What kinda scenario creator are you and what kind is he?

[kobayashi]

I just thought of starting a new thread where people put down what school of thought they subscribe to, i.e. what is the most important thing that they tend to concentrate on.

Obviously different scenarios may force you to concentrate on different aspects but usually you would pick a topic which fits with your school of thought.

 

[kobayashi]

And course I should go first, forgive me if I ramble on.

BUFFET OR SET MENU DINNER

Most people would characterise me as a Sci-Fi scenario guy. I would say that I am really a techtree man. That's my starting point for each scenario and I like to build free flowing and balanced scenarios where you can choose a couple of different races to play. Making a scenario which you can play over and over again, like original civ, seems more challenging to me.

I suppose the opposite type of scenario would be a carefully scripted-single race scenario. Ironically, ST Dominion War which some might say is my greatest creation is one of these. The challenge in this type of scenario is to add lots of bells and whistles (like voice, new terrain types, a secondary map for STDW) to make the scenario attractive and unique. There is still a lot of hard work but it is not as elegant as the first type of scenario cause it doesn't have to be naturally balanced. You just add AI units and change money or tech via events to 'artificially' balance the whole thing.

 

[Morten Blaabjerg]

I would say I'm a terrain man. I must confess I am obsessed with altering terrains, and going into tiny details with the map. I really think one of the most important aspects of a good scenario is an interesting terrain and map. The terrain and outlay of the map should make you want to explore and find the good spots, the cities with great growth potential, and from this arises the great conflicts, because other players will go for these too.

I have yet to make a tech tree that's working out satisfactorily and balanced. I tried it with "Hammer.." -and it works allright, but not all the way I intended. It is definitely the most difficult part of scen making to make the techs work in an intriguing way. It took me weeks just to get it together with "Hammer.."

I will definitely try to do this in my next creation -which will be a HUGE medieval patch, with basically one tech tree -gone medieval in all respects. The development of Europe from the baptism of Clovis to the discovery of the Americas.

The main part of this patch will be a gigantic, ingeniously designed map of Europe with the main axes ranging from Greenland to Jerusalem, and Karelia to North Africa. The map will have sailable rivers, and big main cities with great trade and war potential. I like the way you can attribute ressources to special terrains, and by this control which areas will be very important and which will not. Also leader personalities will also contribute to this -expansionist, perfectionist or aggressive -the way to determine who will carefully cultivate the land, and who won't. In "Hammer.." the great cities would have terrains such as baronies, monasteries and villages to boost production in vital areas. The only small downfall to this, is that you cannot prevent roadbuilding in these special spots, and this takes something away from it, as they eventually will be filled up with roads and screw up the nice look of it... Is there a way around this? Anyway, the most important thing of course, is not the cosmetics, but the way the game plays.

Anyway, I usually prefer the buffet, as too many events often take power away from the player. Also the buffet scenarios most often make the greatest multiplayer games!

Yours Truly,
Morten

 

[willemvanoranje]

I personally like to make events, or actually, I like to make little text pop-up messages in events, containing explnations about what's happening, and historical data. I'm a lousy tech tree designer, it's the thing that takes the most time of all things and I'm never really satisfied. I like making units, but the 'balancing' (kob) is still a problem. But the main thing that I like, is to create a story around my scenario. Or actually, I make up a story first, before I begin with a scenario. Also, I like the information gathering. Searching the web for large texts and such. Terrains are fun, but I don't mind them really. I like to make land-maps, with water crossing here and there as a natural barrier. I guess I like everything a bit, but I dislike the ingame work; placing cities with improvements, railroads, irrigations, etc., etc.

I like the 'building' scenario. You begin with three or four cities (or one) and just play a game. Just like kobayashi. I like war scenarios as well, though, specially ST

ominion. My next one (or maybe two) scenarios will be war scenarios.

I like the combination of war and building the most; as in Imperium Romanum. You start with one city, and troops that are slightly better than your direct oponent. With a few of them, you can take a city, but if you're unlucky, it takes too many, and your only city is crushed because of the lack of defences. Very nice!

------------------
Concordia res parvae cres****.

[This message has been edited by willemvanoranje (edited June 06, 2001).]

 

[Circee]

I'm an..."alternative civ" Scen maker... If I even finish one!! (What's wrong with prom?????? I haven't seen it since about 2 months!!!) I change everything, but my problems is always a part of the scen I have no ideas for... In Planty's, it was city improvements, in "Desert Smash", my next idea, it's currently the tech tree...

