Afrika Korps

General Information

• Name of Scenario : Afrika Korps
• Final Score : 17.1/30
  (Breakdown: 0-10 terrible /11-15 Average/ 16-20 Good/ 21-25 Excellent/ 26+Best possible)
• Type of Scenario : Historical
• Name of Author: John Petroski
• Name of Reviewer: SunTzu

Summary of Scenario

This scenario covers Italian ambitions to make the Mediterranean an Italian Lake. WW2 North Africa.

Playability - Section Sub-total: 4

Were you able to finish in a reasonable amount of turns? (Score: 1 )
Did the scenario avoid being tedious or repetitive? (Score: 1 )
Did the scenario capture the essence of what it was suppose to portray? (Score: 1 )
Were you impressed with the overall sound effects? (Score: 0 )
Was the choice of and interaction between races appropriate? (Score: 0 )
Did you enjoy playing the scenario? (Score: 1 )

This scenario is very enjoyable. It isn't boring like other scenarios. You have a list of options to fight Greece, Yugoslavia, Turkey or the Allies.

Units - Section Sub-total: 3

Were the majority of units changed from the default Civ2 units? (Score: 1 )
Were all of the sounds appropriate for the units in the scenario? (Score: 0 )
Was the scenario free of 'unbalanced' units? (Score: 1 )
Were there innovative combinations of special unit abilities? (Score: 0 )
Were Barbarian units appropriate when they appeared? (Score: 0 )
Any other unit related problems (like shield placement)? (Score: 1 )

The units are somewhat fine. They're well balanced. They could be better though.

Research - - Section Sub-total: 1

Was the progression of advance to advance done properly? (Score: 0 )
Were advances properly related to new units and obsolescence? (Score: 0 )
Was the tech tree of a high level of complexity? (Score: 0 )
Were non-event messages amended to suit the scenario ? (Score: 0 )
Was the civilpedia properly updated? (Score: 1 )
Were there disfunctional improvements or useless technologies? (Score: 0 )

The is no research. Its all original.

Map & Terrain - Section Sub-total: 6

Were you impressed by the Map in general? (Score: 1 )
Was terrain properly adjusted to fit the scenario? (Score: 1 )
Was attention given to geography and historical details? (Score: 1 )
Were you happy with the city, fortress, terrain improvement graphics? (Score: 1 )
Were city names and the placement of cities correct? (Score: 1 )
Were there innovations used in relation to Terrain? (Score: 1 )

The Terrain and Map were very nice. They were all correct and detailed.

Care & Details - Section Sub-total: 4 1/2

Did you find the documentation adequate? (Score: 1 )
Was the events file sufficient for the needs of the scenario? (Score: 1 )
Were you happy with the improvement and wonder icons? (Score: 1 )
Did you like the changes to the player interface? (Score: 0 )
Did you find any very apparent errors in any category of the scenario? (Score: 1 )
Do you think a lot of effort was put into doing this scenario? (Score: 1/2 )

The units were nice and I enjoyed the game, the only problem was the Global Warming that happened very easily, turning many plains and grassland into swamps.

Originality and Technical Proficiency - Section Sub-total: 2

Were the sounds appropriate in volume and clear enough to understand? (Score: 0 )
Were the sounds unique and different in the scenario? (Score: 0 )
Did you discover many unit GRAPHICS not used in any other scenarios? (Score: 1 )
Is the theme of the scenario completely novel? (Score: 1 )
Were complex events used to carry the story line or enhance the AI? (Score: 0 )
Did the author deal with all areas which could be modified? (Score: 0 )
Any other innovations worth mentioning? Explain? No innovations

Overall Assesment and Other Points of Interest:

This scenario is another good John Petroski scenario. But like his scenario's, he could've done alot better. Sounds would be a nice addition.

END

Al-Andulas

General Information

• Name of Scenario : Al-Andulas: Trail of the Sun
• Final Score : 25.0/30
  (Breakdown: 0-10 terrible /11-15 Average/ 16-20 Good/ 21-25 Excellent/ 26+Best possible)
• Type of Scenario : Historical
• Name of Author: Jesús Balsinde
• Name of Reviewer: Alcibiaties of Athenae

Summary of Scenario:

An excellent historical recreation of the Christian reconquista of Spain in the middle ages, carefully researched, and rich with historical flavor and atmosphere.

Playability - Section Sub-total: 5

Were you able to finish in a reasonable amount of turns? (Score: .5 )Yes
Did the scenario avoid being tedious or repetitive? (Score: .5) Yes
Did the scenario capture the essence of what it was portraying? (Score: 1 )Yes
Were you impressed with the overall sound effects? (Score: 1)Yes
Was the choice of and interaction between races appropriate? (Score: 1 )Yes
Did you enjoy playing the scenario? (Score: 1)Yes

This scenario was very carefully researched and playtested to insure that all the tribes were playable and interesting. Each tribe has a slightly different feel, and the Christian and Moslem states have totally different agendas in this game, with the two ideological blocks having different resources and units available to them. The major Christian power is Castle-Leon, and this power receives a supply of powerful units via events. The Christian powers are behind in the tech race, and must steal tech from the Muslims for certain advances, but the Christians can simply overwhelm their enemies with swarms of powerful Calvary types. The other Christian states are more difficult (Navarre is the hardest to play, in my opinion), but the game is fun for each. The Al-Andalusians (the Moors) are the protagonists in this situation, and they must attempt to cope with growing Christian power, while their own steadily declines as the game unfolds.

Units - Section Sub-total: 4

Were the majority of units changed from the default Civ2 units? (Score: 1 )Yes
Was the scenario free of 'unbalanced' units? (Score: 1 )Yes
Were there innovative combinations of special unit abilities? (Score: 1 )Yes
Were Barbarian units appropriate when they appeared. {Score:1)Yes

This author provided many new and unique units in this scenario, which have since been reused many times by others, but they got their start here. Each Christian power has unique Pikeman, and in this scenario you will see Crusaders, Templers, Hospitalers, even the legendary hero El-Cid appears as a unit. All in all, this unit collection is quite beautiful, and completely functional, shield placement is never a problem.

Research - - Section Sub-total: 6

Was the progression of advance to advance done properly? (Score: 1 )Yes
Were advances properly related to new units and obsolescence? (Score: 1 )Yes
Was the tech tree of a high level of complexity? (Score: 1 )Yes
Were non-event messages amended to suit the scenario ? (Score: 1 )Yes
Was the civilopedia properly updated? (Score: 1 )Yes
Were there dysfunctional improvements or useless technologies? (Score: 1 )No

The research of this complex subject is a real strength in this scenario, and the author has included a chronology (In Spanish, with an offer for an English translation). The city names and where they are located has been carefully researched, and names for cities in both Spanish and their Muslim names in included were applicable. Each power has an order of battle very close to it's historical capabilities (as close as civ-2 can provide), and this whole situation can be used as a learning tool to better understand the Reconquista. (The retaking of Iberia from the Moslems by Christian forces).

Map & Terrain - Section Sub-total: 6

Were you impressed by the Map in general? (Score: 1 )Yes
Was terrain properly adjusted to fit the scenario? (Score: 1 )Yes
Was attention given to geography and historical details? (Score: 1 )Yes
Were you happy with the city, fortress, terrain improvement graphics? (Score: 1 )Yes
Were city names and the placement of cities correct? (Score: 1 )Yes
Were there innovations used in relation to Terrain? (Score: 1 )Yes

As previously mentioned, the city placement and names are excellent, of the very highest quality that is possible in a scenario. The Terrain gifs are beautiful, and different looks are given to the Christian and Moslem cities, making the play of each rich in historical flavor.

Care & Details - Section Sub-total: 5

Did you find the documentation adequate? (Score: 1 )Yes
Was the events file sufficient for the needs of the scenario? (Score: 1 )Yes
Were you happy with the improvement and wonder icons? (Score: 1 )Yes
Did you find any very apparent errors? (Score: 1 )No
Do you think a lot of effort was put into doing this scenario? (Score: 1 )Yes

The great care and attention to detail is evident throughout this fine scenario, and the readme includes the author's opinions of the strengths and weaknesses of the various powers. Even a superficial glance at this scenario shows that it contains a vast amount of careful workmanship, and many hours spent crafting and playtesting to insure that is enjoyable to play.

Originality and Technical Proficiency - Section Sub-total: 4

Were there any sounds you had never come across before? (Score: .5 )Yes
Did you discover many units not used in any other scenarios? (Score: 1 )Yes
Is the theme of the scenario completely novel? (Score: 1 )Yes
Were complex events used to carry the story line or enhance the AI? (Score: 1 )Yes
Did the author deal with all areas which could be modified? (Score: .5 )Yes

Once again, the care and the detail of this effort was outstanding. This is truly a work of art by a true master of scenario making.

Overall Assessment and Other Points of Interest:

This is another fine series of Scenarios portraying the history of Spain and it's influence on history. The author built this scenario with the greatest of care, with many beautiful and unique units, wonders, and icons. Any scenario that has the name of Jesús Balsinde included in the credits is sure to be among the best in the genre.

END

Credit: Screenshots on this page were taken by Jesús Balsinde.

Ansteig

General Information

• Name of Scenario : Ansteig
• Final Score : 24.2/30
  (Breakdown: 0-10 terrible /11-15 Average/ 16-20 Good/ 21-25 Excellent/ 26+Best possible)
• Type of Scenario : Historical
• Name of Author: John Petroski
• Name of Reviewer: SunTzu

Summary of Scenario:

Ansteig is a World War 2 scenario based solely on NAZI Germany's quest to conquer Europe.

Playability - Section Sub-total: 5

Were you able to finish in a reasonable amount of turns? (Score: 1 )
Did the scenario avoid being tedious or repetitive? (Score: 1 )
Did the scenario capture the essence of what it was suppose to portray? (Score: 1 )
Were you impressed with the overall sound effects? (Score: 0 )
Was the choice of and interaction between races appropriate? (Score: 1 )
Did you enjoy playing the scenario? (Score: 1 )

This scenario is a very addictive scenario. The ability of the Russians and Allies to work together in this scenario is remarkable. It never gets boring. The battle for Britain is exhilarating. To make it to Stalingrad requires much patience and strategy. The help of Allied B-17 Flying Fortresses in the eastern front really makes thing interesting.

Units - Section Sub-total: 5

Were the majority of units changed from the default Civ2 units? (Score: 1 )
Were all of the sounds appropriate for the units in the scenario? (Score: 0 )
Was the scenario free of 'unbalanced' units? (Score: 1 )
Were there innovative combinations of special unit abilities? (Score: 1 )
Were Barbarian units appropriate when they appeared? (Score: 1 )
Any other unit related problems (like shield placement)? (Score: 1 )

The Units are very well balanced and are historically accurate. With the B-17's bombing NAZI occupied Europe into the ground, the only thing you must do is discover and build FW-190's. The unit graphics are amazing. 5 stars! :)

Research - Section Sub-total: 6

Was the progression of advance to advance done properly? (Score: 1 )
Were advances properly related to new units and obsolescence? (Score: 1 )
Was the tech tree of a high level of complexity? (Score: 1 )
Were non-event messages amended to suit the scenario ? (Score: 1 )
Was the civilopedia properly updated? (Score: 1 )
Were there dysfunctional improvements or useless technologies? (Score: 1 )

The Technology Tree is sufficient. With all weapons that were used in WW2. It even has the Maus a German Super Heavy Tank that hardly saw action late in 1945.

Map & Terrain - Section Sub-total: 5

Were you impressed by the Map in general? (Score: 1 )
Was terrain properly adjusted to fit the scenario? (Score: 1 )
Was attention given to geography and historical details? (Score: 1 )
Were you happy with the city, fortress, terrain improvement graphics? (Score: 1 )
Were city names and the placement of cities correct? (Score: 1 )
Were there innovations used in relation to Terrain? (Score: 0 )

The Map and Terrain are mostly hand made and new for the scenario. I like the terrain because most of it isn't the plain terrain that comes with the game. The Map is a great Europe map with a hint of Russia, The Middle East and North Africa and the US/Canada.

Care & Details - Section Sub-total: 5

Did you find the documentation adequate? (Score: 1 )
Was the events file sufficient for the needs of the scenario? (Score: 1 )
Were you happy with the improvement and wonder icons? (Score: 1 )
Did you like the changes to the player interface? (Score: 0 )
Did you find any very apparent errors in any category of the scenario? (Score: 1 )
Do you think a lot of effort was put into doing this scenario? (Score: 1 )

I think the scenario was made carefully and was done with precision. Not much to say except that this is a great WW2 Scenario.

Originality and Technical Proficiency - Section Sub-total: 3

Were the sounds appropriate in volume and clear enough to understand? (Score: 0 )
Were the sounds unique and different in the scenario? (Score: 0 )
Did you discover many unit GRAPHICS not used in any other scenarios? (Score: 1 )
Is the theme of the scenario completely novel? (Score: 1 )
Were complex events used to carry the story line or enhance the AI? (Score: 1 )
Did the author deal with all areas which could be modified? (Score: 0 )
Any other innovations worth mentioning? Explain? (no actual score here)

Overall Assessment and Other Points of Interest:

This scenario is a very good scenario. I enjoyed playing it and conquering all of England and the North Atlantic, while slowing pushing towards Moscow and making a huge counter attack late in 1944 retaking much of North Africa that was lost earlier. The main failure is the lack of sounds. Sound were made but were lost. I remember the sounds and they were very good. But for some reason all of the sites lost the sounds and so did John Petroski. That is the downfall of this scenario. All scenarios need sounds. Although with the lack of sounds, SunTzu gives this scenario 5 stars and will add it to his Scenario Hall of Fame :)

Atlantis - The Lost Empire

General Information:

• Name of Scenario: Atlantis - the Lost Empire
• Final Score: 25 / 30
  (Breakdown: 0-10 terrible /11-15 Average/ 16-20 Good/ 21-25 Excellent/ 26+Best possible)
• Type of Scenario: Historical/Fantasy
• Name of Author: ERIN T. RYAN a.k.a. "shamrock"
• Name of Reviewer: Kobayashi

Summary of Scenario:

You play as Atlas, leader of the Atlantean Civilization. The Atlanteans are technologically superior to all other civilizations, but unfortunately their continent sinks and they must start all over again. Two of your brothers realized this long ago and made off with some special items to start their own empires long ago. They are your main rivals. You can win by conquest or by building a Deep-Sea Submersible that can make the journey to the lost city of Atlantis.

Playability - Section Sub-total: 4.5/5

Were you able to finish in a reasonable amount of turns? (Score: 1 )

There is a 311 turn limit and some races are able to build the submarine (spaceship) before the end of the game (but not me on Emperor level).

Did the scenario avoid being tedious or repetitive? (Score: 1 )

Pretty good change in pace throughout the game. There were three stages using different source files.

Did the scenario capture the essence of what it was suppose to portray? (Score: 1 )

Does not disappoint. You escape from Altlantis as it sinks and try to return in a submarine.

Were you impressed with the overall sound effects? (Score: 0.5 )

Nothing particularly special but of reasonable quality.

Did you enjoy playing the scenario? (Score: 1 )

Yes- I played it three times in succession.

Units - Section Sub-total: 4.5/5

Were the majority of units changed from the default Civ2 units? (Score: 1 )

Every single unit was changed although the tuaoi settler looked suspiciously like a civ engineer wearing dark glasses.

Were all of the sounds appropriate for the units in the scenario? (Score: 1 )

Not one inappropriate sound. I particularly liked the sound you got on building a submarine component.

Was the scenario free of 'unbalanced' units? (Score: 1 )

Quite good balance - neither defensive or offensive units were too strong.

Were there innovative combinations of special unit abilities? (Score: 0.5 )

Everything was pretty standard. There was a spy type unit which was a land based missile.

Were Barbarian units appropriate when they appeared? (Score: 1 )

Good frequency of appearance and always the appropriate units.

Research - - Section Sub-total: 3.5/5

Was the progression of advance to advance done properly? (Score: 0.5 )

A good face-lift to the standard tech tree. I did not like the fact that there were modern weapons like cruisers in 2000 b.c. The units should have been adjusted to the time frame or vice versa.

Were advances properly related to new units and obsolescence? (Score: 1 )

Good control of units - you got new ones and old ones disappeared. You never have a few dozen units to build like in some other scenarios.

Were non-event messages amended to suit the scenario ? (Score: 1 )

Yes - golden age, first space flight etc were all done up nicely.

Was the civilopedia properly updated? (Score: 1 )

Generally good work here. My only complaint is that some units have the ability 'tuaoi knowledge' and it is not stated anywhere that 'tuaoi knowledge' is the ability to attack air units. There is also a nice tech tree diagram in MS Word format.

Were there dysfunctional improvements or useless technologies? (Score: 0 )

The Church can only function if its prerequisite is monotheism. The author renamed Advanced Flight to monotheism and made it the prerequisite. So the churches didn't work after you built them until you discovered centralized church.

Map & Terrain - Section Sub-total: 4.5/5

Were you impressed by the Map in general? (Score: 1 )

Nicely done atlantic map with America on one side and Europe on the other. I think this is a new (or at least not very common) map.

Was terrain properly adjusted to fit the scenario? (Score: 1 )

Normal regular terrain. The sea was a unique flat shade of purple but otherwise I liked the look of the wavy desert and farmland.

Was attention given to geography and historical details? (Score: 1 )

There is (apparently) proper research and a good length article speculating about the origins of Atlantis. The splitting off of two rival tribes led by Atlas' brothers was a good concept.

Were you happy with the city, fortress, terrain improvement graphics? (Score: 0.5 )

Normal stuff - nothing to get ga ga over.

Were there innovations used in relation to Terrain? (Score: 1 )

Simply the sinking sequence should entitle the scenario to full marks in this category. On switching from part II to part III, terrain movement penalty is adjusted - a nice touch.

Care & Details - Section Sub-total: 4.5/5

Did you find the documentation adequate? (Score: 0.5 )

A bit skimpy. The readme is lengthy but dwells mostly on the legend of Atlantis and the strategy guide for getting off the island before it sinks. I also do not like the use of a word file as the read me (because of the possibility of macro viruses). Nowhere does it say that MGE is required.

Was the events file sufficient for the needs of the scenario? (Score: 1 )

The events die off after the great flood and its mostly you got a free this and free that. Before that, the story of Atlantis and the way the island got swallowed up in part one was great.

Were you happy with the improvement and wonder icons? (Score: 1 )

Yes - especially the wonder icons and names. Very imaginative.

Did you find any very apparent errors in any category of the scenario? (Score: 1 )

Good quality control overall.

Do you think a lot of effort was put into doing this scenario? (Score: 1 )

Yes - it comes in three parts and there are two videos and some graphic files which alter things like the background of the submarine(spaceship) display. This is double the normal 'adequate' amount of work.

Originality and Technical Proficiency - Section Sub-total: 3.5/5

Were the sounds appropriate in volume and clear enough to understand?
Were the sounds unique and different in the scenario? (Score: 0.5 )

No, just your normal typical sounds except maybe for the Tuaoi war cry.

Did you discover many unit GRAPHICS not used in any other scenarios? (Score: 0 )

No. All units as far as I know are from other scenarios.

Is the theme of the scenario completely novel? (Score: 1 )

No. Atlantis is one of the original FW civ scenarios but this one is much improved. But then again the Atlantis theme is not exactly over done so 1 point.

Were complex events used to carry the story line or enhance the AI? (Score: 1 )

Reasonably good. You are supposed to find two portals, one on land and one on sea to trigger other events but I never found them the three times I played. There is also a great flood which caught me completely off guard.

Did the author deal with all areas which could be modified? (Score: 1 )

I think a good job overall in engineering the change from default Civ2.

Overall Assessment and Other Points of Interest:

A reasonably difficult scenario. The author warns you not to play at deity level but I recommend King level at most for an enjoyable and challenging game.

END

---

Author's Feedback

1. The readme is rich text format not a word file.
2. There are other special units like the terraformer and tuaoi jump troop which I didn't get to build - mostly because I did not find any of the portals.
3. There is a complete set of detailed descriptions in the description file and not the civpedia. You need to click the description button.

Brown Man's Burden

General Information:

• Name of Scenario : Brown Man's Burden
• Final Score : 25.0/30
  (Breakdown: 0-10 terrible /11-15 Average/ 16-20 Good/ 21-25 Excellent/ 26+Best possible)
• Type of Scenario :Historical
• Name of Author: Carl Fritz
• Name of Reviewer: Morten Blaabjerg

Summary of Scenario:

Pile on the brown man's burden, and try and claim all of Africa for your nation, before the others do!

