12-10-2001 22:19									#1
	Civ of the Week: Russians Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

UU: Cossack, upg. cavalry (regularly 6.3.3, requires horses + saltpetre) with extra defense

Sci/Exp

	12-10-2001 22:52									#2
	Tired of ads?

So what happened to the Mig then? Was it designed for a modern scn then?

	12-10-2001 22:53									#3
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

Whew! This is the strongest UU so far. I wonder how strong and fast are tanks going to be?
***
With Exp and Science, Russians should be a very powerful Civ.
***
Of course, the most successful ruler was Stalin, not Cath; I guess he is not PC.
***
"The Cossack is an upgraded version of the calvary. Like calvary, it requires both horses and saltpeter to build, but it also adds an additional point of defense to an already formidable set of combat statistics. With their high movement rates, deadly offensive capability, and solid defensive rating, the Cossack is a unit you don't want to tangle with.

Attack Defense Move
Standard Calvary 6 3 3
Russian Cossack 6 4 3 "

It´s C*A*V*A*L*R*Y, of course; Calvary is a place in the Bible, which has absolutely nothing to do with it; spellcheck any body? I sure hope we will not have to play with 'calvary' units in the game.

Last edited by Comrade Tribune on 12-10-2001 at 23:05

	12-10-2001 22:53									#4
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

That could be; I thought it was because the MiG was too similar to the American F15.

	12-10-2001 23:11									#5
	Increase Your PM Length

quote: Originally posted by Comrade Tribune Calvary is a place in the Bible, which has absolutely nothing to do with it; spellcheck any body?

The fact that it's a real word was probably the reason it slipped through the spell check...

I don't know that many people who consider Stalin a "great ruler" (Megalomania does not equal greatness), though a fair number prefer Peter over Catherine. I don't; Catherine the Great is by far my favourite historical leader, an intelligent, unscrupolous and sex-mad monarch with truly Machiavellian characteristics.

	12-10-2001 23:20									#6
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

quote: Originally posted by Snapcase I don't know that many people who consider Stalin a "great ruler" (Megalomania does not equal greatness), though a fair number prefer Peter over Catherine. I don't; Catherine the Great is by far my favourite historical leader, an intelligent, unscrupolous and sex-mad monarch with truly Machiavellian characteristics.

I think "greatness" is an entirely subjective characteristic. On the other hand, "successful" is not. In terms of raw power gains, only Ivan the Terrible and Stalin should have been considered.

	12-10-2001 23:23									#7
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

quote: Originally posted by Snapcase Catherine the Great is by far my favourite historical leader, an intelligent, unscrupolous and sex-mad monarch with truly Machiavellian characteristics.

See how far Earth has come since those days? Take Clinton, for example: an intelligent, unscrupulous, sex-mad President with truly Machiavellian characteristics..

who says history is cyclical, anyway??


Dan

	12-10-2001 23:23									#8
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

quote: Originally posted by Comrade Tribune Whew! This is the strongest UU so far. I wonder how strong and fast are tanks going to be?

I was initially concerned that Panzers for the Germans would be imbalanced. But hopefully this will be offset by not having their stats too different from regular tanks, and the fact that they will require a lot of resources.

	12-10-2001 23:25									#9
	Full PM-box? Change here!

quote: Originally posted by Dan Magaha FIRAXIS See how far Earth has come since those days? Take Clinton, for example: an intelligent, unscrupulous, sex-mad President with truly Machiavellian characteristics.

Why don't you add this to the Civ3 official webpage, Dan?

	12-10-2001 23:25									#10
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

With this UU and the Special units the Russian will probably become one of my favorite civs

	12-10-2001 23:27									#11
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by Snapcase Catherine the Great is by far my favourite historical leader, an intelligent, unscrupolous and sex-mad monarch with truly Machiavellian characteristics.

Btw, Stalin shared all of Catherine´s characteristics, except for "sexmad".

If sexmad is required for greatness, they shouldn´t have included Gandhi.

	12-10-2001 23:33									#12
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

quote: Originally posted by Comrade Tribune Btw, Stalin shared all of Catherine´s characteristics, except for "sexmad". If sexmad is required for greatness, they shouldn´t have included Gandhi.

Actually, Gandhi passes for this requirement... his youth (before the trip to South Africa) was quite "wild" according to some biographies...

