1. We have added the ability to collapse/expand forum categories and widgets on forum home.
    Dismiss Notice
  2. Photobucket has changed its policy concerning hotlinking images and now requires an account with a $399.00 annual fee to allow hotlink. More information is available at: this link.
    Dismiss Notice
  3. All Civ avatars are brought back and available for selection in the Avatar Gallery! There are 945 avatars total.
    Dismiss Notice
  4. To make the site more secure, we have installed SSL certificates and enabled HTTPS for both the main site and forums.
    Dismiss Notice
  5. Civ6 is released! Order now! (Amazon US | Amazon UK | Amazon CA | Amazon DE | Amazon FR)
    Dismiss Notice
  6. Dismiss Notice
  7. Forum account upgrades are available for ad-free browsing.
    Dismiss Notice

1989: Scenario Development Thread

Discussion in 'Civ3 - Creation & Customization' started by AnthonyBoscia, Jun 25, 2011.

  1. AnthonyBoscia

    AnthonyBoscia Chieftain

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2010
    Messages:
    1,436
    "For in this century, within the next decades, will be decided for generations whether all mankind is to become Communist, whether the whole world is to become free, or whether, in the struggle, civilization as we know it is to be completely destroyed or completely changed."
    -Whittaker Chambers








    "Our only salvation lies in world revolution: either we achieve it whatever the sacrifices, or we will be crushed by the petty bourgeois."
    -Nikolai Ivanovich Bukharin​



    In December of 1984, Mikhail Sergeyevich and Raisa Gorbachev paid a visit to Prime Minister and Mr. Thatcher at the Chequers Estate in Buckinghamshire. Gorbachev had previously served as chief of Agriculture, was a fast-rising Politburo member under Andropov and a favorite for the next General Secretary. The meeting was a chance for Thatcher to determine if a younger leader would take the reigns of the Soviet Union, and for Gorbachev, in his words, "to identify the interests we have in common."1

    The Cold War was approaching its fifth decade and the position of the two blocs had shifted drastically. The post-war economic boom of the West had ground down in the 1970s, and its citizens were divided over the arms race, nuclear weapons, government accountability, and social changes. But even as the Soviet Union and her satellites achieved victories in technology, production, and political influence, the balance of power moved once again in the 1980s. The increase in Soviet military strength further burdened a weakening economy, and the war in Afghanistan and frustration with corruption and inequality fostered malaise and stagnation at home, just as their American opponents had endured in the wake of Viet Nam. The West, meanwhile, followed its manufacturing slump with a boon in finance and electronics, leading to a revitalized economy. The massive martial ascendency that the Soviet bloc had achieved at great cost in the late 70s and early 80s was threatened by a NATO increasingly turning to its technological advantages. As Gorbachev would later say, "We are encircled not by invincible armies, but by superior economies."2

    At Chequers that December, the couples and their assistants had lunch. Afterwards, Denis took Raisa on a tour of the library, and Prime Minister Thatcher and Gorbachev sat to discuss their positions. Although Gorbachev's viewpoints espoused Party orthodoxy and stressed the need for arms control, Thatcher was impressed by his vigor, energy, and persuasiveness. "I like Mr Gorbachev. We can do business together," she later stated in a BBC interview.3 Gorbachev was passionate about addressing the arms race, and disputed the exploration of strategic defense. Thatcher considered the meeting a success, and later remarked, "I hoped that I had been talking to the next Soviet leader."4

    Unfortunately, she had not.

    1985

    Konstantin Ustinovich Chernenko, the fifth General Secretary of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, had barely been in office a year before he fell terminally ill. The collective leadership of the Soviet Union was a oligarchy of powerful figures who built strong politcal connections to ensure that no one man could again dominate Soviet politics. Brezhnev's long tenure as General Secretary corresponded with an inertial contiuance of rule by an aging party elite, and his death was followed by the brief leadership of both Andropov and Chernenko. "How am I supposed to get anyplace with the Russians if they keep dying on me?" quipped U.S. President Reagan after Chernenko's demise. Gorbachev, the young party leader and the favorite as Chernenko's successor, was opposed by two candidates: old guard Moscow chief Viktor Vasilyevich Grishin and young rival G.V. Romanov.

