04-08-2005 16:00									#61
	Tired of ads?

quote: Originally posted by sophist Inaccurate might a little strong. Those names are still in common usage.

And mistakes are still mistakes, no matter how common.


Calling Mumbai Bombay when the inhabitants called (and call it) Mumbai is still inaccurate- even if it reflects a period when the British crown and East India Company once ruled in parts of India.

	04-08-2005 18:28									#62
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

quote: Originally posted by molly bloom And mistakes are still mistakes, no matter how common. Calling Mumbai Bombay when the inhabitants called (and call it) Mumbai is still inaccurate- even if it reflects a period when the British crown and East India Company once ruled in parts of India.

Well, it's more complicated than that. The village from which they city got its name was called Mumbai-devi (or something), but the original city site was called Bombay from the start. Mumbai remained the name in the local language, Marathi, but the Hindi word was "Bambai." Many residents still call it that, and Bombay was the city's official name in all Indian maps and such until about 10 years ago.

	04-08-2005 22:18									#63
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by molly bloom And mistakes are still mistakes, no matter how common. Calling Mumbai Bombay when the inhabitants called (and call it) Mumbai is still inaccurate- even if it reflects a period when the British crown and East India Company once ruled in parts of India.

We call Espagne Spain, Nippon Japan, Munchen Munich, etc. Bombay was its official English name, not just a colloquial name. That it has been different for the last 10 years doesn't mean Firaxis needs to change the name in a game that spans 6000 years. Choosing one of several names for a city is a lot better than inventing a city that never existed (I'm looking at you, Ganges).

	05-08-2005 01:33									#64
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

Ridiculouously easy-to-implement suggestion: Please make my total population show somewhere in the main screen, maybe next to where current year is shown. Just like in CIV I and CIV II. Maybe this could be turned on/off from the preferences if it bothers somebody.

This is again just one cosmetic thing, but I trust that Firaxis knows what they are doing on the gameplay issues and they can see things as a whole better than somebody suggesting one single thing. For example I believe that they will find the best solution to RR/infinite movement issue, the one that will suit best in the game they're making. I would like to see same model as in Civ III, but maybe something else is better for CIV IV. I don't know because haven't played it... yet...

	05-08-2005 23:51									#65
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

quote: Calling Mumbai Bombay when the inhabitants called (and call it) Mumbai is still inaccurate

I know a guy from Pune who called it Bombay too, so that's probably not that inaccurate.

	06-08-2005 04:20									#66
	Remove this text

You mean Poona, right ;-) ?

	06-08-2005 12:22									#67
	Increase the size of your Attachments

I actually mean Pouné since that's how I hear it and would write it in French.

	06-08-2005 20:54									#68
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

That was a joke. Poo-nah is how the Brits pronounced it and they spelled it Poona.

	09-08-2005 20:02									#69
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

I also hope they don't go and spell Ashoka's name as "Asoka."

And it's probably a lost cause trying to get them to not use Gandhi as a leader?

	09-08-2005 21:14									#70
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

quote: Originally posted by kofeiini Ridiculouously easy-to-implement suggestion: Please make my total population show somewhere in the main screen, maybe next to where current year is shown. Just like in CIV I and CIV II.

And please make this "total population" figure coherent, which it was not in Civ I and II. Having only 50 millions inhabitants while the whole world is yours is a nonsense.

	09-08-2005 21:53									#71
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

quote: Originally posted by M. le Comte And please make this "total population" figure coherent, which it was not in Civ I and II. Having only 50 millions inhabitants while the whole world is yours is a nonsense.

Good one. I've always found that annoying. Perhaps have city populations scale as an x^2 (or x^1.5) function of city size.

	09-08-2005 23:11									#72
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

The population problem is rooted in the "is it a city or a state?" problem. If you have 200 cities in your game, then presumably that's 30 million people per city, on average, with some cities having double that. People will protest that as unrealistic. You can't win.

	09-08-2005 23:15									#73
	Put an end to popups!

quote: Originally posted by sophist The population problem is rooted in the "is it a city or a state?" problem. If you have 200 cities in your game, then presumably that's 30 million people per city, on average, with some cities having double that. People will protest that as unrealistic. You can't win.

6 billion - for a planet, that's not so bad. Better than 50 million.

Perhaps city populations could scale with time as well - a size 12 city in 1000 AD might hold 200,000 inhabitants, while in 2000 AD it would hole 5,000,000.

	10-08-2005 00:41									#74
	Put an end to popups!

quote: Originally posted by LordShiva 6 billion - for a planet, that's not so bad. Better than 50 million.

6 billion global population = good. 60 million city population = bad.

quote: Originally posted by LordShiva Perhaps city populations could scale with time as well - a size 12 city in 1000 AD might hold 200,000 inhabitants, while in 2000 AD it would hole 5,000,000.

What would that accomplish besides confusion?

	10-08-2005 00:44									#75
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

quote: Originally posted by sophist What would that accomplish besides confusion?

Nothing, except that it would be totally transparent (a simple function that takes in year and city size, and perhaps map size, and outputs pop.) and would produce reasonable civ- and planet-populations that don't affect the game in any way but are a nice touch.

	10-08-2005 03:34									#76
	Increase the size of your Attachments

I think some combination of health and a well chosen function relating city size number with an actual population would be better.

	10-08-2005 14:27									#77
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

quote: Originally posted by LordShiva And it's probably a lost cause trying to get them to not use Gandhi as a leader?

I hope not.

