 |
| |
|
| |
|
|
Toby Rowe
|
|
London, UK
Feb 2001
time: 05:36
|
|
Hi all,
I was hoping that the religious model might be relaxed a bit more in Civ 4:
I view or read about religion daily, usually in terms of how many people died in a bomb.
First the IRA, now the fanatics who claim to be Muslim: but are really just curs (dogs).
A different approach to religion in times like these might be good.
On matters Muslim, as an agnostic Catholic, were it not for the Arab nations, most of what we Christians know know about Greecian and Egyptian culture, science, politics, navigation and philosophy would have been lost, were it not for those early unwelcome invasions of Europe, and us lot in the Northern states remained ignorant throughout, for 600 more years.
So giving science penalties to different types of religion (eg) is just null and void if you view all religions within the Civ time frame.
If Buddism is to be introduced, then surely any nation adopting it will eventually be owned by another, the Arabs will control the seas, and battle often with China, Northern Europe will still live in wooden huts and raid each other........Religion in Civ was fixed and didn't change.
A unique religion you create by your attitude and actions: That would be good.
Personally I'd rather bin it and programme in Government style consequences and give us all a break from religion when playing- as we all see how many died due to it on the news in the real world daily.
Darwin? I've never understood why he causes so much grief to religious people- If God put all creatures on the planet, then over thousends of years they will breed in survival instincts, including changing body shape and food preferences over time.
That BBC programme recently about the dwarf people discovered (remains) on a pacific island fits the bill perfectly- They evolved into tiddlers as the largest died off because food was scarce and in mini form only- even the elephants were "knee high to a grass hopper"
Toby 
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Toby Rowe
|
|
London, UK
Feb 2001
time: 05:36
|
|
Yes it did,
Except it was a War the British Government REALLY wanted, so did the Germans, just not as much, but both for entirely different reasons:
For Britain WW1 destroyed the fabric of the nation, whilst WW2 destroyed the wealth of it.
The last repayment of US exports when we stood alone in WW2 was in 1997: Britain repaid the US for evey bullet, fools that we are. whilst the Marshal plan rebuilt the rest of Europe.
To then compete with the British industry, saddled by ancient machine tools we no longer have. but "had to do" back then.
The US Government quite rightly persued it's own industrustial agenga in WW2, as Britain did in WWI against the Germans- the bullet in Serbia realy was a godsend to our government and Austria has nothing to do with it, it was a German- British War, the minute it began, all other nations became unimportant.
WW2 was about liberty, not goods, but the Yanks refused to join until both Hitler and Japan forced them.
Toby
|
|
| |
|
|
|
joncnunn
|
 |
Maryland Heights, MO
Sep 2002
time: 23:36
|
|
Yes, both the govts wanted it, but they needed some excuse that would be plausible with their populations.
The assasination wasn't quite enough even in Austria, they had to go thru the motions of sending an ultimanum that included terms they knew would be completely unacceptable to Serbia with an extremely short time line (24 hours) instead of just attacking.
From there, though it was really quick: Russians wanted in to protect their brothers the Serbians. Germans wanted in to protect their brothers the Austrians. UK & France govts just said we have an MPP with Russia, and so we are honor bound to declare war on any country that invades it.
The Austrian-Hungarian empire deal have enough role to play in the WWI, after Italy declared war on them, the Austrian-Hungarian empire actually invaded Italy. 
And got not where, and in fact the Germans had to divert four divisions to that border when they would have been much more useful on the French front.
The UK also made their own major blunder; they had a landing on Greece that didn't get much off the beach at all.
These blunders though pale in comparision to both Japan's and Germany in WW II:
The US was planning on sending most of their help to fight the Germans and not the Japense, when the Japs attacked Pearl Harbor. (The US was expecting the Japs to attack the Phillapens instead.)
Then the Germans made the blunder of declaring war on the US when the US had only declared war on Japan. Without that declaration, all that equipment that went against the Germans would have gone against Japan.
The 1940 US Congress prior to Pearl Harbor was an isolationist one until Pearl Harbor shattered it.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Nikolai
|
 |
Bergen, Norway
Oct 2000
time: 06:36
|
|
From the IGN preview:
Aside from "the usual major powers like France, Germany, England, America, China, Japan, etc.", there will be "many Civs that are either new or usually saved for expansions like the Incas or the Aztecs or the totally new Mali."
"[...]culture is alive and well in Civilization 4 but it has been tweaked a bit."
-No minumum culture when founding a city.
"You will have to develop your culture or risk being enveloped by a larger neighbor. This leads to the interesting possibility of creating a Luxembourg or Switzerland completely engulfed by another Civ's borders. We also tweaked Civilization 3's luxury slider and turned it into a culture slider. Raising the culture level makes people happier and helps produce more culture for your entire Civ."
"[...]the AI will have to respect your borders or declare war but you will be able to negotiate Open Borders to allow travel."
"Some of the new resources, like marble, help to increase wonder production, some are food resources (these help with the overall health of your cities), and some, such as iron or copper, allow you to build certain types of units."
Food trading possible!
On religion(and civics):
"Also, just like the Civics, AI leaders may try to get you to convert to their religion."
Less number of different units.
However,"[...]there are some units that haven't been part of previous versions like Grenadiers and Horse Archers and War Elephants that are not specific to only one Civ."
On trade:
"In Civilization 4, you get automatic trade routes after you establish a trade agreement with a particular leader. Also, rivers work like roads so two cities on the same river are connected even if no roads have been built."
On intelligence:
"We will not be including any espionage options that are terrorism related. You will, however, create spy units and move them around as you did in previous versions of Civilization. In diplomacy, you will be able to broker peace between two warring Civs or ask a Civ to go to war with another even if you are not currently at war with that Civ."
In addition to the old victories(and the tweaking of the cultural victory), a new one is added; the Alliance victory.
Firaxis is "hiring voice talent for various parts," and are "happy to announce the return of wonder movies..."45 of them.
On the progress of the game development:
"Internally, we have 38 on the team working directly on various aspects but we also have some work contracted out and several interns coming on board for the summer. We started working on the game about 2 years ago and expect to have it in stores for the holidays."
On how much which is left:
" From a design standpoint, all major systems are in and Soren Johnson (our lead designer/programmer) is spending the majority of his time working on the AI. We have a lot that's looking great already but we still have some art and programming to go before we will be ready for full test this summer."
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Toby Rowe
|
|
London, UK
Feb 2001
time: 05:36
|
|
The Austrians went to Germany to see if they would guarentee their actions, Germany said "Yes", Austria then clamped down, and WWI began.
The US got involved in this war for what? (anyone know?), the sheer numbers of arriving troops from the US helped negate the utter stupidity of the British Officers during the previous 4 years.
WWI was based upon British-German competition in trade, after WW2 Britain had no modern factories, as we just "made good".
The Marshal Plan ensured Germany got brand new factories, to compete with old machine-tools in the devastated UK, which is what the US wanted baack them.
The US whilst being antagonistic to Germany also ensured a weakened UK by grabbing several UK colonies from the lease-lend deal, and got a promise the British would withdraw from India.
The (British) 14th Army fought the land battle of the Asian theatre- yet I see only the US Island campaign in films.
Viewing both WW1 & 2, most nations serve themselves, and Allies are mainly nought today, although NATO keeps most together (better the devil you know....)
Toby
|
|
| |
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:36.
Apolyton Time is 00:36. |
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
10-05-2005 05:34
|