    Gorbachev was not yet sure if either would make a move to oppose him in the bid for leadership. The key moment would come at the Politburo meeting, where the head of the funeral commission would signal the next General Secretary. Although it seemed that Grishin might step aside, the Moscow Party chieftain made critical moves to ensure his ascension. Yegor Kuzmich Ligachev, a Gorbachev protégé who had organized a pro-Gorbachev faction after Andropov's death in 1984, was approached by Grishin and promised full candidacy, increased influence, and a position as both a senior leader of the Secretariat and new First Secretary of the Moscow Party Committee after Grishin vacated the post. Grishin also forged an alliance with Viktor Mikhailovich Chebrikov, head of the KGB. The change in loyalties prompted the venerable Minister of Foreign Affairs, Andrei Andreyevich Gromyko, to shift his influence behind Grishin and the continued rule of the old guard. When Chernenko's funeral came in March, it was Grishin who spoke at Lenin's mausoleum. Before the year was over, Gorbachev was dismissed from office and the influence of the young party leaders was suppressed. The old guard of the Politburo was determined to hold onto its traditional base of power for a few more crucial years, while the world changed rapidly around them.

    1986

    Chebrikov was deeply traditional, but also dedicated to restructuring the KGB and combating corruption. His disagreements with other senior leaders was resolved when he was found dead in his dacha, apparently as a result of difficulty with his medication. Chebrikov was replaced by Vladimir Alexandrovich Kryuchkov, who proposed a vigorous plan to improve security. This included an aggressive and secret campaign to neutralize and discredit Polish Solidarity Union leaders, and numerous measures to counteract Western and domestic influences in Eastern Europe as well as ethnic and nationalist movements at home. In April, three weeks after the bombing of a West Berlin disco, a nuclear disaster erupted at the Chernobyl Plant in the Ukrainian S.S.R. Even as the Soviet Union worked to address the damage, a shaken Politburo discussed the strategic implications of total nuclear war and changes in military strategy in any possible future conflict. The General Staff was instructed in their yearly assessment to re-evaluate more options for a swift, non-nuclear engagement with NATO, emphasizing the need for splintering the West's political will to prevent a Western nuclear first strike.

    In the U.S., military reform continued with the passage of the Goldwater–Nichols Act that reorganized American military commands. Western leaders reiterated a commitment to continued conventional military build-up despite mixed public reactions and contraversial scandals such as the Iran–Contra affair. Reagan, even while preaching strong anti-Soviet rhetoric in his first term, had long desired establishing a personal relationship with his counterpart to work on disarmament. His first meeting with Grishin in Geneva in the fall of 1986 was a disaster. The talks were preceeded by a great amount of public posturing by each side. During the summit, Reagan pressed on human rights, nuclear disarmament, and the protection of research into strategic defensive systems. Grishin countered with accusations of Western attempts to undermine law and order in Eastern Europe and Central America, in addition to the deployment of intermediate range GLCMs and Pershings II missiles in Western Europe. The conference ended with little positive result.

    1987

    The oil glut continued to harm oil-producing countries, with prices as low as $10 per barrel. Not only did the faltering Soviet economy suffer, but the OPEC nations lost clout and the Iran-Iraq war continued to devastate both countries. The Politburo would not stop barter trade in oil and gas with the Eastern bloc, nor could it cut military industry or reduce food imports and implement rationing without major repercussions. The only other choice was to borrow, heavily, from the Western banks.

    A second summit took place in Stockholm, and utterly failed to establish a basis for arms reduction. Grishin refused to agree to dismantling the most modern intermediate range weapons, and Reagan would not relent on the cessation of strategic defense research. The only arms limitation proponents agreed upon were dismantling of obsolete systems, while the intermediate weapons continued to be deployed throughout Europe.

    In the Americas, changes developed progressively. Guyana's only post-independence president, Forbes Burnham, died in 1985 while the country was mired in economic crisis and deteriorating conditions. Vice President Desmond Hoyte's bid for election in his place was thwarted by an alliance led by the PPP and the WPA. The new Guyanan leadership moved to further centralization and nationalization of assets to offset the economic damage, and forged closer ties to Cuba, including limited military assistance. In Venezuela, Jaime Lusinchi's presidency was marked by corruption and economic turmoil, and a break with its traditional ally, the Confederation of Workers of Venezuela, led to increased social tensions. With Cuba's successful support of the MPLA government in Angola and the failure of the Esquipulas Peace Agreement in central America, Castro pushed for greater support to Guyana and liberation movements within Venezuela to preempt what was sure to be inevitable Western interference in the Americas.

    1988

    The year was marked by increased agitation by popular movements both East and West. Major anti-nuclear protests were held in Europe and the U.S., while Polish labor movements grew bolder in opposing the Jaruzelski government in the wake of the campaign to silence them. Suffering under hyperinflation and debt, the Polish people erupted in a series of strikes and demonstrations in Warsaw, Wroclaw, Lublin, and Bydgoszcz. The movements were met with fierce opposition from police forces and anti-terrorist troops. When shipyard workers in Gdansk and Szczecin were joined by steelworkers from Stalowa Wola, Poland's arms manufacturing was endangered. A state of emergency was declared on 23 August, and a second Marshal Law period followed. Jaruzelski, fearing that Polish troops would sympathize with the workers, appealed to the Soviet leadership. The Politburo was deeply split on the issue, but in the end agreed to a limited intervention by a combined Warsaw Pact force under General V.G. Kulikov. The main goal of the force was to get the strikers back to work and avoid bloodshed or escalation.

