 |
|
TVA22
|
|
I don't have a scanner, sorry, but if any of you have seen the magazine article in "Computer Games" where these pics came from, there is a colage in the front with leader/diplomacy pics from all 3 games.
The leader in question is in fact Lenin, because in the colage, he's the same guy that's right next to one of those famous Soviet propaganda paintings with Lenin and the hammer and sickle all in reds and oranges. Again, I'm sorry I can't post the colage on here, but if anybody will just look at the article on a magazine rack somewhere, it's quite obvious.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Daoloth
|
|
Houston, TX
Sep 2001
time: 23:15
|
|
Maybe the guy you saw was Stalin, he kinda resembles Bismarck, but I doubt it's Lenin. Lenin was bald most his life and had red hair and a goatee. Here's a link to some Lenin pics:
http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Senate/6174/
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Kenobi
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by redfox74
Ukraine (alternative historic name: Small Russia), Russia (Great Russia) and White Russia (Belarus) are three sister nations. Their first state was a common one: The Kievan Rus.
There are many cultural similarities between these people. Therefore they are unified in Civ series as "Russians". Kiev and Minsk are "Russian" cities, why can't the cossack be the Russian UU?
Cossacks weren't only Ukrainians. Cossacks were a mix of free people who lived on and beyond the Russian frontier. There were a lot of fugitive Russian peasants (former serfs) between them.
Besides the Ukrainian cossacks there were cossacks on the southern and eastern frontier of Russia: Caucasus, Ural, Siberia, Far East. They weren't Ukrainians. |
Exactly. The Russian word for cossack is "Kazak" (as in Kazakhstan...), and they were free Greater Russians who lived outside of the Muscovite core. They definitely lived in Ukraine, but remember that the word Ukraine is derived from the Russian for "on/in/near the border" ("u kraina"). They were gradually co-opted into the Russian military by the Tsars as elite cavalry border troops. Not only were they used in the conquest of Siberia, the Caucasus and Central Asia, but they also settled their families in military colonies in these border regions.
They are the perfect choice for the Russian UU - Russian elite cavalry.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Adm.Naismith
|
 |
Milano - Italy
Oct 1999
time: 06:15
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Skanky Burns
While giving the Russians T-34's would be appropriate, you then wouldnt be able to have a Panzer as the Germans UU. And what else could you give the Germans??
quote:
Originally posted by LaRusso
volkswagen beetles  or if you want a serious answer, stukas.... |
 for volkswagen 
Stuka is a bad choice: very famous but a bad plane that worked well only in first part of WWII, west front, where the French and English fighters where outnumbered by german fighters, and resisted until the last part on the east front, mainly as an antitank weapon.
They had plenty of great weapons: Fokker fighter during WWI (I know Fokker come from Netherland, but german famous pilots used they to the best), Me 109 or (better, still less know from not dedicated people) FW 190.
Still, the greatest weapon they build where the V1 (first "cruise missile", in Civ meaning) and the V2 (first ballistic missile, no equivalent in Civ II).
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Leonidas
|
|
The german tactics of Blitzkrieg relied on a lightning fast strike by a combined arms approach using the tank, plane, and artillery. For the first couple of years of the war, most of Germany's tanks were outgunned by Soviet, French, and British tanks.
The success of German victories relied on tactics, and less on "special weapons". However, the one strong unit that could have won the war for them (or at least could have delayed D-Day for another year) was the U-boat.
For such a small number of boats (65 at the start of the war), they were the terror of the Atlantic and later a terror along the east coast of Canada and the US in Operation Drumbeat and thereafter.
The unique unit for the Germans? My vote is the U-boat. However, this will never happen, because it relies on an ocean strategy, and it probably isn't cool enough vs a tank or plane unit.
But what the hey - it's worth a shot, right?
|
|
| |
|
| |
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
05-09-2001 05:17
You are right twice, too: submarine is less relevant in Civ terms (AFAIK), but mostly because Civ doesn't consider Supply Line and the need for Cargo Convoy of resources - at least, not at the same level of WWI and WWII between USA/Canada and Europe/USSR.
|