 |
|  |
 |
|
Inverse Icarus
|
 |
flying too low to the ground
May 2001 time: 00:15
|
|
god. there sure is a lot of anti-communism in this world.
i got a kid in trouble at my school this year (im only in high school, going to be a senior), he wrote in the yearbook: "Dislikes: Communists".
i went to the principal, and said that was like someone saying "Dislikes: Blacks, Jews, Homos, Hispanics, Asians, etc"
and the kid got suspended and the yearbook company got repramanded.
i never liked that kid anyway.
and about america. leave america alone please. i don't take shots at your nation, wheverer you're from. infact there are a few choice countried i would actually consider moving to. Dubbya isn't helping.
i know there are a lot of whiteb-red hicks in our country raised to believe we are better than the rest of the world. but they are nothing more than white-bred hicks. so calm down.
there are also some gallant patriots, like SerapisIV. notice how he's not a **** towards other nations, just strongly liking his own.
you hicks could learn a lesson here.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
SerapisIV
|
 |
Hartford, CT, USA
Feb 2001 time: 00:15
|
|
quote: Originally posted by UberKruX
there are also some gallant patriots, like SerapisIV. notice how he's not a **** towards other nations, just strongly liking his own. |
God Bless America !!! Land of Ebonics and Hillary Clinton I love the US and will be the first person to point out its made a lot of mistakes and isn't perfect, but it is still the greatest place in the world. Especially geographically (try and find a more diverse and beautiful country).
Well back on-topic, take the Bill of Rights interpretations stuff over to OT. Here I'll even provide a link:
Apolyton OT Forum
America was founded (ie ealry colonists) as a religious country, but by the 1800s wasn't really much more religious then the rest of Europe, except there were no restrictions. And now, while many American people might be religious, this is definitely a secular country. Here's proof:
Attachment: presbush.jpg
This has been downloaded 105 time(s).
|
|
|  |
 |
|
jsw363
|
|
Does anyone else think that it's sort of ironic that religious is included in a civ's characteristics, but civs never get the chance to express that religion? Religion's not at all a part of the game (like expansion, commerce, military, etc.) but it's a trait. Weird...
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Phutnote
|
|
I'm not sure, but I think these traits will be used to emphasis the leader settings. In other words, the militaristic leader gets the aggressive bonuses (rewards for behaving the way he's, well, programmed to behave). It'll just make them a little more proficient at being conquering enslaving bastards, just as the commercial bonus will make the more entrepreneurial civ wealthier.
All the civ settings seem a little arbitrary. I think the Aztec one works well (militaristic and religious) but I'm not so sure about the American setting or the French (industrious and commercial). You could argue the case for Commercial americans or religious (orthodox) russians or industrious/commercial japanese. And with an editor, I'm guessing you can switch it any way you'd like.
Perhaps Firaxis looked at the behaviour of each nation in it's golden age?
Phutnote
|
|
|  |
 |
|
TechWins
|
 |
Arizona
Apr 2001 time: 22:15
|
|
quote: And one more mention, if the aztecs invaded europe during the hundred years war, both the french and the english would probably have jumped to make them their allies. Just as the enemy's of the aztecs allied with cortez. |
Yes that is true but I don't think Willie was intending that. I think what Willie meant was that if the Aztecs came along and settled in Europe the French and English would probably put aside their differences and ally with each other to rid themselves of the Aztecs. I don't think Willie meant that the English and French would ally with each other during a war to kick out the Aztecs. Am I right Willie?
You're right Alexander, it's just a little more advanced system than the Civ2 one. It's not a SMAC like system in my opinion because there are not any negative effects. Not having the negative effects means that civs can still take any direction in leading their civ but will most likely follow the direction their special abilities have given them. I believe this was the same way in Civ2 as well. The Mongols in Civ2 were militariastic so they built a lot of units, the Aztecs are militariastic in Civ3 so they will build a lot of units plus get a slight military bonus (which can be turned off by the rules.txt not in game screen, only civ-specific units can be turned off in the game screen, that's all that has been confirmed by Firaxis).
quote: Who is Firaxis to assign traits and abilities to constantly changing cultures and nations some of whom have existed in one form or another millennia. |
Who is Firaxis to signify Abraham Lincoln as the leader of the Americans, who is Firaxis to say that the Japanesse are militariastic considering that have been a peaceful nation for many years while having some military conflicts like most nations, who is Firaxis to say that culture will determine your borders, who is Firaxis to say that Fundamentalism isn't a gov choice in Civ3, who is Firaxis to make a third game about Civ? These are all questions that Firaxis has the right to determine, so stop complaining!
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:15. Apolyton Time is 00:15. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
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
|
|
|
|
|
|