	12-10-2001 23:39									#13
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

If were to believe some of the more crazy Biopsychologists out there, all political leadership is about sex. Hungry for power? You're just trying to mate with as many people as possible and produce an environment of safety for your offspring.

	12-10-2001 23:40									#14
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by Patriqvium Actually, Gandhi passes for this requirement... his youth (before the trip to South Africa) was quite "wild" according to some biographies...

It's an interesting stereotype that those who are known for fighting "moral" causes are themselves ascetic (although Gandhi was later in life). For example, Martin Luther King was a womanizer and Albert Schweitzer was supposedly a real ******* to his nurses and staff.

	12-10-2001 23:53									#15
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

Although they are a good idea and add flavour to the game, it seems as if those unique units are unevenly shared between civs.

I mean, the cossack is a better replacement for cavalry than the hoplite is for the spearman, and although the Aztec jaguar warrior might come in handy in the early stages of the game, he will probably be obsolete quickly, and then the Aztecs have lost that military advantage.

The Americans, on the other hand, can look forward to a powerful F-15 in the latter stages of the game, when such advantages might count considerably.

When I first heard about the concept of unique units, I thought there would be unique units for each civ in each era. Come to think of it, that would have been impossible, given historical accuracy. (The Americans did not exist in 1000 BC, and the Aztecs don't exist now.)

	13-10-2001 00:23									#16
	SCIENTIFIC?! Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

Well, that was my first reaction when I read their CSAs. Expansionist definately applies, but scientific? I suppose my objectivist background causes me to react to that poorly.

Then again, the USSR managed to keep pace with the US for a while despite the fact that their system attempted to quash any form of individual thought. Their form of government was still little more than an advanced form of "Despotism" (at least during Stalin's years).

Still, though they may have achieved Rocketry sooner than we, our development of "Advanced Computing" ensured we'd pass them up quickly and easily.

	13-10-2001 00:25									#17
	Inflate your Upload Space

quote: Although they are a good idea and add flavour to the game, it seems as if those unique units are unevenly shared between civs.

Depends on when the best time to have a golden age is. If having it early is beneficial, then having late GEs is set off against having better UUs.

	13-10-2001 00:35									#18
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

So the Cossacks are Russian UUs. Laughable .

	13-10-2001 02:48									#19
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

The fact that it's a real word was probably the reason it slipped through the spell check...

I don't know that many people who consider Stalin a "great ruler" (Megalomania does not equal greatness), though a fair number prefer Peter over Catherine. I don't; Catherine the Great is by far my favourite historical leader, an intelligent, unscrupolous and sex-mad monarch with truly Machiavellian characteristics. [/QUOTE]

They are both very good rulers, but you should also consider Alexander II the emperor which freed farmers, largely expanded borders and made great achievements in industrializing Russia. But the monarch from which Russia has truly started its way to European superpowers is Peter the Great!

	13-10-2001 03:11									#20
	Re: SCIENTIFIC?! Enter the AD-FREE zone

quote: Originally posted by Ironwood Well, that was my first reaction when I read their CSAs. Expansionist definately applies, but scientific? I suppose my objectivist background causes me to react to that poorly. Then again, the USSR managed to keep pace with the US for a while despite the fact that their system attempted to quash any form of individual thought. Their form of government was still little more than an advanced form of "Despotism" (at least during Stalin's years). Still, though they may have achieved Rocketry sooner than we, our development of "Advanced Computing" ensured we'd pass them up quickly and easily.

Really!!!??? The Russian scientist were always at its peak if you start thinking from 1800. TNT was first used in Russian laboratories, the table of elements which helped to discover aluminium and helped chemistry a lot. Radio and heavy bombers were first invented in Russia. And I think that the H-bomb is also worth mentioning. And the US didn't even kept with Russia until the 20th century! As a matter a fact before world wars the US was just a far village. And if you consider todays weaponry: MIG29 is better than F15. If you compare the Russian tanks and US tanks during the history, the Russian tanks were always better. US even today doesn't have good air defense that can compete with S300 which was designed 30 years ago . And what is the favorite assault rifle in the world? Kalashnikov NOT M16. So the Russia is truly scientific nation.

	13-10-2001 03:35									#21
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

Expansionist/Scientific suits Russia perfectly.

Expansionist: They're the largest nation in the world!
Scientific: They made it into space first!

	13-10-2001 03:35									#22
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

Will the Mig be available as a normal unit?