 

[xeven_god_of_helsibahr]

I think the Story line and the Events are the most important. I usually work on those first (I write them down on paper), then I work on the map. Next comes city placement and naming, then tribe, unit, and graphic editing. Then, finally, I take the events on my paper and put them in the game. I only do play testing and unit placement if I think I need to.

 

[CivPartisan]

Well...

Koby this is a fascinating and intriguing thread. Thanks for starting it.

I guess its time to give away a few secrets.

First of all, I need motivation to do a scenario and that motivation gets me going. That means each scenario is probably going to be a different challenge. I'm a "challenge-oriented" kind of guy. You might think of me as a sci-fi scenario designer but I have worked on many different ideas that you've never seen--most are hiding on my hard drive.

If there is something to be done in Civ II that hasn't been done yet, I'm looking for a scenario to do it.

Mostly, I start off with UNIT graphics. Call me crazy but this is what I like doin'--making units. Then I move on to selecting a map. This is usually where I get the motivation for the Terrains; since I am working on UNIT graphics, it's a short skip to start on the terrains.

Then I begin working with the rules.txt

I work with the tech tree and units in tandem for play balance of units right off the top. I first try to change the name of the tech in the tree to a comparable futuristic or historical tech...for instance, if it says "Writing" I change it to "Scrolls" or "Comm Badge". This makes a "working" tech tree possible.

Then, if it is an original scenario such as a sci-fi, I create a back story. If it is an existing story, I start making adjustments and putting units in place.

I have about five different things in my head to do before I even get to the sounds. I generally change every aspect of the game that I can and I endeavor to change something that I haven't changed. I tweak the game to do things that are unique and different..the more different the better.

I use events to guide the player but not too much. I like text boxes but I like actions much better. If I can change money, give a unit, kill a unit, or play a .wav file-- then, I'm writing the event.

I also think that making the scenario fun is paramount. I like certain themes, such as isolation, economics, missions, and barriers. These themes create unusual challenges for players and often cause the player think or play differently. I've never had anyone tell me that a mod or scenario I've made was run of the mill and that of course could be that they are too nice to tell the truth, or because I pick some pretty weird stuff.

The Civ 1 for Civ 2 is a little wacky, but probably not anymore off beat than my Planet of the Apes mod. These are challenging and different things that keep me motivated to do more. Fun stuff, that's what I say. My first love is the Star Trek scenarios that I am working on, but I've just posted the Revolutionary War (by the way Koby, your ZWK patch was inspiring to me) and I am happy to say that my historical work too is bit weird...I've captured a different perspective to it by mixing scenario ideas and approaches...

WEll...that's about it...as you can see, most of the time my work becomes a modpack because I've either suffered lack of motivation or a scenario didn't seem to work out...

Happy civing to all!

John

 

[BeBro]

I started making scns mainly because of my graphical interests. I had civ for years, and started with altering units for my personal use. Making graphics on my computer is one of my passions, and so I was really enlightened when I found out that one can change nearly all graphics in civ

My first attempts in scn making were ...crap

... , I had too high expectations, but without the knowledge about lots of details (I had no idea about events, or to set up tech trees that work

) I was not able to achieve my goals and so I stopped the work.

Then I found these websites about civ, with lots of scns and tips and forums and it all started again with the very first version of Imperium Romanum, only in German at that time, and despite its nice graphics, a relatively weak scn - but good enough to continue...

The main goal for my scns today is still to create an unique game atmosphere, and the graphics are (for me) the best part of it. Sometimes this is a problem that I´m so much focussed on this, Cross&Crescent had good graphics and atmosphere, but, seen from today I would say it lacks a few other important details (the map is not so good, events could been better etc.).

I learned a lot more about scn making after the release of C&C, and the V2 of Imperium Romanum reflects that development: it has all that the first version not had, and even better graphics.

------------------
<IMG SRC="http://civ2000.civ2.gamesweb.de/KnightSig.gif" border=0> Civ2000 hosted by CivII Universum

 

[Henrik]

I usually (I can say Usually even though I have only made one scenario, there where lots of unfinnished scenarios before that one

) start out by changing graphics for Icon, Units or terrain1.gif, while doing this I think of lots of stuff to do in the the text files and so I go on and edit the game and labels txt, then I give all the units thier names whit the ingame editor (the graphics where edited by another program ofcourse), same whit icons and terrains.
Then I give the units thier stats and then I create the tech three

(the tech three is one thing that I never use the editors for, the events I do partly whit the editors and partly myself).
Usually at the same time as I am filling the map whit cities.

