In my scenarios I like to prioritize good multiplayer gameplay, mostly in a rather conservative fashion. in this game I also wanted to combine it with good historical portrayal of Europe in the intriguing era of religion wars.
I normally don’t like games where you start off with lots of units, but in this case I found out I wanted to try that. But in everything I’ve placed out, it’s been carefully considered according to interesting gameplay combined with the portraying of history. I chose to use as a basis my old map of Europe as I built it with the same principles and I’m very satisfied with it, and it seems like many others liked it too.

Apart from being a game set in a real world scene, Europe, and set to a historic period, 1545-1648, the idea for the gameplay was an intense diplomatic and aggressive multiplayer game with eight factions made asymmetric, but quite balanced.
My tradition for these ideas go far back, but it can still be seen as a reaction to the many scenarios on the workshop called diplomacy games. In these games you might be starting with villagers in a boat and finding your place in a vast world (possibly world map) of endless amounts of resources. From watching clips from these games I’ve found that they seldom have any warm conflicts before far into the game. Most players do anything to expand, but not get into conflict. Playing defensive and aggressive evasively is the prefered way to victory.
This is what I wanted to avoid in my game, and therefore I’ve tried to add lots of potentials of conflict from beginning till end on many different fields and with several other players in order of making the relations change quickly and fundamentally and with real outcome.
Important ideas for how to promote an aggressive and active diplomatic game are:

Limiting the possibilities of growth without conflict:

• The most visible mean for this is the lack of vacant space. The most valuable spaces are also rather central and are therefore hard to defend. One mean for this is the enclaves promoting conflict and destruction before expansion.
  
• A direct way of implementing a limitation is my system of storage limit. With triggers I’ve made a limit to how much you can store of any given resource. In order of getting use of it you have to spend it, otherwise it will get burned.
  
• A third way is by limiting population. With rather low population capacity one must use the units in order of gaining space to buy new ones. Combined with the lack of building space and resource storage one must go to war in order of getting good use of the resources.

Giving several alternative victory conditions:

• If the only way to win is by taking out everyone else, it’s obviously best to wait for the others to take each other out. If one alternatively can win more surprisingly with less effort one might take more of an initiative. This can be seen in regicide games where rather weak players find possibilities to snipe stronger players.
  
• With only one possible victory, any two players will always meet in in a conflict over the same thing. With several alternatives they can go further in cooperation, each seeking there own goal. Note: With no allied victory they will still have to wage war on each other at some point. Also note: this could be hindered by having the goals personal and secret (not implemented in this game).
  
• Several reasons for any action is also good for possibilities in diplomacy and deception. This is well apparent in the hegemony system, both being of strategic value, economic as well for victory.

Having several competing factions, but in some ways dependent on each others. Naturally there are more possible diplomatic solutions with many factions than few. But this also tend to be pacifing. In a game of two teams any resource spent on hurting the opponent is just as good as spent on strengthening one self. As soon as there are three independent factions one should rather spend it on one self.

• Whenever one player is close to winning, the other players should naturally team up against him/them. This can occur in several ways in Heresy Europe either through the traditional ways, or the two additional ways of winning.
  
• Allegiance Divide is implemented to split the world in two. With this the players have to choose a side in a two sided conflict working as a side quest giving penalties and bonuses according to the results. This makes everyone dependent on others for the victory, promoting to weaken the other coalition and facilitating an indirect victory and bonus for one self. As the conflict is periodically reset the coalitions may change frequently.

Considering the historic period chosen, 1545-1648, I chose it because of all the intense conflicts taking place. It is approximately 100-200 years after the “Age of Empires 2 era” ended, but I still think it works fine with the units and capacities in game to portray this era.
I originally chose 1558 as the year for the game to start, being the start of the Elizabethan era, but as I found out about all the interesting events few years earlier and found the year too anglocentric I changed it to 1545, the year of the council of Trent. This event is important for the development of the religious wars in Europe, defining the catholic true faith.
The year 1648 was naturally chosen as end of the game, being the year of the peace treaty of Westphalia, ending the thirty years war. Most games will probably end with a victory with the relic cart which is supposed to prompt that same immersive war.

A challenge planning this game was how to distribute the many factions of Europe under the eight playable player factions. I first thought of the traditional cultural divisions, but for a game of geopolitics it’s a lot more simulating with divisions based on politics. The factions represented are:

1. Franks, Scotland, Papacy, Crimean Khanate, Moldavia: Franks being the main body of this group also sets the civilization, franks. Scotland was a natural part of this faction for its many shared conflicts with England. The throwing axemen also seemed nice to have for the scots. The papacy was more difficult to place, but France has long tradition as protector of the church. The church also has some possessions in the germanic area. The crimean khanate is closely bound to the turks, which are also allied to France. Moldavia was a somewhat independent vassal state of the ottomans, but mostly in civil matters.
   