Playability - Section Sub-total: 5/5

This scenario is a personal favorite of mine, because it is very fun to play. It is not revolutionary, by any means, but a good, classic scenario, using most of the classic Civ2 rules in order to portray the theme. The theme is the European "Scramble" for Africa, from roughly 1890-1900, where almost all major European nations in one big rush claimed parts of the African interior in search of trade opportunities and imperial prestige. The scenario extends this time frame a bit, so it runs from 1886 to 1914 (breakout of World War I). This is quite appropriate, in my opinion. It could even have started earlier, with fewer cities in possession of the European nations. As the scenario starts off, the European nations have a fair share of Africa to begin with, which leads on to a "industrial war" playing approach, rather than a "seek and conquest" playstyle. There are a great deal of African tribes left for bidding, but not so many as one could have expected. Afterall, this is a huge continent, with more unexplored regions than anywhere else in the world. So the included African tribes are a little disappointing at the outset. But rather quickly it becomes one European nation watching the others every move. And this makes for an exciting game, and is captured very well. The tribes are the English, Germans, Italians, Mahdists, Ethiopians, French, and Portuguese. As well as barbarians simulating the lesser colonial powers, as well as the savage tribes in the interior. I was personally a little disappointed that the Belgians was left with the barbarians, as the Belgian king Leopold II was very much an active player in the partitioning of Africa, and very much showed the example for others with his overtly ambitious projects in the Congo Free State. But I can live with this. The included African tribes, especially the Mahdists and the Ethiopians, is set up strategically superbly, and is a really hard nut to crack for the European tribes. Very challenging, and quite realistically set up.

Units - Section Sub-total: 5/5

Most of the units are very clearly set up as either defensive or offensive units, and a few in between. This is very intelligently done, so that there are very few units you will choose not to build. I picked my favorites, though. Some units are events generated and nation specific. Germans get "preussers", English "gold-diggers" -and the French get "nameless men" from the foreign legion. Some units, like the explorer, is most useful in the beginning, but useless later in the game. I would personally have liked to see a more offensive explorer type a la H.M. Stanley. One favorite tactic of mine, was the Howitzer-Maxim Gun-Engineer tactic. In order to get close enough to take any of the cities in this game, without too many casualties, you need to carefully position units in fortresses along with high-defensive units such as veteran Gatling Guns or Maxim Guns. Otherwise those Mahdist and Ethiopian Horsemen will keep coming forever charging, and you will lose your weak-defendants on end. As you can stack units in the fortresses, you can actually win wars without even a single casualty, using this strategy. Railroads speed up this approach, and proves extremely beneficial, as always. The strategy and combination/balance of units is in my opinion superb. Graphics wise the units are very nicely done.

Research - - Section Sub-total: 4/5

The tech tree was partly altered to suit the theme, while most of the classic tech tree remains unaltered. The rate for tech development was slowed somewhat, to a nearly perfect level, that suits the game. I noticed something funny about the cathedrals, and I'm not sure, but it seems to be an incident of "monotheism" not correctly applied to the building of cathedrals, which makes these dysfunctional. But as said, I am not sure, and I haven't checked, as it is not so great a problem, when the game plays and you forget things like this. And it could be intentional. Islam was in many places much more successful than the Christian missionaries proved to be; I usually built Mosques instead (Coliseum), which work out perfectly. There are a bunch of wonders as well in strategically placed cities, as well as a few still buildable, including "Stanleys Expeditions" (a free advance), etc. All seem to work quite balanced, and add to the atmosphere of it all.

Map & Terrain - Section Sub-total: 3/5

I wasn't so impressed with the map, but it works and looks ok. There are a few new graphics which look quite good, including the mountains, deserts and hills. And some that look a little out of place. While the setup geographically might be slightly disappointing, the strategical setup is much better. It takes some consideration as to how to conquer cities that lie in the middle of the jungle, with no roads etc. I would personally have liked to see more difficult strategical set-ups with use of the terrain, like the one in the Sudan and Ethiopia, which is set up superbly using the mountain ranges as an effective barrier for easy European conquest. So that the geography of the continent would constantly prove a challenge to the European nations, like was the case historically. Railroads somehow seem to make it a little too easy. -And yes, there were railroads built in Africa during this period, but only with great difficulty, because workers were lazy, and the sicknesses and hazards from opening up the interior proved a tremendous challenge. Another approach could have been sailable rivers, on which you could launch steamers to control an area, which was used historically on the Nile, as well as the Congo, to reach the interior.

Care & Details - Section Sub-total: 4/5

Carl Fritz must be said to be a veteran in the field of scenario design, and this scenario proves this too. As said, this scen is enjoyable, as well as challenging and balanced. But it is also full of all kinds of surprises and nit-bits of humor, including the altering of the advisors, and the icons are appropriately changed, where needed. There are a load of random events which replay some of the great incidents of the "Scramble", like the Kitchener campaign against the Mahdists, the Boer War etc. Most of these events doesn't have a major impact on gameplay, though, and seldom lead to conquest on part of the barbarians.

Originality and Technical Proficiency - Section Sub-total: 4/5

..

Overall Assessment and Other Points of Interest:

I just loved the sound of the native spearmen attacking, which is completely novel to me, and really make my day. Other sounds are more common gunshots and explosions, but sampled too by Carl himself. I also credit Carl for keeping the file size down, by using a sound.bat to copy the sound files between directories.

It all comes together quite seamlessly. This is a classic Civ2 scenario, which plays very well, and accomplishes what I guess the author wanted. To simulate the "Scramble" in a classic Civ2 context. Technically, it has the touch of a proficient hand, who knows very well what it is doing, and so doesn't feel the need to rearrange everything in the game engine, to accomplish his needs. You still know that this is Civ2, the time frame and the setting is just a little different. No need for all brand new complex tech trees or multi-events files. So, while this scen might not be the top notch of originality, it is solid, entertaining work.

Within the frame of Civ2, this is a superb classic scenario, which should not be missed.

Colonization: The Struggle for Empire

General Information:

• Name of Scenario : Colonies 3.12
• Final Score : 25/30
  (Breakdown: 0-10 terrible /11-15 Average/ 16-20 Good/ 21-25 Excellent/ 26+Best possible)
• Type of Scenario :Historical
• Name of Author: John Ellis
• Name of Reviewer: Alcibiaties of Athenae

Summary of Scenario:

Colonies is a fourth generation scenario representing four major European tribes and several native tribes struggling for control of the new world and parts of Europe, beginning at the end of the thirty year's war and ending in 1800. You can play as England, France, Spain, Holland, the Iroquois, the Souix, or the Huron. Each civ has different units and objectives, and taking the entire map with any power is unlikely.

England and France are the star players, the easiest powers to play as, with large base empire potential, and good trade and research possibilities. Both grow smoothly and quickly, and can quickly acquire powerful units.

Spain is at it's height at start, and will only decline, it's financial difficulties and being handicapped with inferior units as the game progresses makes this tribe very challenging.

The Dutch are the most difficult of the European powers, they are a Republic at start, so science and money are not a worry, but their cities have little production potential at start, so producing units is difficult at the start.

The three native tribes are just trying to survive, and hold off the encroaching Europeans, and will have a tough time of it, and require a different way of thinking, since they will never have ships or cannons that the Europeans use to great effect.

Playability - Section Sub-total: 5.5

Were you able to finish in a reasonable amount of turns? (Score: 1 )

The turns are just over 200, so you probably won't defeat everyone in any game, but the author gives a breakdown of scores so you can judge how you accomplished your goals for each tribe.

Did the scenario avoid being tedious or repetitive? (Score: 1 )

Some portions of the game, such as the long sea travel, plus the slow city growth rate, make the game lag at points, but overall, it moves along quite well.

Did the scenario capture the essence of what it was portraying? (Score: 1 )

Very much so. Each power has it's own unique units and goals, and plays differently. It clearly shows the expansion of England and France, why Spain was a declining power in the period, and the difficulties both politically and geographically that hindered Holland.

Were you impressed with the overall sound effects? (Score: 0.5 )

The sounds fit the units, no inappropriate sounds were heard.

Was the choice of and interaction between races appropriate? (Score: 1 )

Yes, the four major powers were good choices, and the mix of natives is interesting as well, as the Iroquois and Huron had much interaction with the early North American colonists.

Did you enjoy playing the scenario? (Score: 1 )

Very much so, enough, in fact to play it several times with a different tribe each time. The unique challenge each European power and the natives have makes each game different.

Units - Section Sub-total:  5

Were the majority of units changed from the default Civ2 units? (Score: 1 )

All the units are different from the default units. One of the great joys of a well done scenario is to see well chosen units that fit our concepts of what the fighting men and equipment of history portrayed in the game.This scenario is loaded with historical color, that will please any fan of this era.

Did you discover any inappropriate unit sounds? (Score: 0.5 )

The sounds suited each unit, and gave a good feel to the scenario.

Was the scenario free of 'unbalanced' units? (Score: 1 )

All units have their place, there were no useless units, nor any super units. Even the natives can receive a unit late in the game to fight the Europeans with.

Were there innovative combinations of special unit abilities? (Score: 1 )

There were Pirates with amphibious capability, Boarding parties (really air units in disguise), two fine innovations. There were also some fine triggers, such as defeating certain natives produce Slave units, which are settlers without city support, so are "free" units.

Were Barbarian units appropriate when they appeared? (Score: 1)

The author used barbarians to represent various Pirate activity, as well as Muslim forces in Africa and minor natives in both Africa and the Americas, to excellent effect.

Any other unit related problems (like shield placement)? (Score: .5 )

All shield placement was correct, and easily visible.

Research - - Section Sub-total: 4.5

Was the progression of advance to advance done properly? (Score: 1 )

This is yet another area where John Ellis shines, the progression of weapons and units, as well as civil and naval tech is very well done, and gives excellent historical flavor to the scenario.

Were advances properly related to new units and obsolescence? (Score: 0.5)

The change over from feudal pikemen and armored horse units to gunpowder and cannon units is well illustrated.

Was the tech tree of a high level of complexity? (Score: 1 )

This area was very well done, with no errors that might cause a game crash, and each tech plays a part in the development of your selected tribe.

Were non-event messages amended to suit the scenario ? (Score: 0.5)

You get some nice messages, such as when you lose a boarding party, it says they have gone raiding on their own!

Was the civilopedia properly updated? (Score: 0.5 )

All units are shown, as well as clear descriptions of each wonder.

Were there dysfunctional improvements or useless technologies? (Score: 1)

The scenario is free of such technical errors, and plays very smoothly.

Map & Terrain - Section Sub-total:  3

Were you impressed by the Map in general? (Score: 0.5 )

It's a good map, showing western Europe, from a line of Holland/France westward, to the Rockies in North America, and from the Faeroes/Hudson bay to the Spanish main/Gold coast of Africa, the area that was important to the age of exploration.

Was terrain properly adjusted to fit the scenario? (Score: 0.5 )

Some of the cities are placed quite close, limiting growth, but no gross errors are seen here.

Was attention given to geography and historical details? (Score: 0.5 )

The feel in North America is quite good, a road-less wilderness where a fortress or outpost appears. Europe seems cramped, but this is a function of map scale.

Were you happy with the city, fortress, terrain improvement graphics? (Score: 0.5 )

The City and fortresses look quite good, however, I was less then pleased with the farm and irrigation graphic, they are hard to see clearly, and the irrigation is mostly orange, giving heavily farmed areas an odd appearance.

Were city names and the placement of cities correct? (Score: 1 )

The colonies are named in their native languages, giving a beautiful historic feel to the scenario.

Care & Details - Section Sub-total:  3.5

Did you find the documentation adequate? (Score: 1 )

Fine historical documentation is included, and some explanation of the strengths and weaknesses of each power are included.

Was the events file sufficient for the needs of the scenario? (Score: 1 )

The events included some historical information on the period, and was mainly used to trigger Pirate attacks around the map.

Were you happy with the improvement and wonder icons? (Score: 0.5 )

Some nice work here, that added flavor to the scenario's atmosphere.

Do you think a lot of effort was put into doing this scenario? (Score: 1 )

As this is the fourth version of this scenario, it's safe to say the author has done quite a bit of updating on it.

Originality and Technical Proficiency - Section Sub-total: 3.5

Were there any sounds you had never come across before? (Score: 0.5 )

Having played so many scenarios the last few years, new sounds are rare, but all the sounds here fit the time period nicely.

Did you discover many units not used in any other scenarios? (Score: 1 )

Quite a few, actually, and the civ specific units for each tribe add much flavor to this game.

Is the theme of the scenario completely novel? (Score: 0.5 )

There have been other scenarios for this period, but this one is clearly the pace setter.

Were complex events used to carry the story line or enhance the AI? (Score: 0.5 )

Events were used mainly to trigger barbarians and special units (like the Spanish treasure galleon, and the huge amount of cash others receive for sinking it! )

Did the author deal with all areas which could be modified? (Score: 1 )

The terrain values are all changed, and must be looked at carefully, colonists and slaves are limited in what they can improve, farmers are crucial to advance (and can only be had by trading with the natives!)

Overall Assessment and Other Points of Interest:

This is a fine historical scenario from one of the best designers of Civilization 2 scenarios out there.

The level of care and historical accuracy is evident from the very first when playing this scenario.

The only real draw back is you will have trouble taking the whole map, and forget about attacks in Europe until better Artillery is discovered, it's extremely difficult to take fortified cities with the initial units provided, as it should be historically).

This scenario is highly recommended to anyone who enjoys the age of European colonization in the Americas, or just a well done effort in general.

Enemy of God

General Information:

Name of Scenario : Enemy of God (version 2.4)
Final Score : 23.5 /30
(Breakdown: 0-10 terrible /11-15 Average/ 16-20 Good/ 21-25 Excellent/ 26+Best possible)
Type of Scenario : Both Historical and Fantasy
Name of Author: Mr. Temba
Name of Reviewer: Kobayashi

Summary of Scenario:

As the scenario tells you:

Uther Pendragon is dead. His heir, Mordred, is still a baby. Arthur must return home to save his future king. With the death of Uther the old High Kingship of Britain is dissolved. Silura, Powys, Gwent, Eluned and Dumnonia are now seperate factions rather than one opposing the saxons. King Gundleus of Siluria has declared war on Gwent and Powys. King Edling of Eluned has declared war on Dumnonina. We must stop this civil war before the great saxon army arrives!

You play as Arthur of the Dumnonians circa 450 A.D. right after the Romans have abandoned Briton. The Dumnonians are one of the tribes of Briton and you control the area known as Wales today. There are several other local tribes like the Benoic and either allied with them or by yourself you have to fight the invading Aenglish and Saxons. The scenario comes in five parts.

Playability - Section Sub-total: 4.5/5.0

Were you able to finish in a reasonable amount of turns? (Score: 1 )

There are about a 100 to 150 turns per chapter and every chapter ends at a particular date. So this brings the total number of turns to about 600. This isn't some scenario you can play in one or even three sittings. However, its nicely broken up into segments so think of it as five scenarios that play sequentially. The 5 chapters are:

Part 1 - You get to familiarize yourself with the scenario and fight mostly in northern France in aid of your allies the Benoic (led by Lancelot).

Part 2 - Involves the search for the caldron of Merlin so his powers can be activated.

Part 3 - Lancelot revolts and you have to destroy the Benoics.

Part 4 - The invasion forces of the Aeglish and Saxons begins to reach your territory while you go on several quests to find a way to stop them.

Part 5 - Modred grows up and there is a final battle with loyalist forces even whilst the invasion of Briton continues unabated.

Did the scenario avoid being tedious or repetitive? (Score: 0.5 )

Battles tended to get repetitive and in particular, the AI wolf units which are actually air units would repeatedly cause a message saying that they are attacking - which originally is the air attack message. I did not enjoy pressing the OK a dozen times each turn for the entire second half the scenario.

Did the scenario capture the essence of what it was portraying? (Score: 1 )

The legend of Arthur is very nicely meshed with what is know about the situation in Briton during the period.

Was the choice of and interaction between races appropriate? (Score: 1 )

Good mix of tribes. There are two invading tribes, one neutral tribe the Franks who play a minor but balancing role in the scheme of things and three other existing powers in Briton.

Did you enjoy playing the scenario? (Score: 1 )

Yes this was one of Mr. Temba's better creations. I liked it much better than Charlemagne and as much as Under Dark.

These are the ever growing Aenglish and Saxon hordes you have to fend off.

(note that Kiel and Konigsberg have move to England)

Units - Section Sub-total: 4.0/5.0

Were the majority of units changed from the default Civ2 units? (Score: 1 )

All units were modified and looked correct for the period.

Were all of the sounds appropriate for the units in the scenario? (Score: 0.5 )

Units slots were arranged so that all sounds were appropriate. However, some of the sounds were simply the default civ2 sounds.

Was the scenario free of 'unbalanced' units? (Score: 0.5 )

You have some hero units which are more powerful but not invincible. I lost most of the hero units I received in each chapter except for Arthur himself. I would have preferred some kind of scissors-paper-stone battle system but it seems that concentration of raw numbers is more important in Enemy of God.

Were there innovative combinations of special unit abilities? (Score: 1 )

Yes. I particularly liked the birdmen which were a combination of a paratrooper and explorer. Took me a while to figure out how to use them properly but once I did, they did wonders. Another unit was cleverly used to complete an otherwise very very expensive wonder.

Were Barbarian units appropriate when they appeared?(Score: 1)

Excellent use of Barbarians. In the tradition of other Temba scenarios, local barbarians are triggered repeatedly by events while other barbarians come out of Barbarian cities and typically protect items you are searching for.

Research - - Section Sub-total: 3.0/5.0

Were advances properly related to new units and obsolescence? (Score: 0.5 )

Except for the A-bomb type unit towards the end, I didn't get any new units other than unique units. I would have liked to have more types of units as the game progressed but it seems the author was intending to let the scenario revolve around the hero figures.

Was the tech tree of a high level of complexity? (Score: 0.5 )

There was no research and you received new techs via events after completing your quests or when certain historical events occurred. Generally the techs were distributed such that each tribe had its unique units.

Were non-event messages amended to suit the scenario ? (Score: 1 )

I didn't notice any inappropriate messages. For example, When your cities reach their size limit, the standard aqueduct message has been modified to tell you the Romans took all knowledge about building aqueducts with them.

Was the Civilopedia properly updated? (Score: 1 )

The pedia had fewer entries than the typical scenario because many wonders, improvements and units were not available. However for those entries which were present, the pedia was well updated as you can tell from this example of the 'Glory of Arthur' Wonder.

Detailed explanations of each wonder and improvement are provided

Were there dysfunctional improvements or useless technologies? (Score: 0 )

You can only build two improvement for most of the game, one is harbor and the other the sacred grove. This latter is a happiness improvement but you never need it as your citizens are never unhappy even at deity level (since all research allocations can be given to luxury). There are several other city improvements but they are already there at the start of the game and can never be built.

Map & Terrain - Section Sub-total: 3.5/5.0

Were you impressed by the Map in general? (Score: 1 )

The map covers Great Britain and a bit of Ireland and France. Its been stretched left to right to increase the playing area while maintaining access to the coast. A good idea compared to using a proportioned map. (I've not included a picture since much of the map is hidden at the start waiting for your exploration)

Was terrain properly adjusted to fit the scenario? (Score: 0.5 )

Pretty standard terrain. Nothing anachronistic but not particularly outstanding wither.

Was attention given to geography and historical details? (Score: 1 )

There was definitely a lot of research done and the author managed to weave much of this into messages and events. I am not that familiar with the period but I doubt if anyone could invent all the concepts and terms used, like in this extract from the events file.

The High Council of Britian convenes for the last time. Many new items are being discussed, but the leaders of Elened and Siluria have not come. Two new saxon chiefs, Aelle and Cerdic have landed, displacing the old king Aesc. From across the water british refugees in Britannia are being attacked by Clovis, King of the Franks. The council decides that the future of Britians is Dumnonias hands. The new King, Mordred ap Mordred ap Uther ap Vortigern is still too young to rule. So the men of the high council summon the best warrior in Britian to fight for him. Arthur will come home.

Were you happy with the city, fortress, terrain improvement graphics? (Score: 1 )

Cities were appropriately adjusted. Your own cities are the standard medieval style but the invaders and barbarians have encampments and some tribes have posts instead of flags.

A piece of land owned by the barbarians whic shows many of the changes done to the terrain and cities.

Were city names and the placement of cities correct? (Score: 0 )

Your own cities are appropriately named but when you look at the AI races, many cities from mainland Europe begin to appear in England. I might be able to rationalize that some of the European tribes decided to found their cities in the British Isles instead but how would you explain Chinese cities being located in England?

 

Care & Details - Section Sub-total: 5.0/5.0

Did you find the documentation adequate? (Score: 1 )
Yes there was a detailed readme and even a history file which explains the situation at the time in great detail. The following is an example from the history.txt.

