What Makes a Good PBEM Scenario?


The aim of this article to help guide the creation and identification of new PBEM-friendly scenarios. In doing this I will discuss the merits of several scenarios I have played, and will offer potted reviews of a few of those scenarios at the end of this article.

Put simply, in order for a PBEM scenario to be successful it needs to hold the players attention so that they enjoy themselves and play their turns quickly (thereby increasing other players enjoyment). As I see it, there are six features which are necessary for this goal to be achieved.
  1. All civilisations should have achievable goals. This doesn't mean that all civs necessarily need an equal chance to conquer the entire map, but that all players have an objective worth pursuing. For example, in Exile's 'Age of War' scenario, the Spanish, Italian and Turkish civs are all extremely unlikely to rise to European dominance. However, as I can attest, these civs are still fun to play as players face the dual challenge of building up an industrial base while keeping the larger civs at bay through strategic alliances.
  2. There must be scope for diplomacy. Diplomacy is often one of the most entertaining areas of PBEM play, and good PBEM scenarios should always act to encourage it. Having a mix of medium and large sized civs located close together goes a long way towards encouraging such interaction between players. A clear implication of this is that the events file should never include events which act to prevent players negotiating.
  3. The civilisations must be balanced. This doesn't mean that all the playable civs need to start on an equal footing, but that there shouldn't be any hugely dominant super powers or pathetic pocket nations. This condition is needed in order to prevent players from being able to score immediate 'knock out' victories at the start of the scenario and to encourage diplomacy. Exile's scenario 'Imperialism' is a good example of this balance being achieved. At the start of the scenario Britain is unquestionably the most powerful nation. However, Britain is weaker then she first seems, and needs to find allies in order to close the technological gap between her and the US and to protect her bloated empire from being gobbled up by aggressive smaller nations. Hence, while a super power is present in the scenario, the careful balancing of all the civs acts to encourage entertaining game play.
  4. The Scenario shouldn't unfairly penalise players. This is often a problem with scenarios originally designed for solo play as a particular civ. While in-game events which cause historical events to occur are suitable in single player scenarios, they can be a real annoyance in multiplayer games. For example, in a WW2 scenario the players may be less then amused when a built in event gives the struggling Allied civ a huge fleet of landing craft filled with elite troops in June 1944. Avoiding this problem means going over the events and unit stats before the start of the scenario and removing any pre-determined historical effects. In doing so, the goal should be to simply recreate the historical starting situation, and then ensuring that there's nothing which unfairly interferes with players strategies. As an example, an event in a WW2 scenario which creates fairly tough anti-German Soviet Partisans is fine, but one which creates the Soviet Army at Stalingrad is unnecessary and unfair as it is the Soviet player's job to build that army for themselves.
  5. Units should be balanced. Again, this need for 'balance' doesn't necessarily imply a situation where all players have equally powerful units available at all times. What it does imply is that there should be no gross differences between the array of units available to playable civs. Many real time strategy games achieve this by giving each side an array of units with differing abilities, while still ensuring that the aggregate capability of each sides military is roughly equal (Starcraft is a good example of this). In my opinion, this approach also works in Civilisation 2, with 2194 Days of War being a very good example of it being put into practice. Another important consideration is the construction cost of units. In general, PBEMs move faster and are more entertaining when units can be quickly built. However, care must be taken to ensure that units aren't too cheap in order to prevent dull wars of attrition or the sudden blitzkrieg of an unwary opponent. The standard gaming rule that powerful units should be expensive and weak units should be cheap is, as always, an important principle in creating balance in Civilisation PBEM scenarios.
  6. Quick action is a must. Most players would agree that starting from scratch isn't suitable in the fairly slow running world of PBEMs. In order to capture players interest and keep the game moving quickly, all the playable civs should start off with working and well developed economies and cities. In addition, in order to keep the action going movement rates for all units should be faster then in single player games. Another rationale for quick action is that cheating seems to be more common in scenarios with slow starts then in scenarios with quick starts.
Mini-Reviews

The purpose of these short reviews is to draw attention to why I believe that these selected scenarios do or don't work as PBEM scenarios.

Great Napoleonic Battles by W.I.N.T.E.R.
This scenario is a good example of balancing the need for quick moving, immediate action while avoiding major problems with balance. As none of the civs is dominant, there is a need for them to form alliances in order to meet their goals. As units are fairly cheap and powerful it's possible for players to launch sophisticated offensives within the scenarios first few turns. However, as the unit stats tend to discriminate against long land campaigns, it's not unusual for stalemates to develop.

Bonaparte Version 2 by John Ellis In my opinion, this may be the best PBEM scenario ever. All the civs are well balanced thanks to their starting situations and John's excellent work on unit stats. There is extensive scope for diplomacy, as even France must act to avoid being dragged down by the smaller civs. In addition, John's extensive use of 'stackable' [fortress] terrain acts to encourage realistic military strategies by enabling players to keep their slow moving armies in the field without having to worry about them being totally destroyed by a much smaller enemy force.

Age of War by Exile Another PBEM classic, this scenario's success is mainly due to fact that all the civs were balanced and have achievable goals. However, through making blitzkrieg campaigns childs play, the combination of rail roads and powerful units can cause major balance problems. While this can act to encourage protective alliances, when these alliances collapse the player who moves first is usually able to destroy their enemy in one turn.

Age of Imperialism by Exile Probably the most popular PBEM scenario at the moment, this scenario in most notable for the excellent balancing of all the Civs. The tech tree and unit stats are also fantastic and contribute greatly to creating balance and achievable goals. The only real problems with this scenario are its relatively slow first few turns, and the maximum city limit preventing the construction of new cities (though Exile deliberately did this).

2194 Days of War by Captain Nemo and Alex Mor In my opinion, the original version of this scenario is totally unsuitable for PBEM play. This is because the Axis civs are vastly more powerful then the Allied civs, and can easily destroy the Allies in a few months of fighting. Field Marshal Klesh's PBEM modified version goes a very long way towards fixing these problems, but the advantage still lies too strongly with the Axis in my opinion. That said, this scenario is a fantastic example of how a diverse collection of units can be used to balance the civs while still being historically accurate.

~ Nick Dowling
This page requires Opera, Mozilla, or some other modern browser in order to be fully appreciated.
Current Staff Members include "Saint" Leons Petrazickis, Editor Warvoid, Magazine Editor Techumseh, Magazine Editor Case, and Magazine Editor Gothmog. Former Staff Members include Editor-in-Chief Blackclove, Web Editor Cam Hills, Tipmaster William Keenan, Web Partisan Stefan Härtel, Founder El Khan, Editor Mark Laanen, Editor Nick Clark, and Editor Mike Jeszenka.
Copyleft (c) 2002.
Front Page | Civilization III | Civilization II | Call to Power II | Alpha Centauri | Master of Orion III | Rise of Nations | Misc
Alt.Civs | Civ I | C:CtP I | About | News | Directory | Apolyton Store | Forums | Chat | Columns | Interviews | Newsletter
Scenario League | CSC | Clash of Civs | Spanish Site | CtP Maps | Cradle of Civ | WesW's Ctp1/2 Site | Civ3 Haven