An Ancient India Scenario

[Blue Monkey]

Hope you can take this in the spirit with which it's intended:

Unfortunately I don't know much about ancient Indian religions.

After that, making specific suggestions about what to include in the scenario doesn't make sense. Once those who know decide what they want then suggestions about how to implement them in the game engine would be greatly appreciated - regardless of any cultural knowledge or lack thereof.

Let's extrapolate from the Total War series for the Polytheists: ...

Extrapolating how to model something in C3C based on TW adds a whole new layer of unreality when not backed by knowledge/research of the cultures and era in question.

... what if there's TWO improvements listed as Spaceship Parts with the same number assigned to them in the editor? Does that create and and/or condition? Does the game crash? Can someone check?

This is the kind of question that needs to be asked in a dedicated thread rather than here.

Please continue to follow this thread and contribute your observations and considered ideas. It's not necessary to spend the hours and days we do reading books and doing on line research to ground this scenario with some authenticity. OTOH investing some small amount of time learning about Asoka & his milieu will most likely help focus your brainstorming & earn your good ideas more of the consideration they deserve.

 

[7ronin]

Blue: I concur with the name changes and will make the necessary corrections. I will also delete the trade civs. I agree with your cultural assignments.

If I'm reading Majumdar* correctly, the Sunga were a follow on dynasty to the Mauryas. Part of the Sunga red area during the scenario period was occupied by unidentified warlike tribes who hid out in the large tropical rain forest between Maghada and Kalinga. Malwa is just a region of Avanti which formed the seat of power of the Saka dynasty which succeeded in Avanti in the First Century A.D. Kosala goes back in. Matsya seems to have disappeared by the beginning of the 4th Century B.C.E. The western red area was largely inhospitable terrain occupied by Gedrosia. We can put Gedrosia in if you wish. I left them out to make things easier for the Macedonians.

To fill up some of the empty areas we will, as I mentioned earlier, give Nanda additional cities but we will make Nanda weak. On the map, so to speak, Nanda ruled a very large area but their empire was in its dying throws.

Tak:

Hinduism is polytheistic. Some wag described it as the religion of a thousand gods where you pick and choose the one(s) you like. Ancient Hindu India was a warlike society which extolled war as an instrument of state policy. This is reflected in some of the wonders and improvements which demonstrate the huge standing armies and the elaborate supporting infrastructure which was not matched in the West until the Napoleonic era. Indeed, the two greatest epics of Hindu literature, the Mahabharata and the Ramayana are stories of war between gods and men on one side and gods and men on the other. Early Buddhism was pacifist in nature. Legend tells us that Ashoka renounced war and became a Buddhist because he was distraught over the destruction he had unleashed on the Kingdom of Kalinga. There are no warrior Buddhist monks in India.

So far there are specific Hindu, Jain, and Buddhist wonders. If you take a look at the wonders you will see that many of your suggestions are reflected in what the wonders do. You may also note that by converting to Buddhism you gain a cultural advantage over your opponents. Several Buddhist wonders connected with the life of the Buddha are pre-placed.

The game as far as I know is limited to one spaceship race. You are welcome to fool around with the editor and see if more than one is possible. Or you might ask the question in the main Creation and Customization thread.

*I ordered my copy from the States and it's still musty.

 

[Blue Monkey]

If I'm reading Majumdar* correctly, the Sunga were a follow on dynasty to the Mauryas. Part of the Sunga red area during the scenario period was occupied by unidentified warlike tribes who hid out in the large tropical rain forest between Maghada and Kalinga. Malwa is just a region of Avanti which formed the seat of power of the Saka dynasty which succeeded in Avanti in the First Century A.D. Kosala goes back in. Matsya seems to have disappeared by the beginning of the 4th Century B.C.E. The western red area was largely inhospitable terrain occupied by Gedrosia. We can put Gedrosia in if you wish. I left them out to make things easier for the Macedonians.

Names are tricky. Before the Mughals nobody was much interested in keeping accurate historical records. Tribes turn into kingdoms. Branches of dynasties rule one part of the subcontinent, disappear completely, then show up as rulers of a kingdom on the opposite side of the map. The same "country" changes names completely depending on who's on the throne. In some cases regional names may make better choices than a particular dynasty.

My primary concern was the extent of open area, not who in particular is there. If needed I'll do the research to find something appropriate to the era.

To fill up some of the empty areas we will, as I mentioned earlier, give Nanda additional cities but we will make Nanda weak. On the map, so to speak, Nanda ruled a very large area but their empire was in its dying throws.

The question is how to give them a large area and make them weak. I'm suspicious of making a civ weak. Especially to the point of making them predictably defeatable. Essentially this means making them unplayable.

