This campaign takes place between Roman a Carthage. They fight 3 different wars, where each one is featured in a different scenario. All historically accurate, because I did my homework with a little bit of humor. Enjoy. 8 ^ )
Added category for all contest campaigns: Historical Rating - 3 The Punic Wars was a reasonably well done campaign, but it Didn't have anything in it to make it stand out from the crowd. The first scenario starts the player out in a fortified section of southern Italy. The player must both control the Island to the south by securing the ruins there and destoy the Carthinian fleet. The Second scenario has the player defending Rome in a tactical battle. This scenario is short, but I thought it was the best of the three. The player is not allowed to lose even one building or the scenario ends in defeat. This battle was a real nail-biter and took me several plays to win. The third scenario represents the roman attack on Carthage. The player must destory 5 buildings, kill 10 enemy and retreive an artifact from the city. The bitmaps were not as good looking as others I've seen and didn't fit the default parchment. The scenarios themselves were enjoyable to play and not overly difficult. The terrain, while a little sparse, didn't have any glaring mistakes or poorly placed sections. The victory conditions were a nice mix, but there was nothing that I haven't seen done before. History was reasonably accurate, but didn't have enough depth and detail to it. My biggest complaint with this campaign is with the introductory story. It wasn't proof read. There were lots of Spelling mistakes in the story. In some places Carthage was spelled correctly and in other places it wasn't. There is just no good reason for this. All in all, this was a campaign that was about average.
Steve Ryan
Posted on 11/30/-1 @ 12:00 AM
Rating
3.0
Breakdown
Playability
4.0
Balance
4.0
Creativity
3.0
Map Design
2.0
Story/Instructions
2.0
Added category for all contest campaigns: Historical Rating - 3 Playability: Good overall. Well above average, each scenario kept me interested and was enjoyable to play Rating 3.3 Creativity: Generally a good use of AOE to generate the actual situations. Troop usage was also quite relevant to the Punic Wars. Rating 3.3 Balance: The best part of this campaign was that each scenario was well balanced. No easy Victory or vast impossible task was presented. 3.7 Map Design: Disappointing, the author could have made the maps so much better without really putting in alot more effort. The maps generally were functional but that is about it. Rating 2.3 Story/Instructions: The Victory and Loss conditions were accurate. The story itself was not very enticing but I won't be too hard as the author is of non-English background. Rating 3 Historical Accuracy: Mostly spot on. Gave only minimum detail but it was historically accurate. The lack of mention of Cato in the 3rd Punic War, the lack of justice done to the 2nd Punic and poor bitmaps war were down points. Rating 3 Scenario # 1 Comments: Playability: (Is the scenario captivating and enjoyable?) I did quite enjoy playing this scenario. It was not anything special but not boring. 3/5 Creativity: (Have we seen these ideas before, or is there something fresh and remarkable?) I am rating these based on the authors ability to use AOE to deliver the particular Roman Scenario. In this instance the author only allowed bronze age but gave the Carthaginians Iron age ships (aalowing the naval superiority that Carthage had) The Roman troops (once upgraded) were tougher than the enemy and again this gave them superiority on land. The above elements and the need to ruin Carthagian ports and control the Starits of Messina was a nicely though out way of depicting the 1 st Punic War. Rating 4/5 Balance: (Winable but not too easy? Challenging even after you've won it?) Good it gave a nice feel of being under pressure at first, limited resources and an enemy that came in waves of cats and swordsmen when you attacked them. Rating 4/5 Map Design: (Enjoyable to look at? Cliffs and elevations used reasonably?) Could have easily been a lot better but conveyed the general lay out of the historic location of the 1 st Punic War. Rating 3 Story/Instructions: (Are they clear? Do you know everything you need? Do they draw you into the scenario?) Slightly more than basically required. They met the requirements but did not entice me into playing the scenario. I'm not being too hard here as I think the authors' native toungue isnot English. Victory condition were clear and worked. Rating 3 Historical Accuracy: (Accurate bit map? Accurate scenario map? Accurate situation/dates/characters?) Bitmap was pretty ordinary. History was brief but accurate. Rating 3 Scenario #2 Comments: Playability: (Is the scenario captivating and enjoyable?) I really enjoyed playing this scenario. It was short and sharp but it was just as easy to lose quickly. The Loss condition meant that you could not lose one building (even a farm) and I lost this scenario at least 4 times before I worked out where to put my troops and what to defend. A good lesson in troop micro management ! Rating 4 Creativity: (Have we seen these ideas before, or is there something fresh and remarkable?) Boy ! how do you cover the 2nd Punic war in 1 scenario.. unless you pulled of something like 'the Summit' I'd say you had no chance of doing it justice. The use of troops made sense and the fear of Rome losing some territory was there but I did not get anything like the feeling of Hannibals great feat in logistics and battle as well as the 14 years of terror rampaging through the Roman countryside.. Rating 3 (only 'cause I liked the concept) Balance: (Winable but not too easy? Challenging even after you've won it?) Got it just about right. You really had to work out exactly what to do and if you get it one go I take my hat off to you ! Rating 4 Map Design: (Enjoyable to look at? Cliffs and elevations used reasonably?) Barely makes it. I guess with what the author planned the map did not matter so much but a little work could have got another point. Rating 2 Story/Instructions: (Are they clear? Do you know everything you need? Do they draw you into the scenario?) Instructions are relatively clear and Victory and Loss condition accurate. Did not do much more than was necessary. Rating 3 Historical Accuracy: (Accurate bit map? Accurate scenario map? Accurate situation/dates/characters?) Well I read a brief history of the 2nd Punic war and it was 15 pages. The author covered the salient points and could not be expected to do too much more.. Rating 3 Scenario #3 Comments: Playability: (Is the scenario captivating and enjoyable?) Again for such a short quick scenario this was quite playable. I thought it would be simple at first but the enemy quickly built up and started to fight back. Lucky I had that villager. Rating 3 Creativity: (Have we seen these ideas before, or is there something fresh and remarkable?) I suppose in a limited sense you did get some feeling for the sack of Carthage. I suppose I expected a less balanced scenario where Roman Consular Armies poured through Carthage. Rating 3 Balance: (Winable but not too easy? Challenging even after you've won it?) Actually quite reasonably balanced, I expected and easy time of it but those Carthaginians fought hard. Rating 3 Map Design: (Enjoyable to look at? Cliffs and elevations used reasonably?) Again the bare minimum. Rating 2 Story/Instructions: (Are they clear? Do you know everything you need? Do they draw you into the scenario?) No great effort went into the map and the bitmap is again pretty ordinary (says me O Great bitmap designer). Rating 2 Historical Accuracy: (Accurate bit map? Accurate scenario map? Accurate situation/dates/characters?) Gave a vague reason for the 3rd Punic war. The main protagonist in the conflict being Cato did not get a mention. I would have expected to get a least 1 quote of 'Cartagena est delenda' Rating 2.