 |
| |
|
|
GhostOfDisco
|
|
 |
|
Prince
of Pizza
|
May 2001
time: 17:20
| |
|
|
Just something I'd like your advice on-
While Virtual PC is getting installed on my Mac (and later Civ II with scenarios and FW  ), I'm thinking of making a scenario based on a "Red State"/"Blue State" civil war in the near future (2012 is the tenative date, as a presidential election is essential to the backstory, and 2008 seems too early). Basically, the "culture wars" continue to divide the nation, with a social conservative narrowly winning the presidential election in 2012. Outraged, the "blue states" secede from the Union and form their own country/take the country back from the "red state" people. And thus the war begins.
Some things I'd like you're advice about :
- From the most recent election terms, the "blue" states would consists of the northeast (from Penn NEward) and the West Coast states, plus maybe a few contiguous states for game balance. (Washington stays "red state," as does Maryland - though the latter might be so, perhaps, due to martial law (need a buffer b/w blue states and DC) What states in particular should I add the the "blues" to keep balance and reflect the red state/blue state divide?
- In the scenario, the US military stays loyal to the Union, so the blue state nation is supported at the beginning of the scenario by military units of foreign friends - People's Republic of China troops on the West Coast (as conservatives/Republicans are more likely to oppose the PRC - geopolitics make strange bedfellows), European Union on the East. (Of course, the Blue state player would probably have to eventually make their own units, hopefully unique ones). What do you think of that?
- A map, and where to place cities. I've tried making an "USA" map at least twice before, but I always have trouble on just where to place the cities, as the lines between states is sadly missing on the Civ II maps. My roads are probably not the same as the real US roads, though I'd like them to be. Can anyone help me on this?
- What to do about Hawaii and Alaska. This scenario will focus mainly on the continental US, so I don't want to cover a vast expanse of Canada and the Pacific (to reach the aforementioned states) if I don't have to. Any suggestions?
- Canada and Mexico. Not sure what to do about them. On one hand, I can't ignore the fact that I need to include at least some of the Mexican and Canadian landmasses on any continental US map made (otherwise, you could perform an amphibious landing on northern Maine! ). On the other hand, I don't want Canada and Mexico colonizing empty areas of the US, or sending their units deep into "Yankee" territory while officially not at war with either the Union or the Commonwealth (the name of the "blue state" secessionist civ at this time). Nor, since Canada and Mexico are populated areas, should their areas be unpopulated areas upon which the Red and the Blue duke it out. What's your advice on this topic?
- The date of the scenario. I'd like to begin the scenario with modern units in order to take advantage of the great "Modern Units" stuff done by the artists here, but they might seem obsolete by 2012. 2008 might make the units more plausible, but it might be too soon in time (it's not that many years away, and it might be obsolete by the time I finish it. I dunno.) What do you think?
- Tech trees. I've tried my hand at scenario designing in the past, and the whole thing of tech trees, of what technologies should be researched and how should it all go, has stumped me. I'm tempted not to allow any research at all, but then reviewers don't like it when there's no research, and the scenario does last 8 years, after all. (Did the armies of 1945 have the same equipment as those in 1939? I think not.) Any help on this would be greatly appreciated.
- If I have research, there will undoubtedly be new units to build. What should they be? They'd be more advanced than the current units, to be sure, but they wouldn't be interstellar starships with laser guns, either. And it seems that there exists a dearth of units between "modern" and "space level" sci-fi. Anyone want to help me on this?
- The size of the initial armies. Doing a little research, the US Army has 20 combat divisions overall (ten active, and ten National Guard). If I do 1 unit per maneuver brigade, it means the red state side has 60 land units to its name, not counting the artillery and helicopter units accompanying the divisions. (That number goes up to 69 with the addition of the Marines) And that's not including the navy and air force. What do you think? (The blue state would have the same number of combat units - albeit from the EU and China - at the beginning.)
- Every city will have at least one nominal defender, so that advances are not too fast (unless the AI moves the city defenders out of the cities). Not sure if he should be the same as the insurgent/gurrellia fighter unit (you know, those guys who spring up whenever you conquer a city.) He should be able to be defeated by a regular Army infantryman, but I'm not sure if I want him to have the infiltration skills that go with the guerrilla fighters. Any thoughts?
I look forward to your comments and appreciate your advice.
