1700AD Scenario Development Thread

[Lone Wolf]

In fact, I think that Italy should be split into 2 civs, Venice, which spawns in 700ish (I can't remember its history even though my family is from near Venice), and Piedmont, which spawns in 1167 and needs to unite Italy. I'll go start a thread for that.

*shudder*

 

[Bamboozle]

What about Greece? They attained independence in the 1820s and would be vital to weakening the Ottomans.
Or would that count as a playable respawn?

 

[Leoreth]

They will respawn through the normal means as a non-playable civ.

 

[blizzrd]

I'll start with the list of civs that will exist at game start / be playable in the scenario:

China
Korea
Japan
Vikings
Spain
France
England
Austria
Russia
Poland
Portugal
Mughals
Turkey
Thailand
Congo
Netherlands
Germany
America
Argentina
Brazil

Surely Mexico should be in this list?

 

[Hippo8085]

Surely Mexico should be in this list?

Respawns not listed. Italy is dead in 1700 AD, so it can only return as a respawn.

Perhaps this should be mentioned in the opening post, but it isn't too difficult to scroll down a little bit ...

 

[blizzrd]

Perhaps this should be mentioned in the opening post, but it isn't too difficult to scroll down a little bit ...

I read the entire thread thankyouverymuch.

How is Mexico any different to Argentina and Brazil? Neither of them were alive in 1700AD either. Yet they are in the list. Which was my point.

 

[Hippo8085]

I see. Mexico is a respawn of Aztec. Brazil and Argentina are separate civilizations. JUst like how Iran is not on there.

 

[Leoreth]

The list is basically who'll show up in the starting screen. Which is the most relevant thing to decide when I put the scenario together. Sorry for not being clear on that.

 

[blizzrd]

What is meant by "starting screen" though?

Is is the list of playable civs that appears in the menu?

Or is it the list of civs who have something on the map in 1700AD?

Because if it is the latter, I don't understand why Brazil or Argentina would be in the mix. And if it is the former, I don't understand why Mexico isn't in the mix.

 

[Leoreth]

The former. Mexico isn't selectable for the same reason that Iran isn't selectable in the 600 AD scenario: that's not how these respawns work.

 

[Wondering Kid]

All I can say is that Inca should not be there. At that time it was still part of the Spanish crown. So yeah...

 

[Leoreth]

Yeah, they aren't. The whole Spanish colonial empire will be under their direct control.

 

[shuizhuchenfu]

Yeah, they aren't. The whole Spanish colonial empire will be under their direct control.

How about Congo ? Aren't they should be destroyed by the Portugal tradecompany when the time is 1700AD ?

 

[Bonci]

I thought that Italy in this mod was the "italian civilization" and not any of the italian polities.
Maybe Venice is not deserving enough alone, but considering all the other states, plus the unified one?

On a side note: Is it possible to give the "switch" popup for every respawning civ? I mean not only for this scenario, but also for the base mod...it would be fun to play some of them, even without UHVs.

 

[VSarius]

I still feel like I have to argue against Austria, while as a country it certainly did exist, in terms of the territory they occupied at the time...they are like a single, maybe dual city empire with it's UHV long since expired and largely being inconsequential. Best case scenario, they are squashed by Prussian and Ottoman culture, reveling in their irrelevance, worst case...one of those powers squash them like a bug.

 

[yurisusuki]

1700 map

Spoiler :

 

[banestrider]

I still feel like I have to argue against Austria, while as a country it certainly did exist, in terms of the territory they occupied at the time...they are like a single, maybe dual city empire with it's UHV long since expired and largely being inconsequential. Best case scenario, they are squashed by Prussian and Ottoman culture, reveling in their irrelevance, worst case...one of those powers squash them like a bug.

I would like to point out that in 1700 Austria has more cities then Prussia. It is only through Leoreth good graces that they start with all German cities in 1700 which is just not historical. Also Austria was the centre of culture and at this point has just stopped the ottomans from taking Vienna. To deny them a spot is cruel. I would say that if they are not to be included that Prussia gets a nerf and actually has to take its German lands and not have them given to them.

Also is this a good time to mention South Africa, Canada and Australia again?

 

[awesome]

Didn't Vietnam conquer the rest of indochina around 1700?

 

[Wondering Kid]

Austria definitively must show up, but they have to be given some more bonuses so that they do not die under Ottoman/Prussian heel so easily. Also, they must be made harder to capitulate; or we'd have an Anschuluss way ahead of time. I'd say boosting up Vienna even more and giving them some more troops; while making the Prussians fight to unite Germany by making Frankfurt and Lübeck (I think thanks the name) independent. Same thing for Poland, or they'll be ran down.

 

[Tomorrow's Dawn]

Didn't Vietnam conquer the rest of indochina around 1700?

No. That is grossly misinformed.
The Nguyen lords conquered Champa. That was it.

Stuff having to do with that map that yurisusuki posted:

1. Okinawa was under a weird dual-subordinate status.
They were vassals of the Satsuma, and a tributary state to the Qing.
If we include Kumemura, it would be an independent state in game terms,
but I think control of the city should just go to Japan.

2. Dzungars and Tibet were part of the Qing Empire. However, the former had not been subjugated until around the middle of the 18th Century. With the latter, Tibet had been peacefully incorporated around the early part of the 18th Century. A Qing stack should be in place to prepare for war against the independent Dzungars by the start of the scenario and Tibet should be incorporated at game start; alternatively, Tibet can exist as a vassal state facing heavy culture pressure.