AD 450 - Adventus Saxonum. The coming of the Saxons. Hengest (a Saxon chief) arrived on the shore of Britian with "3 keels" of Saxon warriors. He is welcomed by Vortigern. During the next years there was increasing Saxon settlement in Britian. Hengest invitied his son Octha from Germany to bring 16 keels of warriors who occupied the northern lands and defeated the Picts. The Picts were never heard from again. After that the Saxons become restless. Raids on British people became more and more frequent.

Was the events file sufficient for the needs of the scenario? (Score: 1 )
Events were excellent. In fact, I think one of the main reasons why the scenario is broken into five parts so that such a huge number of events could be included.

Were you happy with the improvement and wonder icons? (Score: 1 )
Yes all the icons were changed to make them fit with 400 A.D.

Thats all the improvements there are and you can only build two of them

Did you find any very apparent errors? (Score: 1 )

This is version 2.4 so most of the wrinkles have been ironed out.

Do you think a lot of effort was put into doing this scenario? (Score: 1 )

Without a doubt this has been a monumental piece of work.

Originality and Technical Proficiency - Section Sub-total: 3.5

Were there any sounds you had never come across before? (Score: 1 )

There are various sounds like barking dogs and a guy who shouts "You're going down!" much like in a WWF match.

Did you discover many units not used in any other scenarios? (Score: 1 )

Some such as the African Mercenaries were created by Mr. Temba himself while others were made by Harlan Thompson and Alex Moor. As the scenario is not new, many units probably appear common by now but I believe at the time they were relatively unique.

Is the theme of the scenario completely novel? (Score: 0.5 )

No. This is one of the more common medieval fantasy settings.

Were complex events used to carry the story line or enhance the AI? (Score: 1 )

This part was brilliantly done. You have to search for things like unicorns and dragons and the storyline of Arthur, Merlin, Lancelot and Adventus Saxonum are skillfully broughtforth by the events. Also, the algorithm for creating AI and barbarian units was well thought out.

Did the author deal with all areas which could be modified? (Score: 0 )

Sadly no. Although I have enjoyed the scenario as it is, I cannot help but think that too many parts of the traditional civ game such as research, city improvements and unit obsolescence have been left out.

Overall Assessment and Other Points of Interest:

If you are interested in the Arthurian Legend or British History and are willing to invest the time to play a long challenging scenario - this scenario's for you. Also, many civ players (not me) like to bypass research and the micro management of cities. If you are one of them, this scenario is for you.

For a full History Perspective of this scenario, visit this website http://www.vii.com/~cda/atlas/

Imperium Romanum

General Information

• Name of Scenario: Imperium Romanum v 2.2
• Final Score: 25.9/30
  (Breakdown: 0-10 terrible /11-15 Average/ 16-20 Good/ 21-25 Excellent/ 26+Best possible)
• Name(s) of Author(s): Bernd Brosing (a.k.a. BeBro)
• Type of Scenario: Classic History
• Reviewed by: Kevin Klop (a.k.a. willemvanoranje)

Introduction

Bernd Brosing's scenario Imperium Romanum is about the birth of the city of Rome as a republic, to the time in which Rome had conquered the whole Mediterranean and great parts of Europe as well. You begin with the Samnites, Latins and Etrusks as your greatest threat. After that, there are Greek and Celts who oppose the greatest threat within the Italian homeland; or should I say: You are their greatest threat.

Playability - 5.5/6

The scenario's main function is conquering; without it you can't survive. But also building plays a part in this scenario, you will need engineers to build roads and connect all the cities with each other, or rebuild destroyed cities (which I did; I rebuilt Carthago). By this, it reflects the reality as it was the best way it can, since Civilization II doesn't give us the space to program large senate meetings and complicated politics in it. The Romans were very militaristic; and that's exactly what's the great thing in this scenario.

Playing this scenario is fun. You must make hard decisions sometimes, and you don't know if it's the right one. Most of the time, it was the right one, but sometimes, you can lose three or four cities because you didn't expect the enemy to have that much defensive units.

The scenario might take too long for some people; there is a lot to conquer and some people might get bored when they start conquering the Middle-East. That's too bad, but I for one wouldn't know how to change this without messing up the purpose of this scenario.

.
Image 1: The Fall of Carthago. The city of Hadrumetum is already taken.

Units - 5.5/6

The scenario uses 3 different unit-files, but all three of them are almost the same. There are some small changes, to make the scenario right with history. All units have been edited, and look very nice and (for Civ II) realistic. The only thing is, that you probably build just two different units. In the beginning, when you try to get control over Italy, you can do with the Consular Legion and sometimes a small siege unit, so all your cities keep building those. Later, when you start attacks on Carthago and Macedonia, you will need Imperial Legions and Siege tower, same thing when you invade the Persian Empire. Also one type of ship will be used, to transport the units quickly from Italy and Spain to the Middle-East. Maybe that's something that could have been done better; more variety in units. But I think we shouldn't take it so hard; almost all scenario creators have serious problems with the balance of units, and BeBro did very very well in balancing his scenario; every civ has its own defensive and offensive units; so you won't see a Celt in the Middle-East or a Persian chariot in Spain.

Image 2: The Persians don't like it when their cities are being taken.

Research - 5/6

The tech tree was very interesting. For me, the invention of Siege Units was very important, and I'm happy to say that this is historical correct. The Romans learned about Siege Units in Greece. The Greek forces could repel two invasions with their catapults and ballistas. The Romans studied the weapons, and the third time they used catapults as well and conquered Greece. Maybe this could have been done in the scenario: the Romans can only research Siege Weapons after they took a Greek city, or maybe the Greeks could have been a more siege-unit civilization.

Most advances simply have the name of the unit or city improvement they supply, which is a good thing on the one side because you don't have to check the civilopedia every time, but also is a bit too easy for some people, who might think of it as 'without inspiration or creativity'. But for me, making the right techs with good names is always hard, and in my opinion the way how BeBro did it is great.

It's too bad that the tech tree wasn't longer; by A.D. 35 I was conquering the last city of the Macedonians and the westside of the Persian Empire; and I was already at 'Future Tech 79'. Maybe research should be slowed down somehow, though this might give problems in the earlier stages when research is needed.

The civilopedia isn't taken care of for most things, but for the wonders a great deal of information is provided. The thing is; for most people only the wonders are interesting enough to write and read about. Besides that, little (relevant) information can be given for the city improvements. But just a few lines wouldn't have been impossible I think.

Not all in-game messages were changed, but then, they don't need to. There are few people who rewrite the entire game.txt, when the messages already in are good enough.

Map & Terrain - 5/6

The map used in this scenario is logically chosen; it contains the Mediterranean, parts of the Sahara Desert, the Middle-East, the Black Sea area and whole Middle- and Northern-Europe (except for Scandinavia). So all the relevant places are in the map. All cities are placed at the right place, though man is still not sure where Alesia was. Most city names are written the 'Roman' way (in Latin), but there are a few that are written in the German/Western way. The most clear example is the city of Jinjan; the Romans never had the 'J', so they used the 'I'. The Latin should be Iinian. But of course, this gives us problems pronouncing it, so the choice isn't without logic. Another good example is the city of Byzanz, which was first called Byzantium by the Romans, and later Constantinople. Byzanz is probably the German name, and it's a little spot on the almost clean sheet of errors and negative points of this scenario.

The terrain itself is done very nice; it creates a nice atmosphere to play in. The terrain is improved to fit the scenario; two different kinds of forest/woods are used as well as two different kinds of desert; sand and stone desert.

A thing that must be mentioned is the graphic of the cities, which is very beautiful and very well chosen.

The thing I didn't like very much was the 'Fortress' (terrain improvement). It are two walls connected to each other; the backside is open and it's very grey. I think that could have been done better.

Care & Details - 5/6

One of the best things in BeBro's scenario is the graphic, that's for sure. The icons used for city improvements and wonders look great, and really imply what it stands for. The events are used very well in this scenario, and they give the scenario so much extra that it probably couldn't last without it. It might have been nicer, if the author had used more space for in-game messages to tell the player about the Romans and their history. Because of this, the player doesn't know a lot more than what he probably already had in history-class at school, and that's too bad.

However, it is very obvious that a lot of effort was put in doing this scenario, and I think it was all worth it because the result is just great!

Originality and Technical Proficiency - 5/6

In the scenario I met some units I had never seen before, or actually most of them I couldn't remember ever seen before. But then, it is very hard to remember all units you ever saw in all those scenarios. But they seemed new to me, so for that I give Bebro full points.

As mentioned before, the events are very well used. The only thing (again) is that there is no story line and event messages could have been used to provide the player with more background information. The creator has put a lot of effort in this, and made a great scenario which everyone should play.

Overall Assessment and Other Points of Interest

This scenario by BeBro is probably one of the best I ever played. It has a lot of conquering and a little bit of building as well. The graphics are done very well, and the title.gif is very good work of BeBro himself. The only little bit negative thing is the lack of in-game messages in the events, but that would probably have forced the author to double the amount of event-files to 6 or 8 per playable civilization. The fact that this scenario is a multi-file (units, rules ,etc.) indicates once again how much effort BeBro has put into this. I can highly recommend this scenario to everyone; young or old, conquerors or builders, economics or scientists, historians or science-fiction people. It's a great scenario and it's hard to not enjoy it.

Final Score: 31/36

Justinian the Great

General Information:

• Name of Scenario : Justinian the Great
• Final Score : 23.5/30
  (Breakdown: 0-10 terrible /11-15 Average/ 16-20 Good/ 21-25 Excellent/ 26+Best possible)
• Type of Scenario :Historical
• Name of Author: Carl Fritz
• Name of Reviewer: Alcibiaties of Athenae

Summary of Scenario:

This scenario depicts the fall of the Western Roman empire to barbarians in 401 AD through the attempted reconquest of the west under the reign of the Byzantine Emperor Justinian (Thus the scenario's name) several hundred years later. This scenario is not an Empire builder, but a battle scenario, pure and simple. No matter what tribe you select, your starting buildable units are what you will produce throughout the scenario on the road to victory. The Scenario uses Objective scoring, and this was tailored for MGE, so no city is worth more then one point. Most cities, including all objectives, are walled cities, but this provide little protection, as most horse and infantry ignore wall effects, so walls function mainly to preserve population. The protagonists are the Eastern Roman Empire, protected by a powerful wall in Constantinople (A special very high defensive unit), and only they have a full tech tree to explore, and any unbuilt wonders to acquire. The Western empire has no capital (one is under construction at Ravanna), and are under assault from four powerful Barbarian tribes, they must build Limitanei (Infantry) for defense, and can select two kinds of Cavalry for offense, either Comitatenses which ignore walls, and are fast, or Cataphract, which are slower but have more hit points, but don't ignore walls. These are best to destroy barbarians, use Comitatenses to take cities. You can also produce Psiloi, and archer unit with 2 space viewing and good attack values, but weak in defense. The romans can also produce a costal war galley for transport and bombardment. Each tribe gets a leader unit, more powerful then other Cavalry, and able to see 2 spaces, but unreplaceable if lost. The stats for these leaders vary from tribe to tribe depending on their historical ability.The enemies of the two Empires include first, and foremost, the Goths. They have heavy forces in the Balkans, and get more in Spain via events, and are extremely powerful in attack. Their forces include Warriors (Infantry) for defense, Horsemen and Noblehorsemen for attack (Both are more powerful then the Roman horse), and Archers for exploring that are similar to their Roman counterparts.They can also produce galleys, and will capture via events galleys when certain cities are taken. The Vandals use identical to the Goths, are in central units and get reinforcements in North Africa. The next Barbarian tribe is the Franks, who lack Cavalry and Warriors, but instead have more powerful Axemen Infantry and Nobleinfantry, both of which have marine capability, and can build SaxonGalleys, a more powerful navel unit. The Huns aren't meant for play, as their Cavalry do not ignore walls, and would be difficult to capture the many walled cities. The last tribe is the Persians, who have similar units to the other tribes, except for their unique unit, the elephant. All tribes have different unit graphics and cities graphics, making this an extremely pleasing visual scenario. The author includes some game notes for each tribe, as well as a complete list of units and wonders available to all tribes.

Playability - Section Sub-total: 4.5

Were you able to finish in a reasonable amount of turns? (Score: 1 )
Yes, the game is very fluid, with so many horse soldiers about, as well as roads and rivers, things move rather quickly.

Did the scenario avoid being tedious or repetitive? (Score: 0.5 )
To an extent. This is a pure battle scenario, you have what you need at start, so it can become much of the same as it goes on, but this scenario would be ideal for multi-player.

Did the scenario capture the essence of what it was portraying? (Score: 1 )
Absolutely. As the Romans, you are inundated by hordes of barbarians intent on conquest, and your subpar military is severely put to the test trying to stop them. The events include major barbarian invasions in Spain and Africa, and can be a shock to the unprepared.

Were you impressed with the overall sound effects? (Score: 0.5 )
Yes, the sounds are all tailored to the units, and blend in nicely.

Was the choice of and interaction between races appropriate? (Score: 1 )
The choices are very good here, the author logically groups several kinds of Goths (Visigoths, OstroGoths) and German tribes into the Franks, the two Roman empires and Persia fit nicely, and Attilla and his huns are a nice bunch of marauders lurking about.

Did you enjoy playing the scenario? (Score: 0.5 )
I could give a full point here, as the fall of the western empire is a favorite time period, but since this scenario is almost all fighting and little building and research, I'll go for only 0.5 here.

Units - Section Sub-total: 3.5

Were the majority of units changed from the default Civ2 units? (Score: 1 )
All the units are changed from civ-2 default units.

Did you discover any inappropriate unit sounds? (Score: 0.5 )
All sounds are appropriate for this scenario

Was the scenario free of 'unbalanced' units? (Score: 0.5 )
There are some "leader" units which are quite powerful, and a special wall unit, but all work within the context of the scenario.

Were there innovative combinations of special unit abilities? (Score: 0.5 )
All units capabilities are pretty standard here, nothing jumps up as unique.

Were Barbarian units appropriate when they appeared.(Score: 1)
This whole scenario is about barbarians! But there are also random AI Barbarians in addition to the tribal types.

Research - - Section Sub-total: 3.5

Was the progression of advance to advance done properly? (Score: 0.5 )
No problems here, all works just fine.

Were advances properly related to new units and obsolescence? (Score: 0.5 )
There is little to research, and nothing really goes obsolete, but for the time frame depicted, it works well.

Was the tech tree of a high level of complexity? (Score: 0.5 )
It is satisfactory for this game, and slightly different for only the Eastern Romans.

Were non-event messages amended to suit the scenario ? (Score: 0.5 )
All messages fit the atmosphere of the scenario.

Was the civilpedia properly updated? (Score: 1 )
All units, civic improvements and wonders are properly explained.

Were there dysfunctional improvements or useless technologies? (Score: 0.5 )
All worked as it should, the game functions smoothly.

Map & Terrain - Section Sub-total: 6

Were you impressed by the Map in general? (Score: 1 )
Yes, the map includes most of Europe, North Africa, as well as the Russian steppes and Persia.
The cities chosen were logical and well placed, with minor barbarians named as cities in the barbarian zones, a nice touch.

Was terrain properly adjusted to fit the scenario? (Score: 1 )
The terrain is correct for the period depicted, all these areas played a part in this story.

Was attention given to geography and historical details? (Score: 1 )
Yes, there are no poorly placed or historically inaccurate cities.

Were you happy with the city, fortress, terrain improvement graphics? (Score: 1 )
Yes, the Romans have a nice ancient look, the Persians an exotic look, the huns have a tent-like city graphic, and the western Barbarian an early dark age look.

Were city names and the placement of cities correct? (Score: 1 )
As stated earlier, all cities are correct for this period, and good selections were made for each one.

Were there innovations used in relation to Terrain? (Score: 1 )
The best one I say was the use of air bases, here they look like Horses, and act as a speed boost in Hunnish territory, which makes them very fluid and dangerous to attack.

Care & Details - Section Sub-total: 2.5

Did you find the documentation adequate? (Score: 0.5 )
The readme includes a short description of each tribe, all units and wonders are examined, but little historical commentary is included.

Was the events file sufficient for the needs of the scenario? (Score: 0.5 )
Events were used to trigger major barbarian invasions, random Barbarians and some naval units for city capture.

Were you happy with the improvement and wonder icons? (Score: 0.5 )
All fit the time period and are pleasing to the eye.

Do you think a lot of effort was put into doing this scenario? (Score: 1 )
For a battle scenario, and a subject where numbers are very hard to estimate, the author has done a very good job portraying the feel of the period and the forces involved, far better then more complicated scenarios I have seen.

Originality and Technical Proficiency - Section Sub-total: 3.5

Were there any sounds you had never come across before? (Score: 0.5 )
None come to mind, but there may have been some, but all sounds match the units correctly, but leaders lack sound.

Did you discover many units not used in any other scenarios? (Score: 1 )
All the units here were created for this scenario, and are quite beautiful, it's the real strength of this scenario.

Is the theme of the scenario completely novel? (Score: 0.5 )
This period has been heavily depicted, both more simplistically and in more complex fashion, but never more visually pleasing, nor smoother or in a more enjoyable way. This scenario is fun to play.

Were complex events used to carry the story line or enhance the AI? (Score: 0.5 )
No, the events were used to fit the theme, barbarian invasions and reinforcements and such.

Did the author deal with all areas which could be modified? (Score: 0.5 )
A few small things could have been modified, but are hardly important, it works as intended.

Any other innovations worth mentioning? (Score: 0.5)
I like the idea of city walls used to only preserve population, this was not a time of great seiges, but of plundering and sacking, and you will do plenty of both.

Overall Assessment and Other Points of Interest:

This is a fine battle scenario, by one of the best makers of units and terrain in the business. Playing it as either Roman tribe, one gets the feeling of the campaign, the frustration the Romans felt as the endless barbarian hordes destroyed the great civilization they once knew. As the Barbarians, you get to rip up the arrogant Romans, sack their cities and forge the kingdoms that will one day be modern Europe. Those men forged a continent, and you can follow in their footsteps here. A very fine, beautiful to look at and fun to play scenario by a fine author, it's highly recommended for those who love the sting of battle. If your more an empire builder, look elsewhere, the name of the game is war here.

Martian Dawn

General Information:

Name of Scenario : MARTIAN DAWN ver 1.1 (aka 2300MARS)
Final Score : 24 / 30
(Breakdown: 0-10 terrible /11-15 Average/ 16-20 Good/ 21-25 Excellent/ 26+Best possible)
Type of Scenario : Science-Fiction
Name of Author: Benjamin Ball
Name of Reviewer: Kobayashi

Summary of Scenario:

Martian Dawn is pretty much a SMAC (Sid Meier's Alpha Centauri) remade on Mars scenario. Mars is colonised to mine a rare mineral called Cornucopium and after a period of development, war erupts between the various factions. As the situation gets out of control, Cornucopium is discovered on Earth and Earth decides to forget about Mars and quarantines the planet with laser satellites. Left on their own, the colonists continue the conflict which eventually wipes out most of civilization. By 2300, the survivors begin to flourish once again and try to find a way back to Earth.

Playability - Section Sub-total: 4.5 / 5.0

Were you able to finish in a reasonable amount of turns? (Score: 1.0 )
Standard game length which is good. You don't have to slug it out to the last since the Space race will determine the winner long before anyone can take over the planet entirely.

Did the scenario avoid being tedious or repetitive? (Score: 1.0 ) 
During the initial phase things move rather slowly and you can only build two units for the longest time. Soon new units and improvements begin to appear at a regular pace and keeps you waiting for more.

Did the scenario capture the essence of what it was portraying? (Score: 1.0 )
In my opinion, it does.

Was the choice of and interaction between races appropriate? (Score: 0.5 )
I think more could have been done to give each race a more distinct identity. Each faction is very similar and is only differentiated by their starting position and the wonder that start off with. For instance, the Academ's start off with 'the Great Library' etc. The leader's section in the rules.txt was untouched and this means that each race had the same specifications for aggressiveness, expansion and military tendencies.

Did you enjoy playing the scenario? (Score: 1.0 )
The best Sci-fi scenarios I have every played that is not linked to existing media or books. Martian Dawn's most striking characteristic is that at its core, it is very similar to a standard game of Civ II. This is something you so seldom find nowadays and was totally refreshing for me.