Last edited by GhostOfDisco on 21-11-2006 at 22:28
|
|
| |
|
|
Harry Tuttle
|
|
|
|
Wow, this is thought out.
quote:
Originally posted by GhostOfDisco
- From the most recent election terms, the "blue" states would consists of the northeast (from Penn NEward) and the West Coast states, plus maybe a few contiguous states for game balance. (Washington stays "red state," as does Maryland - though the latter might be so, perhaps, due to martial law (need a buffer b/w blue states and DC) What states in particular should I add the the "blues" to keep balance and reflect the red state/blue state divide?
|
Minnesota, Michigan, maybe Wisconsin.
quote:
In the scenario, the US military stays loyal to the Union, so the blue state nation is supported at the beginning of the scenario by military units of foreign friends - People's Republic of China troops on the West Coast (as conservatives/Republicans are more likely to oppose the PRC - geopolitics make strange bedfellows), European Union on the East. (Of course, the Blue state player would probably have to eventually make their own units, hopefully unique ones). What do you think of that? |
Sounds good. Make it a bit outlandish, maybe add Castro and Chavez. France should be a good one, Alec Baldwin would entice them to help out.
quote:
A map, and where to place cities. I've tried making an "USA" map at least twice before, but I always have trouble on just where to place the cities, as the lines between states is sadly missing on the Civ II maps. My roads are probably not the same as the real US roads, though I'd like them to be. Can anyone help me on this?
|
I would just add ther major cities and the state capitals. Divide them up depending on which color state they'd be in.
quote:
What to do about Hawaii and Alaska. This scenario will focus mainly on the continental US, so I don't want to cover a vast expanse of Canada and the Pacific (to reach the aforementioned states) if I don't have to. Any suggestions? |
You could always add them just off the coast, maybe in elementary map fashion. This would be slightly unrealistic but then again it would be new and intersting.
quote:
Canada and Mexico. Not sure what to do about them. On one hand, I can't ignore the fact that I need to include at least some of the Mexican and Canadian landmasses on any continental US map made (otherwise, you could perform an amphibious landing on northern Maine! ). On the other hand, I don't want Canada and Mexico colonizing empty areas of the US, or sending their units deep into "Yankee" territory while officially not at war with either the Union or the Commonwealth (the name of the "blue state" secessionist civ at this time). Nor, since Canada and Mexico are populated areas, should their areas be unpopulated areas upon which the Red and the Blue duke it out. What's your advice on this topic? |
I think they should be integral players really. With a US civil war along ideological lines I could see the two trying to stake a claim. I would add in southern Canada as it's the most populated part of the country. With Mexico I would do the northern half with enough distance to add in Mexico City at the very bottom.
quote:
The date of the scenario. I'd like to begin the scenario with modern units in order to take advantage of the great "Modern Units" stuff done by the artists here, but they might seem obsolete by 2012. 2008 might make the units more plausible, but it might be too soon in time (it's not that many years away, and it might be obsolete by the time I finish it. I dunno.) What do you think?
|
I think the vast majority of the units would still be in use. You could add in some newer units, like the F-22, the JSF, but I don't see a huge jump in hardware, especially since there's nothing besides the aforementioned slated for production in the next decade.
quote:
Tech trees. I've tried my hand at scenario designing in the past, and the whole thing of tech trees, of what technologies should be researched and how should it all go, has stumped me. I'm tempted not to allow any research at all, but then reviewers don't like it when there's no research, and the scenario does last 8 years, after all. (Did the armies of 1945 have the same equipment as those in 1939? I think not.) Any help on this would be greatly appreciated.
|
I would not do a full fledged tech tree. I think techs given by events would be your best bet when reflecting the civil war climate. Make the techs prerequisites for additional units or special units. The idea of researching for advanced units seems odd given the fact that most advanced units in the time period would only be possible with the defense spending of an unfragmented US.
