 |
|
Brent
|
|
Do not make Civ4 inappropriate for children.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Brent
|
|
I'd say Civ3 is acceptable the way it is, but I'd want Civ4 to take out the unit animations, or at least allow time to see what's happening when they're turned off, and maybe some of the Civ3 movies are too much. And I don't like human sacrifice.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Spiffor
|
 |
CPA - Evil Clone brigade
Nov 2001
time: 06:32
|
|
skywalker.
of all the civilisations in the world today, the one which has had the most impact is France, not America.
[blah blah, we're the best, Napoleon was the one who spread modernity and enlightenment in Europe, not some pansy Brit, and certainly not some pansy American]
Let's face it, most Civs available in this game are or have been highly influencial in their area of the world at some point. Either that, or they had an original culture that is worth mentioning in the game.
I think Civs should be more varied: more African Civs (Mali!  ), more SE Asian Civs, and maybe less European Civs.
Civilization would probably be more interesting if it stopped being euro-centered. Unfortunately, it may also be much more confusing for the western audience, the huge majority.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
yellowdaddy
|
 |
Saoir-Ebhor, Sasainn a tuath, Rialtas Aontach
Apr 2003
time: 05:32
|
|
spiffor - remember that Napoleon got his enlightened arse plugged by pansy Brits like Nelson and Wellington, and then spread his French enlightenment to a tiny British island in the South Atlantic.  
There is simply no way that France can claim to have had anywhere near as much influence on the world as Britain - it's something the Froggies have a hard time dealing with. (I snipped my rant, but I can back it up all the way mon petit chou!)
Trying to be as subjective as possible I'd probably compare the French to the Arabs in terms of their impact on human civilisation.
(I'm guessing this is what Skywalker means by trolling?)
--------------------
But yeah - the Khmers have never been in Civ (and they had a significant empire), some more African ones - Ethiopia, Zimbabwe, Hausa (Kanem-Bornu and Songhay) would be nice for the brothers.
Native American ones have finally got a mention beyond the Aztecs and Sioux, with the intro of Maya and Inca civs.
I think America should be in, but only in scenarios...
...for me, I'm dissatisfied with the whole Romans v Americans thing in the game, and I would like to see a bit more ethnolinguistic authenticity, perhaps having key points in history (ages or eras) where you can enter the game with a choice of appropriate Civs (I suppose this is like scenarios). I'd like the Romans to start off as the Italics, then become the Latins, with one branch becoming the Italians - so there's no "Roman Space Force", same with the Americans so there'd be no American Phalanxes.
Hence I've submitted my detailed tribal evolution tree to the "Clash of the Civilisations" game, as it's shaping up to be a lot more interesting that Civ 4 is ever likely to be. 
of course, player choice is important, and I think Skywalker should have every opportunity to start with his Yankie civ in the neolithic era if he really wants to. But not as a standard option.. please! 
Last edited by yellowdaddy on 01-02-2004 at 02:07
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Plotinus
|
|
Hey, I don't know if it's true that France has had less influence in the world than Britain (Charlemagne, anyone?) but I think we all must admit it's an infinitely cooler country. Come on, who's more interesting - Napoleon or Wellington? Louis XIV or Charles II? Descartes or Hobbes? Pascal or Newton? Joan of Arc or Wat Tyler? And I speak as a man of Kent myself, you know.
Bear in mind, when arguing about this kind of thing, that we have a natural tendency to think that a country that is important *now* is more important, period. Assyria were a mighty superpower for far longer than America have been to date, and they're not in the game at all.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
yellowdaddy
|
|
Saoir-Ebhor, Sasainn a tuath, Rialtas Aontach
Apr 2003
time: 05:32
|
|
Re: Trolling - It's scary what the internet can do to people
what's it got to do with sitting under bridges?!
(we're ALL spods (=nerds) here though really! )
---
Plotinus - I don't believe you're from Kent if you use americanisms like "period"! 
who's more interesting? How is France "cooler"? isn't that a bit subjective?
I'm trying to be objective and consider not just important figures and inventions etc... - and I think you'll find if you flap through the pages of an encyclopaedia that Britain outnumbers France at every point in history.
You've cherry=picked a few names, but there are loads more.
But if the question is "which is the most influential Civ", then we've got to look at real impact on the way the world is.
France is a major Civ, but Britain is more major.
I think calling Charlemagne French is a bit like the English claiming King Arthur isn't it?
Is William the Conquerer and Doomsday book English or French, both or neither? Is Adam Smith American or Scottish?
And anyway, what did Charlemagne actually do that's any more significant than a host of other imperial rulers?
I know that other Civs at other times were great, Egypt, China... but their impact is limited both in time (most never made it beyond the dark ages), reach (most only affected their immediate region) and number of things they have created that the rest of the world depends on. OK, Britain's influence is mainly only the last 400 years, but it's impact is so much greater than any others - we live in a world largely (ie. the biggest percentage) defined by British ideas.
You could say that someone else would have done what Britain has eventually, but the fact that such a small place with the odds so stacked against it did it, is enough in itself.
I think Assyria are sort of covered by having Babylonia - as they spoke the same language and were culturally pretty much the same.
...stop me if I'm trolling 
------------------
SkyW - I'm not sure I agree
I said I think the USA should be in, in post-revolutionary scenarios, didn't I?
and only if you are playing a custom non-historical game where most of standard features are thrown to the wind.
What I mean is the standard game from the dawn of time should haver reasonably relevant Civs (no European or post-colonial civs), but if you want them ou go to the bank of Civs and add them in.
The only differnce with Rohan is that it's fictional. I s'pose it makes almost as much sense having it in as having the Americans battle with the Sumerians on the plains of Mesopotamia? At least their all supposedly human!
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
BlueTrin
|
|
Maybe to avoid stacking, it should be possible to attack from multiple sides at once. If you got flanked, it should lower your units defense.
|
|
| |
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:32.
Apolyton Time is 00:32. |
top of page
|
|
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
30-01-2004 07:05
|