Units - Section Sub-total: 4.5 / 5.0

You will find a full array of units at your disposal. The land units have four levels for each category. Initially you will only be able to build infantry which are good for exploring the nearby environs but once vehicles begin appearing, they will only be useful for garrison purposes. Vehicles start off as rovers and slowly evolve into tanks. They have higher attack and mobility values than the infantry but poor defence. For pure attack, four levels of slow moving artillery can be built. One novel addition to your arsenal will be a fourth type of ground unit, the armoured walkers. These have the alpine ability and can navigate the poor terrain that is so common faster than vehicles. They are balanced units and capable of fulfilling both the defence and attack roles. Aircraft appear in three levels with both fighter and bomber varieties.

Were the majority of units changed from the default Civ2 units? (Score: 1.0 )
All units were changed from the default version.

Were all of the sounds appropriate for the units in the scenario? (Score: 1.0 )
All sounds were changed from the default version. 

Was the scenario free of 'unbalanced' units? (Score: 1.0 )
With clearly defined roles, the match off between various types of units works well and you cannot get away with not building a particular type of unit. This is one of the hallmarks of a well-balanced unit scheme. The only imperfection was the low cost effectiveness of cruise missiles. I only used it once and the AI wisely chose never to use them.

Were there innovative combinations of special unit abilities? (Score: 1.0 )
Besides the walkers mentioned above, I found two examples of great unit ability characteristics. One were ultra troopers which could paradrop 100 tiles - roughly equivalent to SMAC's orbital diving units. Another was the para capable nukes which puts you on equal footing with the AI which can move nukes to any city instantly.

Were Barbarian units appropriate when they appeared?(Score: 0.5 )
The full barbarian sequence was enabled. One problem I found was that the later Barbarian units were weaker than the earlier ones.

Research - - Section Sub-total: 3.5 / 5.0

Were advances properly related to new units and obsolescence? (Score: 1.0) 
New more powerful units and improvements appeared regularly and in sequence.

Was the tech tree of a high level of complexity? (Score: 1.0 )
This was a full tech-tree at the regular research rate. The section matching the 'industrial era' of the standard game was cleverly packaged to portray a transformation of martian society from machine to mind based technologies.

Were non-event messages amended to suit the scenario ? (Score: 1.0 )
All pop-ups were meticulously updated to match the Martian theme. My only gripe was that there was no para jumping message and I never knew I had para-jumpers till they were used against me. It was probably used for some other purpose.

Was the civilopedia properly updated? (Score: 0.5 )
Inappropriate words were changed in the pedia but there was no explanation whatsoever for any of the terms. For instance the wonder Cornucopia Device has this entry "Pays the maintenance for all colony improvements which ordinarily cost 1 MegaBuck per turn.  Colony improvements requiring more than 1 MegaBuck per turn maintenance are not affected."

Were there dysfunctional improvements or useless technologies? (Score: 0.0 )
There were dozens of advances which had absolutely no function, especially at the beginning while later on advances could give you more than one new capability. This caused some confusion when it came to choosing your next advance. I think their purpose was to slow you down at the beginning but it would have been much better to have just given them to the races as simply having more techs already slows down your rate of research.

Map & Terrain - Section Sub-total: 4.0 / 5.0

A flat map with the north pole in the center is used to represent Mars. While it doesn't represent a planet well, this is necessary as all races need equal access to it.

Were you impressed by the Map in general? (Score: 0.5 )
Although distinct regions and a blending of terrains gives a very impressive map visually, the actual attributes of the terrain types leaves a little to be desired. I found that terrain was far too uniform. All major terrain types could be irrigated and this resulted in water becoming far too plentiful and several cities had surplus food of over twenty in the later stages. On the other hand, only one rare type of terrain could be mined for extra shields and in general cities of the same size had the same production capability. Money was quite easy to come by as well as all terrain produced it. While the scenario functioned perfectly under this monotonous terrain scheme, it could have been improved upon with the introduction of more terrain variety in terms of resources.

Was terrain properly adjusted to fit the scenario? (Score: 1.0 )
Was attention given to geography and historical details? (Score: 1.0 )
The Mars landscape is quite well depicted with permafrost, dry riverbeds and volcanic plains as the main colonizable terrains. Other terrain types are cratered, canyon and ice cap. The author has aptly chosen to make water the primary survival commodity and this forces you to seek out areas with underground water before developing colonies. As fusion power is prevalent by 2300, water as it turns out becomes a source of energy as well as food. Storm basins were used to get pass the fact that there were no oceans.

Were you happy with the city, fortress, terrain improvement graphics? (Score: 0.5 )
These were for the most part quite appropriate and the author made full use of the different city eras while most would have just tried bypass the default changes in city graphics. Improvements were nice, especially the mines and soy-farms.  There was one major irritating thing. All the city names were red making it very difficult to tell the extent of the empires on the small map. Also at times it became difficult to tell who controlled a city especially with the two yellow races which both had white city names.

Were there innovations used in relation to Terrain? (Score: 1.0 )
One innovation worth mentioning was the use of single square rivers as sources of underground water, what you need to begin irrigation.

 

Care & Details - Section Sub-total: 4.0 / 5.0

Was the events file sufficient for the needs of the scenario? (Score: 0.5 )
Although the existing pop-up messages were adequate to carry the storyline, they were few and far between and more of these could be added to spice up the scenario given the amount of unutilised space in the event file.

Were you happy with the improvement and wonder icons? (Score: 1.0 )
Good choice of icons for both improvements and wonders.

Did you like the changes to the player interface? (Score: 0.5 )
The standard interphase was changed to a reddish brown scheme in line with the theme. I didn't find it particularly striking it but it wasn't ugly either.

Did you find any very apparent errors? (Score: 1.0 )
Do you think a lot of effort was put into doing this scenario? (Score: 1.0 )
I couldn't find a single obvious error. I believe the scenario was subject to meticulous checking for text that is out of context. The sheer volume of sounds (55 sound files) is testament to the work put in.

Originality and Technical Proficiency - Section Sub-total: 3.5 / 5.0

Artwork, as admitted by the author in his readme, were none too original and all taken from existing scenarios. The various units reminded me of various games including Outpost II, Dune, Mech Warrior and Babylon 5. Having said that, credit must be given for their skilful blending into the game and I would describe their integration as seamless and tasteful. In terms of technical proficiency, the scenario was of a very high standard with no obvious errors.

Were there any sounds you had never come across before? (Score: 1.0 )
Most sound effects were very well chosen and this was instrumental in making the scenario special. No credit is given to third parties for the sounds and I have not come across many of them so I assume they are original.

Did you discover many units not used in any other scenarios? (Score: 0.0 )
Various scenarios and authors were credited with the original art.

Is the theme of the scenario completely novel? (Score: 1.0 )
Were complex events used to carry the story line or enhance the AI? (Score: 0.5 )
Although not a new theme, there being a Mars scenario even in the FW pack, the scenario is original in the sense of how the storyline develops. The events were implemented in a fashion which did not disrupt the natural evolution of a standard Civ2 game. One important turning point hinges on the discovery of the abandoned research facility and this ushers in the Martian equivalent of the ‘industrial’ era and triggers the entire sequence leading to the space race. This was very well done and explained the story of why the original Martians died out. Having said that, I wouldn't describe the events as complex.

Did the author deal with all areas which could be modified? (Score: 1.0 )
Although a plain vanilla scenario with nothing innovative in terms of advanced techniques, each standard aspect of scenario making was dealt with and modified accordingly. There were no glaring omissions

Overall Assessment and Other Points of Interest:

On balance, I would say a very good first effort for Mr. Ball. I played it three times myself which is a great deal for someone who typically plays for 10 turns and then gives up. As mentioned earlier, one of the main attractions is that the scenario plays like a regular game. The AI behaves very well under these parameters and gives you a very challenging game. I played on King level and only managed to win on my third try. Despite being executed flawlessly, Martian Dawn still needs a bit of extra polish. There is still plenty of event space and over a dozen empty unit slots. I'm sure if there is a future version the scenario can make it to the ranks of one of the All Time Greats.

Of Celts and Iberians

General Information:

• Name of Scenario : Of Celts and Iberians
• Final Score : 25.5/30
  (Breakdown: 0-10 terrible /11-15 Average/ 16-20 Good/ 21-25 Excellent/ 26+Best possible)
• Type of Scenario :Historical
• Name of Author: Jesús Balsinde
• Name of Reviewer: Alcibiaties of Athenae

Summary of Scenario:

An excellent look at the Roman and Carthaginians interaction in the Iberian peninsular, and including the Iberians themselves as playable tribes.

Playability - Section Sub-total: 6

Were you able to finish in a reasonable amount of turns? (Score: 1 )Yes
Did the scenario avoid being tedious or repetitive? (Score: 1 ) Yes
Did the scenario capture the essence of what it was portraying? (Score: 1)Yes
Were you impressed with the overall sound effects? (Score: 1)Yes
Was the choice of and interaction between races appropriate? (Score: 1 )Yes
Did you enjoy playing the scenario? (Score: 1 )Yes

This scenario is really two scenarios in one, as the choice of sides alters the game radically. If you select the Romans or the Carthaginians, tech research is unimportant, and conquest is your only goal. If You select one the native tribes, then you must fight powerful and technologically superior enemies, as well as other Iberian tribes, so the game is very diverse.

Units - Section Sub-total: 4

Were the majority of units changed from the default Civ2 units? (Score: 1 )Yes
Was the scenario free of 'unbalanced' units? (Score: 1 )Yes
Were there innovative combinations of special unit abilities? (Score: 1 )Yes
Any other unit related problems (like shield placement)? (Score: 1 )No

The units for this scenario are mostly new, and are very beautiful, a real strength of this designer. The roman Cohorts and cavalry is superb, as are the native units, and the Carthaginians as well, are extremely well done. This is one of the finest collections of Roman era units I have yet seen. Each power has tribe specific units, and all in all, they look splendid.

Research - - Section Sub-total: 5

Was the progression of advance to advance done properly? (Score: 1 )Yes
Were advances properly related to new units and obsolescence? (Score: 1 )Yes
Was the tech tree of a high level of complexity? (Score: 1 )Yes
Were non-event messages amended to suit the scenario ? (Score: 1) Yes
Was the civilopedia properly updated? (Score: 1 )Yes

The research for this effort was excellent, considering this is a very difficult period to obtain hard facts on. The Roman units look and function as Roman forces should, and the natives can fight back, just as in the historical campaign. The story accurately follows the Roman conquest of Iberia, including their meeting with their great rivals, the Carthaginians, as well as the struggle against the native population.

Map & Terrain - Section Sub-total: 6

Were you impressed by the Map in general? (Score: 1 )Yes
Was terrain properly adjusted to fit the scenario? (Score: 1 )Yes
Was attention given to geography and historical details? (Score: 1 )Yes
Were you happy with the city, fortress, terrain improvement graphics? (Score: 1)Yes
Were city names and the placement of cities correct? (Score: 1 )Yes
Were there innovations used in relation to Terrain? (Score: 1 )Yes

The map area includes all of Iberia, and a small portion of Gaul, but this area is impassible due to innovative use of hidden blocking terrain. Allied terrain hinders the Roman advance in many areas, and strategic movement (There are hidden rail lines) allows the natives some freedom of action, and the ability to deal with invasions from two powerful factions.

Care & Details - Section Sub-total: 5

Did you find the documentation adequate? (Score: 1 )Yes
Was the events file sufficient for the needs of the scenario? (Score:1 )Yes
Were you happy with the improvement and wonder icons? (Score: 1 )Yes
Did you find any very apparent errors? (Score: 1 )No
Do you think a lot of effort was put into doing this scenario? (Score: 1)Yes

The wonders are fewer in this scenario, but they are tailored to fit the situation. The readme is extensive, and includes an historical time line, as well as recommendations for choice of tribe, and possible course of action. The enormous effort put into this scenario is apparent in the readme. The whole situation was carefully crafted to fit the situation it portrays, and no errors along historical lines have yet been detected.

Originality and Technical Proficiency - Section Sub-total: 4.5

Were there any sounds you had never come across before? (Score: 1 )Yes
Did you discover many units not used in any other scenarios? (Score:1)Yes
Is the theme of the scenario completely novel? (Score: 1 )Yes
Were complex events used to carry the story line or enhance the AI? (Score: 0.5 )Some
Did the author deal with all areas which could be modified? (Score: 1 )Yes

Again, this author has done a fantastic job with an unbelievably complex subject, yet this scenario works, and works extremely well. The great care that went into it is evident in every phase of the scenario, from the look and feel of the graphics, to the Pedia, and in the actual game play. This author has a superb grasp of the Civ-2 game engine and what can be done with it.

Overall Assessment and Other Points of Interest:

This scenario author is well known, and this scenario represents his finest work. It is a dynamic, interesting, and totally enthralling scenario, and gets the highest endorsement possible. I cannot recommend it enough.

Credit: Screenshots on this page were taken by Jesús Balsinde.

Seeds of Greatness: The Early Empires

General Information:

• Name of Scenario : Seeds of Greatness - The Early Empires
• Final Score : 26.5/30
  (Breakdown: 0-10 terrible /11-15 Average/ 16-20 Good/ 21-25 Excellent/ 26+Best possible)
• Type of Scenario: Historical
• Name of Author: Paul "Kull" Cullivan
• Name of Reviewer: Alcibiaties of Athenae

Summary of Scenario:

This scenario represents the birth of civilization in the near east, starting from 3500 BC and continuing until 0AD. The player may choose from any of Seven historically accurate civilizations at the dawn of history, the Hittites, Assyria, Babylonia, Egypt, Persia, Mycenean Greece, and the Minoans are all available for play, each with custom events and a special leader unit specific to that civilization. The map includes Greece, all of Asia minor, the near east, parts of Persia, Mesopotamia, the Levant, all of Egypt and parts of Libya, so there is plenty of room for both trade and expansion. As in basic Civ-2, you start knowing little, with just a size one city that grows slowly, and an exploring unit. There are huts to trigger, and the events provide slaves (free settler units) if your forces defeat minor tribes sprinkled around the map, so you rarely need to build your own settlers to expand, like the ancients, you can attack to grow! You can also gain envoys (diplomats) this way also, to buy off other cities and steal technology. Your mission is to take the capital of EVERY other starting civ and hold it at game's end for victory, what the author calls the "Alexander solution". Each nation starts in it's historical start area, and the game includes a completely new tech tree, units and wonders that fit this time period.

Playability - Section Sub-total:  6

Were you able to finish in a reasonable amount of turns? (Score: 1 )

There are 350 turns in this game total, which may seem like alot, but since you start with virtually nothing, it isn't really that much time.

Did the scenario avoid being tedious or repetitive? (Score: 1 )

Not at all, the race for civic improvements, better technology, and to open the map of the ancient world all make this game quite interesting.

Did the scenario capture the essence of what it was portraying? (Score: 1 )

Absolutely, far better then any ancient scenario I ever played, and I have played dozens of them. The map, units, sounds and graphics all make for a very pleasant experience when playing.

Were you impressed with the overall sound effects? (Score: 1 )

Very much so, they fit this era perfectly, and even include special theme music each time you start the scenario.

Was the choice of and interaction between races appropriate? (Score: 1 )

Yes, the seven selected are all fine choices, and are historically significant in the time frame portrayed.

All were dominate at one point or another in the time frame provided, even if the Hitties and Assyrians and Minoans aren't as well known as the Babylonians, Egyptians, Persians or Greeks, their emperies either included great amounts of terrain or in the Minoan case, huge scientific advancement.

Did you enjoy playing the scenario? (Score: 1 )

Yes, this scenario is neither boring nor repetitive, simply because city placement can change from game to game, and each of the Seven tribes are different in starting terrain and advancement.

For instance, the Egyptians start on the fertile Nile with few enemies nearby, while the Greek start isolated in the difficult terrain of Greece. Each game is a new approach to empire building.

Units - Section Sub-total: 3.5

Were the majority of units changed from the default Civ2 units? (Score: 1 )

All the units are changed from standard civ-2 units, including many different types of infantry, chariots and cavalry.

Did you discover any inappropriate unit sounds? (Score: 1 )

All sounds are correct for their respective units.

Was the scenario free of 'unbalanced' units? (Score: 0.5 )

Each tribe gets one "super king unit" at some point in the game through scenario events, buy the time of arrival and unit type is different for each tribe, some civs are at a disadvantage here, because their "king" arrives at later times then others.

Were there innovative combinations of special unit abilities? (Score: 0.5 )

Engineers make fine defensive units and can take on Barbarians and invaders, so are invaluable.

There are also some Amphibious units as well, and most ships cannot bombard (but some later types can).

Were Barbarian units appropriate when they appeared. (Score: 0.5)

Yes, barbarians appeared both randomly as well as specific events in history, so play a roll here.

Research - - Section Sub-total: 4.5

Was the progression of advance to advance done properly? (Score: 1 )

Yes, each advance flows from another, and the prospects for military conquest and scientific advancement are both present and consistent with any historical model.

Were advances properly related to new units and obsolescence? (Score: 0.5 )

For the most part yes, but you do lose powerful Chariots for weaker and slower Phalanxes at one point in the game, but this changes over to powerful legions over time so it balances out in the end.

Was the tech tree of a high level of complexity? (Score: 1 )

Yes, the entire tree is utilized to excellent effect to give the proper atmosphere to the scenario.

Were non-event messages amended to suit the scenario ? (Score: 0.5 )

Yes, no incorrect messages were seen.

Was the Civilopedia properly updated? (Score: 1 )

All units are displayed and their functions clearly defined.

Were there dysfunctional improvements or useless technologies? (Score: 0.5 )

None of either were seen, but there is a nit to pick with the unit progression. The author chose to have units such as Chariot I, Chariot II, Chariot III ect instead of something more creative such as light chariots, medium Chariots, battle Chariots ect.

This is repeated in the heavy infantry and legions as well.

I have heard some complaints about this from some players and designers, but I think it doesn't detract much from the scenario as a whole.

Map & Terrain - Section Sub-total: 5

Were you impressed by the Map in general? (Score: 1 )

Yes, as mentioned earlier, it accurately shows the near east and fertile crescent quite well.

Was terrain properly adjusted to fit the scenario? (Score: 1 )

Yes, there are several special terrain types that greatly aid city growth, and terrain modifications (such as chopping down trees) is a time consuming process only possible with engineers.

Was attention given to geography and historical details? (Score: 0.5 )

Each capital is located fairly close to what we view as the historical birthplace of each tribe.

Were you happy with the city, fortress, terrain improvement graphics? (Score: 1 )

Very much so, each tribe has it's own unique city styles, the terrain is pleasant to look at as well as functional.

Were city names and the placement of cities correct? (Score: 1 )

Great care was taken to provide many names for each tribe, and when this runs out the first set of default city names are Roman, giving a good ancient feel to the cities.

Were there innovations used in relation to Terrain? (Score: 0.5 )

Airbases are used to represent minor villages that help with resources for cities as well as movement.

Care & Details - Section Sub-total: 4

Did you find the documentation adequate? (Score: 1 )

Yes, a brief synopsis of each tribe is included, including hints on play to help those new to this scenario.

Was the events file sufficient for the needs of the scenario? (Score: 1 )

The author provides a batch file at start, that makes choosing a civ specific events file as simple as picking a number, a nice clean innovation.

Were you happy with the improvement and wonder icons? (Score: 1 )

Yes, all fit the ancient milieu perfectly, and are yet another asset to this fine scenario.

Do you think a lot of effort was put into doing this scenario? (Score: 1 )

Practically everything that could be changed was changed, so yes, considerable effort was put into this scenario.

Originality and Technical Proficiency - Section Sub-total: 3.5

Were there any sounds you had never come across before? (Score: 0.5 )

After so many scenarios, it's hard to say, but I like the little "ancient" chime that plays at game start.

Did you discover many units not used in any other scenarios? (Score: 0.5 )

Again, at this time, many of these units have been seen elsewhere, but they are excellent here, and used to good effect.

Is the theme of the scenario completely novel? (Score: 0.5)

There are other "Ancient" scenarios, but this is the best pure empire builder that I have seen.

Were complex events used to carry the story line or enhance the AI? (Score: 1 )

As mentioned earlier, historical invasions, great kings, and barbarians are all used to great effect in this scenario.

Did the author deal with all areas which could be modified? (Score: 1 )

Even the game cursor was replaced by an Assyrian looking archer, showing the level of detail here!

Overall Assessment and Other Points of Interest:

This is a fine scenario, and in many ways my personal favorite, as it provides crisp game play,  historical accuracy in both units and advances, and allows the player to experience the growth of ancient empires to much greater degree then I have seen in many other scenarios.

This game isn't about holding back and researching the best military unit then mass-producing it for conquest that is seen in so many scenarios, but instead, the player must reach out with his primitive military, and try to advance in a hostile world.

This is a truly fine scenario and is highly recommended to any who love the Ancient period and empire building.