    The intervention was strongly denounced by the West and many other nations, including China. NATO forces maintained a higher state of alert, but no action or threat of action is carried out. The main conflict came as Western legislators threatened to stop critical loans to the Soviet government. Some European nations decried the actions, pointing out that it intensified the conflict and threatened Soviet oil and gas supply to Western Europe. The Soviet leadership was caught in a constrictive dilemma. It could not back off from its intervention, as it would irreperably weaken Soviet influence in Eastern Europe. Conversely, it could not jeopardize its economic ties with the West without risking imminent economic catastrophe.

    In the end, the situation slowly defused. Solidarity moved back underground and Polish strikers returned to work. The Warsaw Pact forces rapidly returned to barracks, and the flow of cash, oil, and grain continued. In the Middle East, Iran and Iraq signed a cease-fire after eight years of war. In the Americas, Nicaragua settled but northern South America smoldered. Everywhere, it seemed, the tensions brought on by hardship, inflation, and oppression simmered under the surface, waiting an event to bring them to head.

    1989

    In February of 1989, Soviet forces withdrew from Afghanistan after a decade of intervention. The Soviet soldiers returned to a nation that was splitting at the seams, weighed under with cynicism and frustration at increasing hardship and ethnic and nationalist tensions. In the U.S., former Vice President George Bush was elected to office to continute the conservative reign. Military modernization had accelerated on both sides of the Iron Curtain. That February, a major demonstration in Caracas elicited a violent repressive response from Venezuelan President Carlos Andrés Pérez. Rioting continued, and Pérez pressed for more support from the United States, including light military arms. The conflagration erupted into near civil war, with Guyanan forces and Cuban advisors rapidly infiltrating the country to support the rebels. But it was in Europe that the world's eyes soon turned, as another revolution erupted that would change everything.

    A number of dissident movements had been stirring in East Germany, many using churches as meeting places since the government had reopened them. Protests had become more common, especially after the Polish movement. In June of 1989, the East German people erupted into the streets, demanding reform. The Volkspolizei sent to curtail the protests refused to use violent action, and many simply stood aside. The effects of the Berlin Spring were immediate and electric. Throughout Eastern Europe, citizens demanded reform, better wages, and freedom of movement. Trade union strikes followed in Leningrad, Sverdlorsk, and Dnipropetrovsk. Stasi agents took swift action to arrest ringleaders and disperse crowds, and KGB troops in the Soviet Union clashed with strikers and violently turned back demonstrators in the Baltic states. Soviet Army reserves activated throughout the country and frontline forces increased their readiness, though they did not participate in opposing the movements.

    Western leaders roundly denounced the use of force in the Eastern bloc, and increased military readiness and diplomatic pressure to show their resolve. International media brought extensive coverage of the revolutions throughout the world, with speculation on whether there would be a military intervention or economic consequences. At an emergency NATO summit, a proposal was made to place an embargo against the Soviet Union to force talks on reform and opening international borders. The U.S. cabinet was sharply divided on a course of action. Defense Secretary Cheney advised a mobilization of reserves and reinforcement of forces in Europe to show a strong support of the revolutions, while Secretary of State Baker advised an immediate engagement with Grishin to press for an opening of the borders. In West Germany, Kohl's government came under strong pressure from the German people to take diplomatic action. The U.S. Congress authorized a Presidential Reserve Call-Up, the largest in post-war history, but no further troops were yet sent to Europe. On 28 June, a Berlin demonstration with the complicit assistance of some Volkspolizei breached the Wall and allowed Germans to cross over the border. Soviet and East German troops used gas and bullets to deter the breakout, but affected not only East Berliners but also West Berliners who had congregated to the breach to help their countrymen. Security forces on both sides eventually brought the breach to a halt, but the West German people were in an uproar, demanding the immediate opening of the border and cessation of repressive actions.

    Grishin's Defense Council secretly discussed the consequences of further actions. To back down would mean losing control of Eastern Europe, and open the Soviet Union to divisive internal pressures that could lead to the country's eventual dissolution. The alternative, enacting harsher security measures, would lead to Western sanctions and quite possibly military intervention. Either path raised the spectre of near-certain economic collapse. Defense Minister Sokolov, one of the Soviet Army's most respected Marshals, was joined by Kryuchkov and others in warning that NATO military intervention was imminent and that the West would use this force to blackmail and cripple the Soviet Union. The only responsible solution would be a pre-emptive attack to destroy the capitalist armies before they mobilized. A swift military operation would throw the West off-balance and relieve the economic pressure. The defensive manuever would be accompanied by a strong international propaganda campaign to splinter NATO into a set of competing and incongruous national objectives that would neuter the alliance, while ensuring neutral nations of the limited nature of the operation. With its alliance fractured, its armies defeated, and its populations and neutrals firmly against escalation, the United States could not consider a nuclear response and would be forced to negotiate on favorable terms.

