Simple vs Complex

[Mercator]

I much prefer the simple scenarios, probably partly due to my lack of patience, experience and strategical insight.

I'm currently enjoying JB's Mexico, the Spanish have landed a few turns ago and I'm holding them back so far.

I absolutely hate scenarios where I start out with a ton of cities/units. I need to be able to assess my civilization and be given the time to get into it and adjust to the new rules.
Mexico is excellent in those respects, while Harlan's Mongols scenario is pushing it already, IMHO, still quite enjoyable but very frustrating.
RPG-style scenarios like Favoured Flights's go well with me as well.

 

[techumseh]

I agree with much of what's been said, including some contradictory stuff. I like scenarios which are compact and dense. Not sprawling maps full of empty spaces and tons of units. Nor multiple files. Instead something original (hopefully) that makes full use of Civ2's capabilities, but is reasonable in scale and can be played in an evening or two.

Alex the Magnificent always argued that a smaller map was better, mainly because the AI worked much better on a small map. I've found this to be true as well. If a city you're defending is within a few movement points of several AI-controlled enemy cities, the chances of the AI mounting a coordinated assault are significantly increased. On maps which are too large, the AI sends units at you one at a time.

One reason I like Test of Time is that you get 100kb of events, rather than the standard 30kb, so you can do a lot without needing to use multiple events files. And you can get more complexity in your events.

Generally, I like some complexity and depth, without being forced into an exercise in macro management.

 

[kobayashi]

Instead something original (hopefully) that makes full use of Civ2's capabilities, but is reasonable in scale and can be played in an evening or two.

Could not have put it better.

One set of files on a regular large map is about the maximum I can stand. Sometimes people don't appreciate the difficulty/beauty of squeezing everything into the standard CIv2 infrastructure. Instead of maximizing the use of techs, sounds etc. some designers just take the easy way out and go for scale.

 

[Henrik]

What about maximizing everything including the map then?

There is no rule saying I cannot make optimal use of techs sounds, ingame messages, etc when I use a gigamap is there?

 

[Mercator]

No, but the scenario's bound to be filled with infinite amounts of cities and units. And the most attractive idea behind gigamaps for a scenario maker is probably just the grand scale and detail you can achieve.
But why bother creating a giga-scale WWII scenario with every little town, when you can achieve better accuracy and more attractive gameplay by scaling it down a bit?

 

[Henrik]

What if I use the giga map to ad more room between the cities rather than to fit in more of them.
Normal civ maps will often result in battles being fought over only cities, in reality there where plenty of battles in the field...