Sons of Heracles

General Information:

Name of Scenario : Sons of Heracles
Final Score : 17.0 / 30
Type of Scenario : Classic History
Name of Author: Stefan Härtel
Name of Reviewer: Kevin Klop (a.k.a. willemvanoranje)

Summary of Scenario:

Sons of Heracles is about the birth of the state Sparta on the Peloponessos and it's growth to one of the mightiest states of the Mediterranean in its time. You start as a small village with just few units, and you must end as the ruler of Greece. This scenario will take up a lot of your free time if you want to play it, so better think twice or even more before you download and play this scenario.

 

Playability - Section Sub-total: 2.5/5

Were you able to finish in a reasonable amount of turns? (Score: 0 )
Did the scenario avoid being tedious or repetitive? (Score: 0.5 )
Did the scenario capture the essence of what it was portraying? (Score: 1 )
Was the choice of and interaction between races appropriate? (Score: 0.5 )
Did you enjoy playing the scenario? (Score: 0.5 )

The amount of turns needed to finish the scenario is large, very large, too large. After starting the scenario and playing it for a full 10 days, I still wasn't finished and decided to 'rest' for a while. The scenario captured the essence of what it was portraying, but by doing that it was very repetitive. The only thing one will do a lot is attacking the Messenians and defending against races from the north. Every turn again. The intercation between races was good, the Messenians are offensive and hate you very much, but they are also very inferior. You can easily wipe them out with 2-3 hoplites and your hero unit. It will take a long time though, you will never be able to conquer more than 3 cities at the same time, because you have to wait until they have their defence before you can move your hoplite to the next city. The waiting makes it less fun as well. On the other hand the passive role of Athens is something I would've changed. Athens has a lot of cities and a large army, but they never attack you or even encounter you before your conquest leads you to them. Athens could've played a larger role on the sea and maybe in aiding other civs against you, though the last suggestions probably would've made the scenario even more the same. I didn't enjoy the scenario much, but enough for half a point.

Units - Section Sub-total: 3.5/5

Were the majority of units changed from the default Civ2 units? (Score: 0.5 )
Was the scenario free of 'unbalanced' units? (Score: 1 )
Were there innovative combinations of special unit abilities? (Score: 0.5 )
Were Barbarian units appropriate when they appeared? (Score: 0.5)
Any other unit related problems (like shield placement)? (Score: 1 )

Though a great part of all original Civ II units were changed, it still could've been more. A more diverse collection of units would have been possible. The creator could for example have put in some succession in the units, by having three units named phalanx, but one just a bit stronger than the other, and the stronger one making the weaker oppsolete: succession. A good thing is that there were no extroardinary strong units that just rampage through the map destroying and conquering everyhting it sees. In your first turns you will get a general, well even he is being damaged and can't destroy 3 units without healing. It's too bad no serious innovative combinations of unit abilities were made, except maybe for the settler ability of the Spartan hoplites. But since they're so strong in battle, one will probably not use those abilities. Hoplites are for war, the Helots (slaves, prisoners of war) are for settling and improving terrain. The barbarian units in the scenario that appeared were correct, but that is because the only time they appeared was by event. The creator did his best on the units, resulting in units without any problems.

Research - - Section Sub-total: 3/5

Was the progression of advance to advance done properly? (Score: 1 )
Were advances properly related to new units and obsolescence? (Score: 0.5 )
Was the tech tree of a high level of complexity? (Score: 0.5 )
Was the civilopedia properly updated? (Score: 0 )
Were there dysfunctional improvements or useless technologies? (Score: 1 )

Though researching is very hard in this scenario, there are some advances. The progression of advance to advance was done properly well, I fully agree with it. More new units, which you really need, come with new advances, as do new important buildings that make your research faster and help you defend against the strong phalanxes of the Arcadians. Because of the slow researching the tech tree isn't very large, but it has enough, maybe even too much techs to research. There are a lot of techs that don't bring you anything but access to a new tech, which is pretty irritating seen the fact that researching 1 tech already costs about 20 turns. Luckily I couldn't find any useless technologies, that would've cost Stefan Härtel another point.

Map & Terrain - Section Sub-total: 3.5/5

Were you impressed by the Map in general? (Score: 1 )
Was terrain properly adjusted to fit the scenario? (Score: 0.5 )
Was attention given to geography and historical details? (Score: 0.5 )
Were you happy with the city, fortress, terrain improvement graphics? (Score: 1 )
Were city names and the placement of cities correct? (Score: 0.5 )

The map used in 'Sons of Heracles' is one of the Peloponessos and a part of the land north of it and Attika. The map is very good work, and it impressed me, especially because I find making a accurate map of an excisting place very difficult. The terrain was changed as well, though it wasn't much more than other graphs. As mentioned before, the map is pretty accurate as far as I can tell, so attention is given to the geographical details. A thing that I didn't like was that there were a lot of cities without a name. I think there is no record of citynames there, only one that says there are cities, but still the creator could've solved that an other way. He could've made zero-movement units of them, or just called the cities 'village' or something. We can't complain about the graphics for cities and terrain improvement. Though I sometimes said otherwise in other reviews, I now decided to not be so harsh about fortressess anymore.

Care & Details - Section Sub-total: 3.5/5

Did you find the documentation adequate? (Score: 0 )
Was the events file sufficient for the needs of the scenario? (Score: 0.5 )
Were you happy with the improvement and wonder icons? (Score: 1 )
Did you find any very apparent errors? (Score: 1 )
Do you think a lot of effort was put into doing this scenario? (Score: 1 )

In the readme.txt, a few lines are decated to historical background. I think a scenario should contain more historical background. It would be good if he would have included some URL's for more information or something, but I find this insufficient. The events were ok. They fitted the scenario well, but could've been expanded with some extra's, for example small notes on historical background in-game, so you can compare your results to what happened in real time. The icons for wonders and city improvements look good. Some of them are new to me, and after reading the credits again, I discovered that Stefan made some of them himself. The right icons are chosen for the right city improvement. I cannot do else than give a full point for that one. The last point for this section is the one for effort. I usually don't play scenarios where the creator didn't do his best, and besides that I think it's unfair to give someone not the full score for effort. One has obviously spend a lot of free time in his project, and one would not release it if he thought it was a bad scenario at that moment. Therefore Stefan Härtel gets a point for effort as well.

Originality and Technical Proficiency - Section Sub-total: 2.5/5

Did you discover many units not used in any other scenarios? (Score: 1 )
Is the theme of the scenario completely novel? (Score: 0 )
Were complex events used to carry the story line or enhance the AI? (Score: 0.5 )
Did the author deal with all areas which could be modified? (Score: 1 )
Any other innovations worth mentioning? (Score: 0 )

The units used in the scenario were partly designed by the creator himself. He would've done more, but computer problems made it impossible. Maybe an update will provide us with more units in the future. We will see. The scenario should be a complete novel, but the events aren't used to tell anything about the Spartans except for two or three little, small messages. I would've given 0.1 point, but since that is not an option it comes down to 0 points. The events do enhance the AI though, simulating rebellions and risings, and that ofcourse adds something interesting to the scenario. The author did deal with a lot of areas that can be modified, and in my opinion he did it sufficient. No need for more changes other than more units.

Overall Assessment and Other Points of Interest:

Overall the scenario is nice. It is a more difficult scenario, which isn't easy to win. Especially not on the higher levels. The AI is strong and it could happen that they wipe you out. You must be careful when starting wars: if you pick the wrong one......

Bad Objective System: -1.5
A bad move of Stefan Härtel is the objective system. Even if you have ALL the objectives, you can't get higher than a Marginal Defeat! The maximum of objectives you can get in the scenario is 20, but for an Absolute Victory, you need 94! I guess the creator has missed a spor there, he probabl;y wanted every city to be an objective, but instead he just made a few cities an objective. This costs him a lot of points....

Star Contact: Part 1 - The Star Wars

General Information:

• Name of Scenario: STAR CONTACT: Part 1 - THE STAR WARS
• Final Score: 17.5/30
  (Breakdown: 0-10 terrible /11-15 Average/ 16-20 Good/ 21-25 Excellent/ 26+Best possible)
• Type of Scenario: Science Fiction
• Name of Author: Nikola Kupresanin
• Name of Reviewer: Kobayashi

Summary of Scenario:

You play as the Empire right after the Battle of Yavin when the first Deathstar is destroyed. At first you try to discover hidden Rebel Alliance bases and destroy them. Other tribes are the Trade Federation (a loyal Imperial ally), the League of Free Planets (a weak alliance of technically developed star systems), Jabba the Hutt's gangster empire, the Neutrals and finally the extra-galactic visitors. At first some of the non-rebel tribes are allied with you but the rebellion catches on and eventually everyone is trying to splinter off a piece of the empire. To make things worse you encounter a fleet of extra-galactic visitors who aren't too friendly.

Playability - Section Sub-total: 4.5/5

Were you able to finish in a reasonable amount of turns? (Score: 1 )

Yes. The ships can move very far in one turn and there is no super defense unit which can stop a properly assembled and sizable invasion force.

Did the scenario avoid being tedious or repetitive? (Score: 0.5 )

No research, too many cities and units = a very tedious game. There are so many units you have to wait over five minutes between each turn. Even so, the repetitive elements do give an impression of a vast galactic empire.

Did the scenario capture the essence of what it was suppose to portray? (Score: 1 )

I do not for a moment doubt the Star War-ness of the scenario. Full marks.

Was the choice of interaction between races appropriate? (Score: 1 )

I think the way each race slowly turns against the empire is quite well done. Choice of races seems to be an intelligent grouping of different star war political groups.

Did you enjoy playing the scenario? (Score: 1 )

To some extent. The scenario has the beginnings of a great game but the author has failed to capitalise on many aspects of the civ2 game engine.

Units - Section Sub-total: 3/5

Were the majority of units changed from the default Civ2 units? (Score: 1 )

All units were suitable and of good quality except for the Calamari Cruiser and Fleet Carrier which were someone blurry. The full range of Star Wars ships and smaller craft are present. My only complaint is that Star Trek Olympia class ships were used as space station and the extra-galactic visitors were represented by Battlestars (a la Galactica).

Were all of the sounds appropriate for the units in the scenario? (Score: 0 )

There were absolutely no sounds and the scenario warns you to turn off your speakers. I suppose this is better than no warning at all but even then - zero points.

Was the scenario free of 'unbalanced' units? (Score: 0.5 )

Mostly OK, the scenario plays like a pacific theater carrier/battleship game. I thought that X-wings scrambling to defend against TIE bombers shouldn't get decimated every single time. There was insufficient distinction between many units and some lack of balance. For instance it takes either one star destroyer or 20 TIE bombers to kill one calamari cruiser. A star destroyer costs 52 while 20 TIE bombers cost 320. Why build TIE bombers at all?

Were there innovative combinations of special unit abilities? (Score: 1 )

One particular unit merits mention. This is the assault transport. Its a helicopter and gets carried by Star Destroyers (carriers) which normally cannot carry troops. Because of their weak attack, they can't be used to assault planets like the ground troops carried by corvettes (transports) but they can be used to take over a planet after bombardment has killed off all resistance.

Any other unit related problems (like shield placement)? (Score: 0.5 )

Shields were sometimes 75% covered by some units making it hard to tell who they belonged to.

Research - - Section Sub-total: 2.5/5

Were advances properly related to new units and obsolescence? (Score: 0.5 )

New designs were made available through events not research. Although these were few and far between, they made a crucial difference. The scenario needs some unit obsolescence built in - like the TIE fighter remains buildable even when the TIE unterceptor and even the advanced TIE fighter becomes available. I must also mention that there are two types of super star destroyers, the original executor and a generic superstar destroyer (same as the Executor but has sub attributes added) both using the same graphics. I would have preferred to see an Executor class followed by the Eclipse class instead. Also, there is no progression from the Victory Class star destroyer to the Imperator Class star destroyer. Instead, many unit slots are wasted by having too many types of similar fighters and frigates.

Were non-event messages amended to suit the scenario ? (Score: 0.5 )

Some messages were adjusted. It says "units may only hyperspace between planets on hyperpath". But There are still messages like "our words are backed by nuclear weapons."

Was the civilopedia properly updated? (Score: 0 )

A definite no. Entries still go "All ocean squares produce one more shield"

Were there dysfunctional improvements or useless technologies? (Score: 1 )

None that I cam across. The root advance for the happiness improvements was correct.

Map & Terrain - Section Sub-total: 3/5

Were you impressed by the Map in general? (Score: 0.5 )

A huge map with planets scattered all over. Put this together with a lack of recognizable terrain formations like nebula clouds, movement allowances of 15 to 20 and you get utter confusion. It would be better if Jabba's empire and the Rebels weren't both yellow. There were also two races which were a close shade of blue.

Was terrain properly adjusted to fit the scenario? (Score: 1 )

The map looks and feels like it should. My only comment is that the open areas use space with lots of white particles while the rest of the terrain and cities had a very black space background. This leads to a jarring visual transition from open space to squares with terrestrial bodies.

Were you happy with the city, fortress, terrain improvement graphics? (Score: 1 )

There were no fortresses, airbases or terrain improvements. But this is compensated by the concept of having different planets for cities in such a way that it maximized the use of city size, style and era. Of course the planet changes completely when you conquer it but that is an acceptable price to pay.

Were city names and the placement of cities correct? (Score: 0.5 )

I am not as familiar with Star Wars as I am with Star Trek but the more common planets where present and in appropriate proximity of each other. In my opinion, there were too many planets and they were too densely packed. There were some non-star war planet names - many were from Asimov's books and some from our own galaxy even though it is supposed to be a galaxy far far away. The unspoken rule of not having more than one city starting with the same three letters was broken repeatedly.

Were there innovations used in relation to Terrain? (Score: 0 )

None that I could discern.

Care & Details - Section Sub-total: 3.5/5

Did you find the documentation adequate? (Score: 0 )

There was no documentation to speak off and that made playing the game very difficult. Coupled with the fact that a) the science advisor/goal/unit method doesn't work when you only have future tech left to research. b) the abilities listing goes off the screen in the military advisor since most of the units have more than one ability. It makes figuring out what each unit is for very hard. I had to activate scenario mode and look at the unit editor finally. For instance who would know that a corvette carries troops while a frigate carries fighters. The assault transport does not carry troops - it is a helicopter.

Was the events file sufficient for the needs of the scenario? (Score: 1 )

I would say that the events were adequate although they could have been better. For instance, when the millennium falcon is destroyed, it just says Han Solo is dead but does not trigger anything.

Were you happy with the improvement and wonder icons? (Score: 1 )

Nothing much new here but the icons look appropriate and there were a few Star Wars specific icons. The choice of things to use as wonders was very good and showed some effort.

Did you find any very apparent errors in any category of the scenario? (Score: 1 )

No crashes and nothing fatally wrong. I should note that the economic aspect is not given proper treatment. Since there was no need to research and no need for luxury (fundamentalism government), I put tax at 80% and got a surplus of 1800 per turn. Even then, it didn't spoil the game - full marks.

Do you think a lot of effort was put into doing this scenario? (Score: 0.5 )

There definitely was some effort, the map is huge and the units have been done well. However, I can't escape the feeling that the scenario was left incomplete. I attribute this more to a lack of knowledge. For instance, the bulk of the units were air and sea domain units- not to difficult to make just a few sounds for these. Probably the author made the units and map first only to discover that there was no way to fit the sounds in without redoing everything.

Originality and Technical Proficiency - Section Sub-total: 1/5

Were the sounds unique and different in the scenario? (Score: 0 )

There were no sounds, no music - nothing.

Did you discover many unit GRAPHICS not used in any other scenarios? (Score: 0 )

I think that the bulk of units were obtained from the existing body of star war units floating around out there. Most of them are the common Star Wars units originally done by StM (I think it was Stephen Meissl) and used before by many others like Paul Cadwell, John Valdez and Alinestra Covelia & Hu Man Ning(unfinished).

Is the theme of the scenario completely novel? (Score: 0.5 )

No but then Star War scenarios are not that common either.

Were complex events used to carry the story line or enhance the AI? (Score: 0.5 )

No, most events were simple messages but they did an adequate job - the spelling could be improved.

Did the author deal with all areas which could be modified? (Score: 0 )

No sound, no tech tree, no pedia entries, no points for this question.

Overall Assessment and Other Points of Interest

Normally when I start a new scenario and discover that there are no sounds, no tech tree and tons of cities and units, I give up immediately. But somehow, I was drawn to continue playing in this case and even to do a review. That speaks volumes for how the author makes up for what is missing by using what is there skillfully. That's why there is almost full marks for playability. On the other hand, the scenario's lowest score in in the technical proficiency stage and I sincerely hope that there is a version 2 eventually that fixes all the deficiencies. If you are a fan of Star Wars do not hesitate to play the scenario and if you are not, this scenario is still worth a try.

Star Trek: Dominion War

General Information:

Name of Scenario : Star Trek Dominion War
Final Score : 28.5 /30
Type of Scenario : Science Fiction
Name of Author: Kobayashi
Name of Reviewer: John Valdez

Summary of Scenario:

I know a lot of people who like Star Trek (ST) and love to play Civilization. At the same time there are only a few Star Trek scenarios out there that meet the challenge of being a Star Trek scenario. You see, writing a scenario is one thing, writing a Star Trek scenario is another. ST scenarios are best suited as either mission based scenarios or usually modpacks. This is because ST is not about colonization or building a civilization; it is about missions. That is just a fact. Therefore, to build a good ST scenario, you have to have a story in mind or at least a relatively loose mission that a player can experience. In addition to this challenge, the author must also be concerned with making things work within the limits of the Civilization game itself. Certain bits of trivia or logistical situations sometimes need to be addressed in such a way that the author must have all his (her) creative juices flowing at peak velocity. As you will see in the following review, this scenario met those requirements.

Playability - Section Sub-total: 5

Did the scenario avoid being tedious or repetitive? (Score: 1 )
Did the scenario capture the essence of what it was portraying? (Score: 1 )
Were you impressed with the overall sound effects? (Score: 1 )
Was the choice of and interaction between races appropriate? (Score: 1 )
Did you enjoy playing the scenario? (Score: 1 )

I played the Star Trek: Dominion Wars by Kobayashi. This particular scenario is based on the DS9 series, and the events that took place during the war with the Dominion. The scenario starts with a Title.gif that is appropriate and fitting for the type of scenario showing several Federation ships getting blasted. A selection of ST music is played to kick off the atmosphere. Before playing a scenario, I generally observe the events, graphics and other .txt files to get a feel for what the author is trying to accomplish. In this particular instance, Kobayashi specifically requested that I do not perform this ritual, but instead, he wanted my reaction to the surprises and events as a first time player. I agreed to this and played the scenario cold. What I found was a very complete scenario with well prepared events--so much so, that Kobayashi had even included sound clips for some of the situations of the game. In fact, the scenario is split into "Acts" and "scenes" that match the titles of episodes (a nice touch). I should also point out that the scenes do not necessarily reflect the TV shows, so that people who are not familiar with ST can play this scenario without a knowledge of ST:DS9. As a reviewer, I found the graphics superior to most ST scenarios. I have not played a scenario this good for a long time. Generally, I experience let down from promises in the readme.txt of scenarios that fail to deliver what the scenario author presents. In this case, I would say the author was modest in the readme.

Units - Section Sub-total: 4

Were the majority of units changed from the default Civ2 units? (Score: 1 )
Were all of the sounds appropriate for the units in the scenario? (Score: 1 )
Was the scenario free of 'unbalanced' units? (Score: 1 )
Were there innovative combinations of special unit abilities? (Score: 0.5 )
Any other unit related problems (like shield placement)? (Score: 0.5 )

As far as the units go, I think Kobayashi has established himself as a cutting kind o' guy. His units are excellent. The units were very clear and worked well in the game. I found the units to perform as expected in the game. I did find that the author replicated the power and precision of the Dominion ships perfectly. I can only say that I intend to ask Kobayashi for help on some scenarios that I am working on so that I can replicate this same effect. I didn't have much interaction with the Breen in any game that I played. It is possible that I was too prepared for them and was able to hold them back simply from experience. I thought their ships might have been made more powerful. Mostly, I found them a bit hard to see against the dark background. As this may be unavoidable, it can influence your perception of what is going on. Perhaps they could be outlined or lightened a little.

Research - - Section Sub-total: 5

Was the progression of advance to advance done properly? (Score: 1 )
Was the tech tree of a high level of complexity? (Score: 1 )
Were non-event messages amended to suit the scenario ? (Score: 1 )
Was the civilopedia properly updated? (Score: 1)
Were there dysfunctional improvements or useless technologies? (Score: 1 )

Well planned and organized. Just by looking at the technologies you could tell it was a ST scenario and that you would have to check to see what you should research (expected for a theme scenario). There didn't seem to be any out of place techs like "radio" or "explosives". Everything seemed to fit the 24th century. There are some excellent, well designed city improvements, but I have to admit that I only built two (propaganda machine and gravity dynamo).