RFRE is only playable as Rome. And getting that scenario playable took years of intensive work on the game engine side, let alone all the historical research. It takes study just to play it. And the result is an exercise in historical simulation rather than a 4X game. There's more of a tech line than a tech tree. There's only one real route to victory. Enjoyable, but radically different from playing a C3 scenario with a multiplicity of choices.

A fundamental question needs to be asked. Do you want to reproduce the historic events of Asoka's reign, or set initial conditions and let players work for whatever outcome they desire?

One of the funnest things I've done with C3C is tweak the Mughals scenario to make the Pirates a playable faction. Nearly impossible to win, but a lot of fun being a spoiler. They were fun to the point that I didn't care about the ostensible victory conditions. The point is that the scenario was designed to make them unplayable. Yet playing them let me see the scenario from a completely different perspective that made my play as other civs more effective by changing my shorter term strategic goals. That was when I really shifted from being a player who made graphics for modders to thinking and creating as a modder.

There are no warrior Buddhist monks.

In India. The Bodhisattva Warriors is pretty enlightening about Bodhidharma's influence on the Shaolins and their ilk.

 

[7ronin]

Blue: You raise an excellent point: the issue of historicity vs playability and enjoyment. History has never been fair. Since the dawn of time nations have started out unequal in every possible way. If we keep to the historical record then some civs will come up short and never have a chance of winning. If we level the playing field then we move into an area where there are historically impossible outcomes. Don't forget that Chandragupta conquered the Nanda Empire in less that five years. I think we can balance things so that Nanda has a chance without compromising the edge inherent in some of the other civs. Hegemon does this in the way that it allocates resources and units. If it turns out in testing that this was a bad idea we can always change it.

So, "Do you want to reproduce the historic events of Asoka's reign, or set initial conditions and let players work for whatever outcome they desire?" I would describe my position as sixty-forty. Then again, I might be tempted to go for the latter. It's a difficult question. I wonder what Rambuchan thinks.

 

[Takhisis]

Hope you can take this in the spirit with which it's intended <snipped>

I thought we were brainstorming&#8230;?

Please continue to follow this thread and contribute your observations and considered ideas. It's not necessary to spend the hours and days we do reading books and doing on line research to ground this scenario with some authenticity. OTOH investing some small amount of time learning about Asoka & his milieu will most likely help focus your brainstorming & earn your good ideas more of the consideration they deserve.

Names are tricky. Before the Mughals nobody was much interested in keeping accurate historical records. Tribes turn into kingdoms. Branches of dynasties rule one part of the subcontinent, disappear completely, then show up as rulers of a kingdom on the opposite side of the map. The same "country" changes names completely depending on who's on the throne. In some cases regional names may make better choices than a particular dynasty.

My primary concern was the extent of open area, not who in particular is there. If needed I'll do the research to find something appropriate to the era.

The question is how to give them a large area and make them weak. I'm suspicious of making a civ weak. Especially to the point of making them predictably defeatable. Essentially this means making them unplayable.

RFRE is only playable as Rome. And getting that scenario playable took years of intensive work on the game engine side, let alone all the historical research. It takes study just to play it. And the result is an exercise in historical simulation rather than a 4X game. There's more of a tech line than a tech tree. There's only one real route to victory. Enjoyable, but radically different from playing a C3 scenario with a multiplicity of choices.

A fundamental question needs to be asked. Do you want to reproduce the historic events of Asoka's reign, or set initial conditions and let players work for whatever outcome they desire?

One of the funnest things I've done with C3C is tweak the Mughals scenario to make the Pirates a playable faction. Nearly impossible to win, but a lot of fun being a spoiler. They were fun to the point that I didn't care about the ostensible victory conditions. The point is that the scenario was designed to make them unplayable. Yet playing them let me see the scenario from a completely different perspective that made my play as other civs more effective by changing my shorter term strategic goals. That was when I really shifted from being a player who made graphics for modders to thinking and creating as a modder.

If it's just an Asoka/Maurya campaign then religion stays as the conversion to Buddhism was very important.

I agree with most of that post but 7ronin does have a point about history never being fair. Some civs should just be doomed to failure, or at least only winnable by one hell of a player. There wouldn't be much point in it if everyone got five cities and three workers to start with and similar paths, eh?

In India. The Bodhisattva Warriors is pretty enlightening about Bodhidharma's influence on the Shaolins and their ilk.

Isn't Boddhidarma a Chinese Buddhist?


P.S. has CFC timed out for anyone else tonight? I should have been posting this half an hour ago.