	13-10-2001 03:38									#23
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

quote: Originally posted by Col Bigspear Will the Mig be available as a normal unit?

I sincerely doubt it. All the planes in Civ II were general descriptions (Bomber, Stealth Fighter, etc.) and not specific models. Plus, the old images specifically said "Russian MiG" (Capital M, lowercase i, Capital G, properly spelt, or else capital M, lowercase backwards N, capital upside-down L ).

	13-10-2001 03:38									#24
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

Scientific does not describe the Russians, seeing as they stole much of their tech from the west.

	13-10-2001 03:40									#25
	this sucks Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

I dont want no saggy assed queen for russias rulers

give me Lenin, Stalin or at least Peter..

And for the cossack, its not bad but the anticipated Mig would have been better and would also have fit in with a Stalin leadership.

This is really horrible!

Also they should be Mil/Sci. It would be more suitable. They are definately militaristic. and there space program and nuclear projects were scientific id say.. H-bomb first man in space satelight in space intercontinental missile..

	13-10-2001 03:40									#26
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

quote: Originally posted by red_jon Scientific does not describe the Russians, seeing as they stole much of their tech from the west.

Along that logic, we stole gunpowder from the Chinese and the alphabet from the Phoenicians!

No, they developed on info already discovered by the West.

	13-10-2001 03:51									#27
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

quote: Scientific does not describe the Russians, seeing as they stole much of their tech from the west.

Actually many mathematical thesis and physics postulate made in Russia in the 60s were only developed in the West in the 80s. Only after the collapse of the USSR was this scientific advancement truly realised. Before this time the Russian scientists/mathematicians were prevented from sharing their discoveries, or had no forum to discuss them with.

	13-10-2001 03:59									#28
	Re: Re: SCIENTIFIC?! Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

quote: Originally posted by Dark Scorpion And what is the favorite assault rifle in the world? Kalashnikov NOT M16. So the Russia is truly scientific nation.

well, it helped that they mass produced them and gave them away tp every revelutionary they liked

	13-10-2001 03:59									#29
	Re: Re: SCIENTIFIC?! Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

damn dp

Last edited by d_dudy on 13-10-2001 at 04:32

	13-10-2001 04:18									#30
	Put an end to popups!

quote: And if you consider todays weaponry: MIG29 is better than F15. If you compare the Russian tanks and US tanks during the history, the Russian tanks were always better. US even today doesn't have good air defense that can compete with S300 which was designed 30 years ago . And what is the favorite assault rifle in the world? Kalashnikov NOT M16. So the Russia is truly scientific nation.

The MiG-29 is not a better aircraft than the F-15. I promise you that if you put a squadron of F-15s against a squadron of MiG-29s with roughly equal pilots and ground support the F-15s would come out on top.

As for the S-300 SAM, yes, it is quite good. But, Good Lord, have you ever heard of the Patriot? Definitely outclasses the S-300.

Just because one weapon was produced in greater numbers does not mean it's better. There are more T-72s in the world than there are M1A2s. Does that make the T-72 better? I don't think so. The AK-47 was popular because it was asoundingly cheap and because any country or group that wanted to become Communist or at least support Communism wasn't going to be getting any Western guns. Put a squad on infantry in a trench during the next big war and they'll pick an M-16 over an AK-47 every time.

Now, as for real Russian superiority in the sky, try the Su-27. A few European NATO countries did some major testing with it against the F-15 and it managed a 1.3:1 kill ratio. Of course, in a couple years America will have the F-22, which will dominate over anything else out there. The nearest Russian competitor, the Su-37, is more maneuverable but doesn't support such an advanced electronics suite, equal weapons, or stealth.

The new S-400 SAM provides the Patriot with some real stiff competition. I'd say the two are about even, though the "big" version of the S-400 designed to take out slow craft like AWACS and cargo planes (and perhaps B-2s if they can get a radar lock) is a unique design.

I'd say that the M-16 is still one of the better rifles out there, though by now it's been outclassed by new bullpup configuration rifles in Europe. The USA's designing one of those, too, but it won't enter production for a couple more years. Russia doesn't have any, and as far as I know, isn't designing any, either.

In the past two decades, Russia has been ahead in unorthodox war technologies more than orthodox ones. Electromagnetic technology, supersonic cruise missiles, scramjets, and tank defenses are a few of the areas in which Russia has a lead over America. The edge in orthodox stuff (tanks, planes, ships, submarines) is still the USA's.