Map & Terrain - Section Sub-total: 5

Were you impressed by the Map in general? (Score: 1 )
Was terrain properly adjusted to fit the scenario? (Score: 1 )
Was attention given to geography and historical details? (Score: 1 )
Were city names and the placement of cities correct? (Score: 1 )
Were there innovations used in relation to Terrain? (Score: 1 )

What can I say about the map...it is...unusual. I mean, it's got one big wormhole in one corner and the Federation smack dab in the middle surrounded by bad guys. It is designed with some radical changes (I presume) to the terrain parameters and that makes all the ships respond to the terrain in a certain way. The terrain graphics are appropriate and done well. It looks like a ST map of the Alpha/Gamma Quadrants. Also, the terrain had been substantially modified to accommodate both the appearance and response of a "wormhole" in the custom map. I found the attention to planet (city) names outstanding. The city names were damn good. I for one know that typing city names into the city.txt file can be quite a task. Then again, having to make up the city names can be even worse when you are trying to stay consistent with the spirit of a theme. Kobayashi really did a good job on this part of the game. I think the graphics of his cities and the planet terrain accomplish the "feel" of being in space. Once again, this was unique and well planned.

Care & Details - Section Sub-total: 5

Did you find the documentation adequate? (Score: 1 )
Was the events file sufficient for the needs of the scenario? (Score: 1 )
Did you like the changes to the player interface? (Score: 1 )
Did you find any very apparent errors? (Score: 1 )
Do you think a lot of effort was put into doing this scenario? (Score: 1 )

I found almost no mistakes or anomalies in the programming for the scenario which is highly unusual for a ST scenario. The text was quite readable and there were some really good messages. I like Kobayashi's style of writing for the programming (a little humor involved) and a lot of the text is absolutely necessary to the experience. On one note, I would say that the intro text is just too long. It really doesn't fit on the screen. While this isn't such a big deal, it doesn't look as neat. There were virtually no "inappropriate" sounds. Inappropriate sounds are the sounds that occur which don't fit the unit or game play. Kobayashi took great care in changing the sound parameters. I rate the sounds as "excellent". I know for a fact, the author spent two months or more working out all the details for this scenario, and believe me it shows. I would challenge anyone to find anything wrong with this scenario, simply because it is so good. ST: Dominion Wars is probably the best ST scenario made. In my opinion, everyone should download this scenario, just to have fun playing it.

Originality and Technical Proficiency - Section Sub-total: 4.5

Were there any sounds you had never come across before? (Score: 1 )
Did you discover many units not used in any other scenarios? (Score: 1 )
Is the theme of the scenario completely novel? (Score: 1 )
Were complex events used to carry the story line or enhance the AI? (Score: 1 )
Did the author deal with all areas which could be modified? (Score: 0.5 )

The author was attentive enough to include a great deal of new sounds and units in the scenario that I thought took a substantial effort to create. I particularly liked the "Sisko" unit and the design for which it was used in the game play. As I will not give away the scenario, I can say that innovations such as the way this unit was used is what prompts me to give a higher score. The events worked for me. There was only one thing that didn't seem exactly right but I feel almost too dang nit-picky to even mention it. During the taking of bases, the same Act/scenario box pops up each time, even though you have moved on. Actually, I understand the event programming that makes this happen and by adding the line "JUSTONCE" in the events file, it would fix this.

Overall Assessment and Other Points of Interest:

Last but not least, my final score playing the scenario in Captain (Prince) level was 22% and I took two of the planets in the Gamma Quadrant. I also played the scenario in Ensign (Chieftain) level and my score inflated to 83% and I conquered the Dominion. My first game was only 15% (Commodore [King] Level) with a score of 190 points. Score really is not relevant though, because the mission is to destroy the Dominion (really tough) and stay alive, which is the point of the scenario, not the score. I must say however, if anyone were to play it, they should start at a much easier level probably Ensign or Commander. In fact, I recommend that you DO NOT start at Commodore or higher. Try any other lower level first. I say this because a substantial amount of "micro management" is required for your planets (cities) in order to play a decent game. I would also warn players that the Dominion will make you cry when they attack because they will "Die hard" with a vengeance. Never, and I repeat, never stop building units or you can just kiss it goodbye. Oh, a strategy guide is available, but try it first and see if YOU can beat the Dominion!

Subwar

General Information:

Name of Scenario : Subwar version 1.0
Final Score : 26 /30
(Breakdown: 0-10 terrible /11-15 Average/ 16-20 Good/ 21-25 Excellent/ 26+Best possible)
Type of Scenario : Science Fiction
Name of Author: Bernd Brosing aka Bebro
Name of Reviewer: Kobayashi

Summary of Scenario:

You play as the commander of SubForce - a UN type peacekeeping force for the deep oceans in the late 21st century. Playing the scenario brings to mind Roy Schieder of the semi-popular TV series 'SeaQuest DSV' or possibly Patrick Duffy and 'Man from Atlantis' if you're in your 30s (or even 'Sea Hunt' starring Lyod Bridges for the really old folks). Only in Subwar, its a no holds barred undersea war because the nasty corporations who are causing ecological disasters have gone completely rouge and their subs are armed to the teeth.

Playability - Section Sub-total: 4.5

Were you able to finish in a reasonable amount of turns? (Score: 1 )
Well actually no. There is a set number of turns in which you have to irradicate the evil corporations. I failed to do so having only conquered the Australians - more on that later. But anyway the scenario doesn't go on forever so I'll give it a score of 1 here.

Did the scenario avoid being tedious or repetitive? (Score: 1 )
A most enjoyable scenario. Only three starting cities (two of which get wiped out) and different enemy units appear at different areas requiring different reactions. You only have a limited number of units and turns move quickly.

Did the scenario capture the essence of what it was portraying? (Score: 1 )
Yes - much more that the average scenario. All scenario elements are aligned properly with the underwater theme.

Were you impressed with the overall sound effects? (Score: 0.5 )
Sounds were reasonably well done and helped to create an impression of a deep sea world. I would have liked to hear some music though as the overall range of sounds is limited.

Did you enjoy playing the scenario? (Score: 1 )
Yes immensly. Its definitely one of the best of this year's crop.

 

Units - Section Sub-total: 4

Were the majority of units changed from the default Civ2 units? (Score: 1 )
Every single unit was changed and units well very well drawn. They were consistent and didn't look as if they were put together from different sources like in some other scenarios. (Some of the tank units look like they are from the game Outpost2, and maybe even some of the buildings. I wonder if they are?)

Were all of the sounds appropriate for the units in the scenario? (Score: 1 )
I didn't like having the battleship sound for my cruisers since you can't have explosion sounds like that under-water. Otherwise the sounds were nicely done especially the 'water' noise when units move. There could have been a wider variety of sounds but I the overall quality deserves a score of 1 here (I already took off half a point in the playability section).

Was the scenario free of 'unbalanced' units? (Score: 1 )
Units were not balanced but the overall forces per tribe were balanced. By this I mean the equivalent AI units having better shallow sea (land) units while you have better deep sea units. Your heavy ships cost a lot and you most likely can't build more than two or three in the time alloted so you have to make the best of your limited forces. The AI on the other had has got tons of weak deep sea units.

Were there innovative combinations of special unit abilities? (Score: 1 )
Plenty here. One type of unit worth mentioning are the 'wall' type units of which there were several types. These are air units which can't move but impose a ZOC (maybe its two units stacked together, I don't know). Anyway, the some of your units can't attack them and they do a good job of protecting the AI cities. Another innovative unit idea is the location beacon.

Any other unit related problems (like shield placement)? (Score: 0 )
Yes many units had their shields half hidden - as if the author did not even bother with this. This makes it quite hard to check the status of your units. Another problem was the carrier which also had holds - an unworkable combo in Civ2 which leaves units sleeping in the sea.

Research - - Section Sub-total: 3.5

Was the progression of advance to advance done properly? (Score: 0.5 )
There are only three advances which you can research and progress is very slow. Personally I'd like to see a bit more research. The way it is now, the research related improvements are practically a waste of time.

Were advances properly related to new units and obsolescence? (Score: 1 )
Yes you do get a new unit with each advance you research.

Were non-event messages amended to suit the scenario ? (Score: 1 )
All messages were altered. There are one or two german words left over from the original version but the author has mentioned that this will be fixed in the next version.

Was the civilopedia properly updated? (Score: 0.5 )
Civilpedia entries are ok but the description files have not been updated even though this is a MGE specific game.

Were there dysfunctional improvements or useless technologies? (Score: 0 )
Seems to me that there is no pollution in the game which is such a shame since the scenario is about stopping corporations from destroying the environment. Yet there are many pollution control city improvements. (You do get the global warming effect because of the pollution from nukes)

Map & Terrain - Section Sub-total: 5 - prorated from 4/4

Were you impressed by the Map in general? (Score: 1 )
The map is easily the most impressive part of the scenario. Very well done and completely original.

Was terrain properly adjusted to fit the scenario? (Score: 1 )
I simply love the different types of terrain the author chose. One thing that was very well done was the ocean rifts which replace the normal rivers.

Were you happy with the city, fortress, terrain improvement graphics? (Score: 1 )
As with the rest of the map - very well rendered. All the terrain bonuses, like sea shells, lobsters, magma pits were well chosen and a perfect final touch to the map. City graphics were very well done.

Were there innovations used in relation to Terrain? (Score: 1 )
Redoing the map to represent the sea floor is an innovation it itself. I would consider the fortress complex, consisting a two dozen tiles, belonging to the baddies an innovation as well. You need to see it for yourself to understand.

Care & Details - Section Sub-total: 4

Did you find the documentation adequate? (Score: 1 )
Wonderful documentation - in the form of several linked HTML files. The unit table was especially useful and could be kept open in the background for speedy reference.

Was the events file sufficient for the needs of the scenario? (Score: 1 )
A full events file. You get to rescue and repair a undersea liner, rendevous with informants and you get a reinforcement fleet of dreadnaughts. Too many other events to mention them all here. And I should mention that the events carry the storyline well.

(by the way Bernd, I don't think there is anyway to reach the informant in three turns when he is so far away and so well guarded)

Did you like the changes to the player interface? (Score: 1 )
The city screen, title bars and various icons have all been changed to give the scenario a fresh feel.

Did you find any very apparent errors? (Score: 0 )
Yes. One really irritating error is that you don't get the 'Typhoon' and 'Sea Dragon' experimental units you are supposed to. A message tells you they are arriving and they don't. Their pre-requisite is a tech called prototype but you can't research it. Another message tells you you can get guided weapons with plasma warheads to attack fortified cities. You don't. A third message tells you to explore some ruins. According to the events file, you're supposed to get new units who join your forces but you don't. Another problem is the city names.

Do you think a lot of effort was put into doing this scenario? (Score: 1 )
Yes. Every aspect has been altered to give a convincing undersea scenario. Obviously a lot of though and planning have gone into the making of Subwars and you will be able to feel the 'quality' of the scneario the moment it starts.

Originality and Technical Proficiency - Section Sub-total: 5

Were there any sounds you had never come across before? (Score: 1 )
I haven't played any underwater scenarios before but I think at least some of the sounds are new.

Did you discover many units not used in any other scenarios? (Score: 1 )
To the best of my knowledge, all the units are created by the author himself. I certainly don't remember seeing any of them before and the credits do not mention the use of other people's units.

Is the theme of the scenario completely novel? (Score: 1 )
Yes, I have yet to see another similar scenario - except perhaps the Millenium 004 scenario but that was on a much larger scale and had a different storyline.

Did the author deal with all areas which could be modified? (Score: 1 )
Yes, the scenario is practically a mod pack.

Any other innovations worth mentioning? (Score: 1 )
There is some trick that the author uses to set off nuclear explosions on cue. That's a new one to me.

Overall Assessment and Other Points of Interest:

We've come to expect high quality scenarios from Bernd and this one doesn't disappoint. Seems to me that some errors were caused in the process of transplanting the German version to the English one. That would explain the events which didn't work and the city names. Nothing a bit of further testing wouldn't resolve. For a new release before any version upgrades, the scenario is a very good piece of work, - a work of art even. Once all the bugs are resolved, I wouldn't hesitate to vote for this one as the best scenario of the year.

The Cruel Sea

General Information:

Name of Scenario : The Cruel Sea (version 1.1)

Final Score : 20 / 30
(Breakdown: 0-10 terrible /11-15 Average/ 16-20 Good/ 21-25 Excellent/ 26+Best possible)
Type of Scenario : Historic WWII era
Name of Author: Case aka Nick Dowling
Name of Reviewer: Kobayashi

Summary of Scenario:

This is basically a Battle for the Atlantic scenario where you play only as the Germans (under Admiral Raedar). You try to kill as many enemy ships as you can while preserving your own limited navy. Only sea and air units are involved and the scenario concentrates on mostly on fighting.

Let me start by warning you that this is going to be a very long review. I must say I am not a 'war enthusiast' and my review encompasses many dimensions of Civ2 and goes beyond the scope of the typical 'war enthusiast' players. Quite a few people are very impressed by the Cruel Sea but unfortunately I don't share all their sentiments, just some of them - so I've gone to great lengths to explain my score.

Playability - Section Sub-total: 3

Were you able to finish in a reasonable amount of turns? (Score: 1 )
There scenario last of about 50 turns, each a month, lasting from late 1940 to mid 1944. Quite a nice time frame and a reasonable number of turns considering how long each turn lasted.

Did the scenario avoid being tedious or repetitive? (Score: 0 )

Most of the turns were very repetitive (more on this below).

Did the scenario capture the essence of what it was portraying? (Score: 1 )
I was quite happy with the basic premise of the scenario. The effort to confine the entire scenario to a mega naval conflict was commendable.

Was the choice of and interaction between races appropriate? (Score: 1 )
The attitudes of the powers were handled nicely. The beginning of Russian/German hostilities is timed perfectly but the German declaration of War after Pearl Harbour is one turn late. This cost me two Bismark Battleships and several escourts because I thought that the US wouldn't attack until I attacked first during that one twilight turn.

Did you enjoy playing the scenario? (Score: 0 )
Well I must say that although the scoring system is an innovative way of providing an objective to the player, I feel that it spoils the entire game. To summarise, you get points when you sink ships and you lose (a lot of) points when your own ships are sunk.

This forced my U-boats to race out of port, kill a few ships and then return all in the same turn. I ended up using my Ju-88 planes to attack shipping more than my U-boats since they were practically invulnerable for most of the game and you don't lose any points if they do get shot down. I ended the game with over 60 U-boats and a half a dozen capital ships all sitting idly in port while a constantly replenished fleet of bombers had a never ending picnic of tankers and freighters.

The point penalty for losing ships also makes the big Allied ships invulnerable. Why risk attacking a battleship (50 points) with your own (250 points) when the penalty for losing your own ship is five times greater? You can't use a series of smaller vessels as the penealty is just a bad.

I understand the rationale for the point penalty system as Germany's naval resources were scarce but the situation would have been better portrayed by using pollution to simulate bomb damage and wartime shortages (The Allies will of course have pollution free factories or something) and have points only for killing shipping, not surface combatants. I suggest one point each for sinking freighters, tankers, liberty ships etc. then you can forget about the complicated MSWorks spreadsheet that is included (but doesn't work on my Excel).

After all, the goal should be to reduce enemy shipping and if you waste most of your fleet but destroy enough shipping, you should still have achieved your objective - to starve Great Britain out of the war. If you kill off all the enemy warships but all the convoys ge through, it wouldn't help.

Units - Section Sub-total: 2.5

Were the majority of units changed from the default Civ2 units? (Score: 1 )
All units were changed to WWII era naval and naval-aviation units. Good attention was given to representing the full range of capital ships available to the Kriegsmarine and Allied Forces.

Were all of the sounds appropriate for the units in the scenario? (Score: 0 )
You are supposed to turn off your speakers - which is really a pity as it is an all naval and air affair. The author had only to replace the jet sounds with the piston plane sounds and apply the standard navbattle sound to the spare and extra units to give the scenario a decent sound ability. Merely sixty seconds of work but instead the author had chosen to continue to disregard sounds as in all his other scenarios.

Was the scenario free of 'unbalanced' units? (Score: 0 )

I feel that the balance of units in the entire scenario was wrong. Besides the problem of not having different speeds (movement allowances) for destoyers, cruisers and battleships, above all I felt that submarines should have been much slower on a relative basis. In any case, none of them should move more than a speed of 5. Instead, all move at roughly the same speed, 10 to 12 tiles per turn. Given the number of Allied ships and this movement allowance, they practically sweep the entire map on every turn. There were not only too many allied ships but also too many allied ships capable of seeing subs - including the King George V Battleship? Also, almost all ships can see 2 spaces - remember that subs are not invisible when they move or fight. As a result, I didn't get a single blockade runner back to an Axis port and no U-boat that went south of Iceland ever returned to base.

I also do not agree with the seeding of invisible mines everywhere. Three of my very expensive condors 'flew' into hidden minefields and were destroyed. This completely destroyed any air recon role they might have had.

In WWII, three battlecruisers made a successful dash across the English Channel but in the scenario, the channel is dead to both the Allies and Axis because of the visible invincible mines. Another problem was when mines were returned after the treaty with Russia was broken. Disbandening each mine would yield atleast a cruiser. Also, British light cruisers for some reason would continually suicide themselves against these mines.

Were there innovative combinations of special unit abilities? (Score: 1 )
Mostly standard units. The Hudson and sword fish were examples of plane with the submarine flag, simulating a maritime patrol plane. The most innovative feature was the training range which helps you make your ships veteran. As each ship is destroyed, a new one is created via events.

Any other unit related problems (like shield placement)? (Score: 0.5 )
I think the bribe unit ability of the sabatuers should have been disabled together with the steal tech and incite revolt features. In my game I spent 3800 gold bribing a King George V battleship and then used it to destroy a sistership. I could have probably bribed the invincible mines if I had tried.

Research - - Section Sub-total: 3.5

Were advances properly related to new units and obsolescence? (Score: 0.5 )

A few advances led to new units but all of them were well choosen and carefully researched. The obsolecence of the German's heavy surface combatants was well ochestrated too - but via events.

Was the tech tree of a high level of complexity? (Score: 0.5 )
A simple tree with about five techs to research before the scenario ends. At the Diety level which I played(no recommended level specified), I couldn't even reach Elektro Boats. Maximum research was ten turns on any setting. I would have preferred a discovery every six turns or so.

Were non-event messages amended to suit the scenario ? (Score: 1 )
Yes. This was quite well done. For instance the veteran message is "Your X has completed its training." and if a plane crashes from lack of fuel you get a "rescue crews will be dispatched to look for survivors" message.

Was the civilopedia properly updated? (Score: 1 )
No complaints. Here is an example:

@PEDIAIMPROVE61

The Lend Lease program was one of the most generous acts in modern history. Through it the United States donated vast quantities of war materials to countries fighting the Axis. - Provides Hydro power to every city on every continent..

Were there dysfunctional improvements or useless technologies? (Score: 0.5 )
I was not happy to discover that the Walter Engine Tech served no purpose at all other than as a pre-requisite to Elekto Boats. Also there were other mysterious messages like "Vichy France discovers mobile warfare" and "Neutrals discover flight".

Map & Terrain - Section Sub-total: 4.5

Were you impressed by the Map in general? (Score: 1 )
Very nicely done map - easily the best part of the scenario. I think it was just about the right scale for the purposes of the scenario nad stretched to part of the South Atlantic and included the Med and a workable suez canal.

nicely done map. See the training range in the top right corner

Was attention given to geography and historical details? (Score: 1 )
Full marks here. All events relating to the Battle of the Atlantic were included, an then some. I do not think that historically the Russians made so many battleships and submarines which were a major nuisance.

Were you happy with the city, fortress, terrain improvement graphics? (Score: 1 )
No complaints here. Almost all of the terrain improvements and bonuses were changed to give a much better feel on WWII to the map. Were the changes in the terrain graphic Nemo originals?

Were city names and the placement of cities correct? (Score: 1 )
Full marks here again. I gether that very detailed research was done on placement of relevant cities and important events and geographical locations.

Were there innovations used in relation to Terrain? (Score: 0.5 )

No not really - terrain did not play an important part in the scenario as there is very little you can do with the sea.

Care & Details - Section Sub-total: 4

Did you find the documentation adequate? (Score: 1 )
There was one of those html type readme files which are beginning to appear in new scenarios. There were nine sections: Installation, Overview, Hints and Tips, 'House Rules' and scoring system, Historical Notes, Units, Credits, Sources, Distribution & Contact Information. The units section gave a particularly good idea of the background and function of each.

