Topic: Successors Scenario

[Strategy]

Those of you who have followed the development of Imperium, may recall that the test/tutorial scenario of Imperium is based upon the wars of Pyrrhus. As the game nears completion, I am beginning to see the need for a bigger "test bed" for the game AI, and have thus started work on the next scenario.

Because I am still fiddling with the model of the Republic, I am strongly considering building on a Successors (i.e., Alexander's Diadochoi) scenario. It has the advantage of requiring a large playing area (ensuring that it will stress test the game's engine), basically only contains monarchies (the few "democratic" governments of the region in the period can be "simulated"), and - very usefully - almost all the data from such a scenario would be possible to "carry forward" into the Grand campaign scenario at a latter date.

Currently, I am considering building the scenario around the situation in 320 BC after the Triparadisus conference, representing each of the major "Successors" alive at the time (Antipater/Cassander in Macedonia and Greece, Lysimachus in Thrace, Antigonus in Asia Minor, Eumenes in Cappadocia, Seleucus in Syria, Ptolemy in Egypt and Peithon in Media) as separate kingdoms in the game. I do not think that this is too much of a stretch, as each of the satraps acted as independent kings to all intents and purposes for most of this time.

It would also be interesting to see to what extent the Indian sub-continent can be built into the game, as this is the time of the rise of Chandragupta Maurya, the first unifier of India. During his rule, the Muryans threw the Macedonians out of India and conquored vast stretches of territory along the arabian sea. It would also open up the possibility for the player to game Porus (of Hydaspes fame).

Since I know some of you have a good knowledge of the period, I thought I'd call for volunteers to help in building the scenario. It's not glamorous beta-work, unfortunately, but rather digging up data for:
- The People/Tribes of the regions
- Dynastic Families (and names) for the characters
- The Map: game regions with population numbers, etc.

If any of you are crazy about editing this kind of data in nasty big text files, let me know as I could surely use the help.  Comments, thoughts and suggestions (perhaps for an alternate scenario) are also welcome.

[Demonic_Emperor]

I think a Successors scenario is a great idea. I understand how the limited scope of the Pyrrhic Wars can't really capture the feel of the game as a whole.

I wonder if 320 BC is really the best time to start though. Wasn't Seleucus assigned Babylonia, not Syria, and subsequently fled to Egypt? As far as I know, he didn't become a major successor until much later on. There's seems to be alot of good information on the subject here: http://www.livius.org/di-dn/diadochi/diadochi.htm

Since I know some of you have a good knowledge of the period, I thought I'd call for volunteers to help in building the scenario. It's not glamorous beta-work, unfortunately, but rather digging up data for:
- The People/Tribes of the regions
- Dynastic Families (and names) for the characters
- The Map: game regions with population numbers, etc.

I like to think I have some knowledge about this period, but unfortunately I wouldn't know how to go about finding the details you require. Most of what I know concerns the grand sweep of events.

[Strategy]

You are of course right; Seleucus is in Babylonia, not Syria. But Babylonia was a very rich satrapy, so his position should by no means be considered untenable. There is - after all - nothing to determine that Antigonus will follow historical events and turn on Seleucus... he might opt to try and knock Antipater/Cassander or Ptolemy out first. This is also the only point where the empire is really, truly fragmented. Both earlier (Perdiccas) and later (Antigonus), there tends to be one or two major powers among the Successors which I think makes for a less interesting scenario.

In any case, if Seleucus is thrown out, I might get a chance to play around with implementing the "monarchy in exile" mechanisms I would like to have in the game. 

I could perhaps post some stuff here, as I start putting the data files together and let people review the data.

[Porcius]

I'd be happy to help with research.

[Strategy]

Before I start this, I should try to explain (however inadequately) some of the basis structures around which the Imperium game setting is built. One of the key foundations is the Culture -> Tribe -> Family -> Persons axis, where:

Characters: The in-game characters who run around doing the murdering, intriguing and other nasty stuff. All major characters belong to a Family.

Family: The association of characters by birth and marriage. All families belong to a Tribe.

Tribe: Constellations of people that could potentially coalesce into a political power of the period. In essence, each independent kingdom/republic/democracy in the game will tend to have a separate tribe as its basis (nb. forget any direct relation to antrophological tribes; the name is merely one of convenience). Each tribe has a heartland/capital. Each tribe is aligned with a specific Culture.

Culture: Culture basically determines the "basic values" of the various tribes; what kind of troops are typical, etc.

Currently, I am working with the following basic tribes for the different areas on the "Asian" map. Note that in many cases "Greek" simply implies a mixture of Greek settlers/culture and the original native population. Due to the fractitious nature of the Greeks, Greece and Asia Minor is generally packed with Greek tribes, while other regions have larger (though not necessarily more powerful) tribal constellations. A basic rule of thumb is that if a collection of people did not form an independent political entity at some point in its history (preferably within the game period), then it gets subsumed into other tribes.

The basic (still incomplete) list that I am working with at the moment contains the following tribes:

Greece, Macedonia, and Thrace

Corinthian Greek - East peloponnese
Achaian Greek - West Peloponnese
Spartan Greek - South Peloponnese
Athenian Greek
Boiotian Greek
Euboian Greek - Population of the island of Euboia
Aitolian Greek - Includes the Ambrakians
Kerkyran Greek - Corcyra
Thessali
Makedoni - The Macedonians, of course
Chalkidian Greek -
Epirote Greek - The Mollossi, Chaones, etc. Pyrrhus' folks.
Chersonese Greek - Collective group of the Greek people settled along both sides of the hellespont
Aigian Greek - Collective group of the greeks settled on the islands of the Aegean. Maybe Cyclades?
Dardani
Odrysi - Thracians (there'll be 2-3 tribes)

Asia Minor

Pontic - Pontos
Paphlagoni - Paphlagonia
Bithyni - Bithynians
Lydian Greek - Foundation of the latter Pergamon
Ionian Greek - Collective group for the Greek people on the Asian side of the Aegean sea
Lykian Greek - Lykia. Maybe also Karia
Rhodian Greek - Rhodos
Pisidi - Pisidia and Pamphylia
Phrygi - Phrygians before the arrival of the Galatians
Kilikian - Cilicia
Kappadokian - Cappadocia. Eumenes the Greek's power base.
Armenian

Syria

Commagene
Syrian
Phoeni
Judean
Nabatean - Arabians
Aramaean - Collective designation for all those non-coastal aramaic speaking people between Edom/Judea and Mesopotamia
Assyrian - Upper Mesopotamia
Babylonian - Lower Mesopotamia
Characene
Elamite
Persian
Median
Carmanian
Gedrosian
Drangian
Arachosian
Parthyian - Original people of later Parthia
Hyrkanian
Bactrian
Sogdian

I've not yet gone through the African (Egypt) and Indian continents at this point. Anyway, feel free to provide feedback: who do you think are missing, alternative names, etc.

[Ray]

I don't know if you are still looking for people to help out with this still, but if so I'm prepared to lend a hand. I have access to a University library with a reasonable number of books covering this period.

[Strategy]

A key issue right now is finding names for characters - both family names and first names. The Hellenes are well covered; the big issue now are finding appropriate names in the various eastern cultures where one needs a good enough selection to prevent constant repetition of names. First names are a priority since surnames - if other alternatives cannot be found - can always be built on the "of city" and "son of name" form.