I do think that city improvements and governments should be given through research. The Red and Blue sides could have divergent city improvements based on their poltics. Mass transit for the liberals, Mfg plants for the conservatives, etc... It would add some definate flavor to the two sides. Also, the techs could reflect the formation of a goverment infrastructure and culture for each side.
quote:
If I have research, there will undoubtedly be new units to build. What should they be? They'd be more advanced than the current units, to be sure, but they wouldn't be interstellar starships with laser guns, either. And it seems that there exists a dearth of units between "modern" and "space level" sci-fi. Anyone want to help me on this? |
See above.
quote:
The size of the initial armies. Doing a little research, the US Army has 20 combat divisions overall (ten active, and ten National Guard). If I do 1 unit per maneuver brigade, it means the red state side has 60 land units to its name, not counting the artillery and helicopter units accompanying the divisions. (That number goes up to 69 with the addition of the Marines) And that's not including the navy and air force. What do you think? (The blue state would have the same number of combat units - albeit from the EU and China - at the beginning.) |
I wouldn't try to reflect a realistic spread of power in this scenario. The idea is to make it playable, but not so much plausibly accurate. Just spread the units between the two sides to reflect the situation you would like to encourage. Would give the national guard units to the states as it demands and the armed forces to the federal government with one or two small armies defecting to the Blue states. Make the Blue state units cheap to build and the red state units expensive but more poweful. Make it balanced.
quote:
Every city will have at least one nominal defender, so that advances are not too fast (unless the AI moves the city defenders out of the cities). Not sure if he should be the same as the insurgent/gurrellia fighter unit (you know, those guys who spring up whenever you conquer a city.) He should be able to be defeated by a regular Army infantryman, but I'm not sure if I want him to have the infiltration skills that go with the guerrilla fighters. Any thoughts? |
Yep, as Techumseh said, make them police units. Sarsstock was working with some State Trooper units for my Atomic Eagle II scenario and came up with some interesting variants. Ask him.
Also, I would like to offer my AEII map for use. It covers the continental US and has pretty accurate city placement as well as historically accurate road placement based on 1945 rail lines. Only problem is that has a rather large wedge of land southwest of Mexico that was going to be used for a game mechanic I had planned. Anyways, hope it helps.
 Attachment: unitsplaced60905b.sav
This has been downloaded 7 time(s).
|
|
| |
|
|
Emperor
The backlash starts here
|
Feb 2000
time: 09:20
| |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by GhostOfDisco
[*]What to do about Hawaii and Alaska. This scenario will focus mainly on the continental US, so I don't want to cover a vast expanse of Canada and the Pacific (to reach the aforementioned states) if I don't have to. Any suggestions? |
You could either 'write them out' of the scenario (both states are home to large military bases so would be quickly secured by the US government) or place them on the scenario map in geographically unrealistic locations.
quote:
[*]Canada and Mexico. Not sure what to do about them. |
Line their borders with invincible units so nothing can cross into Canadian or Mexican territory. If Mexico and Canada aren't going to play any role in the scenario I wouldn't bother creating them as civs with cities, etc, as this will occupy two potentially useful civ slots for no gain.
quote:
[*]The date of the scenario. I'd like to begin the scenario with modern units in order to take advantage of the great "Modern Units" stuff done by the artists here, but they might seem obsolete by 2012. |
AFAIK, almost everything in the current US inventory is expected to still be in service in 2012 and there's not much genuinely new stuff which is going to enter service between now and then (the F-35 Lightning fighter, the Littoral combat ships and the Virginia Class subs are the only new bit of equipment which spring to mind). In the case of a national civil war all the old equipment will be dusted off anyway, so I think that it's OK to use it. If you're worried, dig around on www.globalsecurity.org to see when the US is planning to replace its current hardware.
quote:
(That number goes up to 69 with the addition of the Marines) |
Actually, it should be over 92 brigades. All of the US Army's divisions are being reorganised into four smaller brigades (so 80 divisional brigades), there are a number of seperate Army and NG brigades and the USMC has a 4th (reserve) division. AFAIK, the USMC divisions will keep their current organisation of three regiments per division.
|
|
| |
|
|
GhostOfDisco
|
|
|
|
Prince
of Pizza
|
May 2001
time: 17:20
| |
|
|
Well, I might add Chavez in the form of Venezuelan forces. I just wish I had a pic of Venezuelan infantry, plus maybe some top-of-the-line Russian armor and mech infantry in Venezuelan garb.
I might take up the French- I'm already planning to have them have a division of the Foreign Legion supporting the Commonwealth, I just need pics of the LeClerc tank and what the French are using for Mech Infantry for more French units.
Current plan for foreign support for the blues is PLA ([Chinese] People's Liberation Army) in the west, Franco-Chavista forces (plus maybe some Gurhka mercenaries) in the east.