    Since the first mobilization, Soviet forces had constantly moved and adjusted their poisitions and readiness posture. With hostilities imminent, the Soviet Army knew it could not hide its mobilization, and so began a pattern of change over the months that would frustrate NATO forces and erode their combat readiness. At the end of July, Soviet forces moved unmistakably into preparations for offensive operations. After conferring with his security advisors, President Bush gives a televised address on Monday, July 31st, outlining the NATO case for immediate mobilization and calling on Soviet leadership to immediately withdrawal its forces from Germany. While Pope John Paul II leads a Piazza San Pietro audience of over 200,000 in prayer for peace, the armies of East and West prepare for battle from Norway to Turkey. Soviet diversionary troops infiltrate Western Europe and activate sleeper cells in prepartion for sabotage, assasination, and disruptive attacks preceeding the assault. Soviet Airborne troops use Aeroflot flights to coordinate deep penetration drops even as attack submarines shadow enemy naval groups with the aid of satellite guidance.

    4 August 1989

    At 040250ZAUG89, 3:50 AM local time, the artillery guns and rocket launchers of the Western Theater of Strategic Military Action commence fire from Lüdersdorf to Lenora. The nations of Europe and North America find themselves, once again, at war.

    1. Howe, Jeffrey: 'Conflict of Loyalty'. St. Martin's 1984.
    2. Address to Central Committee Conference, MAY 1986.
    3. Thatcher interview with BBC's John Cole, 22 DEC 1984.
    4. Thatcher, Margaret: 'The Downing Street Years'. Smithmark Pub 1995.


     

    Attached Files:

  2. AnthonyBoscia

    AnthonyBoscia Chieftain

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2010
    Messages:
    1,436
    The Third World War 1989 is an upcoming war scenario for Civilization III with the object of obtaining enough victory points to defeat your opponents by destroying their forces and capturing or defending key victory locations. In the style of the 'WWII in the Pacific' scenario included with Conquests, the game will focus on a precise application of forces to acheive victory, and will not incorporate the expansion and building strategies found in a normal epic game. Instead, like a game of chess, each civ will possess a limited pool of forces that it must use and preserve if it is to succeed. The game is designed to be fairly short, possibly 6-10 hours, but every manuever and attack must be carefully considered to maximize your nation's potential.

    As the Soviet Union, time is your enemy. You have the initiative and the first movement, but you must use it wisely. Forge Rights of Passage with your Warsaw Treaty Organization brethren and unleash your attack on the Western fascists. Although you possess the largest and most powerful military force in human history, you must use it to boldly to overrun your foes before they can fully mobilize. From Naval infantry assaults to submarine attacks, from long range aviation strikes on enemy convoys to massed artillery concentrations along the German border, you have to press on aggressively regardless of heavy losses. You can use your reserves to overwhelm Western Europe, or conduct daring thrusts into Sweden, Yugoslavia, or the Middle East to shift the balance of power, liberate the people from their oppressors, and protect your nation from revanchist capitalist greed.

    As the NATO powers, every movement counts and every asset is precious. Your slight edge in technology must be applied with a surgeon's skill to counteract the enemy's preponderance in forces. As West Germany, you are in a fight for your very existance. Protect your cities and use the forces of the Bundeswehr and Territorialheer to extract a price for every foot of ground the enemy advances. As major NATO powers like the UK, France, Italy, and Turkey, you need to counterattack swiftly and spoil the advance, while activating your own national reserves. And as the United States, you are the Alliance's strongest military member and the last bastion of defense for the free world. Only you have the forces available to counteract Soviet Naval and Air intrusions. Deploy forces by air and sea to reinforce the continent, carry out deep strikes with tactical aircraft and stealth fighters, or use Marine and Naval forces aggressively to throw the enemy off balance.






    The game will take place on a custom 362 x 214 map, focused on central Europe and featuring an oblique view encompassing the Middle East, Scandinavia, the North Atlantic and North America. City placement, population size, resource locations, and political boundaries are being based on atlas and census data from the era. Each turn will represent one day. There are 31 civilizations in the game. Due to the 31-civ limit, not all nations can be individually represented and some have been combined or omitted.

