No problem. I'm always happy to contribute towards historical accuracy, which I think, and read was others' motive to check the game, should be a characteristic of it. It's not that easy to achieve unique things in RTS nowadays, and one has to try to make a difference with whatever possible. Another observation: if you are going to name the campaign "The Fire of Freedom", then Scenario 2 has to have a different name, maybe "The Flames of Carpetania", since "The Raid of Carpetania" would be too literal when compared to the other scenario titles.

@Thalatta Thank you! I think we're aiming for a solid, official-quality campaign something that could help people rediscover 0 A.D. a 5th scenario is worth it. I'll keep it in. I might find more people to help along the way too I actually found someone for the voice-over on my intro and draws !

This website lets you temp number for quick online verification. The strongest reason to use it is the extra layer of privacy it provides.

@lilypoppy, Scenario 4 seems fine to me, just rotated to align a bit more with geography, and more dropsites:   The premise of Scenario 5 seems ok (just rotate it, leaving Saguntum on the right, and that should be on the coast), but my "Ending" was just the outro of the whole campaign, and since you said you wanted Viriathus story in three scenarios, I made it as short as possible, with four. But if you want to add it, it's title could be "The Lands of Sunset", because it's the end of the campaign and their independence proper, and for the lands given and their western location in the Empire.  

@lilypoppy, remember: §67) Servilianus marchs to Itucca (Tucci in a previous map), the big battle follows, Servilianus retreats to Itucca; §68) Viriathus returns to Lusitania (which we won't place so far), Servilianus attacks Baeturia, the Cunaei, and then Lusitania (so, took a northwestern direction); §69) stops at Erisana (shown west of Tucci, so he went back southeast, but the exact location of these towns is not really known), which Viriathus then attacks, but instead of killing them, Viriathus obtains peace. This is good because, like it was in part in Scenario 2, you are putting the final targets too close to the base, which in this case would render the southern part of the map almost useless. Thus, to make more chronological and geographical sense, and encourage the use of the whole map, for Scenario 3 the Roman CCs would be Erisana (left) and Tucci (right), the routed units placed on the path of retreat (turning the tide of the battle should be the first thing), and the other settlements should be in control of the natives, but weak and about to be taken by the Romans. So one starts in the lower part, retreats to the upper part, and has to come back to the lower part, with lots of the action taking place on both right and left of the map. To make it more historical, the capture (not destruction) of Erisana would be the objective, but whatever similar could work. It might actually be better to rotate this since the "up" direction would be a bit northwest: Edit: I'm thinking that maybe routed units should be located only below the centre of the map (another settlement could be placed about it), they are there just to defeat the Roman army (which, historically, would have retreated to Itucca, the CC on the right) before a long retreat. They should not be enough to challenge the Roman CCs.