2. Britain, Portugal, Calvinists/Huguenots, Navarra, Zaporozhian cossacks: Britain is the main body here, but as the britons in the game seem like more of a high medieval civilization I found it more fitting with the portuguese naturally fitting the long lasting ally (1373) of Portugal. During the religion wars in France Britain supported the huguenots along with Navarra. For the calvinists of Europe Britain is the land where they probably had the most influence, but not in a much heated way. Zaporozhian cossacks have little to do with either of the mentioned ones, but geographically far from them it fits well under their flag as a rather independent faction in its region.
   
3. Turks, Barbary states, Mali: The ottomans were a great threat to Europe at the start of this era, but was soon to be less of a threat. It works well standing alone, only with some barbary client states and the Mali oasis, with its vast empire being the strongest faction at the start of the game.
   
4. Spain, Hafsid: Spain being the obvious main body of this faction dictates the civilization. It has its strength in the many exclaves in valuable areas, like the Netherlands, Naples, Milan and America. The Hafsid is a barbary state closer to Spain than the ottomans at this point.
   
5. Russia, Denmark-Norway, Orthodox and Lutheran community, Wallachia: Russia and Denmark-Norway are of somewhat equal value here, and among all the wars that have occured around the baltic sea, they have not been much in conflict. The goths were chosen for them as it fit well for the russian priority in quantity, in arms as well in defenses. For the scandinavian part it might fit with the infantry style of warfare, even though it’s far past the viking era. They neither need strong walls, but rather a large fleet. The religious communities are to be found in Egypt and the germanic area, being an expansion of the communities in their main areas. Wallachia was one of the vassals of the ottomans, but somewhat independent and seemed rather close to Russia.
   
6. Holy Roman Empire: This is an important faction in Europe with a legal power surpassing its dynastical belongings. Apart from their main area in Böhmen and Austria they have belongings in the germanic area who were of rather imperial affiliation. In cultural style and in gameplay properties the teutons were the most fitting.
   
7. Venice, Hansa, Teutonic order, Maltese order, Switzerland, Saadi, Mamelukes, Don cossacks: The three first ones are the main bases of this faction. Among them the italians were the only “vacant” civilization and also as a naval civilization I found it fitting for the two first at least. Most of the factions in this group had probably very little to do with each other, but what they have in common is being politically isolated and dependent on good relations with their nabours. This leaves it a probably very difficult, but interesting faction to play.
   
8. Poland-Lithuania, Sweden, Persia, Hungary, Catholic and Jewish communities, Boyars: The two first ones are the main powers here and fit together due to their few conflicts among the many conflicts around the baltic sea. As civilization I considered the slavs, but found it more fitting with the magyar with their power in the cavalry. Persia and the remnants of Hungary is under same flag due to their common enemy in the turks. Some Catholic communities, politically not too close to the church also belong to player 8. Due to tolerance towards jews in Poland the jewish communities also fall under them. The boyars could be a problem for the tsar of Russia and are therefore under the faction of Russia’s main regional rival.

Now looking at the trigger mechanics added according to gameplay enhancement and historical legitimacy:

Relic cart

• As mentioned, with several ways of winning there should be more action. As the timer shortens for every eliminated player, it should also help end the game when some fall out of it, and also motivate players to keep others alive to hinder the chaotic situation that follows the Relic Cart. It spawns on the center of the map and should therefore be possible for all players to reach. Player 3, 5 and 8 are furthest out and are also meant to be more peripheral.
  
• Historical legitimacy comes from the thirty years war. In 1618 this horrific war started and was fought mainly in what we today know as Germany, but most of Europe was engaged in it in some way. When the war ended, the era of religious wars in europe ended with the treaty of Westphalia. The war started with Bohemia rebelling against their catholic king, the emperor of the Holy Roman Empire and elected Frederick V as king. He was Prince-Elector of the Rhenish Palatinate centered in Heidelberg. Therefore the Relic Cart spawns in Heidelberg.

Allegiance Divide

• It is a huge difference between a game of Age where you have two teams and a game where you have several teams. If two teams, one may renounce one self to significantly weaken an enemy, but in FFA you would never do that. By constructing this common goal for two defined teams, I hope to gain a bit of this side of the two teamed Age game. At the same time, as the allegiances may alter for every 20 min, the diplomatic relations should change frequently. Giving relics as trophees to the winning leaders makes it a very noticeable achievement, and also a step towards game victory as one may win with relics. This victory can also be shared with allies. Could be loyal members of the allegiance. The towers are to give legitimacy in the area controlled. The damage on defencive structures for the losers is to simulate the general loss of legitimacy.
  