    The Warsaw Pact consists of the U.S.S.R., East Germany, Poland, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Bulgaria, and Romania. They begin in a locked alliance, except for Romania. The Warsaw Pact starts in a locked war with NATO, and has the first move. It would be wise to broker Right of Passage agreeements with fellow members from the start.

    The North Atlantic Treaty Organization is a locked alliance consisting of West Germany, the United States, Canada, the UK, France, Norway, Denmark, Belgium, the Netherlands, Italy, Spain, Portugal, Greece, and Turkey. They begin in a locked war with the Soviet Union. Strong negotiations may induce other nations to join the fight, and trade agreements will give you access to key resources.

    Neutral nations include Sweden-Finland, European Neutrals (Austria, Switzerland, Ireland), Yugoslavia (including Albania), Iran, Iraq, Egypt, Israel, the Arab League (Saudi Arabia, Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia, Libya, and Kuwait for game purposes), Cuba (including a Cuban-backed Guyanan force), and the Caribbean States (primarily Venezuela, with Hispaniola and Jamaica). Many of these nations have formidable forces of their own, and could provide an interesting challenge to the shrewd player who knows how to manipulate both sides! The game begins with Cuba and Guyana locked at war with Venezuela, a conflict that may draw other forces into the fight.

    All forces will be based on their actual historical composition to the best degree that I can manage. Units will bear their proper division, squadron number, or ship name to the highest degree of accuracy possible. I am still creating the formulas for how unit stats and hit points will work, but essentially hit points will correspond to size, while stats will reflect their combat abilities. Veteran unit hit points will allow a smaller but elite unit to stand up to larger reserve formations.

    Carriers, battleships, cruisers, destroyers, frigates, and submarines will be represented and named individually. Smaller craft may be grouped together. Naval aircraft sqaudrons are smaller than their land counterparts but will be of elite status.


    "The revolution in technology is bringing about changes in the form of military operations at an ever accelerating pace; in any future armed conflict the basic operational entity would no longer be the Front, but a form of military operations of much greater scale."
    -Marshal Nikolai Ogarkov​



    The standard Soviet unit is the regiment. Motor-Rifle, Tank, Artillery and Airborne units will bear regimental numbers and their appropriate higher headquarters whereever possible. Supporting units such as reconnaissance, engineer, and anti-air assets may be by batallion. For example, a sample Motor-Rifle division might consist of the following:

    1 tracked Motor-Rifle Regiment (BMP)
    2 wheeled Motor-Rifle Regiments (BTR)
    1 Tank Regiment (T-80, T-72, or T-64)
    1 Artillery Regiment (2S3)
    1 Rocket Battalion (BM-21 Grad)
    1 Anti-Aircraft Bn (9K330 Tor/SA-15 Gauntlet or 9K33 Osa/SA-8 Gecko)
    1 Soviet Engineer Bn
    1 Reconnaissance Bn (BRDM-2)
    1 Anti-Tank Bn (T-12)
    1 Independent Tank Bn (Commander's Reserve)

    The Soviets begin with all Category A formations in combat positions, while Category B units will be fully mobilized at their barracks locations. Naval forces will be deployed throughout the theater. The PVO will include immobile interceptor aircraft and anti-air systems. Frontal Aviation, Longe Range and Naval Aviation will most often have two units per regiment (as squadrons would be too small and numerous).

    Examples of Soviet units:

    Spoiler :






    "Above all, we must realize that no arsenal, or no weapon in the arsenals of the world, is so formidable as the will and moral courage of free men and women. It is a weapon our adversaries in today's world do not have."
    -Ronald Reagan ​

    NATO forces will be standardized by brigade. They also will have supporting units, though they will be heavily outnumbered on pretty much every level by Warsaw Pact forces. NATO air forces will be named by squadron. NATO forces in Germany will begin on fortifications in their border positions, supported by SIGINT (Radar towers). They are exposed to the Soviet first strike but possess great defensive strength. NATO forces have the disadvantage of being divided by nationality, and thus unable to share airbases, tiles, and transport fellow troops. These peculiarities of Civ III do well to simulate the difficulties of this multi-national, multi-lingual alliance. All together, though, NATO nations will have some tough forces to employ, especially with regards to air power.

    Examples of NATO units in-game:

    Spoiler :











    NBC Warfare: Chemical weapons will be represented by the charm ability to simulate their primary use as a degradation of enemy effectiveness. They can be deployed by certain air and artillery assets. The Soviets will have large numbers of these, while the U.S. will have a limited capability. Nuclear weapons will be dealt with in a separate post. Biological weapons will not be featured.