I've also got a plan on battleships - at the start, the Union will have all four remaining Iowa-class BBs (recommissioned between the election and the secession). The Commonwealth will have acquired by then four King-George class BBs currently in storage (or something) in Britain. Neither side will have the capacity to build new BBs unless they research the tech to do so. (This would represent the fac t that the US has lost the tooling needed to build battleships, and would need to build said tooling again.
I might also have "king" units for the Union and Commonwealth's heads of state. The plan for now is the Union's President be Rick Stantorum, with Alan Keyes as VP, and the Commonwealth have Hillary Clinton as Prime Minister, with Barak Obama as Deputy PM. If you killed Rick or Barak, the side they were on would lose some support with "Middle America." Not sure how to simulate that in game terms.
Not sure if I will have Chavez personally in the game. If so, I wonder how it could be so that if he is killed, the Venezuelan units withdraw.
I'll try to space out the "Wonders" equally among the red and blue sides, some "active" and some there for bonus points (MGE does let you use wonders for bonus points, right?)
Canada and Mexico will probably be in the game, starting out as neutrals (but will they stay that way?)
I'll show a preview graphic showing some of the graphics I'm planning to use on Monday.
|
|
| |
|
|
Emperor
The backlash starts here
|
Feb 2000
time: 09:20
| |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by GhostOfDisco
I might take up the French- I'm already planning to have them have a division of the Foreign Legion |
Not wanting to be pedantic, but if you're going to accurately model the US military then you might want to accurately model the other militaries. AFAIK, the Foreign Legion currently consists of a single brigade plus a number of independent battalions.
quote:
I've also got a plan on battleships - at the start, the Union will have all four remaining Iowa-class BBs (recommissioned between the election and the secession). |
Bad idea IMO. I believe that only 2 of the Iowas are now in a condition where they could feasibly be brought back into service, and no-one thinks that this would be a good idea anyway. If you want land-attack ships, then include the USN's new (and possibly soon-to-be-canceled) DDX land attack destroyers as building some of these is probably more feasible than recomissioning an Iowa.
quote:
The Commonwealth will have acquired by then four King-George class BBs currently in storage (or something) in Britain. |
All of the KGVs were scrapped in the 1950s. AFAIK, the Iowas are the only surviving post-drednaught battleships in the world and the only big gun ship in Britain is the HMS Belfast, which is a (very impressive) museum ship in London.
quote:
I might also have "king" units for the Union and Commonwealth's heads of state. The plan for now is the Union's President be Rick Stantorum, with Alan Keyes as VP, and the Commonwealth have Hillary Clinton as Prime Minister, with Barak Obama as Deputy PM. If you killed Rick or Barak, the side they were on would lose some support with "Middle America." Not sure how to simulate that in game terms. |
I like that idea. Strong leaders have historically played a critical role in civil wars, and the loss of these figures often spells disaster. You could represent this effect by their death triggering an event which costs the nation a lot of money and/or gives the nation a technology which renders some of their military obselete.
|
|
| |
|
|
GhostOfDisco
|
|
|
|
Prince
of Pizza
|
May 2001
time: 17:20
| |
|
|
Well, attached below is the graphics that I have.
A note: I used some of (Typhoon's? Fairline's? I forget which at the moment) infantry to make the Commonwealth soldiers (infantry, airborne and marines).
I took the 1985 US soldiers and gave them different weapons - the infantry the G36, the paratrooper the French bullpup, and the marine - well, I copied another country's Marines (a European nation, I think) and gave him a G36.
Yes, there are some graphcis missing and yes, as of this time I've downloaded the graphics Hans99 et al have given me. I've just yet to put them in the graphics file.
You'll also see that I'm using the modern city graphics from Curt Sibling, and flags from the AllFlags file. The Commonwealth flag is a composite of the UN flag, the EU flag and the Micronesian flag. (Though I wonder what it looks like up close? )
And here's a view of the divided USA as I have it now. What do you think? I'm wondering about either giving Illinois to the Union (but then, it's Obama's state) or Indiana and Ohio to the Commonwealth (but then, it will look too much like all the Union states from the Civil War.) I'm hoping to divide the wonders equally between Union and Commonwealth, and therefore I need to finalize the boundaries before making Wonders (some will work, some won't, but they'll all count as bonuses!
