我被引用的發表

The Rise of Rome series chronicles the rise of the Roman Republic from 326 BC to Caesar. Maps, units, and economy are as historical as possible while maintaining a balance. Each scenario has its unique challenges and fun, and along the way you can gain historical knowledge.

Rise of Rome 1: Samnite Wars
Rise of Rome 2: Pyrrhic War
Rise of Rome 3: First Punic War
Rise of Rome 4: Second Punic War
Rise of Rome 5: Macedonian/Syrian Wars
Rise of Rome 6: Twilight of the Republic
Rise of Rome 7: Spartacus' Revolt
Rise of Rome 8: Caesar's Civil War

Rise of Rome 1: Samnite Wars
Players: 4 (ffa-no alliances)
Victory Conditions: Hold capital for 3 turns
Suggestion: Disable Alliances
Summary:
This scenario begins at the outbreak of the Second Samnite War. Rome is the rising power in Italy. Its strongest rival, the Samnites, must be destroyed. To the north is the Etruscan civilization and the barbaric Gauls, who have in the past fought each other but could make common cause against Rome. Rise of Rome 1 is a small scale scenario, and if alliances are disabled a very cutthroat one as people constantly shift and backstab to maintain a balance of power.




Factions:

Roman Republic (Start Money: 2700, Income: 1616, Recruitment centers: 55)
Strategy: Imperialist or Perfect Defense. Rome has the most balanced unit roster, Hastati and Principes are solid defense/attack combo, with trarii as elites, and equites as long range wall breakers. It is vital to both make an agreement with the Gauls or Etruscans, and make sure they fight each other, so you can focus on the Samnites. It is doubtful Rome could fight a two front war and survive. Rome's superior income and recruitment centers give it the advantage long term, and the longer you survive the greater your chances of victory. A key region not to lose is Campania, its wealth and cities are key to victory against the Samnites.

Samnites (Start Money3800, Income 987, Recruitment centers: 38)
Strategy: The Samnite military is very similar to rome, they have better stealth and cavalry units, although lacking any elites. The stealth are however not of great use as the Samnites lack funds for an expensive military. Nearby unclaimed Lucania may seem a free province, but with 54 defense it is a costly adventure that will leave you weakened against Rome. Campania is the key to victory, if it can be taken and held, the fortunes of the Samnites will be significantly improved. Also, keep in communication with the Etruscan and Gauls, any one of them attacking Rome will greatly increase your chances of victory

Etruscans (Start Money 2700, Income 740, Recruitment centers: 29)
Strategy: The Etruscan military is minimal but adequate, consisting of levy and noble hoplites with basic stealth axemen. Sandwiched between the Gauls and Rome, the Etruscans must pick their enemies with care. Rome's cities are closer and wealthier, and with the Samnites engaged in war they will probably look like a fairly easy target, not able to maintain a defense against your invasion. If you choose this path you must be swift, because if a fast victory is not achieved (Taking Sabinium, Latium, and Rome within the first 5 or so turns) one or two bad things may happen. One, the Gauls will invade you from the north at full strength, unless they go for neutral Umbria first. Two, the Samnites will likely begin winning against Rome and will essentially become Rome 2.0, more powerful and more dangerous. The other other strategy is to make peace with Rome and conquer the Gauls. One on one, it will be an even fight but their capital is close to your city and can likely be taken and held. Then with the gallic territories you can push southwards against the (hopefully) still fighting romans and samnites.

Gauls (Start Money 2700, Income 711, Recruitment centers: 28)
Strategy: Perhaps the weakest faction, the Gauls advantage lies in their powerful offensive infantry and only one front to worry about. The disadvantage is their cities are spread out and under populated. You will want to spam gallic swordsmen almost exclusively, and then look to see what the Etruscans are doing.
If they are in a war with Rome, they you have some breathing room and could probably afford to annex Umbria, as you will need the cash flow ( you will always be desperate for money). If they seem to have made some sort of agreement with them then you are in for a tough fight, and will need to commit everything to crush them in a sort of gallic blitzkrieg. Once you overrun north italy you can begin building larger attack stacks, probably head straight for rome in an attempt to cap it and crush Rome's economy.

Yes remove SP from UN. It should be classified as a roleplay scenario, not a competitive one. I am all for people having fun doing whatever they want but UN players should be rewarded for their games.

[spoiler]I like all the ideas so far, really almost anything is better than what we have now which is nothing. Information about %percentage of games abandoned might help, but the different gametypes and the investing idea of stichammer are all great.[/spoiler]

4/5 Stars, I'll take it! I am glad you like it Terminal lots of effort is put into it and I welcome feedback for balance. Also its part of the "Rise of Rome" series, which is a chronological set of scenarios following Rome's rise.
But as Pyrrhus says

引句:

We even adapted all units to Imperialist in the map, but if we had more range for the units the other Strategies would have worked, which would have been much more effective than picking Imperialist, making it just a bit repetitive.

Until atwar allows more flexibility with range, we cannot change it.

Agreed. Because of these limitations on some of my maps I have had to resort to making all units Ground, Air, and Naval "Other" units which makes strategies useless.

FUND IT

Yes that or have a reputation system so that we can easily see who leaves in the first few five turns or so. Every time someone does that they get a negative hit, and everytime people finish a scenario they get a positive or something

作者： Flat Earth, 16.06.2013 at 12:33

I know that my maps are the greatest but there's no incentive for me to spend that extra time perfecting a map. I think that maps should NOT be featured by mods, because they re often very bias it should be based on maps which have been played (top 15) the most in the previous week by people other than the creator.

What I don't like about you (I have seen you do this too) is that you host your maps, then once they fill you start then leave them to play it. Then you immediately go back to lobby and host the same map or another one of your maps, fill it and repeat. Its like you are farming plays for your map. Its honestly weird and kind of pathetic man.

But your maps are generally alright though, but nothing spectacular.

Its alright, at least its unique. But as a person with knowledge of mesoamerican history its really off in lots of places. Even well known cities like Tlaxcala are just in wrong spot. Other cities have spanish names, or native names, they alternate for no reason. Stick ton one or the other. So overall I give it a could be better/10

Yeah I really know what you mean Franco, so many people allyfag these days. And the problem is that allyfagging begets more allyfagging because it forces the people without many allies to ally people or die (ie: everyone in the allyfag alliance gangbangs them) Its a really bad problem and as a new subscriber I hope that atwar moderators will make the diplomacy their number 1 priority to fix.

Durruti's solution is fine, anything is better than right now.