 |
|
Pembleton
|
|
Cyberspace
Apr 1999 time: 23:15
|
|
Maybe I don't contribute that much, I don't know. But I'd rather keep quiet when I'm not contributing than continually opening a big mouth and saying a whole lot of nothing.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Pembleton
|
|
Cyberspace
Apr 1999 time: 23:15
|
|
Let's go back to what started this then to see who is stupid. You brought up the ideas of concentration camps as if it was a legitimate suggestion and something that should be considered. This is absolutely preposterous. Someone already called you disgusting, and I agree with him, but I don't think that the moral issue is even necessary for me to argue, and I won't unless you really want me to.
So let's go back to why the idea is stupid rather than just morally objectionable. I'm not even sure why I'm doing this since it seems that someone with your lack of intellect won't understand or comprehend my argument.
Anyway, look what happened to the press, games, and entertainment industry in the U.S. after the terrorist attacks. Any reference to the World Trade Center, airplane explosions or even explicit references to terrorism in film or television are being edited or deleted. A trailer for the upcoming Spiderman movie was pulled just because it had a scene with the WTC. They've already taken out the WTC in flight simulators. There was also some tendencies to tone down violence in general in all upcoming games.
Let's look at the prominent comedians. The late night talk shows used to parody George W. Bush and were not even kind in the least. Now no-one will dare to make fun of a political figure for a very long time. I really can't imagine when an environment for politcal satire will be appropriate for a long time.
Now with this environment, you think Sid Meier is going to say, hey, concentration camps, that's a good idea? What would that do his reputation? Do you think the members of the design team or programmers won't object? Do you think gamers and the general public would accept this? There is already a movement to eliminate violence in games in general, which I disagree with.
I don't even know why I'm wasting my time arguing this. Even in a pre-September 11 environment the idea is ridiculous. The U.S. has the largest population of Jews in the world, many who are holocaust survivors.
To suggest concentration camps is really the lowest depth of stupidity in my opinion. And yes, perhaps I am being stupid for saying what I did as well, but I know I won't even come close to approaching your level.
Last edited by Pembleton on 24-09-2001 at 00:07
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Pembleton
|
|
Cyberspace
Apr 1999 time: 23:15
|
|
Well I give up. Most of your post was insults rather than arguing anything of substance. I guess I did waste my time.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
|
How about this:
You may use (ground) troops to kill off the population of a city... Each troops can "attack" up to it's attack score of population per turn. The population however also fights back (it's attack score is say 1/2 that of the population being assaulted by that particular troop (round up)) and the unit must defend vs. this counter-attack first, if it survives it deystoys the population (but it gains benefits as if it was "entrenched" but not from walls, etc.). Thus you can kill off a large population quickly, if you have a large enough army... but you might take some losses.
Example:
Romans take an egyptian city of 9 population... the romans use 2 units each with an attack of 2 and defense of 1.
Each turn the romans try to kill 4 population, but each unit must survive an attack of 1 (2 pop being attacked per unit/2) vs it's defense of 1.5 (1 +50% for entrenchment). Each unit that survives kills 2 pop.
The game mechanics are just a possible example, but you get the idea...
So, what do you think?
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
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
|
|
|
|
|
|