    Special Operations: All the major powers have special forces of some type. Marine forces will be amphibious and will include their own artillery and armor forces. Airborne and air assault forces are available so that the computer can employ as well as the player. Many countries have border troops and special police forces for occupation and detection. The Soviets will have a variety of diversionary forces (including Land and Naval SPETSNAZ and KGB assault groups) that can wreak havoc throughout the map. The U.S. and U.K. can employ special forces behind enemy lines, which will have a chance of spawning anti-communist guerillas to disrupt transportation and communications deep in Soviet territory.

    Air Power: I had good experiences with the multi-move air forces in Worldwide, and this will appear again. You will have to decide how you will rebase your forces, conduct interdiction, interception and reconnaissance. Heavy bombers are strong but suceptible to interceptors and air defenses. Some attack helicopters will be land units with stealth attack, while others are air units and can transport infantry. Some units will employ electronic countermeasures and low observability technology that makes them more difficult to intercept. Electronic warfare units and chemical strike craft can degrade enemy defenders and leave them vulnerable to further strikes.

    Sea Power: There's a whole nother war at sea, and the cold waters of the Atlantic are unforgiving. Submarines will have low hit points but great striking power and invisibility. Vessels with missiles will have bombard abilities commensurate with their launch ranges. Naval aviation can be both land- and sea-based with attack, interception, recon, and detect invisible depending on their type. Satellites will give each side a chance to scan the empty sea. Aggressive reconnaissance is a must! The computer knows where you are, so you are going to have to find them and strike them first. There are Naval Infantry and Marine forces that may provide dramatic assaults in the Mediterranean, Norway, Iceland, and even Scotland! Deciding where to employ your air assets will be a crucial decision. Special missile units will also allow aircraft and submarines to bombard the enemy with lethal payloads.

    Reinforcements: Because of the limits of the transportation network, you must plan your reinforcements carefully. Roads use the Railroad graphics to denote major routes. The U.S. will have several airbases through Western Europe with POMCUS sites. Certain units in the States will be flagged as REFORGER units that can airlift from airbases back home, mating up with prepositioned equipment in Europe. Other units will have to make the perilous journey across the Atlantic under the watchful eyes of Soviet submarine and Naval Aviation forces. The game utilizes a system of Landmark Terrain to limit the building of rail lines, as used to good effect by Civinator and the Storm Over Europe team.

    Building: Building units and improvements is not the focus of the game, but will be a small part. Building units will be referred to as mobilizing. Unlike a regular game where you build better units as time passes, the units that you can build will be reserve forces consisting of older equipment, like M-60 and T-62 tanks. Building times will not be swift, but these forces might give you a little extra edge. Also, improvements may be available such as civil defenses, district headquarters (acts as a barracks), NBC protection (charm barrier), etc. More on these later. Some cities will have special wonders, either to increase their value or to spawn special, limited reinforcements.

    Techs: Technology separates the eras that each nation resides in, and have graphical and relationship consequences. There are four eras, with the first relating mostly to the Soviet Union, East Germany, and Cuba, which will be complex and cover a wide variety of areas. Era 2 covers Mobilization, and will allow more options from activating reserves, retraining units with equipment in storage, and importing equipment from friendly nations. Era 3 covers diplomacy, and allows transatlantic shipping, special units, buildings that protect civil populations, and deals with oil-producing nations. Era 4 is specific to the U.S. and U.K., and relates to the action in the Pacific, where unfolding events can allow reinforcements to come late in the game.

    Civilopedia: I'm going to follow the Firaxis way of having the first screen tell you the entry's purpose in game, and the second give historical info. I'm aiming to make the gameplay entries as simple to understand as possible for easy reference, and then put the technical nonsense in the descriptions. Game concepts will cover many areas, and a full bibliography of sources will be provided.

    Sounds: A custom soundscape is being assembled. In addition to a soundtrack for the main map and diplomatic music, there are ambient sounds and custom unit sounds where necessary.

    Victory: There will be key victory locations and point scoring. Certain units will have very high shield values and provide a great bonus. Special areas like the Middle East and Western Europe will have bonuses to tempt players. Also, the Luxury resources are acutally going to be National Resources, such as French culture, Israeli culture, etc. civs will be able to trade these to build certain special advantages. Of course, they'll also be a goal for capture. Finally, I'm working on a Political Victory condition (Space Race). You'll have to capture or trade for the National Resources, and put some investement in the tech tree for this one, but it basically will signify a dissolution of NATO and separate peace as a win for the USSR, or an Eastern Bloc revolution as a win for NATO.
     
  3. AnthonyBoscia

    AnthonyBoscia Chieftain

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2010
    Messages:
    1,436
    Reserved.

    Nothing follows.
     