 

[Blue Monkey]

There wouldn't be much point in it if everyone got five cities and three workers to start with and similar paths, eh?

Play TAM multiple times as a variety of civs, then post your answer.

Isn't Boddhidarma a Chinese Buddhist?

Didn't they used to do this thing in universities called research? Even reading the page at Amazon.com would be enough to get an answer.

 

[7ronin]

Ah, I'm caught between the Scylla of historical accuracy and the Charybdis of playability. What to do? I suppose if you want congruent history you are better off going to the library. Then too, I want people to play this game and enjoy it. I suppose there's nothing worse than playing a civ for a day or two and then finding out that you can't win. Let's try it your way. Find me two civs to fit Malwa and Sunga which are roughly contemporaneous (Malway and Sunga?) and I'll give it a try. Psst: don't forget a leader and a capital. We can treat these two as breakaway provinces of Nanda (what we are doing with Maghada) and still be reasonably accurate historically.

 

[7ronin]

List of civs updated here (post #46) - Jan 3, 2012

 

[Blue Monkey]

Find me two civs to fit Malwa and Sunga which are roughly contemporaneous (Malway and Sunga?) and I'll give it a try. Psst: don't forget a leader and a capital.

Will do. In the mean time use those names as place holders.

List of civs updated here (post #46) - Jan 3, 2012

Are Malway & Sunga the two additions? It's helpful to indicate what's changed - in the announcing post if not in the one edited.

I forgot in the map post to ask why you changed Bactria to Balika. Bactria seems more in keeping with the naming standard - Hellene names for Hellene civs.

Ligmikya as leader of Zhang Zhung is anachronistic. Ruled in the 8th c. CE - only about 1000 years in the future.

Still have Gangaridae for the Bengali civ. Must be an excellent reason to use the Hellene's name for them rather than the Indian.

In general it's more appropriate to use Raja rather than King. Same reason - it's the Indian appellation.

 

[7ronin]

Will do. In the mean time use those names as place holders.
Are Malway & Sunga the two additions? It's helpful to indicate what's changed - in the announcing post if not in the one edited.

The two additions are Gedrosia and Zhang Zhung. I'll follow your suggestion in future updates. I also deleted the four trade civs.

I forgot in the map post to ask why you changed Bactria to Balika. Bactria seems more in keeping with the naming standard - Hellene names for Hellene civs.

I thought we were doing everything from the Indian perspective. We did change Alexander to Sikander. I can change it back if you wish (and change Sikander as well).

Ligmikya as leader of Zhang Zhung is anachronistic. Ruled in the 8th c. CE - only about 1000 years in the future.

Perhaps he used the Steam Punk scenario time machine? I was under the impression that Ligmikya was a generic title rather than the name of an actual person. If you have a name we can go with it.

Still have Gangaridae for the Bengali civ. Must be an excellent reason to use the Hellene's name for them rather than the Indian.

Too many lists; too little time. I'll change it.

In general it's more appropriate to use Raja rather than King. Same reason - it's the Indian appellation.

I agree. I will make the corrections.

Thanks for keeping a weather eye out. I appreciate someone in the know watching my back.

 

[7ronin]

Update to the list of civs here (post #46) - Jan 3, 2012

Major changes:
1. Title of King changed to Raja where appearing.
2. Changed name of civ Gangaridai to Gangarashtra.
3. Changed name of civ Balika to Bactria.

 

[Blue Monkey]

• There 26 civs in the list you had that I worked from to make the culture groups map.
• The culture groups map also has 26 civs listed.
• The four "trade civs" were removed. 26 - 4 = 22
• Zhang Zhung is not new. It's a renaming of Tibet - which was already on the list.
• Malwa & Sunga are brought back into the set. 22 + 2 = 24
• Gedrosia was added (when did that happen - I missed the memo). 24 + 1 = 25
• The current version of the list in post #46 shows 24 civs.

I'm confused. I don't know whether to go by the discussion or by the updated list. Some civ that was discussed and approved is not on the list. I suspect (but can't be sure) that some civ is still left out, as well.

 

[Takhisis]

Play TAM multiple times as a variety of civs, then post your answer.

I've already done that. Stop treating me like an idiot.

I don't like your tone. I don't like your attitude, your previous accusations and insults already speak badly of you. I don't know what mortal offense I'm supposed to have inflicted on you. But I'm not even going to bother answering you anymore. There's no point.

 

[Blue Monkey]

Find me two civs to fit Malwa and Sunga which are roughly contemporaneous (Malway and Sunga?) and I'll give it a try. Psst: don't forget a leader and a capital.

In addition I've got a couple books requested from the library that may help with similar info for the Monyul & Tibetan civ(s).

