Alternative Map for DOC

[Leoreth]

There is little point to a 4000 BC scenario, the difference is only ten turns on normal. I chose 250 BC over 300 BC because by then the Parthians have retaken Persia, and Rome and Carthage can start in open conflict.

 

[Steb]

There is little point to a 4000 BC scenario, the difference is only ten turns on normal. I chose 250 BC over 300 BC because by then the Parthians have retaken Persia, and Rome and Carthage can start in open conflict.

The Parthians conquered the bulk of Iran around 140 BC, not 250 BC, although they did found their empire in the 240s BC in Parthia (northern Iran). There doesn't seem to be that many geopolitical differences between 300 BC and 250 BC.

 

[Leoreth]

Huh, did I look that up wrong? In that case it might as well be 300 BC.

 

[1SDANi]

There is little point to a 4000 BC scenario, the difference is only ten turns on normal.

Are you kidding? 10 turns is HUGE for 3000 BC civs! The starting worker takes 14 turns alone, THAT'S 2/3 FREE

 

[Bautos42]

Maybe the 1700 AD scenario could be moved to something like 1750 AD or 1770 AD, as the scenario is mostly there for playing the American civs, which would decrease the loading times for all of them. A 1400 AD or 1500 AD scenario would then nicely fill the gap between those two.

 

[BarbarianX]

Maybe the 1700 AD scenario could be moved to something like 1750 AD or 1770 AD, as the scenario is mostly there for playing the American civs, which would decrease the loading times for all of them. A 1400 AD or 1500 AD scenario would then nicely fill the gap between those two.

That could be an interesting idea, since it would basically start with the American Revolution ongoing, so US would be there already. As for the latter part, since a Turkic civ might be added, 1400 would allow for the Timurids to be present (as the Turkic civ).

 

[Leoreth]

1444 AD?

 

[Orbii]

Maybe the 1700 AD scenario could be moved to something like 1750 AD or 1770 AD, as the scenario is mostly there for playing the American civs, which would decrease the loading times for all of them. A 1400 AD or 1500 AD scenario would then nicely fill the gap between those two.

Would just like to note that 1700AD is a great date for Prussia, who loses no turns relative to 600 AD while getting a nice controlled start. I think 1750/1770 has merit too, but that date winds up shafting Prussia a bit, just like 600 AD does with Japan and Vikings relative to 3000 BC.

 

[Zaddy]

What I would add is maybe a 250 BC scenario (to jump start the classical era and remove some of the randomness of the early game) and a 1500 AD scenario (to skip the medieval era but without having colonisation of the New World locked in). I do not see the appeal of late game scenarios and they are comparatively much more work.

I know I would really love a late game scenario and would play it often. but I'm probably in a distinct minority.

 

[Steb]

I think many would enjoy a 1900 or 1939 scenario, including myself. But it's true that it'd be a lot of work, and it may be true that the effort required outweighs the benefits of having such a scenario. Regardless, since Leoreth isn't interested, someone would need to take on the project (or it could be a group effort).

 

[soul-breathing]

I think many would enjoy a 1900 or 1939 scenario, including myself. But it's true that it'd be a lot of work, and it may be true that the effort required outweighs the benefits of having such a scenario. Regardless, since Leoreth isn't interested, someone would need to take on the project (or it could be a group effort).

I think the most important problem of modern era scenerio is game speed. For example, during 1939 to 1945, there were many events taking place, but even in Marathon speed, there are only 12 turns, it's too short.

 

[AtlantaMarty]

There is little point to a 4000 BC scenario.

Agreed, but the 600 AD should be pushed back to 500 AD, to give the Byzantines and Japanese a little more time.

 

[Darnokthemage]

A 1500 AD scenario would be perfect if a Swedish civ is added, It would give the Danish Kalmar Union a big challange.

 

[Bautos42]

Would just like to note that 1700AD is a great date for Prussia, who loses no turns relative to 600 AD while getting a nice controlled start. I think 1750/1770 has merit too, but that date winds up shafting Prussia a bit, just like 600 AD does with Japan and Vikings relative to 3000 BC.

As far as I know, the 1700 AD Scenario was never meant for a Prussian start. I think many people argue that the lack of flips makes the 1700 AD far more suboptimal for Prussia. Furthermore, a 1400 AD or 1500 AD start would be quite suitable in order to start as Prussia.

 

[Imperator Knoedel]

The long term goal is obviously to have one scenario per civ.

 

[1SDANi]

The long term goal is obviously to have one scenario per civ.

To be fair, I'd just like each scenario to be before each of the major wave of civs.

• 3000 BC - 65 AD Egypt - Maya
  
• 330 - 1390 AD Byzantines - Congo
• 1700 - 2020 AD Prussia - Endgame

The only civs that don't fall into these waves are the Dutch and Merijn's Sweden, though one could just include them in wave 2.

Using the current 3 scenario system, I'd suggest the following: 3000 BC, 300 AD, and anytime between 1600 AD and a couple turns before 1700 AD. This way it doesn't start immediately upon the birth of the first civ in the wave, meaning we avoid the Prussia issue, and we don't cut a wave in two, avoiding the Byzantine/Japan/Viking issue

 

[BarbarianX]

Where can I download the new map for testing and making suggestions by the way?

 

[Edmund Ironside]

What you need to do is start it at 4000 BC, have the Sumerians, Egyptians and Harrapans start, set the game speed to marathon, and then sit back and enjoy the rise of the first civilizations. Who's with me? (Crickets chirp).
Worth a shot, I know I am fighting a losing battle on this one!

I picked 300 BC as another possible scenario start as that was just before the Pyrrhic and Punic Wars, which really marked the rise of Rome.

If you are going to insist on starting the mod at 3000 BC maybe you should call it "some time after the Dawn of Civilization!"
I still love the mod though.

 

[Leoreth]

I live at 51°N, I'm used to a longer dawn.

 

[citis]

To be fair, I'd just like each scenario to be before each of the major wave of civs.

• 3000 BC - 65 AD Egypt - Maya
  
• 330 - 1390 AD Byzantines - Congo
• 1700 - 2020 AD Prussia - Endgame

The only civs that don't fall into these waves are the Dutch and Merijn's Sweden, though one could just include them in wave 2.

Using the current 3 scenario system, I'd suggest the following: 3000 BC, 300 AD, and anytime between 1600 AD and a couple turns before 1700 AD. This way it doesn't start immediately upon the birth of the first civ in the wave, meaning we avoid the Prussia issue, and we don't cut a wave in two, avoiding the Byzantine/Japan/Viking issue

Wish me luck in bugfixing and maybe I can deliver a 300AD scenario.