  4. Samez

    Samez ION GUNNER Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2005
    Messages:
    1,422
    Location:
    center of nowhere
    Wow!
    Ambitious project with a very good choice of map!
    Just two questions:
    How ill you resemble the US Bases in Europe? AI tends to use very little transatlantic operations...
    And won't there be balance issues if it is possible to break away soviet allies like Czechoslovakia but not Nato allies like Austria or Spain.
     
  5. AnthonyBoscia

    AnthonyBoscia Chieftain

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2010
    Messages:
    1,436
    Originally I was going to have cities represent US bases in Europe, but you can't make them 1-tile and there's no room to place them anyway. Right now I'm using airbases, and preliminary testing shows the AI bringing guys over. I'm trying to optomize conditions in the Atlantic for them to use convoys. One advantage is that the US has all these units at the start, wheras in many WWII scenarios it usually has to build them first.

    The alliances are still open to change. Basically, I'm going to set up the units as they were based historically to the best of my ability, and hit the GO button. Then the balance of play can be adjusted from there. So NATO might be split up, or Warsaw Pact combined, or some other combination depending on what works. The reason I have them as such right now is:
    a) The Warsaw Treaty powers did break away independently, of course, but thankfully without a war
    b) After spending many hours researching these forces, it is still mind-boggling how powerful the Soviet Army really was. If they had the first attack, as they do in this game, I don't think NATO had a prayer of stopping them and the Eastern European powers combined. But all this is open to change as work progresses.
     
  6. RickFGS

    RickFGS Chieftain

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2006
    Messages:
    2,205
    Location:
    Lisboa, Portugal
    Looking forward to see how this turns out, keep it up!
     
  7. Bengal Tiger

    Bengal Tiger Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2010
    Messages:
    1,160
    Location:
    Toronto
    This looks incredible! Hope it turns out well, I'm definitely going to try this when it comes out.
     
  8. Gojira54

    Gojira54 The folly of Man

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2002
    Messages:
    2,152
    Location:
    Monster Island black-sand beaches
    Someone will need to make a unit with a Flock Of Seagulls hairdo... In all seriousness sounds great :)
     
  9. Bengal Tiger

    Bengal Tiger Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2010
    Messages:
    1,160
    Location:
    Toronto
    I have a few suggestions for the civs/map.

    -Put a few U.S. and/or Canadian bases in the Arctic circle(such as Alert at the top of Ellesmere Island. This was a major frontier in the cold war.(Think NATO toops in arctic camo looking through binoculars at Russian troops in arctic camo looking back at you through binoculars:lol:)

    -Instead of putting Sweden and Finland together, maybe put Netherlands and Belgium together. Sweden and Finland are two very different countries. Examples include their language and WW2 affiliation.

    -Denmark should probably have a few cities in Greenland, at least to give them access to the resources that are there.

    -It seems a shame that Cuba plays no role in this so far. (Maybe Egypt could be put in the Arab League to make room). I think it would be interesting to give North America a second front that might divert them from Europe until it's too late...

    -Israel might be included in NATO,if only to preempt the impossibility of the Soviets getting them to declare war on the U.S.
     
  10. smirnoff

    smirnoff Crusader

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2009
    Messages:
    455
    Location:
    Canada
    this is an awesome , Anthony is making a scenario :) , I will try it when it will come out :)
    and if i know things i post them

    Good Luck bud :)
     
  11. AnthonyBoscia

    AnthonyBoscia Chieftain

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2010
    Messages:
    1,436
    Thanks, guys. I'll probably post the map soon if anyone would like to use it for some other purpose. A Flock of Seagulls unit would be totally rad...it will go well with a neon interface.

    They will be there. :) Most likely as outposts, which seems a logical way to represent them. Of course, the Soviets will have them, too.

    I had to get comfortable with the fact that countries were going to be combined and no matter what solution we end up with, there needed to be compromises. Sweden and Finland are/were decidely different, but geographically it makes sense, especially when you see the completed setups. Also, could either of these nations afford to stay unaligned if the other had its neutrality violated?

    I really would like to keep all NATO and Warsaw Pact nations separate, since the game is really about them. That's why Portugal and Spain didn't get combined, even though the Portuguese forces are very small on the scale we're working in.

    But it's all open to change still. We'll keep it in mind.

    They did, and I had to erase them. Along with about 70 other cities. Even with Knuckles' editor, the city limit has been a painful crutch on top of all our other limits. It took a lot of creative geography to get it even manageable. It sucks, but what can you do. So for every city that I add, I'll have to take another away.

    Yeah, I've been thinking the same thing. And the more I think it, the more I want to include them. But again, I'd have to remove a civ and some cities to make it happen. Also, what about the rest of the Carribean? I really like having Egypt separate, though. They had such a unique place in the Middle East in the 80's and I think it's cool to have them on their own. I'm also wary of making any of the 'combo powers' too strong by making them consist of too many nations.