• Throughout the whole era I’m trying to portray, religious wars is a significant concept. With the central point for this mechanic located in the center of the germanic area, it is supposed to represent the conflict between the catholics and the protestants following the reformation of 1517. As in every global conflict, all prominent powers have some interest in the outcome of the conflict, and in this case, even the muslims (player 3). For them this is a possibility to weaken their arch rivals on their borders in Europe. By several occasions, a league by the name Holy League, was formed, often to battle the ottomans. The Coalition Politique is not based on any historical coalition, but is based on the franco-ottoman league which in christian Europe was a scandalous alliance as it was between a christian state and a muslim state. At the same time a new term got prominent in french state politiques, politique. In this case the term is used as the idea that the strengthening of the state is more important than to follow religious principles. As coalition also is a french term it forms a fitting name for an alliance of mixed religious origin.

Hegemony

• Gameplay wise this system suggests a division of the map into three areas where each flag is the regions hotspot. The stone should make it easier to keep the area when first stabilized, while the timer should make it possible to cancel its power. They are distributed so that each flag should have two/three players in close proximity, promoting conflicts between them in the region.
  
• Important conflicts had been or would be fought over these areas. In western France, France fought the huguenots who on their part gained help from England. The Balkan area was an area full of conflict between the Turks and the European powers. Beograd was in this campaign a very strategic city to have. Riga was an important trade center, and the Teutonics were finally eliminated there in this era.

America

• This spot is to make the marine game more interesting, leaving a very valuable island far from the European coastline and giving player 4 another highly valuable spot to protect.
  
• Historically America was of immense value for Spain. Their wealth wasn’t in their European holdings alone, but to great extent in their colonies. But this also led to conflict with the envious British who sent their privateers and fought for control over the Atlantic sea.

Trade posts

• This gives an extra source of undepletable gold to the game. They are spread out for several players to enjoy, but at the same time urging players to invest in decentralization to gain huge income from these.
  
• Trade with the world outside of Europe was an important income to mercantilist Europe. Having the monopoly on this external trade could be very valuable. The turks had quite much taken the monopoly as they had control over the middle east, but new routes to India were found and new important markets further north in Europe were developing.

Trade Republics

• This system is supposed to make the central areas more valuable economically and especially for the strategy popular in late game. Economy by trade units. By this it also hinders a cowardly strategy of solely hiding in a corner. With the mod the trade output is made bigger, but when you have a trade fleet/caravan of some size you should also engage in the central areas to support the units.
  
• Historically northern Italy, the lowlands and the Hanseatic league were important areas for trade in Europe and are also therefore chosen.

Holy Roman Empire

• This is to make the central and very important area more open by not allowing players to build too much defenses in this area. The exception is the player who might have the title of emperor, strengthening player 6 who has a real challenge having all his belongings in the center.
  
• Historically the germanic area was an area split into lots of different somewhat independent stats (of sorts). This “independence” makes it unfitting with real defensive infrastructure for any great power. But as emperor one would have legitimacy and a military advantage.

Treasury of Europe

• With this I hoped to strengthen the diplomatic capacities of player 7 as it is dependent on some allies if to keep more than one of its holdings.
  
• As the name proclaims, the city states of northern Italy functioned as the banks of Europe and kings called on these banks to finance their undertakings.

Vassalage

• The system of vassalage was included in order of giving weaker players something to offer in return for mercy. Defended by the system, it should be hard for the pardoned player to backstab his savior.
  
• Feudalism was not as much a significant part of society in the era of enlightenment as in the middle ages, but the system of having vassal states have probably been relevant in any era. The ottoman empire had at least several, and some of these are also represented.

Shipwreck

• This is to defend the units hidden in the upper corner.
  
• Storms might be a problem in the far north, and was also an important factor in the war between England and Spain (but then further south).

Other resource triggers

• The resource limits and minimum storage are, as mentioned to make it better to spend than to keep. The minimum also helps any player next to eliminated.
  
• No real reason historically. Could call it inflation, storage problem or “The little ice age”.

For the map I neither wanted at the time I made the map nor as I started making the Heresy scenario, to make a scenario filled with aesthetics. I wanted to stay true to the original style of Age of Empires random maps and only use different types of terrain to make it colorful. Neither did I want to mix types of trees in the forests or make open forests. The one piece of beautification I’ve ended up with allowing is the flower beds as I see it as a very old and plain one.
Any other change from what you would see in a standard game is there for gameplay reasons. Rocky ground has been added to hinder blocking the bridgeheads and flags too easily and to protect informative objects. These objects are neither standard content in RM, but they carry information, linking them to game mechanics.

With this I hope to have made it transparent the ideas and considerations behind the distributions of historical factions, units and other resources for the players and the triggers, with consideration towards historical accuracy and a gameplay with lots of diplomacy.
Hope you’ll enjoy the scenario and, smile to the flying dog.