Was the events file sufficient for the needs of the scenario? (Score: 0.5 )
Way too much space was taken up giving too many free units to the AI. I didn't like having U-boats appearing mysteriously either. On more than one occasion a Type IX U-boat would appear next to a stack of 16 enemy units. Instead, some of the event space should have been alloted to GOTO commands to steer the ships back and forth the atlantic. Instead practically every AI ship, and I'm not exagerating here, was bunched off the west coast of France. This is a major neccessity.

Oh did I mention there were too many AI ships?

Were you happy with the improvement and wonder icons? (Score: 1 )
There were quite a number of existing wonders but very few improvements. All had suitable icons. The technology icons were all mixed up though - not a major problem but worth mentioning.

Did you find any very apparent errors? (Score: 0.5 )
I must minus half a point here becasue of the repeating scnorchel message which was quite irritating.

Do you think a lot of effort was put into doing this scenario? (Score: 1 )
Setting up the map properly and arranging the units would have been a ardous task.

Originality and Technical Proficiency - Section Sub-total: 2.5

Were there any sounds you had never come across before? (Score: 0 )

Maybe the scenario sould be called the "Silent Service" (a submarine simulation game I used to play on my Apple II).

Did you discover many units not used in any other scenarios? (Score: 0 )
With so many different WWII era ships, I was sure some of them were new. However, the readme explains that most of the units were done by Captain Nemo and Anzac.

Is the theme of the scenario completely novel? (Score: 1 )

Yes, this is the only atlantic war scenario I've seen.

Were complex events used to carry the story line or enhance the AI? (Score: 1 )
Yes there was a nice messages telling you what is going on in the rest of the world and explaining when new technologies were introduced. The ENglish also get poorer with every freighter you sink.

Did the author deal with all areas which could be modified? (Score: 0.5 )
Not all areas were modified, the user interface was unchanged for instance but there were many changes (cities, units, wonders). I would have liked the descriptions in the defense minister window to be abbreviated so they don't run off the screen.

Overall Assessment and Other Points of Interest:

In my game I sank 672 vessels worth 9816 points including 159 freighters, 35 tankers and 45 lierty ships. My losses were 125 vessels worth 6000 points including 76 type IX and 29 tyoe VII U-boats. Besides thinning down the Allied numbers and reducing their sub detecting abilities, one other major suggestion I have is to incorporate the use of torpedoes(missiles with movement allowance of 1). This allows U-boats to attack and have both the target and the attacker survive. Something that happened in real life. This forces U-boats to return to port for resupply. Something that happened in real life. This allows U-boat to stay hidden more effectively and attack ships with high defense factors (if they have a lot of torpedoes). The torpedoes could be given by events at important sub-ports at the beginning but not at in the second half forcing the player to waste resources manufacturing them. Another way to simulate the deteriorating war situation. At the end of the day, I guess I expected a scenario where you could move your U-boats out to the atlantic to conduct stealth attacks but that just isn't what I got. But then maybe that's just my own opinion - you should try the scenario and draw your own conclusion. p.s. I understand that version 2.0 will have fixed many of the errors mentioned here.

The Quest for El Dorado

General Information

• Name of Scenario : The Quest for El Dorado
• Final Score : 26.5/35 (Adjusted: 23/30)
  (Breakdown: 0-10 terrible /11-15 Average/ 16-20 Good/ 21-25 Excellent/ 26+Best possible)
• Type of Scenario :Historical
• Name of Author: Jesús Balsinde
• Name of Reviewer: Morten Blaabjerg

Summary of Scenario:

A band of Spanish deserters struggle through the amazon jungle in order to attack the Spanish settlements there.

Playability - Section Sub-total: 5.5 / 6

Were you able to finish in a reasonable amount of turns? (Score: 1 )
Did the scenario avoid being tedious or repetitive? (Score: 0.5 )
Did the scenario capture the essence of what it was portraying? (Score: 1 )
Were you impressed with the overall sound effects? (Score: 1 )
Was the choice of and interaction between races appropriate? (Score: 1 )
Did you enjoy playing the scenario? (Score: 1 )

Let me be frank. This one blew me away. And that's unusual. Right after discovering this very special scenario, I sat all night long and struggled to get my Spanish rebels through the jungle, and succeeded too. I managed to take about 3 out of the 5 Spanish objective cities. On my first go, I played at King level, but this probably doesn't matter so much, as the scenario is very much based on the events-file. Most of the playability comes from the carefully scripted manner in which everything is done. You have no cities. The object of the game is simple. Survive long enough to get through the jungle. The more men you get through, the more likely you are to be able to take the Spanish cities and win the scenario. I won't ruin the game for you, but there are a few surprises along the way. But what really is great, is the somber atmosphere which encompasses the whole thing.

Units - Section Sub-total: 5 / 5

Were the majority of units changed from the default Civ2 units? (Score: 1 )
Was the scenario free of 'unbalanced' units? (Score: 1 )
Were there innovative combinations of special unit abilities? (Score: 1 )
Were Barbarian units appropriate when they appeared? (Score :1 )
Any other unit related problems (like shield placement)? (Score: 1 )

The scenario is quite unique in that the player takes control with a number of Spanish soldiers, arquebusiers and pikemen, as well as a few hero units. The opposition consists primarily of barbarians, unusual encounters, as well as forces from the Spanish settlements that needs to be taken to complete the scenario. Saying too much would spoil the playing experience for you. But, yes, this scenario is probably one of the most innovative I have seen, also in this department. The units are very nicely drawn, and adds significantly to the atmosphere. You really have the feeling that you're leading a bunch of Spanish renegades through the amazon. There are a few graphic glitches here and there, but nothing that gets in the way really. The opposition met with consists mostly of powerful barbarian units like mosquitos and indians hiding in the forest. There was a consistent decision to make these quite deadly, so you lose units every other minute. The challenge is to survive with enough men to be able to conquer the cities at the end of the journey. However, there's little to do really to avoid the disasters of the jungle. This provides a certain hazardous feel to it all, which is quite intentional, because it recreates the hazard of the historical journey of these men. But after playing it, I can't help but think the author could have provided an additional strategic element to the game play, by giving more thought to different unit qualities.

Research - - Section Sub-total: 1 / 6

Was the progression of advance to advance done properly? (Score: 0 )
Were advances properly related to new units and obsolescence? (Score: 0 )
Was the tech tree of a high level of complexity? (Score: 0 )
Were non-event messages amended to suit the scenario? (Score: 0.5 )
Was the civilopedia properly updated? (Score: 0.5 )
Were there dysfunctional improvements or useless technologies? (Score: 0 )

There's no research whatsoever, which of course means that this scenario misses that aspect of civ2. The tech tree was tweaked to support the quest scheme, and functions quite well. Its clear that the authors intentions were to create something totally different from the traditional civ2 game. And in this he has succeeded. That said, lack of tech development etc also means that the scenario is not so deep and multifaceted as a scenario with a full blown tech tree. The depth of the scenario comes from the clever use of events, and the multi layered text messages that tells the story line.

Map & Terrain - Section Sub-total: 5 / 6

Were you impressed by the Map in general? (Score: 0.5 )
Was terrain properly adjusted to fit the scenario? (Score: 0.5 )
Was attention given to geography and historical details? (Score: 1 )
Were you happy with the city, fortress, and terrain improvement graphics? (Score: 1 )
Were city names and the placement of cities correct? (Score: 1 )
Were there innovations used in relation to Terrain? (Score: 1 )

The map layout plays a large part in constraining the player. Exploring the map and meeting with the various hazards of the jungle simply is the scenario. The tedious dullness of the jungle is clearly intended. However, the terrain graphics used are nothing unusual in themselves. That the map and scenario manages to stay interesting despite of this is a credit to the innovative use of events and barbarians employed.

Care & Details - Section Sub-total: 5 / 6

Did you find the documentation adequate? (Score: 1 )
Was the events file sufficient for the needs of the scenario? (Score: 1 )
Were you happy with the improvement and wonder icons? (Score: 0 )
Did you like the changes to the player interface? (Score: 1 )
Did you find any very apparent errors? (Score: 1 )
Do you think a lot of effort was put into doing this scenario? (Score: 1 )

The documentation and presentation are top-notch. You get an unusual insight in a small chapter of Spanish history, from the events and the background story in the documentation, which fires the imagination. It is very interesting to see this kind of multi layered events, that not only supports the story that is taking place, but also tells the background story as well. You don't spend your time looking at city icons at all, simply because you don't have any cities, until the very end. This is not what is important. This is in some ways a very simple scenario, but one that grips you with that simplicity. Making it look and play so smoothly has taken much effort and consideration as to how to tweak the appearance and presentation of the game.

Originality and Technical Proficiency - Section Sub-total: 5 / 6

Were there any sounds you had never come across before? (Score: 1 )
Did you discover many units not used in any other scenarios? (Score: 1 )
Is the theme of the scenario completely novel? (Score: 1 )
Were complex events used to carry the story line or enhance the AI? (Score: 1 )
Did the author deal with all areas which could be modified? (Score: 0 )
Any other innovations worth mentioning? (Score: 1 )

Events and events-created barbs carry a great deal of the story line, and add considerably to the already solid atmosphere provided by the graphics and sound work. The clever use of events and other innovations in many ways serves as inspiration for other scenarios, quest based as well as more strategic scenarios. The only problem with this scenario that I can see, is that you will probably only play it once. It has been clearly designed as an interesting story to be played out. And once you've played that story out, there's no more to do. No more tricks to discover, no new units, no nothing. This is not necessarily a bad thing, but it does mean that this scenario is a one time thrill. The events-controlled setup is simply not as flexible as a tech-controlled setup could have been, if that would have been possible at all, given the authors premise.

Overall Assessment and Other Points of Interest: 26.5/30 (23/30)

The fact that this scenario in its essence isn't well suited for replay ability is its biggest drawback, because once you've played it, you've really acquired an appetite for a bit more. But you deserve to play it that one time to see what a civ2 scenario can also be. It has been a truly inspiring experience for me to see and play this one, and I strongly recommend you to give it a try.

Underdark

General Information:

• Name of Scenario: Underdark
• Final Score: 27.5/30
  (Breakdown: 0-10 terrible /11-15 Average/ 16-20 Good/ 21-25 Excellent/ 26+Best possible)
• Type of Scenario:Fantasy
• Name of Author: Mr. Temba
• Name of Reviewer: Kobayashi

Summary of Scenario:

A part of a kingdom in the middle ages falls into the dark netherworld in an earthquake. You play the role of the leader of the human folk appointed by the princess of the town. You have to battle it out with the other races living underground - the ILLITHIDS(mind flayers), the DROW(dark elves), the GHOULS(undead), the GOBLINS(raiders of the surface), the KUA-TOA(fishmen)and the MONSTERS(a mysterious race).

Playability - Section Sub-total: 4/5

Did the scenario avoid being tedious or repetitive? (Score: 0 )

There are two very tedious parts. One is when dozens of airial creatures like the summonned attack you and you have to click ok when the missile message comes up - or twice when they attack a city with a SAM site. Also, irritating undeaded creatures continually appear near your home cities and you have to keep killing them.

Did the scenario capture the essence of what it was suppose to portray? (Score: 1 )

Very good atmosphere all round. The style and choice of words adds to the feel of the scenario nicely. example - "The gibberlings hadn't known about our land! Now the rogues among them are invading! More will arise every season, we must station troops to stop them." "It is with some regret that we enter the slave trade. But it is instrumental in the underdark."

Were you impressed with the overall sound effects? (Score: 1 )

Excellent sounds for all units and city improvements.

Was the choice of and interaction between races appropriate? (Score: 1 )

Yes you fight increasingly powerful races as the weaker races are closer to you. Different races also have their own identities as defined by the government and the types of units they can build.

Did you enjoy playing the scenario? (Score: 1 )

Without a doubt this is my all time choice for a fantasy scenario. Even though it was made quite sometime ago, I have yet to come across another which matches the overall quality and appeal of this scenario.

Units - Section Sub-total: 5/5

Were the majority of units changed from the default Civ2 units? (Score: 1 )

Yes - all units were completely changed.

Were all of the sounds appropriate for the units in the scenario? (Score: 1 )

Very good sounds all round and mostly unconventional I might add. I especially like the roar of the attacking goblins and mummering of the undead units. Plus the aleilouyah of the priest is the best unit sound. There was just one inappropriate sound - the rat swarm says "I warned you!" just like your hero unit.

Was the scenario free of 'unbalanced' units? (Score: 1 )

The enemy units are very powerful and the game is not easy but with some careful strategies, you can get by. Units are clearly segmented into different roles - like attacking, anti-air, defending, diplomacy by their abilities and other attributes.

Were there innovative combinations of special unit abilities? (Score: 1 )

One type of the goblin settlers are helicopters which can transform sea back into land so you can join your islands into a single land mass. Great combination.

Any other unit related problems (like shield placement)? (Score: 1 )

No problems.

Research - - Section Sub-total: 4.5/5

Was the progression of advance to advance done properly? (Score: 1 )

Very nicely done tech tree with different units and wonders for each race. The ideas and names used for the advances were very well thought out.

Were advances properly related to new units and obsolescence? (Score: 1 )

There wasn't much in the way of obsolescence but you didn't get new units frequently so the build list didn't stretch down too far. I was quite happy with the mix of buildable units at any given time.

Were non-event messages amended to suit the scenario ? (Score: 1 )

Everything was amended properly. When you try to contact the Kua Tao leader he replies "Za zoom? lagone fatong? YA LAKEAR! Sirb a listo, tu coche! Nada puto!!" What originality.

Was the civilpedia properly updated? (Score: 0.5 )

Words were changed where needed but there were no passages added to describe what the wonders were - etc.

Were there disfunctional improvements or useless technologies? (Score: 1 )

Everything was working fine as far as I could tell.

Map & Terrain - Section Sub-total: 4.5/5

Were you impressed by the Map in general? (Score: 1 )

Great island warfare map of good size stretching up instead of sideways for a change. You have a good idea of your progress by seeing how far up you've conquered as you start right at the bottom.

Was terrain properly adjusted to fit the scenario? (Score: 1 )

Beautifully done - the sea was changed to black and the rest of the terrain was changed to red, orange and yellow to keep the impression of an underground world.

Were you happy with the city, fortress, terrain improvement graphics? (Score: 1 )

Everything was well done especially the implematation of the irrigation, farmland and roads.

Were city names and the placement of cities correct? (Score: .5 )

Nice appropriate city names - no history or geographical references applicable.

Were there innovations used in relation to Terrain? (Score: 1 )

Different islands have different terrain features and you have rather poor terrain which you must work to improve just to keep up. If you use the sea squares for production, you actually lose trade and the AI actually figures out that an entertainer is the better option.

Care & Details - Section Sub-total: 4.5/5

Did you find the documentation adequate? (Score: 1 )

The readme is well done with sections on what to do first, characteristics of different races. Credits are listed seperately and done with good detail - you know exactly who made whic unit. You rarely see this nowadays (even in my own scenarios).

Was the events file sufficient for the needs of the scenario? (Score: 1 )

There was a good deal of events - many of them recurring. There is also a storyline well carried by messages at different stages. This is an exampe of a message you can expect "Noble leader, the magics of the underdark are much greater than our normal world. With our new knowledge of Magiocrachy we can form a government that puts the magic users in charge, under yourself of course. (you may now become a Communism)."

Were you happy with the improvement and wonder icons? (Score: 0.5 )

Although some icons were crudely done at least they were not the default icons.

Did you find any very apparent errors in any category of the scenario? (Score: 1 )

No.

Do you think a lot of effort was put into doing this scenario? (Score: 1 )

I would consider this scenario a masterpiece - almost everything has been revamped. The events file is very long and filled with all kinds of messages to deal with different situations and stages. Obviously took a long time to piece everything together.

Originality and Technical Proficiency - Section Sub-total: 5/5

Were the sounds unique and different in the scenario? (Score: 1 )

Definitely a yes. For instance, the civil disorder sound is a 'I'm singing in the rain' rendition. The sound for founding a new city is 'uhga uhga chaga chaga'.

Did you discover many unit GRAPHICS not used in any other scenarios? (Score: 1 )

About half the units were new and the rest taken from other scenarios and the micropose library. I think there are enough unique units to give a one here.

Is the theme of the scenario completely novel? (Score: 1 )

I haven't seen another underground island scenario (not counting dungenon type scenarios) yet.

Were complex events used to carry the story line or enhance the AI? (Score: 1 )

There were lots of AI creatures that had to be generated randomly from the hordes that I encountered. Also, there are unique units that appear and a story about ...ah I should not reveal too much.

Did the author deal with all areas which could be modified? (Score: 1 )

Nothing seemed leftover from the defualt civ so I should give full marks here as well.

Other Points of Interest:

The concept of pollution is completley novel and deserves mention. Production mutipliers are 'slave' type improvements while pollution control units control slaves. So if there is not enough control - you get slave rebel meetings (pollution) and thus reduced output.

Overall Assesment

This is my favourite scenario - need I say more.

END

Up the Deadly Boot

General Information

• Name of Scenario : Up the Deadly Boot
• Final Score : 22.5/30
  (Breakdown: 0-10 terrible /11-15 Average/ 16-20 Good/ 21-25 Excellent/ 26+Best possible)
• Type of Scenario : Historical
• Name of Author: John Petroski
• Name of Reviewer: SunTzu

Summary of Scenario:

This scenario is based on the Allied Invasion of Italy.

Playability - Section Sub-total: 5

Were you able to finish in a reasonable amount of turns? (Score: 1 )
Did the scenario avoid being tedious or repetitive? (Score: 1 )
Did the scenario capture the essence of what it was suppose to portray? (Score: 1 )
Were you impressed with the overall sound effects? (Score: 0 )
Was the choice of and interaction between races appropriate? (Score: 1 )
Did you enjoy playing the scenario? (Score: 1 )

You really capture the essence of this scenario. From the initial invasion of Sicily. Plus the invasion of Anzio after being stopped at Monte Casino.

Units - Section Sub-total: 4

Were the majority of units changed from the default Civ2 units? (Score: 1 )
Were all of the sounds appropriate for the units in the scenario? (Score: 0 )
Was the scenario free of 'unbalanced' units? (Score: 1 )
Were there innovative combinations of special unit abilities? (Score: 1 )
Were Barbarian units appropriate when they appeared? (Score: 0 )
Any other unit related problems (like shield placement)? (Score: 1 )

There are many different units which gives a great twist to the game allowing you to use the famous 'Big Red 1' in your assault! :)

Research - - Section Sub-total: 4

Was the progression of advance to advance done properly? (Score: 0 )
Were advances properly related to new units and obsolescence? (Score: 1 )
Was the tech tree of a high level of complexity? (Score: 0 )
Were non-event messages amended to suit the scenario ? (Score: 1 )
Was the civilpedia properly updated? (Score: 1 )
Were there disfunctional improvements or useless technologies? (Score: 1 )

Again like J. Petroski's Afrika Korps scenario, the tech tree wasn't really used. All units are given at the start or by events, like the Tiger and King Tiger tanks.

Map & Terrain - Section Sub-total: 5

Were you impressed by the Map in general? (Score: 1 )
Was terrain properly adjusted to fit the scenario? (Score: 1 )
Was attention given to geography and historical details? (Score: 1 )
Were you happy with the city, fortress, terrain improvement graphics? (Score: 1 )
Were city names and the placement of cities correct? (Score: 1 )
Were there innovations used in relation to Terrain? (Score: 0 )

The Map and Terrain are right on with history. The fortifications at Monte Cassino are especially accurate.

Care & Details - Section Sub-total: 6

Did you find the documentation adequate? (Score: 1 )
Was the events file sufficient for the needs of the scenario? (Score: 1 )
Were you happy with the improvement and wonder icons? (Score: 1 )
Did you like the changes to the player interface? (Score: 1 )
Did you find any very apparent errors in any category of the scenario? (Score: 1 )
Do you think a lot of effort was put into doing this scenario? (Score: 1 )

This is a very detailed scenario. Good job john!

Originality and Technical Proficiency - Section Sub-total: 3

Were the sounds appropriate in volume and clear enough to understand? (Score: 0 )
Were the sounds unique and different in the scenario? (Score: 0 )
Did you discover many unit GRAPHICS not used in any other scenarios? (Score: 0 )
Is the theme of the scenario completely novel? (Score: 1 )
Were complex events used to carry the story line or enhance the AI? (Score: 1 )
Did the author deal with all areas which could be modified? (Score: 1 )
Any other innovations worth mentioning? Explain? (no actual score here)

Overall Assesment and Other Points of Interest:

This is a great scenario and it is apart of SunTzu's Scenario Suggestions!

