didn't really care about anything in the New World until it was too late.

 

[luiz]

I disagree. Competition with the Venitian's trade with the East was one of the reasons why Portugal decided not to stop with the conquest of Ceuta. And the Portugeuse came into frequent conflict with the Arabs in the Indian Ocean and Arabian Sea. At around this time, Islam had reached from western North Africa all the way to the Philippeans. Portugeuse discoveries in the New World were accidents and they didn't initially take advantage of it. In the year 1500, the Portugeuse were only interested in establishing a trade route around the tip of Africa to India and the East, thereby bypassing the Venitians and the Arabs. In fact, Vasco De Gama arrived in India in 1498 and set up a trade post. The Treaty of Tordesillas was signed in 1494 which divided the world between Portuguese and Spanish lands. The Spanish received all of the land to the West and the Portuguese to the East. This gave Portugal Africa while Spain received all of the new world with the exception of Brazil. Portugal didn't really care about anything in the New World until it was too late.

Portugal cared more about the trade routes with the East, I'll agree with you on that one.

But they also cared about the New World. Cabral didn't reach Brazil by accident in 1500. Today most historians agree that Cabral had two objectives in his mission: claim Brazil(in that time, Ilha de Santa Cruz[/i]) to Portugal and capture the indian city of Calicute(what he did).

Another interesting point is that according to the Treaty of Tordesillas, only a fraction of what is today Brazil would be under portuguses rule. But Portugal kept sending explorers towards the interior with the explicit objective of enlarging the country, what Imperial Brazil continued to do after independence in 1822.

I would say that Portugal had moderate interest in the New World in 1500, but by 1525 this interest was already huge(huge enough for them to send an army to fight the french who had settled in what is today Rio de Janeiro).

 

[Hygro]

Does this scenario incorporate the whole treasure idea in conquests? If not, you might consider it as an alternative to low corruption for making colonies profittable.

 

[luiz]

Does this scenario incorporate the whole treasure idea in conquests? If not, you might consider it as an alternative to low corruption for making colonies profittable.

I have created a new government, Colonialism, that has Communal corruption. This makes colonies very profittable. I'll release it in a next version.

 

[Flamegrape]

Luiz, I am very impressed. I've been thinking of working on the same sort of scenario for quite a while. Perhaps I was inspired by your earlier version, although I don't remember it.


If you don't mind, I will try to create my own version of a 1500 A.D. scenario. I will use Rhyse's 170x170 Earth map and incorporate many of his rule changes. And your own 1500 A.D. scenario has given me some great ideas about the arrangement of tribes.

For my own 1500 A.D. scenario, I intend to have the Islamic civilization play a huge role. Combining the Ottoman Empire, all of the sultanates, etc., into one civilization, it should present a powerful obstacle for the the Western countries. The "Islamic Tribe" would cover all of northern Africa, the Middle-east, Persia, northern India, and parts of Malaysia and Indonesia. I'll have to tinker with the rules in order to prevent the computer-controlled Islamic civilization from instantly taking over the world. Perhaps a new Islamic government is needed in the game rules.

My 1500 A.D. scenario, of course, would be Western-oriented. The Islamic tribe ought to be computer-controlled. Otherwise, a human player could play the part of the Islamic tribe and completely dominate the world in short order. Although that almost happened, the West and the Far East civilization still exist today.

 

[luiz]

Luiz, I am very impressed. I've been thinking of working on the same sort of scenario for quite a while. Perhaps I was inspired by your earlier version, although I don't remember it.


If you don't mind, I will try to create my own version of a 1500 A.D. scenario. I will use Rhyse's 170x170 Earth map and incorporate many of his rule changes. And your own 1500 A.D. scenario has given me some great ideas about the arrangement of tribes.

For my own 1500 A.D. scenario, I intend to have the Islamic civilization play a huge role. Combining the Ottoman Empire, all of the sultanates, etc., into one civilization, it should present a powerful obstacle for the the Western countries. The "Islamic Tribe" would cover all of northern Africa, the Middle-east, Persia, northern India, and parts of Malaysia and Indonesia. I'll have to tinker with the rules in order to prevent the computer-controlled Islamic civilization from instantly taking over the world. Perhaps a new Islamic government is needed in the game rules.

My 1500 A.D. scenario, of course, would be Western-oriented. The Islamic tribe ought to be computer-controlled. Otherwise, a human player could play the part of the Islamic tribe and completely dominate the world in short order. Although that almost happened, the West and the Far East civilization still exist today.

Good luck on your scenario

 

[jrpower]

When I run the scenario, the only playable Civ I get is Portugal. Can someone give me a hint as to the problem?

 

[kevincompton]

I think this should have treasure like the conquerors. And yes, the only playable civ is still Portugal.