I do find it vaguely offensive (and funny too...) when the 20th Century's most famous popularizer of non-violence nukes one of my cities.

It would be interesting to see a non-Moghul leader, if only for variety, but I suppose if they're opting for male/female leaders we'll still have a Gandhi, but it won't be one in a dhoti.

It's not like they don't have an awful lot of leaders and Indian empires to choose from.


Try walking a mile in Kanishka's shoes...

	10-08-2005 20:56									#78
	Increase the size of your Attachments

quote: Originally posted by molly bloom Try walking a mile in Kanishka's shoes...

Kanishka was Parthian, though.

Ashoka is a good choice, and I wouldn't mind Nehru either. Akbar would be a decent choice, but in a game with religion, and two Indian religions, we probably need Hindu and/or Buddhist leaders.

	10-08-2005 21:00									#79
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

quote: Originally posted by sophist I think some combination of health and a well chosen function relating city size number with an actual population would be better.

It should definitely scale with time, I think. And since health affects city size, that's already accounted for. Or it could be used as an offset, like so:

population = f(health) + (number of turns) * (city size) * 1000

so a city of size 1, turn 1 would have 1000 inhabitants, city of size 12, turn 100 could have 1.2 million, city of size 20, turn 500 = 10 million, assuming f(health) = 0. Add an appropriate offset for the health function.

	10-08-2005 22:51									#80
	Get a bigger avatar today!

I don't understand why you want to have the actual population per pop point be variable over time. What's wrong with saying 12 people = 500,000 and 30 people = 9 million and structuring the game such that you were only able to get to 30 in the modern era?

	10-08-2005 23:03									#81
	Get a bigger avatar today!

quote: Originally posted by sophist I don't understand why you want to have the actual population per pop point be variable over time. What's wrong with saying 12 people = 500,000 and 30 people = 9 million and structuring the game such that you were only able to get to 30 in the modern era?

Because the world population growth has been faster than the rate of city growth in civ. And, before sanitation, cities are stuck at 12 for a while - which isn't really realistic.

	11-08-2005 02:15									#82
	Support Apolyton

Is that true in Civ4? I hope not. I hope health has been implemented so that there are no hard caps like 6 and 12, so that it's more organic. It would just so happen that without certain improvements (which depend on certain technologies), you cannot improve the health of a city enough to sustain such high populations. i.e., you could force a city to have a population of 25 even in 1 BC by merging workers and settlers, but any citizens above, say, 8, would die off rapidly.

	11-08-2005 02:33									#83
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

Yeah, that would be better.

I just hope that civ-world population and city pops reflect, reasonably well, historical populations. How this is managed doesn't matter.

	11-08-2005 13:42									#84
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

quote: Originally posted by LordShiva Perhaps city populations could scale with time as well - a size 12 city in 1000 AD might hold 200,000 inhabitants, while in 2000 AD it would hole 5,000,000.

"Honey, suddendly our bed seems a little crowded today. There is anything you should tell to me?"

	11-08-2005 15:09									#85
	Put an end to popups!

quote: Originally posted by LordShiva Kanishka was Parthian, though. Akbar would be a decent choice, but in a game with religion, and two Indian religions, we probably need Hindu and/or Buddhist leaders.

Kanishka was Kushan, rather than Parthian. And Akbar was the descendant of other Central Asian nomads.

However both Akbar and Kanishka can be credited with syncretized forms of religion based on beliefs originating in India- and both can be credited with furthering Indian civilization. And of course, Kanishka did sponsor the travels and proselytizing endeavours of Buddhist missionaries.


A great southern Hindu leader might be a welcome change- Rajaraja of the Cholas, for instance.

	11-08-2005 18:53									#86
	Increase the size of your Attachments

quote: Originally posted by molly bloom Kanishka was Kushan, rather than Parthian. And Akbar was the descendant of other Central Asian nomads.

Sorry, that's what I meant

Akbar was a 3rd generation immigrant , though, so that pretty much made him Indian. I wouldn't mind Krishnadevaraya for a south-Indian hindu king.

But in any case, I think Firaxis is set on Gandhi and Ashoka (please, not Asoka), with leaderheads and all. Oh well.

	12-08-2005 14:41									#87
	Increase the size of your Attachments

quote: Originally posted by LordShiva But in any case, I think Firaxis is set on Gandhi and Ashoka (please, not Asoka), with leaderheads and all. Oh well.

Ugh.

quote: Akbar was a 3rd generation immigrant , though, so that pretty much made him Indian.

Stretching a point, I know, it's a little known fact that India also had rulers who were sons of African slaves.

Re: Kanishka- I've just been looking at a coin of his that shows how diverse in terms of culture and religion and ethnicity the rulers of Indian empires were-

on one side is a portrait of the standing Buddha, clad in the sanghati, with the topknot/chignon, halo around the head, extended earlobes, a bodily halo and his right hand is blessing in the abhaya mudra gesture.

An inscription in Greek (!) says 'BODDO', and Kanishka's monogram is across from this, on the left hand side.

On the other side is a standing portrait of Kanishka, very dramatic, very martial. He's placing an offering on a fire altar, he's bearded, wears a crown, and holds a spear upright, and has the typical northern long baggy trousers, heavy calf length boots, and long tunic caught in at the waist by a belt, so that it flares out below.

As well as the Zoroastrian/Parthian fire altar, he also has Parthian style regal flames on his shoulders, identifying his kingship.

It's here:

http://www.bpmurphy.com/COTW/week2.htm