END

Zhan Guo

General Information:

• Name of Scenario: Zhan Guo
• Final Score: 17/30
  (Breakdown: 0-10 terrible /11-15 Average/ 16-20 Good/ 21-25 Excellent/ 26+Best possible)
• Name(s) of Author(s): Prometheus
• Type of Scenario: Classic History
• Reviewed by: Kevin Klop (a.k.a. willemvanoranje)

Introduction

Zhan Guo is a scenario about China in the third century. The country is split, and your goal ofcourse, is to take as much cities as you can. You start with a lot of alliances, but from day 1, one ally will ask you to declare war on another, and to be sure to accomplish the goals, you better join the in their crusade. Allies will turn their backs on you, and you will turn them down severale times as well. An alliance is no insurance, you just got in to one of the most treacherous world in it's time, and there's no escape..

Playability - 4.5/5

Were you able to finish within a reasonable amount of turns? YES (1)

Did the scenario avoid being tedious or repetitive? YES (1)

Did the scenario capture the essence of what it was portraying? YES (1)

Was the choice of and interaction between races appropriate? YES (0.5)

Did you enjoy playing the scenario? YES (1)

The player doesn't need to much time to complete this scenario succesfully, and can finish before the maximum of turns is achieved. This is a plus in my opinion, 'cause even with one hour a day, you won't need long and still have a lot of fun. The scenario is about conquest and conquest only, meaning that you are either the offensive or defensive party, so that makes it a little bit repetitive. But that cannot be fixed, every war scenario has it, and you still have fun playing. The fun rate in this scenario is very high, once you started off. The first few turns can be very boring, when you are at war with just one or two other civilizations, and you don't even know which. The turns consist mostly of moving units through the map to the enemy. But once you reached the enemy, and other civs declare war, the fun begins and you can find yourself lost for an hour or two.

Units - 4/5

Were the majority of units changed from default Civ2 units? YES (1)

Did you discover any inappropriate unit sounds? NO (1)

Was the scenario free of 'unbalanced units'? YES (0.5)

Were there innovative combinations of special unit abilities? NO (0.5)

Were barbarian units appropriate when they appeared? YES (1)

All but three by Civilization II original provided units have been changed by Prometheus to be used in the scenario. There are different units with different functions, and often each civilization has its own version for a certain function. A good example is the defensive units that cannot move: There are several types of Towers, each used by a different civilization. But even with the whole bunch of units one can choose from, the player will probarly build just four or five types: diplomat, one of the towers, heavy infantry, an offensive horseman and another defensive, cheap unit. Some people probarly don't even build the offensive horseman, for it has a lower movement than the heavy infantry and has the same strength. The unit's special abilities aren't used fully, in my opinion. Most units with abilities have 2x defence strength against Horses, and some units have the Alpine ability or 2 space visibility. Some units have the Amphibious Assault ability, but that has not been used in the scenario at all (not by the reviewer). So some units certainly have special abilities, but to say that there are innovative combinations is too much. The barbarians are a different thing. Their activities concentrate mainly in the south of the map, and a bit in the north as well. The northern empire (meant to play) have little trouble defeating the few barbarians that attack the cities, because they have the Great Wall wonder in one of their cities, and most southern cities are equiped with City Walls as well. Both terrains in the north and south are filled with stationary barbarian units though, and killing for example a horse, makes a few new barbarian units appear, which will try to attack a city, because they are angry you killed on of them.

.

Research - 0.5/5

Was the progression of advance to advance done properly? NO (0)

Were the advances properly related to new units and obsolescence? NO (0)

Was the tech tree of high level of complexity? NO (0)

Were non-event messages amended to suit the scenario? NO (0.5)

Was the civilopedia properly updated? NO (0)

Well, I can be very short on this one. The tech tree is limited to the special techs for one civilization, that cannot be shared or conquered by others in another way than stealing through a diplomat. Research is slowed down artificial in the scenario settings and it is abvious that the scenario creator doesn't want the player to research anything. I know it can be hard to design a good working tech tree, but even a small one would have been sufficient here. Because there is no game.txt, most non-event in-game messages haven't been changed. Now most don't need a change, but putting the messages ina in this case ancient chinese perspective would have added to the game. There is a pedia.txt included, but to be honest; I couldn't find out what the creator changed in it except for the word 'triremes' for the Lighthouse description is changed to 'ships'. The creator forgot to edit some words, for example it still says that the 'Tavern' (Colosseum) can be enhaned with Electronics, and it still says that the Workshop (Stock Exchange) is cumulative with MarketPlace and Bank.

Map & Terrain - 3/5

Were you impressed by the terrain in general? YES (0.5)

Was attention given to geography and historical details? YES (0.5)

Were you happy with the city, fortress, terrain improvement? YES (1)

Were city names and the placement of cities correct? YES (1)

Were there innovations used in relation to terrain? NO (0)

The terrain used in Zhanguo, looks nice. All kinds of terrains got a new graphic from creator Prometheus, and new resources were invented to create the right atmosphere. The terrain was a bit chaotic sometimes though, but that didn't cause any trouble. The one thing that troubled me was the historic accurasy. It's true that this civil war happened, but the date used in the scenario is totally wrong. The scenario starts in 230, and after playing a few turns, you see that you are in 228, meaning that you are in the B.C.'s. The creator tells about the fall of the Han-dynasty, so no mistakes can be made. The Han-dynasty ruled over China from 206 B.C. to A.D. 220. The civil war this scenario is about went from A.D. 220 to A.D. 589. This scenario takes place in only one part of the scenario (20.5 years): the conquests of the Ch'in. My encyclopedia tells me that the conquests of the Ch'in happened from A.D. 280 to A.D. 317. This is in my opinion a very large error, and should, no must be improved in the next version. About the geography, though, I couldn't find real mistakes. Every language writes those city names different (Bejing or Peking, Ch'in or Tsjin, Mao Tse Tung or Mao Zedung) so I didn't pay much attention to that. I am happy about the looks of the cities, fortress and terrain improvement. The look nice and fit in the terrain used. A full point for that.

Care & Details - 3/5

Did you find the documentation adequate? NO (0)

Was the events file sufficient for the needs of the scenario? YES (0.5)

Were you happy with the improvement and wonder icons? YES (0.5)

Did you find any apparent errors? NO (1)

Do you think a lot of effort was put in the scenario? YES (1)

No documentation was given at all, except for the pre-scenario information. I think that isn't a good thing at all, because most people do not know anything about this time period in China. A small Word document or just some background information in the very short readme file would be enough. It's too bad that there is such little information, now. That is something the author might want to change in the future versions he might be planning to making. An other point, which is sufficient, is the eventsfile. The file isn't too large and provides the scenario with an acceptable amount of events, mostly used to tell about the death of an important leader or to enhance the AI. The best events are the 'randomturn'events: the creator has put in the possibility that a certain civilization declares war at the player. This adds a nice extra thing to the scenario and forces you to never weaken your defences at the borders. For example, you are on the edge of a full-scale-final-battle attack on the three eastern civs. All your units are there and are in the middle of an important battle, when over sudden, the civ south of you declares war at you and takes over all those size 10 cities without proper defence. You don't want that to happen. The icons used in the scenario are chosen well and look nice enough to give a full point for it. Prometheus had put a lot of effort in making this scenario and did a good job in my opinion. Prometheus is not a newbie on the scene and knows his part of scenario building, which he has proven in this one.

Originality and Technical Proficiency - 3/5

Did you discover many units not used in other scenarios? YES (1)

Is the theme of the scenario a completely novel? YES (0.5)

Were complex events used to carry the story line or enhance the AI? YES (0.5)

Did the author deal with all areas which could be modified? YES (1)

Any other innovations meantioning? NO (0)

Every unit was new to me, so that is a plus for the creator. This doesn't mean that all the units are his ofcourse, but since there is only given credit for the 'base infantry unit' to the unknown CtP author, I assume all of the units are new. The theme of the scenario is a completely novel; one part 'civil war' (220-589) of ancient China, but I explained everything in the Map section. The author dealt with almost every part that could be modified, and that is only posotive. A full point for that.

Overall Assesment and other points of Interest:

Overall, the scenario is fun to play. The creator made a big mistake considering the time the scenario should play, but this does not affect the playability in any way. It is a shame that there is no tech tree used, and too bad the units don't success eachother. A thing that would certainly improve the scenario is the background information; the creator could add a file with historical details and extra information for the ones that had to check their encyclopedia to know more about it.The graphic part is done well, and the creator can be happy about that part. Overall I can recommend this scenario to everyone who likes a war scen' and doesn't want to spend too much time.- willemvanoranje -

Final Score: 17/30

Zweiter Weltkrieg

General Information:

Name of Scenario : Zweiter Weltkrieg 2.0
Final Score : 25.0 / 30
Type of Scenario : Modern History
Name of Author: Patrick Choo a.k.a kobayashi
Name of Reviewer: Kevin Klop a.k.a. willemvanoranje

Summary of Scenario:

Zweiter Weltkrieg is German for Second World War, and that's exactly what this scenario is about. The difference with some other WW II scenarios is that this one doesn't simulate WW II, but only gives you the situation as it was in September 1939 and lets you do your own thing from there. This means that it is possible to ally with the Minor Allied while playing Axis, or conquering Berlin as the Minor Axis. The scenario is designed for multiplayer, but a lot of people play it single player as do I. Kobayashi recommends to play as the Axis in single player, or as the Allied. Personally I liked the Sovjets as well, but Axis are preferable.

All of France? No, one little city kept resisting the Axis agressor, fighting against them using a magic potion........or wait, wasn't that 2000 years earlier?

Playability - Section Sub-total: 4/5

Were you able to finish in a reasonable amount of turns? (Score: 1 )
Did the scenario avoid being tedious or repetitive? (Score: 0.5 )
Did the scenario capture the essence of what it was portraying? (Score: 1 )
Were you impressed with the overall sound effects? (Score: 0.5 )
Did you enjoy playing the scenario? (Score: 1 )

Playing as the Axis is always fun, since you are certainly for the first 100 weeks (=50 turns) the agressive civ. After that the Allied get their heavy bombers and you get trouble in Russia. The key to success in this scenario is fast research, which can become difficult because you have to build up defences (Air Defence, Coastal Battery) against the Allied and troops against Russia as well. The amount of turns as the Axis depends on your tactic: it will be a quick game when you choose to go all research (either you win early, or loose early), and if you play save it will be a longer, more difficult and more interesting game. A wise thing in about all single player games might be taking over the minor Axis territory or at least Rumania, Hungary and Bulgaria: they are an extra side for you to attack Russia from. And if you think it's not enough you can take Turkey as well: just be sure to have a strong border with Spain. You can expect attacks from there when taking Turkey. Believe me: taking over their cities is better than giving them all your techs. A very nice effect of the Axis, wanted or not, is that everything is very real. In the beginning you will conquer Europe with ease using the Blitzkrieg tactic, but later on when the enemy has better tanks and air defences, the Blitzkrieg won't work anymore. In real history the Blitzkrieg wasn't used anymore because there weren't enough planes and because the enemy Airforce became too dangerous. Playing as the Allied means a bit boredome in the early stages. You see how the Axis takes over Europe, and all you can do is research and rule the seas. Once again research is very important, you should get good tanks and long range bombers as soon as possible. Without them you shouldn't even think of taking one Axis city. The place were you should be able to act first is Afrika, besides the Northsea and Atlantic. In Afrika you have the Minor Axis in front of you. They're weak and with little research you should be able to take over their bases there, helped by the Minor Allied that can approach from the other side. Once you have researched enough, you can build up forces: first a lot of bombers followed by cargo ships filled with Shermans. Then operation Overlord can begin. Playing as the Russians is really fun in my opinion. If you wait until you are attacked by the Axis, you can get pretty frustrated. My tip is to attack the Neutrals and maybe Minor Allied early. They are weak, and even though your forces are just little better, you can gain a lot of influence by taking their cities over, and besides that you stop the German expansion for at least a while. Once again Turkey can be the key. If you have Turkey you can take over the Minor Axis from a good starting point. You should not move too fast though: you have to balance the building defences at the border with the Axis and building forces to take over Turkey. After taking Turkey you should become friends with the Independants and turn them against the Axis. Give them a few useless techs, ally with them, make them declare war to the Axis, and give them and obsolete T-34 tech. This way you force the Axis to spread forces. Axis troop concentration will weaken near your border, or at least lost units will be replaced far too late. Make sure you act quickly, and give the Independants better techs when you see they're losing. Hopefully the Allied are acting the same moment and invade the Axis from somewhere else. Now you should slowly retake lost cities and begin taking Polish cities. Your final attack should wait 'till you have traded some techs with the Allied (that really helps!) or even with the Minor Axis. As soon as you can build the B-29 you should launch your attack towards Berlin. The Russians are most fun after the Axis and it is certainly the civ with the most changes if following the above tactic. Maybe you think that it's no fun to use Allied techs, but this scenario was meant to let the player discover how the war could've gone as well. And besides, Russia did get a lot of planes, tanks and weapons from the Allied in the Lend-Lease program.

Barbarossa is going ok. Already better than Hitler: I have Leningrad!

Units - Section Sub-total: 4/4

Were the majority of units changed from the default Civ2 units? (Score: 1 )
Was the scenario free of 'unbalanced' units? (Score: 1 )
Were there innovative combinations of special unit abilities? (Score: 1 )
Any other unit related problems (like shield placement)? (Score: 1 )

All of the units used in Civilization II are changed and adjusted to fit the scenario. Kobayashi even had a shortage of units: in the readme you can read that some units are meant to be used as other units as well. For example the P-51 counts as the Bf 109K as well, and the Lancaster can be seen as the Halifax, B-24 Liberator and Short Stirling as well. The scenario had no unbalanced units in it. All units that are meant to fight eachother have about the same strength, and you often don't know how things will go. Only the B-29 is a bit stronger than its opponents, which is only good because it's the 'crowbar' needed to decide the war. It's like a goalgetter or pinch-hitter in football: someone that can decide the match. Kobayashi did a pretty nice job on the submarines. Submarines have 0 attack strength: they have to loaded with torpedoes to have effect at all. Without torpedoes they're just fragile pieces of china between a horde of elephants.

The Axis is beaten, the Allied are far away, Europe will become a large Soviet country.

Research - - Section Sub-total: 4.5/5

Was the progression of advance to advance done properly? (Score: 1 )
Were advances properly related to new units and obsolescence? (Score: 1 )
Was the tech tree of a high level of complexity? (Score: 1 )
Were non-event messages amended to suit the scenario ? (Score: 0.5 )
Were there dysfunctional improvements or useless technologies? (Score: 1 )

I could not find any errors in the tech tree at all, and I didn't disagree with the relation to new units. The only thing I think could've been different was the fact that the Panzer IV doesn't get obsolete. In my opinion it should get obsolete after the Panther comes available, or maybe after the King Tiger does. The Panther is really the better version of the Panzer IV in this scenario, with the only difference that it cost 10 shields more. The tech tree is of high complexity. Techs are either 'Allied-special', 'Axis-special', 'Sovjet-special' or available for all. All the special techs come available with techs available for all, though need an other special tech as well. Just take a look at the pics of the tech trees kobayashi included and you see that it takes time to make such a tech tree. It's an almost perfect tech tree without disfunctional or useless technologies. I can only make a comment on the non-event messages. When you save and quit, it says 'No, Cry Havok! Let slip the Dogs of War' and 'Yes. I'm needed in a Galaxy saving mission'. Now either kobayashi made a mistake and thought he was working on an other scenario, or he really thought about this message and is refering to his Star Trek scenarios when talking about the Galaxy saving mission. Maybe the message is a build-in text to the ones that know his other scenarios.

Yep! The Independent can come....

....very handy! Mwahahaha!

Map & Terrain - Section Sub-total: 4.5/6

Were you impressed by the Map in general? (Score: 1 )
Was terrain properly adjusted to fit the scenario? (Score: 1 )
Was attention given to geography and historical details? (Score: 1 )
Were you happy with the city, fortress, terrain improvement graphics? (Score: 0.5 )
Were city names and the placement of cities correct? (Score: 1 )
Were there innovations used in relation to Terrain? (Score: 0 )

The map used in Zweiter Weltkrieg came from the scenario 'Third Reich', which covers World War II as well. The map is well chosen: it has Europe, the important places of Afrika, a part of the Middle-East, Russia, and the north-eastern coast of North-America. I can only say that maybe the map should've gone further to the east, so Russia would be even larger. The terrain was properly adjusted for the scenario, though I would recommend to make mountains unaccessable for all units. Ofcourse the Wehrmacht was able to go through the mountains in real-life, but a super-heavy-weigth tank as the Tiger couldn't. The same could be said of the swamps, but that is more difficult though, since Hitler did make use of the swamps for his early tanks (e.g. Panzer III) in his attacks against Poland and Russia. No mistakes concerning placements of cities were mad as far as I can tell. English city names were corrected in this version. The only thing I must say is that I would've given all the cities their original names and written correct in their native language. Generally this means that most German cities would get another name (Cologne to Köln, Munich to München, Vienna to Wien). The only errors I found were 'Salonika' and 'Smyna', those should be 'Saloniki' and 'Smyrna'. Little erros that slip in easily and are difficult to find when not particulary looking for them.

Operation Weserübung was a success as well. Soon I will rule this part of the Northsea again.

Care & Details - Section Sub-total: 4.5/5

Did you find the documentation adequate? (Score: 0.5 )
Was the events file sufficient for the needs of the scenario? (Score: 1 )
Were you happy with the improvement and wonder icons? (Score: 1 )
Did you find any very apparent errors? (Score: 1 )
Do you think a lot of effort was put into doing this scenario? (Score: 1 )

About the eventsfile I will talk later. But it comes down to this: it couldn't have been much better. I can't complain about the icons used, which came from the scenario 'Gangsters' by Cam Hills. I couldn't detect any errors nor could I deny that a lot of effort was put in the scenario. To be honest, I think that there are few people that would do as much as kobayashi does for his scenario. Every single scenario has a new surprising thing, for example in unit abilities, terrain graphics or events. Only about the documentation I can say something: the readme is very large and complete, but links to one or more sites or reference to books would've been great.

Operation Seelöwe is moving to the next stage.

Originality and Technical Proficiency - Section Sub-total: 3.5/5

Were there any sounds you had never come across before? (Score: X )
Did you discover many units not used in any other scenarios? (Score: 1 )
Is the theme of the scenario completely novel? (Score: 0 )
Were complex events used to carry the story line or enhance the AI? (Score: 1 )
Did the author deal with all areas which could be modified? (Score: 1 )
Any other innovations worth mentioning? (Score: 0.5 )

The eventsfile for Zweiter Weltkrieg is something special. For example: when the allies conquer Ploesti, the oil supply for the Axis is cut off, and the Guderian wonder becomes obsolete meaning Axis units aren't 'veterans' anymore from the start. On the other hand, when the Axis conquer Port Said, the Suez-canal is closed, and the Allies must start paying maintenance for all the buildings that cost 1 maintenance. A third example is the disappearance of the French Maginot-Defence line after Paris is conquered by the Axis. The Maginot line forces you to take Paris as oon as you can, via the Netherlands and Belgium, since you will loose a lot of troops of you want to break through the Maginot-line. Texts appear when certain things happen to inform the player what effects something has on the game and what really happened in history. Last I'd like to point out the music files, kobayashi included in the scenario. Both are used to 'support' the in-game messages telling you something special has happened. It's a nice add to the game, though I may say that sometimes the music goes on too long. Especially when you have 3 or 4 special happenings right after eachother it can be a bit too much.

A typical example of kobayashi's event messages....

Overall Assessment and Other Points of Interest:

Though this scenario wasn't meant to be played as a single player scenario, it is a very good scenario for this. It adds something to the game in a way I can't describe, but it comes down to the fact that you need to think better and it's more about tactics than usual. Kobayashi didn't mean to simulate the war, but this scenario is more a simulation than he might realize. In Africa, the Minor Axis can't do anything against the Allied, and the Allied have no reason to increase they're troops there until Germany comes to aid the Italians. Just like in real history, you will think twice before shipping troops over the Canal to invade England: they'll be bombed away. I only found it save after I bombed all the coastal cities, made enough fighters that I could move in the newly conquered cities to defend against B-29's, had enough money to buy AA Defence and had a fleet that could bomb shores, defend transports from airplanes and keep off all enemy ships. The Russian campaign was realistic in a way as well: the Russians seemed to destroy everything on their way when I attacked them. Seven cities were destroyed, making it very difficult to advance quickly, and even resulting in a large Russian counter offensive which destroyed another city. I surely recommend this scenario to you.