So to sum it up I allways begin whit one of the graphics files and then do the tech tree in the end.
After doing the tech three I remodel a lot of the other stuff.

And even though i have usually given all unit graphics from the begining they will change later on.
For instance in my only released scenario: Carolus Gustavus Arne Schmied made most of the graphics for me.

 

[Tracid00]

I´m a historical scenario maker by heart. It´s the best for me if I have a scenario project running, because then I usually read tons of books (virtually!) on the topic. I´m not very good in making events.txt running, but it kinda is enough to support my ideas. The one thing I´m totally incapable of is graphics. I never got one unit or terrain to look something near it fits into civ2...
BTW, just wanna tell u, if somebody needs any historical adwise, u now where u can find me...ICQ:114712116

------------------
TRACID

"Attacking the enemy´s plans is best; next is to attack his alliances; next to attack his army; the worst is to attack their cities." Sun-Tzu (the Art of War)

 

[oryx]

What first drew me to scenario making was the ability to use custom graphics. Then the ability to alter just about everything else to create an atmosphere sucked me in completely. A lot of the fun is doing research for creating trade commodities, improvements, wonders, events, maps and what not. All of this means a lot of work and re-work. I also like smaller maps and a small number of turns.

------------------
<FONT size="1">"There is no tiddle-taddle nor pibble-pabble in Pompey's camp." -- from Henry V</FONT s>

 

[Andrew Livings]

My motivation is striving for perfection - I'll never get there, but that won't stop me trying

All, well, all but one of my scenarios originated as improvements on previous works. My "Euro1939" was an overhaul of the Microprose "WW2" scenario; "Global WW2" an overhaul of Michael Nielson's "Axis and Allies". The "Cuban Missile Crisis" and "US Civil War" - I'm sure I don't need to explain. Plus several more ideas waiting to be translated into Civ2 masterpieces!

"Crises of the New World Order" was all mine.

So there's no-one area to concentrate on. You really need to be Renaissance man and do it all yourself. I think it's fine to borrow artwork - it's the reason why we have so many scenarios out now; but it's better to bring something new, as many creators do, to increase the pool of scenario resources.

Like most people I guess I just prefer designing scenarios on paper (or Notepad in my case) to the hard work of translating those ideas into something more tangible.

 

[willemvanoranje]

Now I know it! I am bad at the actual scenario part, because it bores me. But I like the modpack part, you know, creating units, civs, cities and their names.

------------------
And I'm proud to say: 'Ich bin ein Civfanatics Official Reviewer!'

 

[kobayashi]

It may be debatable but my understanding is

scenario = everything that can go inside the scenario folder - including all those things you mentioned. Scenarios must have a starting map.

So the only modpack guy around here in Valdez - cause he wants pre-FW people to be able to play his creations.


modpack = things which have to be changed in the main civ directory - like city screen backgroud, graphics and music you get before you even load a game etc. After loading a modpack, you cannot play unrelated scenarios without reversing the changes first.

A modpack must be playable using the random map generator. If a .scn file is provided, then it is a modpack with an accompanying scenario.

[This message has been edited by kobayashi (edited July 26, 2001).]

 

[Exile]

I try to create a miniature of the default game with more period detail for the period selected. My feeling is that the civ2 engine is poorly suited for simulating a single war or campaign. It can be done, but that's not what I want to do. I select a period, and sometimes it's a very long period. What I usually look for is an era when military technology, ideology, and methods of government were in transition. This takes advantage of the most prominent aspects of the civ2 game.

My motivations are frustration and selfishness.

There are times when playing the civ2 default game that I want to do things. If I find that the game makes it impractical to do those things, I change the game to suit myself. The result is a new scenario, which focuses on what I want at that moment.

If others enjoy the by-products of my selfishness, so much the better.

Exile

 

[willemvanoranje]

I just didn't know how to call it kob. But I meant the cities.gif, cities.txt, rules.txt and such. I called it the modpack part because it is the part that is changed in a modpack.

------------------
And I'm proud to say: 'Ich bin ein Civfanatics Official Reviewer!'