 

[7ronin]

• There 26 civs in the list you had that I worked from to make the culture groups map.
• The culture groups map also has 26 civs listed.
• The four "trade civs" were removed. 26 - 4 = 22
• Zhang Zhung is not new. It's a renaming of Tibet - which was already on the list.
• Malwa & Sunga are brought back into the set. 22 + 2 = 24
• Gedrosia was added (when did that happen - I missed the memo). 24 + 1 = 25
• The current version of the list in post #46 shows 24 civs.

I'm confused. I don't know whether to go by the discussion or by the updated list. Some civ that was discussed and approved is not on the list. I suspect (but can't be sure) that some civ is still left out, as well.

Mea culpa, mea culpa, maxima mea culpa.
I think the confusion comes from my updating the primary civ list and not the attribute list. I was holding off on the latter until we had some other things nailed down. I think also at one point we were thinking originally about three vice one Tibetan civ. Post #46 is correct with one exception: I had not yet gotten around to adding Malwa and Sunga following my ephiphany.

Here's a quick recap: differences from the culture map are bracketed:

Bactria, Kamboja, Aracosia, Macedonia, [Gedrosia] sub total 5
Gandhara, Paurava, Surashtra sub total 3
Nanda, Magadha, Gangarashtra, Kalinga, Avanti, [Kosala] sub total 6
Zhang Zhung, Shakya, Malla, Kirat, Monyul sub total 5
Vidarbha, Chera, Chola, Pandya, Anuradhapura sub total 5
Total 24
add Malwa and Sunga
Grand total 26

One request: substitute Matsya for Sunga. This fills up all your empty areas. Sunga should be occupied by barbarian tribes. Matsya and Malway need to be assigned to culture groups.

When you're not busy please take a look at the civ attributes. I've tried to mix it up the way you like.

 

[Blue Monkey]

A really quick look at some maps suggests that Gedrosia goes somewhere in the Southern red swathe between the coast & the interior desert. Balochistan (the modern equivalent) covers that whole area. Am I in the ball park?

My first thought is to put both Matsya & Malwa into the Western group. That would give it parity with the other groups. Does Kosala in the Central group - another Gangetic civ - make sense? That's my instinct.

For the next go-round on a posted map I'll try to put a star or something for capital locations. & attach a larger version of the map for more detailed consideration of terrain access by each civ. This sort of work actually helps thinking about the more detailed terrain placement with the actual biq map.

A central plateau full of barbarians makes sense. Barbarian units can be initially placed to roam around and cause mischief - reinforcing the initial difficulty settling there.

I'll be busy forever so I'll go ahead and look at the attributes list now.

 

[7ronin]

A really quick look at some maps suggests that Gedrosia goes somewhere in the Southern red swathe between the coast & the interior desert. Balochistan (the modern equivalent) covers that whole area. Am I in the ball park?

Dead center.

My first thought is to put both Matsya & Malwa into the Western group. That would give it parity with the other groups. Does Kosala in the Central group - another Gangetic civ - make sense? That's my instinct.

Sounds good - I agree.

For the next go-round on a posted map I'll try to put a star or something for capital locations. & attach a larger version of the map for more detailed consideration of terrain access by each civ. This sort of work actually helps thinking about the more detailed terrain placement with the actual biq map.

On post #46 I have identified the modern names or locations of some of the capital cities. You should be able to get pretty close to the actual locations. Most of the Gangetic capitals (duh) were I think located on the Ganges.

A central plateau full of barbarians makes sense. Barbarian units can be initially placed to roam around and cause mischief - reinforcing the initial difficulty settling there.

Plus they are hiding out in that huge swath of tropical rain forest.

I'll be busy forever so I'll go ahead and look at the attributes list now.

Don't forget that some of the civs aren't on the attributes list. You will note that there are some expansionist, religious, seafaring, and commercial threads running through the list. Oher than that, I tried to provide some variety. Some civs are well endowed; some aren't.

We are moving forward!

 

[Blue Monkey]

There's actually quite a mix of terrain on the Deccan Plateau. From forests to thorny scrub.

 

[7ronin]

@Blue

If you are planning to make the initial placement of cities on the map, please enter the civs into the editor in alphabetical order.

It makes a number of tasks easier. Also, if you do it alphabetically in the editor, the list of civs will also show up on the initial "select a civ" screen in alphabetical order.

 

[Blue Monkey]

@Blue

If you are planning to make the initial placement of cities on the map, please enter the civs into the editor in alphabetical order.

Only meant putting a star or something on the posted images. Not ready (at all) to touch anything other than terrain in the editor.