Coming Soon: Alexander the Great Scenario

[realn]

Oh I didn’t know that. There were picture here and there and I was new to this. I had the impression that you had so many ideas yet only one complete. Then I saw another unit. Then another. And then heard something about elfstorm helping. Your last post just cleared everything up. I will now straighten it up and add description. By the way I love your scythe chariot. That is one unique unit.

NOTE: I have a book that I got from the library “Atlas of Classical History” by Richard J.A. Talbert and it has some good cities and such and locations. One thing is that it had Alexander’s army formation and Persians at Gaugamela, River Granicus, Issus, and River Hydaspes. Now this was a lot of unit names that I have no idea what they are. Alexander has smaller formations with many different units. Persia has Cavalry, Cavalry and a few Chariots, Elephants in big clumps.

Battle at Gaugamela. 331 BC

PERSIAN:
CAVALRY: come from: Bactria(leading cavalry) Parthians(Second), Sacea, Tapurians, Hyrcanians, Albanians, Sacesinians, Dahae, Arachosians, Susians, Persians, Cadusian. Just to give the variety.
INFANTRY: this was reserved and in the back: Babylonians, Uxians, Sitacenians, Red Sea men, Syrians, Mesopotamians, Medes.
UNIQUE: Needed description (with Darius III): “Kinsman” melophoroi, Indians, ‘transplanted Carians’, Mardian Archers, Greek Mercenaries.
That was it. He had some elephants and chariots in front line.

ALEXANDER:
CAVALRY: Mercenary, Companion(with Alexander), Thessalian Cavalry, Greek, Odrysian.
INFANTRY: Mercenary, Thracian Archers, Cretan Archers, Hypapists and Phalanx bridges(2 lines).
??INFANTRY??: Prodromoi, Paeonians, Agrianians.

This was just that one battle. There was quite a few units. Since I cant reproduce in any form I could maybe mail a picture to some people. I don’t think anyone should get it since it is only that few pages that have Alexander’s campaigns. But is you find it at your library then go ahead. No need to buy it now!

 

[elfstorm]

If you must include Thessaly I believe Onomarchus is your best bet as leader. He commanded Phocion forces well and in 353 he inflicted a rare defeat upon Philip.

Philip rallied his men after the battle by claiming that he wasn't fleeing, but, like a ram, was retreating ni order to butt harder next time.

Thessaly was added to Philip's empire in 352 so I don't think they need be included as an independant force.

 

[Exsanguination]

Originally posted by elfstorm
Thessaly was added to Philip's empire in 352 so I don't think they need be included as an independant force.

I have a bad memory, especially when it comes to Philip. I read earlier that Thrace was also under control? For some reason I find that hard to believe since Thrace was so large (it stretched way north). Some, but not all. If Thessaly was subjugated, it is out.

I realized earlier that if I include more than 16 civs, I will have to modify diplomacy.txt, and I don't want to. That is way too tedious. So, by the looks of it Thessaly and Ethiopia are out. However - Kryten - we still need the Thessaly resource icon since Thessalian units still exist.

 

[elfstorm]

Originally posted by Exsanguination


I have a bad memory, especially when it comes to Philip. I read earlier that Thrace was also under control? For some reason I find that hard to believe since Thrace was so large (it stretched way north). Some, but not all. If Thessaly was subjugated, it is out.

Philip did indeed become ruler of all Thrace.

People didn't have such strong feelings of nationalism back then. So with the King of Thrace dead, who was going to argue with a guy like philip?

 

[Exsanguination]

Originally posted by Exsanguination


I have a bad memory, especially when it comes to Philip. I read earlier that Thrace was also under control? For some reason I find that hard to believe since Thrace was so large (it stretched way north). Some, but not all. If Thessaly was subjugated, it is out.

I retract my statement. I've had three sources agree that Thrace was entirely under Philip's control, but Thessaly was only ALLIED with Philip (not part of Macedon). Essentially Philip could have taken over Thessaly, but didn't. Alexander did, wihtout force of course.

So as it stands, Thrace and Ethiopia are out.

