 |
| |
|
|
Solomwi
|
 |
Don King of the Apolyton HLA Movement
Dec 2002
time: 23:17
|
|
It's not a real issue as far as game mechanics, but I know there are plenty of people who prefer unique city names and extended lists to the stock convention. I put the city names I had been using in stock (an amalgam of a couple of lists I downloaded either here or CFC, don't remember exactly) into the AU Mod 1.07 for my own use (you can find the file here). At alexman's suggestion, here's the discussion thread for it.
Options as I see them:
1. Keep stock city lists
2. Use the lists I put in
3. Use a different list of names agreed upon by the AU community.
Pros and Cons as I see them:
1. Pro: No work required.
Con: "Berlin 2 - Founded 110 BC"
2. Pro: All the work's already done and the civ with the shortest city list is Sumeria, with 54 unique names.
Con: Not particularly vetted for anything but duplication within each civ (and maybe not very well at that, knowing me  ). I really don't care if, for instance, Birmingham is on both England and America's lists. If they're both in the game, whoever comes to it first gets it and no further problems. If one or neither is in the game, moot issue.
3. Pro: Almost certainly wind up with a richer and more historically relevant list for most, if not all, civs due to the wider range of inputs.
Con: That's a lot of consensus to build.
Thoughts?
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
The pirate
|
|
Its got my support, not that I had a vote..
If there is still a panel..
and they still vote...
go for 2, then when there is duplication, and a problem, we can sort it then...
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:17.
Apolyton Time is 00:17. |
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
14-04-2005 08:31
|