    So, we'll keep Cuba in mind. As you said, they can be a real interesting side note. Imagine Castro's dilemma being stuck between that rock and hard place! But I'm not sure who else I can spare to be eliminated. I sure can't make the Irish part of Great Britain...I'd incur the Wrath for that!

    We're going to have to see how alliances work out in the world of Civ III for this. I'm using what tricks we have (culture groups, favorites gov'ts, etc.) to try to keep crazy things from happening. Fancy Switzerland signing a military alliance with the U.S.S.R. against Canada!

    Thanks for the support and I'll keep you updated as things progress.
     
  12. Samez

    Samez ION GUNNER Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2005
    Messages:
    1,422
    Location:
    center of nowhere
    I thought the maximum city limit was increased with the hacked .exe file? IIRC El Justo plans/planed to add cities to the next version of AOI. But I could as well be wrong and it was about unit limit or something like that which changed with the last version.
    Adding Cuba would be really nice but I see no real need for greenlandish resources. It would either have to be some luxury resource which is "imported" to Denmark or some strategic ones. Both wouls require enables sea or airtrade which will be nasty due to turn times. Bonusresources would be quite unrealistic as no City in Greenland was even close to a big productive city anywhere else on earth during CW....
     
  13. Gojira54

    Gojira54 The folly of Man

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2002
    Messages:
    2,152
    Location:
    Monster Island black-sand beaches
    The hacked exe allows the human player(s) only to build beyond the 512 city limit, but not the AI.
     
  14. Samez

    Samez ION GUNNER Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2005
    Messages:
    1,422
    Location:
    center of nowhere
    So it's not possible to preplace more cities?
     
  15. AnthonyBoscia

    AnthonyBoscia Chieftain

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2010
    Messages:
    1,436
    The Knuckles/Syn editor gives you the ability to build more cities once the game starts, but if you pre-place too many then the game will crash on loading. For this scenario, the limit was 553 cities without a crash. This makes me wonder if that limit is determined by the overall map size.

    Still, 553 makes a big difference over 512. Of course, the player will have to use the special EXE to play the scenario.
     
  16. nick0515

    nick0515 Dad, Librarian, Writer & GNU/Linux User

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2008
    Messages:
    2,384
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    New Zealand
    Anthony this looks really great. I love the level of detail you are putting into this and how you came up with a credibile alternate history backstory.

    Not sure if this is what you meant but be aware that giving detect invisible to aircraft for recon missions doesn't work very well. It only detects invisible units on a single tile you clicked on not on the whole area shown by the recon mission. You probably already know this but just incase you didnt.

    Can't wait to play it.
     
  17. El Justo

    El Justo Chieftain

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2004
    Messages:
    12,945
    Location:
    Southern NJ
    this is a neat project :) always thought of doing some sort of fulda gap type thingy, sort of in this vein.

    re the city patch - it works but there is a limit, i'm told. i did not hit it since i added only about 20-25 more cities to the AoI map.
     
  18. Bengal Tiger

    Bengal Tiger Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2010
    Messages:
    1,160
    Location:
    Toronto
    Could we see some screenshots of major parts of the map, like West German, the middle east, North America, etc?
    Also, out of curiousity, how did you implement Cyprus?
     
  19. AnthonyBoscia

    AnthonyBoscia Chieftain

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2010
    Messages:
    1,436
    Thanks, Nick. Yes, invisibility detection will be limited, but there are a number of land-based rotary and fixed wing assets whose 2-radius field of view can add up to help you spot the enemy. ASW aircraft will also have some nasty short-ranged attacks. You'll have to get your guys out sub-hunting if you want to avoid Soviet torpedo attacks on your convoys or USN missile launches at your Backfire airbases in the Kola Peninsula.

    Thanks, El Justo. The Gap consists of about one sqaure in the map, but the Black Horse Cav will be there waiting.

    I just downloaded your Vietnam scenario; I'd really like to see how you tackled the modern operational-level game, especially in regards to air-land interaction and VP accumulation. It looks great so far, and superbly detailed!

    There's not going to be too much to see for a while. Much of what I am doing now is groundwork. Unlike my Worldwide game, which grew very organically, I am trying to pin down the details for improvements, techs, units, rosters, and civs for this game before committing them to the Biq. So I'd like to hold off until there's more to see.

    But to answer your specific question:

    Spoiler :
     

    Attached Files:

  20. Bengal Tiger

    Bengal Tiger Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2010
    Messages:
    1,160
    Location:
    Toronto
    Looks very nice.
    Although I do recommend Getting rid of Be'er Sheva(which is in the middle of the desert) and putting in Eilat on the Red Sea. Aqaba would have to be moved a smidge, though.
     

Share This Page