Yeah, it would be particularly interesing to play Irish againt Nato! And what you mean by slavs? The 21st century scenario should have civs like major powers or organisations: USA, European Union, China India, Arab League and two neutrals like UN and Japan, maybe?
Squirrel2004
Chieftain
Good call, burak. what i meant by slavs was yugoslavia and Milosevic in charge of that. not like the baltic sea slavic countries. I actually started a WWIII/cold war scenario and I used:
- North America
- Western Europe(included Australia, Greenland, Scandinavia, Iceland, Greece)
- Soviet Bloc(old USSR + other Iron Curatin nations)
- Arabs(Middle East, India + Indon)
- Orient(China, Japan, Southeast Asia, Korea's and Phillipenes)
- Latin America
- Africa
-Barbarians(in Jerusalem and Bern)
Squirrel2004
- North America
- Western Europe(included Australia, Greenland, Scandinavia, Iceland, Greece)
- Soviet Bloc(old USSR + other Iron Curatin nations)
- Arabs(Middle East, India + Indon)
- Orient(China, Japan, Southeast Asia, Korea's and Phillipenes)
- Latin America
- Africa
-Barbarians(in Jerusalem and Bern)
Squirrel2004
D
Dreadnought
Guest
Wow i leave for a month b/c my computer breaks down and all the sudden my topics are popular. (actually it still is, this is my brothers comptuter)
I've seen a few scenarios on the topic but they suck. I was talking about a war in the european threatre with an overhaul of new units and stuff. I've got all kinds of great ideas but so far can't get them too work.
B'c my computers down i cant even play civ..THAT SUCKS!!!!!!!!!!
well its nice to be back in the forum...
------------------
"It is well that war is so terrible-we should grow too fond of it."
-Gen. Robert E. Lee, 1863
I've seen a few scenarios on the topic but they suck. I was talking about a war in the european threatre with an overhaul of new units and stuff. I've got all kinds of great ideas but so far can't get them too work.
B'c my computers down i cant even play civ..THAT SUCKS!!!!!!!!!!
well its nice to be back in the forum...
------------------
"It is well that war is so terrible-we should grow too fond of it."
-Gen. Robert E. Lee, 1863
Andrew Livings
Warlord
I think the sort of thing you're after would be a "Red Storm" style scenario, set in the late 1980s with the USSR as the aggressor. Maybe like a reverse Red Front? Use the European map out of Ansteig (I like that one) and have two/three different scenario files (basically just a balancing thing).
1. Human plays NATO, computer plays USSR. USSR has massive advantage in initial units and event-generated/re-generated units.
2. Human plays USSR, computer plays NATO. NATO has massive initial units and event generated/re-generated units. A real test of tactical skill to achieve all the objectives.
3. A more balanced/historically accurate (hah!) scenario for either FW hotseat or multiplayer: humans play both sides.
But why? As the point was made in the SLeague forums not so long ago, we might love civ, but there better games for tactical wargaming. Plus this would merely adopt some of the design concepts of Red Front, simply transposed to a different time and place.
You see, I have been thinking about this as an extension to my Atomic Age modpack, but I'm afraid my forte is global scenarios, and I like building scenarios above simple wargaming ones.
Dreadnought (more specifically): sorry I didn't reply to this sooner. You can find all (well some; all the decent ones) of my scenarios on my site: http://members.nbci.com/HistCiv2/index.htm
Plus I hope everyone here has looked at my Crises of the New World Order scenario. That quickly degenerates into global bloodshed (a civ2 flaw, say I, which I'm trying to get around).
http://www.btinternet.com/~aplivings/scenario/crises.htm
Watch out for version 3, soon...
1. Human plays NATO, computer plays USSR. USSR has massive advantage in initial units and event-generated/re-generated units.
2. Human plays USSR, computer plays NATO. NATO has massive initial units and event generated/re-generated units. A real test of tactical skill to achieve all the objectives.
3. A more balanced/historically accurate (hah!) scenario for either FW hotseat or multiplayer: humans play both sides.
But why? As the point was made in the SLeague forums not so long ago, we might love civ, but there better games for tactical wargaming. Plus this would merely adopt some of the design concepts of Red Front, simply transposed to a different time and place.
You see, I have been thinking about this as an extension to my Atomic Age modpack, but I'm afraid my forte is global scenarios, and I like building scenarios above simple wargaming ones.
Dreadnought (more specifically): sorry I didn't reply to this sooner. You can find all (well some; all the decent ones) of my scenarios on my site: http://members.nbci.com/HistCiv2/index.htm
Plus I hope everyone here has looked at my Crises of the New World Order scenario. That quickly degenerates into global bloodshed (a civ2 flaw, say I, which I'm trying to get around).
http://www.btinternet.com/~aplivings/scenario/crises.htm
Watch out for version 3, soon...
I have a good base for and scn.(bunch o' cities, 7 tribes broken in to genral regions, and i can do good Advance Icons(like the bullet one i did) , but the map looks kinda funny and I suck at making units/tech trees/other .gif/.bmp stuff in the game...) SOME ONE HELP ME MAKE THIS SCN!!!
------------------
" I AM A GOD!!" Urvon, disiple of Torak.
------------------
" I AM A GOD!!" Urvon, disiple of Torak.