EDIT: Ethiopia is definetely out, I'm not making a map that big. I did not realize northern Africa stretched that far beyond the Mediterranean . I'm still inclined to keep Crete as part of Sparta (see below), leaving one spot open. Also, I'm thinking of removing Illyria and putting it in as a Frontier Tribe (most sources relate the Illyrians to the Getae/Triballians/Agrianians), giving us 14 civs (which I am content with). Discuss!

I saw a map that showed Crete as part of the Greek "neutral", or Spartan, states. Perhaps we could take out Crete and make that island part of Sparta? It would give Sparta an extra edge, so it wouldn't be conquered so easily.

Thessaly is still in.

Also, good news: today I went to the college library and picked up a bunch of books on Macedon and Alexander. Now I've got some very detailed maps of Philip's Macedon, Alexander's Macedon, pre-Alexander Greece/Mediterranean, plus several maps of Alexander's route. I've now also got the locations of many Macedonian cities, as well as detailed info on the big metropolises.

 

[Exsanguination]

Map Links:

1 2 3

Current map stats (just started!):

160x100
Large Map rules except 40 city corruption limit

And thats it. I'm going east to west, cause I wanna. It will stretch from east-most Greece to mid-India, and from the northern tip of the black sea down to about 23 degrees north latitude (cant find any geographical barriers/points I could use).

 

[Mongoloid Cow]

I reckon you should have Sparta include any Greek neutral states, like Crete as you said. Sparta needs to be bigger - just one city would make it far too weak.

 

[Exsanguination]

Edit on Map Size: it will be 160x90. Take a look at this map:

Take the dimensions - with a 160 width a height of 90 it works best (I resized it slightly with PS6 - it comes out to 160x85, and I added a bit of room for error).

I am going through VERY painstakingly to make this map as accurate (to the map above) as possible. When I am done copying that map I shall look at exact regional maps, and make the necessary adjustments. After that, it's terrain and resource placement.

I will post screenshots of my progress as I get further and furhter into the map. Currently I am working towards the Persian Gulf, and have in essence finished the Indian region (nothing north of it).

MC - yea, Sparta will be MUCH more than Sparta the city, it will have Crete, all or Greece south of it, and a very powerful (not necessarily numerous) army.


And, take time to check out my new website I knocked up today! http://www.geocities.com/ex_civ3

 

[elfstorm]

I still think you should keep Thessaly out of the scenario. They never gave Alexander any trouble and contributed large numbers of cavalry to his army. There should definately be a Thessaly resource though.

Crete being part of Sparta sounds good. Crete never really did anything independantly from Persian or Spartan policy.

I still think you need to include Cyrene. They were a nation of Greek settlers and therefore of great interest to Alexander. Also if you look at your map which you posted up - look for Sparta and the Peloponese, then look at the part of Africa directly below it: thats Cyrene.

They did meet with Alexander and submit (sign peace treaty, whatever you call it), indeed I've seen a number of maps which include Cyrene as part of Alexanders empire.

 

[Kryten]

I like the map Exsanguination.

Question: do you still need those 'physical' world maps with the major rivers & montains on them from the Encarta Reference Library? If so, then let me know.

And I agree with elfstorm about Thessaly. Alexander becomes king of Macedon in 336 BC, spends the next two years crushing revolts in Thrace/Illyria/Thebes, then zips off to Asia in 334 BC. So Thessaly never really give him much trouble (and he has to march through it to reach Thebes anyway).
This could be simulated by having one Thracian, one Illyrian and one Greek city independant, each with a relatively weak garrison, at the start of the scenario. But will Alexander get a bad reputation if he wipes out these 'one city civilizations', which may effect his future culture-flips and diplomacy?
Alternatively, you could start the scenario in 334 BC and assume that all this has ready happened.

But I'm not sure that I agree with adding Cyrene (or Carthage and Italy for matter). These are after all just diplomatic side-shows. Cyrene could be just another city that is dependant upon Aegyptus, and would join or culture-flip to Alexander along with the rest of the Egyptian cities. Or maybe even left off-map altogether.

Another Question: will the player be able to control the Persians instead of Alexander? There is something about controlling and trying to hold together a dying empire that appeals to me (must be because I'm British! ). If so then it might be a good idea to start the Persian version in 334 BC with Alexander already over the Bosporus, because the AI is not very good at seaborne invasions. Just a thought.
(Of course there was the 10,000 foot & 1,000 horse Macedonian/mercenary expeditionary force already in Asia Minor at the time of Philips' death to be taken into consideration as well)

 

[Exsanguination]

Originally posted by Kryten
Question: do you still need those 'physical' world maps with the major rivers & montains on them from the Encarta Reference Library? If so, then let me know.

Yes, my Encarta CD is acting really strange... it says I'm missing about 50 files.

And I agree with elfstorm about Thessaly. Alexander becomes king of Macedon in 336 BC, spends the next two years crushing revolts in Thrace/Illyria/Thebes, then zips off to Asia in 334 BC. So Thessaly never really give him much trouble (and he has to march through it to reach Thebes anyway).
This could be simulated by having one Thracian, one Illyrian and one Greek city independant, each with a relatively weak garrison, at the start of the scenario. But will Alexander get a bad reputation if he wipes out these 'one city civilizations', which may effect his future culture-flips and diplomacy?

Ah yes, but I am including Illyria and the Getae and such am I not? It wouldn't be fair to Thessaly to include them but but not it now would it? Seriously, I'll think about it. Thessaly was a huge HUGE contributor to ALexander's campaign and leaving them out seems just wrong.

Alternatively, you could start the scenario in 334 BC and assume that all this has ready happened.

Well, actually, thanks to Firaxis the scenario will start in 4000 BC. But the events will be shaped to what it was like in 336 BC.

Another Question: will the player be able to control the Persians instead of Alexander? There is something about controlling and trying to hold together a dying empire that appeals to me (must be because I'm British! ). If so then it might be a good idea to start the Persian version in 334 BC with Alexander already over the Bosporus, because the AI is not very good at seaborne invasions. Just a thought.
(Of course there was the 10,000 foot & 1,000 horse Macedonian/mercenary expeditionary force already in Asia Minor at the time of Philips' death to be taken into consideration as well)

- you didn't think I'd leave Persia out did you? In fact, ALL the civs will be playable, but how much fun that will be will be debatable. The real contenders are Macedon and Persia.

And since the scenario editor has been released I've found a couple problems which will greatly affect this scenario.

1) NO DIPLOMACY. Enough said.

2) We CANNOT adjust how much of the world each civ sees. At the beginning each civ ca only see past its territory one square. However, don't fret, I am playing with the FoW to see if I can fix this. It will be extremely tedious though. I just need Gramphos to release a working 1.29-compatible C3MT.

3) We cannot adjust the dates. The scenario will start in 4000 BC.

 

[Exsanguination]

Here is the minimap at exactly halfway through the x-axis. I haven't filled in the northern parts yet cause there is no shape to them and that would waste time at the present.

 

[Kryten]

Ok matey. I'll make a bundle of 'physical' maps. I won't make them too small scale, because I assume you're only interested in the major rivers, not all their thousands of tiny tributaries.

As for the scenario editor problems....

1) No Diplomacy: yes....this is a bit of a bugger! No ideas I'm afraid.

2) Map Visibility/FoW: you've probably already thought of this, but you yourself could play the first turn, trade maps with Persia, then save the game, and everybody then starts their scenario from this.
On the other hand, I quite like the idea that Alexander cannot see the whole map. I think that it adds to the mystery of "Alexander the Great, spreading the boundaries of the 'civilized' world, leading his army into far off unknown lands...."

3) Scenario Dates: well.....some time ago I did suggest something. You rejected it at the time, but I'll offer it again just in case you've changed your mind :-
If we can't show the correct dates, then why show ANY dates!
This also adds to the mystery of the game; how long is left before the end of the scenario and old Alex kicks the bucket?

"Guess the date competition!!!". What is the date in the following game?

 

[Exsanguination]

mmm...

Actually, I never thought of the map trading idea. That would work - the reason I don't want Alexander to know only of his domains is because in reality he knew about Persia/Egypt/Greece. He did not know about the Gedrosian Desert, Indus Valley, India, China, etc.

Press F5 and I'll know what the date is . Really, that may be a good idea. I'm doing a lot of playing around, but so far my labors have been entirely fruitless.

And, here is update #2 on the map:

 

[Exsanguination]

I'm almost done with the outline. I have one question: Should I make the Bosphorus and Dardanelles rivers or coastals inlets? I'm not sure whether Alexander needed ships to cross the Bosphorus (I think it was the Bosphorus), so I can't make a decision. Any input?

 

[Kryten]

Oh, this is a hard one!

From a game-play point of view, I'd say make it a river. This would allow an AI controlled Alexander to cross into Asia Minor without ships (because we all know that the AI is not much good at seaborne landing). It means that ships won't be able to move from the Aegean Sea to the Euxine (or Black Sea), but no real naval activity happened in the Euxine during Alexanders' conquests.

But from an historical point of view, the Hellespont (Bosporus/Dardanelles) should be a sea. To quote from Arrian's "The Campaigns of Alexnder":-
"The task of getting the mounted troops and most of the infantry across the Hellespont from Sestus to Abydos was entrusted to Parmenio, and the crossing was carried out in 160 triremes and a large number of merchant vessels. It is generally believed that Alexander sailed from Elaeus to the Achaean harbour (NW of Troy near Cape Sigeium), himself at the helm of admirals ship..."
It would be historically correct, and give a reason for Alexander's anti Persian fleet strategy, if it was a sea.
And those 11,000 troops already in Asia Minor could be the garrison of the city of Abydos, thus giving an AI or player controlled Alexander an already established bridgehead, with a harbour.

Originally posted by Exsanguination
Press F5 and I'll know what the date is .

Not any more .....

 

[Exsanguination]

Kryten, you're a sly one.

I guess there is something I must stress for this scenario: I wish to make it a historical scenario, rather than an arcade-style scenario. What do I mean? I shall make no acquaitances to "easier" gameplay unless not doing so would render the situation impossible/much too tedious. In this case, the straits shall be straits, not rivers (esp. since he used 160 galleys!!).

Oh well, I gotta study for Physics AND Bio so I can't finish it now. Look for a "beta" outline tomorrow (hopefully). After the initial outline is done, I shall take exact and intricate maps of each region and, in detail, make the necessary adjustments. Like I said, historical accuracy.

 

[Jon Shafer]

This looks pretty interesting. I've always liked the ancient Rome & Greece scenarios, so I'll have to check it out once it's finished. When do you think that it'll be done?

 

[Kryten]

To Trip....

For elfstorm and I to make the units....about another 5/6 weeks (certainly not more!).
For Exsanguination's map....certainly less.

Originally posted by Exsanguination
Kryten, you're a sly one.

I assume this is a compliment! (But you're right, I am )

Question: does Gramphos' tool (!) work with the 1.29f patch, or will you be using the 'double-mountains-with-a sea-in-between' method to make the map 'flat'?

And how will you stop the Maceonian & Persian AI's from building cities in the Scythian north?
I have an idea (don't I always ).....

I assume that Tundra terrain is not used very much on your map. And since the editor now allows us to limit where cities can be built, how about not letting cities (and roads?) being built on Tundra. You could then rename Tundra to 'Steppe', change the Tundra icon to something brownish, and slap it all over the region north of the Persan Empire & Danube, with you yourself placing the Scythian/Frontier Tribes 'cities' on your map.
You could even make the movement cost of 'Steppe' be 2, which won't affect the Scythian Horse Archers very much as they should have the fastest movement rate, but it would make an invasion of the empty northern wastes non-profitable & time-consuming and help keep Alex & Darius in the south.
(But watch out though. The AI has already found an exploit! It can still build cities on forests even if the base terrain is not allowed, and maybe even on hills if they are not within somebody's boundary.
The AI ain't as stupid as some people think!)

Anyway, here's some more maps. If you need larger more detailed ones, then let me know which region.

 

[Exsanguination]

The "beta" outline IS COMPLETE!!! [dance] [dance]

Here are some inspirational pics:

The minimap -

Alright, since the upload system chooses to yet again fail me, see below for a picture of the Aegean and Mediterranean Seas and their outying regions (and approximately where each civ will go).

Kryten - I was thinking exactly as you were . Except I couldn't think of what terrain to make unbuildable... tundra is great since nowhere is tundra needed on this map.

And about the flat map, I've had problems with Gramphos' original C3MT for 1.29, but I'll guarantee you he'll get it all worked out. Don't worry, I won't resort to mountain barriers, I hate that.

And hey, those maps are WONDERFUL. Thanks!