How to make Great person in your games?

1. The creation of a Great Wonder.
2. Taking city population away from working the land and turning them into Specialists.

P.S.

http://news.softpedia.com/news/Great-People-in-Sid-Meier-s-Civilization-IV-6195.shtml
Great People are created at the city level, as each city can generate "great people points" based on conditions and structures in the city. You can affect the amount of people points generated in several ways.

Several ways? What a big liar! Only two ways.

Well you can affect the number of points generated by buildings and civics too so technically it is correct. I voted both anyway.

Well you can affect the number of points generated by buildings and civics too so technically it is correct. I voted both anyway.


You're wrong. The buildings and civics can boost it, not generate. 0 point * 100% = 0 point.

Well, a Great Person is created when a Mommy Great Person and a Daddy Great Person come together, and they love each other very much. And...

Well, a Great Person is created when a Mommy Great Person and a Daddy Great Person come together, and they love each other very much. And...

And playing Civ4 together.

While great people points (GPP) can only be generated in two ways, there are more ways than GPP to get a great person. In Warlords, the Great General cannot be gotten with GPP at all, but you can also get Great People by being first to Music, Economics, Scientific Method etc. So while the aforementioned quote is indeed incorrect, it's just a typo.

You're wrong. The buildings and civics can boost it, not generate. 0 point * 100% = 0 point.

He's not wrong.

The article says: "You can affect the amount of people points generated in several ways."

You're right about the fact that buildings and civics can't generate it, but that's not what the article, or Paradigm is saying. They're saying there are several ways to affect the amount of GPPs. If you have 2GPP/turn, and you turn to pacifism, you've affected the amount of GPPs you're generating... just like the article said.

It's a matter of wording.

I was going to post that in reply too but the "You're wrong" post made me think it wasn't worth the bother, to be honest. Rudeness and the internet, goes together like a horse and carriage.

He's not wrong.

The article says: "You can affect the amount of people points generated in several ways."

You're right about the fact that buildings and civics can't generate it, but that's not what the article, or Paradigm is saying. They're saying there are several ways to affect the amount of GPPs. If you have 2GPP/turn, and you turn to pacifism, you've affected the amount of GPPs you're generating... just like the article said.

It's a matter of wording.


Affection is not the point of this post. That's why "in several ways" is incorrect.

Affection is not the point of this post. That's why "in several ways" is incorrect.

But affecting GPP is the point of that quote. That's a bit like you quoting a guy saying that dogs are loyal animals, then posting that he's wrong because Benedict Arnold is disloyal and dogs are not the point of your post.

Affection is the point of YOUR MOM! :p

You are forgetting that 0*anything = nothing. Let's all be quiet about Not 0*something != something though.

EDIT: Ooops

You are forgetting that 0*anything = nothing. Let's all be quiet about Not 0*something != something though.

Okay, then. You quote the guy who says dogs are loyal, and then you post claiming he's incorrect because dead dogs are incapable of loyalty and your post isn't about living dogs.

That was sarcasm ;)

Affection is not the point of this post. That's why "in several ways" is incorrect.

Affection is the point of the post. That's why "in several ways" is correct.

"You can affect the amount of people points generated in several ways."

That is correct.

If it said something like "You can generate great people points in several ways", then it would be wrong. But instead it says that you can AFFECT the GPP generated in several ways.

That was sarcasm ;)

Oh, you're not the OP. Sorry, mea culpa.