 Attachment: uscivilwar2_graphics.gif
This has been downloaded 516 time(s).
|
|
| |
|
|
Chieftain
|
Dec 2003
time: 23:20
| |
|
|
Won't the French Foch class Carriers have been decommissioned (I think they might have been already, one at least definitely has been sold off already). A Charles De Gaulle CVN might be a better unit...
|
|
| |
|
|
Emperor
The backlash starts here
|
Feb 2000
time: 09:20
| |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Tigey
Won't the French Foch class Carriers have been decommissioned (I think they might have been already, one at least definitely has been sold off already). |
One of the Foch class carriers is currently being scrapped and the other one has been sold to Brazil and is in commission with the Brazilian Navy.
The British and possibly French navies are aiming to introduce a new class of carrier from 2012. See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CVF for details, though this project seems rather troubled and is likely to run behind schedule.
|
|
| |
|
|
Emperor
The backlash starts here
|
Feb 2000
time: 09:20
| |
|
|
Yeah, the CVF is the first sexy looking British carrier since the WW2-era armoured carriers.
|
|
| |
|
|
Warlord
Tokyo
|
Oct 2004
time: 08:20
| |
|
|
Cheers man, this sounds interesting. Best wishes to finish soon!
- I'd like to play on a large (giga) map, lots of dteail and space between cities. Somebody did an amazing Japan/Samuri game on a large map, and I thought it really worked.
- story does seem a bit campy. You only get a couple of lines on your title page, and maybe a few event boxes to tell your story, and those should be sparse (my opinion). I recommend a scandal in the election; both parties claim fraud and refuse to back down, could be strong enough to add some believability to the plot.
- Some zero attack protestors in the early game? for 2012 special weapons I'd go with whatevers hot on TV or movies right now. small vials, body armor, etc.
- Canada and Mexico should definitely be in. Especially Mexico.
|
|
| |
|
|
GhostOfDisco
|
|
|
|
Prince
of Pizza
|
May 2001
time: 17:20
| |
|
|
Update:
I've got most of the unit graphics, just need the Chinese amphibious vehicle I requested in the Modern Unit Graphics thread, a Stryker for the Commonwealth Mech Inf unit, Hugo Chavez, and a few other units.
As for terrain graphics, right now I'm using a lot of La Belle Epoque (graphics upgrade) terrain graphics (Is that OK?) - they're beautiful, but I wonder if there's a terrain set that better fits Curt Sibling's city graphics pack. (There probably is.)
Attached to this post is my latest attempt at city placement. The US and Mexico are all done (somewhat), though Canada is not complete. The map is essentially the B-Dawn map one will find in Apolyton's archive of Civ 2 maps, with the bottom "oceaned" to simulate travel from one "coast" (i.e. East Coast or West Coast) to another (either via the Panama Canal or around Tierra del Fuego). I put mountains above the "canal," on which will, in the final game, be stationed State Troopers owned by the "Neutral" civilization, a "civ" which cannot be negotiated with, and will be allied to all sides (How do you do that? I've tried doing the "NEGOTIATION" thing in EVENTS, but as the Neutrals I've been able to engage in diplomatic relations even with these events in place. Or is it just me?)
Anyway, I'd like feedback on my city placement (I've dones reasonably well, especially in the eastern side where river and coastal references are frequent, but I'm not so sure about the Midwest, where I seemed to forget which tributary of the Mississippi was which.)
Attachment: ne_b3900.sav
This has been downloaded 15 time(s).
Last edited by GhostOfDisco on 08-12-2006 at 13:26
|
|
| |
|
|
GhostOfDisco
|
|
|
|
Prince
of Pizza
|
May 2001
time: 17:20
| |
|
|
Yes, I did, but given that I'm playing Civ II on a Virtual PC on a Mac... it's not perfect. FW seems to work better, so that's what the save game is. Not sure if the scenario will be MGE or FW, but given that FW scenarios do just fine in MGE, MGE players should be able to play it. Right now I need to know if I need to any adjustments on city placement.
Also, what should I do about roads? Should the roads there be RRs (ensuring unlimited movement) or roads, for limited movement?
On a thrid note, I'm not sure what to do for technologies, if any. I think I might force the player to research Battleship to create more BBs, to depict the fact that the old tools needed to make such vessels are gone (the two BBs being held in reserve in RL will be in the game - whether it'll be both for the Union or one for each side remains to be decided), and maybe Meixco and Canada will need to research Carriers to build such things. I dunno. Advice on such matters would be welcome.
|
|
| |
|
|
Warlord
|
Jun 2002
time: 23:20
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
.
Attachment: