Since the other WWII topic is pretty much completely about the European theater, this is about something that really bugs about the Pacific side. I haven't gotten to playing it much yet so I haven't found much else, but the problem I have right now is about China.

First of all, the leader of China's name is "Chairman Zedong." Zedong being Mao's given name, or "first name" (In Chinese, the family name is always written first) that's like calling Washington "President George." However, this shouldn't even be an issue in the first place, if it weren't for the second problem

My biggest gripe is what China is. In this game, it's the People's Republic of China, with the PRC communist flag, and Mao Zedong as its leader. Sure, complain about Hitler being in the game, or Nazi flags bearing the Weimar flag. However, this is much worse, historically. During World War II, country was the Republic of China, led by Chiang Kai-shek of the Kuomintang (and if you look up the Big Four, you'll see Chiang, not Mao with Roosevelt, Churchill, and Stalin). It wasn't until after Japan's surrender that the KMT and Communists finished up their civil war, the communists took control of the mainland, and Chiang escaped to Taiwan.

This shouldn't even be a sensitive issue either, like Hitler being leader. Even the PRC recognizes the Republic of China as the predecessor and government in control during that era in history. So then why isn't the flag the white sun, blue sky flag of the RoC, and their leader "Generalissimo Chiang" instead of "Chairman Zedong"?

Being from Taiwan, I have to say this is a pretty stupid error/choice. It's not hard to put in the right flag, nor is it to simply have no leaderhead with Chiang's name as the leader.

*sigh*

I'm thinking Fixaris didn't want to offend the huge market of China, so they had to do this.

It's a game, just enjoy it. :)

Mao was still around, and controlled a few provinces in northern China. I consider it a reasonable abstraction to make instead of using a static leaderhead or generic flag or something. Actually creating a thread to complain about this is just plain dumb.

The KMT was the strongest faction in China, but they hardly 'controlled' it. China was a mass of the communists, the KMT, warlords, etc.

Clearly, Chiang is the best choice, but it may have been easier just using the Mao charactersitcs and the like.

By 1944 the communists were probably doing more fighting than the nationalists, at least until the nationalists were rolled in the Japanese 44 offensive.

Breunor

I don't think this was done to avoid offending mainland China gamers, as no one would actually be offended to see Chiang Kai Shek as the Chinese leader during WW2.
It seems more like a mistake (lack of knowledge) than a politically motivated move.

I don't think this was done to avoid offending mainland China gamers, as no one would actually be offended to see Chiang Kai Shek as the Chinese leader during WW2.
It seems more like a mistake (lack of knowledge) than a politically motivated move.

My decision was based on two things:

- Communist China did actually win the civil war; and
- I had to keep the number of civs down (in the official release anyways).

Not mistake / lack of knowledge.

It seems more like a mistake (lack of knowledge) than a politically motivated move.

Call me crazy, but somehow I think that the person who designed an extensive World War II scenario based around both the European and Asian theatres *probably* was aware that Chiang was the leader of the KMT faction that was the most powerful force in mainland China during the time period of the game. A pretty bold assumption on my part, I know.

The KMT was the strongest faction in China, but they hardly 'controlled' it. China was a mass of the communists, the KMT, warlords, etc.

Clearly, Chiang is the best choice, but it may have been easier just using the Mao charactersitcs and the like.

By 1944 the communists were probably doing more fighting than the nationalists, at least until the nationalists were rolled in the Japanese 44 offensive.

Breunor

Communists rarely fought the Japanese head on in the entire war from 1937-1945. The "hundred regiment" battle was more like 5 regiment battle, and their highly self-promoting Pingshing Guan victory was a guerilla skirmish that caught a Japanese supply unit behind the lines.

Throughout the war and especially after 1939 the Communists were simply conducting guerilla activities, not combat guerilla activities against the Japanese either, and more like guerilla propaganda activities to rebuild their support after their famed "long march" victory which some authors have bedunked with Russian documents as horse trading between Chiang and the Russians.

If you're interested in the history of this period, you can start by simply using wiki or any history of China during this period that isn't published by the PRC or uses J Edgar Snow as their source.

Communists fighting the Japanese is pure propaganda

PS - by 1937 the KMT certainly "controlled" China, and only a few warlords were left who were all in allegiance to Chiang (took orders from Central - Chiang), including Yen Xishan in Shanxi, Chang Xueliang in Manchuria, and Li Yuenhong in Central China.

It's all about money. Firaxis would even name him "Great Mao, ruler of the world" - just to have permission to sell the game in China. Be frank Dale, didn't they push you to do that?

My decision was based on two things:

- Communist China did actually win the civil war; and
- I had to keep the number of civs down (in the official release anyways).

Not mistake / lack of knowledge.

CCP and KMT was nominally allied from 1936-1944. The Chinese civil war did not officially start until 1946 with the armaments and supplies captured from the Japanese by the USSR.

However by 1947 the central government of the KMT was so weak (from actually fighting the war) and the bureaucracy and local government (mostly former warlords) were so corrupt that the CCP was able to roll over several tens of millions of KMT troops (along with massive defections caused by CCP propagandists and possible KMT generals who were CCP moles).

If this is a WWII scenario, then certainly Mao is not the leader of China.

It's a game, just enjoy it. :)

Some people don't seem capable of realizing Civ is just a game. <shrug> Maybe read that excellent history of civilization interivew with Sid - where he says the game uses historical elements to make it more familiar - and that's it as far as history goes.

My decision was based on two things:

- Communist China did actually win the civil war; and
- I had to keep the number of civs down (in the official release anyways).

Not mistake / lack of knowledge.

Works for me!

Breunor

Communists rarely fought the Japanese head on in the entire war from 1937-1945. The "hundred regiment" battle was more like 5 regiment battle, and their highly self-promoting Pingshing Guan victory was a guerilla skirmish that caught a Japanese supply unit behind the lines.

Throughout the war and especially after 1939 the Communists were simply conducting guerilla activities, not combat guerilla activities against the Japanese either, and more like guerilla propaganda activities to rebuild their support after their famed "long march" victory which some authors have bedunked with Russian documents as horse trading between Chiang and the Russians.

If you're interested in the history of this period, you can start by simply using wiki or any history of China during this period that isn't published by the PRC or uses J Edgar Snow as their source.

Communists fighting the Japanese is pure propaganda

PS - by 1937 the KMT certainly "controlled" China, and only a few warlords were left who were all in allegiance to Chiang (took orders from Central - Chiang), including Yen Xishan in Shanxi, Chang Xueliang in Manchuria, and Li Yuenhong in Central China.

Well, my source on this is Donovan Webster's 'The Burma Road: The Epic Story of the China-Burma-India theater in WWII'. Actually, that is my source for the Communists fighting and the nationalists. Webster talks about this quite a bit, how Roosevelt was effectively switching support to Mao. Indeed, Mao felt betrayed (probably rightfully so) when Truman shifted the alliance back to Chaing. I have other sources for the warlords, I can gather them. and Webster does talk to them.

Stillwell had had enough of Chaing and basically wanted to stop shipping Lend-Lease, and was impressed by the fact that the Communsits really resisted. The meetings of the US brass with Mao and his staff cleaarly happened, they aren't propaganda, although the results can be subject to interpretation.

Jim Dunnigan has also talked about how the Communists were doing more of the fighting by the war's end.

Of course, this is a theater where there is a lot of different opinions.

Breunor

Sure, complain about Hitler being in the game, or Nazi flags bearing the Weimar flag.

The flag in the game is actually the imperial flag. Weimar had the same flag modern Germany uses.. Black/Red/Gold.

well if you don't like it, I'm sure there are plenty of mods and such that will cover it eventually. Fireaxis is picky of what they will release, so most of the really creative stuff goes into the mods. My take on the pre-built in mods such as Rise of Rome or Vikings, even this one, is just to be a simple little example of what we as modders can do. They will never overdo it and always try to keep things as simple as possible, to keep those on the lower spectrum of pc performance, still able to play.

Here's a novelty...

Lets just enjoy Civ for what it is - A GAME????????

It seems some people on here are all too quick to pass judgement when it comes to criticising the work and effort of others.

Like I said, others have obviously spent a considerable amount of their own time and effort to enhance an already great game. So what, it's not historically accurate, it doesn't claim to be, so rather than whining about irrelevant details, why don't you do your own 100% historically accurate mod? No? I thought not, as some people prefer to complain/whine endlessly rather than being productive themselves.

Dale, whenever you have dealings with the general public there will always be those that like nothing better than to pick holes in what you do, so I wouldn't take it to heart. It's what we humans do.

My decision was based on two things:

- Communist China did actually win the civil war; and
- I had to keep the number of civs down (in the official release anyways).

Not mistake / lack of knowledge.

Those two points are both very good and I think you made the right decisions... but, Dale, the NAME! Chairman Zedong? I learned that was wrong in elementary school social studies! :p Also he wasn't really "Chairman Mao" until later anyway.

Here's a novelty...

Lets just enjoy Civ for what it is - A GAME????????

It seems some people on here are all too quick to pass judgement when it comes to criticising the work and effort of others.

Like I said, others have obviously spent a considerable amount of their own time and effort to enhance an already great game. So what, it's not historically accurate, it doesn't claim to be, so rather than whining about irrelevant details, why don't you do your own 100% historically accurate mod? No? I thought not, as some people prefer to complain/whine endlessly rather than being productive themselves.

Dale, whenever you have dealings with the general public there will always be those that like nothing better than to pick holes in what you do, so I wouldn't take it to heart. It's what we humans do.


It is supposedly supposed to be a WW2 Pacific scenario with almost exact info everywhere-having Mao lead the whole of China during WW2 is just Horse Raddish, and China being Communistic during WW2 is even more Horse Raddishy. C'mon, it is supposed to be historically accurate to the extent of civ names and leaders, so this scenario needs modding to be enjoyable in the historic manner. This is just plain wrong.

the one and only burn I have on this is getting some historical stuff wrong, that was easily avoidable. When your building a mod, in the dark closet of fireaxis, it is your responsibility to check and double check for historical accuracy. Really great work Dale, don't me wrong your contributions are great to the civ4 community, but like R.B. said, we will need to mod it to enjoy the historical aspect of it.

Dale, the Chinese Civil War was basically on hold between 1937 and 1945, with Mao taking control between 1946 and 1949. So Chiang Kai Shek should be the leader, as 1936 is just at the end of the Long March when Mao controlled a tiny bit of mountainous land in northwestern China.

True, it is a game, and I also appreciate that people can spend time to make something better than I possibly could. I'm not posting to downgrade the efforts of the modders, but to point a major historical inaccuracy in a mod that simulates an important part of history. :P

My decision was based on two things:

- Communist China did actually win the civil war; and
- I had to keep the number of civs down (in the official release anyways).

Not mistake / lack of knowledge.

As for that, yes, China did win the civil war, but after the timeframe of the scenario. By that logic, having "Russia" with the Russian Federation flag as a civilization would be equally acceptable, as the Soviet Union collapsed after the war like the Republic of China's control over the mainland. Yes, it happened a few decades later, but for the sake of analogy, neither the Russian Federation or People's Republic of China existed during the war.

And for number of civs, it'd still be just China... it's not like it was totally regionally split like America was. Also, Mao's forces were only guerilla forces (as previously mentioned) temporarily allied with Chiang while the Nationalists did the bulk of the fighting, so their contribution to the scenario would be insignificant.

Portrait-wise, a stache-less and slightly recolored Stalin would work for Chiang, similar to what was done for the other leaders.

Zhahz:

Good call on the Sid quote. I gotta remember that one. :)

BlackJAC:

To be honest, if the only faults folks can find with the mod are "Hitler" and "Mao" and "plane models" then I'm happy. :D

I find it totally ironic that there's over 1000 posts (CFC & Poly) about leaders, but not one post on the spy bug which renders spy missions impossible. :lol:

Dom Pedro:

It was confusing. :p We didn't do Chinese history at school, and Wiki kept pointing out his name (which as I knew is backwards in Chinese) as "Mao Zedong". It's a simple mistake to make considering we ALWAYS refer to the second name. ;)

RB & Shiggs:

If you need historical accuracy to enjoy a game, then what the hell are you playing Civ for? It abstracts / modifies history so much its not even funny! Seriously, if you want pure historical accuracy (over fun gameplay) go play "Making History: The Calm & the Storm".

TO EVERYONE ELSE:

Please note the following:

1. Remember, RtW was NOT a community mod. RtW is an official mod with Firaxis - Take 2's names on it. As designer, I was only one link in the chain. To that end, I had to work together with a number of other entities to ensure the mod was acceptable to the whole world.

2. As RtW stood at one point during development, there was 200 megs of leader graphics, 200 megs of unit models, and 200 megs of videos. That's 600 megs just for artwork. I HAD to cut it down. Hence, the videos were dropped and unit models were combined to cut the number of different models used.

3. Gameplay versus History. Always an interesting debate. Purists want history, and the average Joe wants gameplay. I wanted to target as many people as possible, and allow for a fun game in the WW2 environment. I believe I have achieved that. Consequently some elements of history were changed to fit the fun gameplay goal. If you want pure history, go play Hearts of Iron or Making History: The Calm & the Storm. If you want a fun game that simulates WW2, then play RtW.

I will comment no further on any of these issues. Please keep an eye on the RtW Forum: http://forums.civfanatics.com/forumdisplay.php?f=265 and the RtW Website: http://rtw.apolyton.net. I am currently working on an add-on which will enhance the historical side of the mod.

Thanks
Dale

I'm not going to put Dale down, and as someone said (as well as Dale himself) he knows better.

If he had to keep the civs down, and didn't want to deal with a static leaderhead or flag I can understand to a significant degree, and move on and enjoy the scenario. Maybe I'll just play as Japan and conquer them? ;)

I'd love to see a later version with the two sides, and being able to play them off each other (as Japan) or as the Allies try helping one (Mao if Russia, nationalists as England/America) over the other while still getting them to fight Japan more. I can understand how it'd be hard to do, and the harder deadline when including it in a release as opposed to a "private mod" like on this website.

I might change the flag, for personal aesthetics, as that's my only true small gripe... I can understand not using a new leaderhead and having a unified China... but I'd rather have just "China" and the correct flag if you're creating a new flag. Personal taste as I said.

Nonetheless, it won't reduce my fun in the mod.As I said, if I am focusing on the Pacific I'm either conquering China as Japan or fighting Japan as America ;-)

This will be one of the first two mods I play as well.

Good work Dale, must've been hard. Besides my personal tastes won't always agree with yours so I look for how it plays. :)

I am really looking forward to the addon and hopefully future scenarios/more UUs for RtW, but its plenty of fun as is.. people really take this stuff too seriously.

Please fix the spies, though ^^

Coming from a VERY BIASED background - grew up in Taiwan and trust me, they brain wash you on this bit of WW2 history, I have to agree with the "just a game" idea.

Personally I would be hard-pushed to think Firaxis would even include this scenario in the Chinese version of the pack if it is ever released officially there(and that's a big IF), given the official vanilla version released there the leaders Mao, Qin Shihuang were completely wiped out, and Mongolia and Japan were no where to be seen, I won't be surprised if Firaxis will just skipped the whole thing for political convenience.

Let's not turn this into another Charlemagne thread about the historical accuracy of the holy roman empire.

Here's a novelty...

Lets just enjoy Civ for what it is - A GAME????????

It seems some people on here are all too quick to pass judgement when it comes to criticising the work and effort of others.

Like I said, others have obviously spent a considerable amount of their own time and effort to enhance an already great game. So what, it's not historically accurate, it doesn't claim to be, so rather than whining about irrelevant details, why don't you do your own 100% historically accurate mod? No? I thought not, as some people prefer to complain/whine endlessly rather than being productive themselves.

Dale, whenever you have dealings with the general public there will always be those that like nothing better than to pick holes in what you do, so I wouldn't take it to heart. It's what we humans do.

Dale I don't need historical accuracy to enjoy it, but it does add to the flavor having a scenario which is based off history to be correct. You did a great job and I really dont want to be a complainer, just a few small things needed adjusted. Please don't take suggestive criticism offensive, it is part of creating something and putting it out to the public. Obviously not everyone is gonna be happy, but you should know your contributions here are great, if not invaluable.

Thanks

Dale I don't need historical accuracy to enjoy it, but it does add to the flavor having a scenario which is based off history to be correct. You did a great job and I really dont want to be a complainer, just a few small things needed adjusted. Please don't take suggestive criticism offensive, it is part of creating something and putting it out to the public. Obviously not everyone is gonna be happy, but you should know your contributions here are great, if not invaluable.

Thanks

Seriously no offense taken. :) Like I said above, if leaders are the only things people are talking about, then I'm happy. :p

As I've said previously, (even in the intro text to RtW) that the add-on will fix things in many ways. That's the beauty of after-release changes. There's no legal department, no "official stances", no disc-limits, and no "minimum spec" criteria. :)

EDIT: And HoI / Making History are great games, jam-packed full of history. :) (Just more scripted than fun).

I'm glad to hear it's still being added to! :)

If that's the case, then I give a major thumbs up. Just like the main game itself, it's something to be built on... and it sounds like a strong foundation!

Any advice on a good civ to play to get the feel of it?

I believe Hearts of Iron II was banned in the PRC because they felt it underplayed Mao.

I believe Hearts of Iron II was banned in the PRC because they felt it underplayed Mao.

You can't win, can you? Somebody is always offended.

I think this is why the Geico commericals (where the cavemen get offended) are the most popular commercials on TV here in the US right now.

Breunor

I'm not going to fault Dale for this or anything else, because I don't think a lot of casual players understand just how much work goes into making even a simple scenario these days. Kudos to Dale for making it and doing a fine job overall.

Now, on topic, Chairman Zedong, seriously? :p I'm still one of those old-types who prefers Tse-tung, but I guess that's just me... at any rate, it seems really odd not to have Kai-shek in the game. But whatever. To me this just proves how modern PC people often behave stupidly (not you Dale) when it comes to issues like this.

The Pacific always gets the short end of the stick in just about every WWII scenario anyway. The global map is inevitably drawn with the Pacific just as big or smaller than the Atlantic (?!), and many of the major island campaigns are left out. It's also very hard to recreate the naval battle sequence because the AI doesn't fight naval wars as well as humans.

Oh, and to those who keep saying "it's just a game," if it's just a game then why can't YOU-KNOW-WHO be in? Or Hirohito? Or Mussolini? (Not "the duce.") Evidently it's not just a game. Politics and modern issues get wrapped up in it as well.

It kind of reminds me of an old joke about a map of the U.S. that was made in Texas. In their version, Texas stretched almost all the way up to Canada and nearly touched the east and west coasts, and all the other states were crammed in between. :lol:

EDIT: And if the Pacific campaign still annoys you, just wait a little while, till I get ahold of it... :lol:

One more thing to note in Dale's defense: China's "ideologies" (the mod's version of religions) seem to correspond roughly to the historical location of the KMT and the Communists. Lots of "democracy" in the south; some "communism" in the north.

Personally, my only gripe with the most excellent RTW mod is the lack of unit icons... those grey boxes are dull!

well if you don't like it, I'm sure there are plenty of mods and such that will cover it eventually. Fireaxis is picky of what they will release, so most of the really creative stuff goes into the mods. My take on the pre-built in mods such as Rise of Rome or Vikings, even this one, is just to be a simple little example of what we as modders can do. They will never overdo it and always try to keep things as simple as possible, to keep those on the lower spectrum of pc performance, still able to play.

This is partially it. Most of the mods and scenarios in the game are examples of what can be done with the game engine, and then people go out there and do amazing things with it, some of that (everything from mods to scenarios to interface changes like the Demographic graphs) being reincorporated into the game in future expansions. Afterworld is a good example: not a particularly strong stand-alone scenario, but the concept and sheer amount of art design for this one simple scenario is amazing. Art, both 2D and 3D takes a very long time, and having taken a dozen courses in 2d art, 3d computer modeling and animation, I have a strong appreciation for the number of work-hours invested in that scenario.

neither CCP nor KMT will agree on using Mao as leader of china in WWII.
it is just historically wrong and it is not like PRC would oppose KMT, KMT isn't Nazi;
in fact CCP is working toward building ties with KMT in hope for a peaceful reunification.
it wasn't needed... other then to save a few dollars on an animated head :p

Pfft. I bet Garret wished he got paid for the leaderheads.

Can any one mod this? It's WWII, I'd rather have the ROC flag and a non-animated Chiang Kai-shek. :)

Can any one mod this? It's WWII, I'd rather have the ROC flag and a non-animated Chiang Kai-shek. :)

Download add-on pack 1.

I'm beginning to sound like a broken record. :D

Can any one mod this? It's WWII, I'd rather have the ROC flag and a non-animated Chiang Kai-shek. :)

Well of course you can mod it. Like Dale said, the non-official expansion on his site addresses many of the issues people have had, but if you want to go further, like adding unique buttons for each unit, its really not that hard. Keep in mind though, you won't be able to play MP if you mod it.

PS what happened to all the tech buttons on the expansion? about 90% of them disappeared when I updated from your site (not pink blob, just non-existant), So when you initially start the game it appears that you cannot do any tech, but if you open up the tech advisor then you can.

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=234668


For those of you that aren't search oriented.

its no doubt that Chiang represents China in that period.But without the temporary unit of Comunist and KMT,japan will achieve more success in China easily.KMT has the most advanced weapon and productivity(still poor compared with japan)in china.Comunist was spreaded in villages(including those occupied by japan)and do everything to damage the supply of japan and sometimes annihilate small squads.its wrong to ignore either but due to the limit of the game engine,the true history cant be performed prescisely,thats understandable

People this is civ not replay history:everything you knew and nothing you didn't Jeez I mean the fact that America can fight Rome and the celts with the carthiginians at their side and founding Islam in London is no problem but a leader a name and plane models ruin the historical accuracy for you expect the game to be loosely based in history but not be a perfect record with every detail down to the color of Hirihito's shirt being perfect play it enjoy it or leave it.

As someone who studied Chinese history 1911 to 1976, from a variety of sources (if you think Wikipedia is a source for serious academic study then you're not serious about studying - it's informative, but Wiki is useful only if you know it's limits), I'm actually very happy with Dale's decision-making. I think within the scope of what he had to work with, he's made sound choices, representative of the "best fit". More importantly I think he's done a good job balancing between historical purism and gameplay.

For the record, I'd like to see any evidence that Jiang Jieshi (Let's not mix Wade-Giles and Pinyin up, people) did anything in the war period other than put up a token resistance. Almost all credible evidence points to Jiang sitting on an ever growing stockpile of US supplies during the war and doing comparatively nothing with them - something that played against him when CCP Cadres were able to exert considerable influence over regional leaders after Japan's defeat.

Those who would imply that Jiang was *the* leader of China and exercised some semblance of control over regional leaders and warlords during the war would need to explain how the CCP managed to subvert that supposed powerbase in under 12 months after the Japanese surrender, and would also need to explain how someone can be said to exercise effective Command and Control in an immense Area of Operations when he can't even speak the same language as the warlords who are apparently flying his colours. Jiang Jieshi was not the leader of China. He was the leader of the Guomindang. BIG Difference there kiddies.

Again, Dale, top effort. Have only been able to take a cursory look to this point, but mate, splendid job as always....

...Well done, that man. :goodjob:

As someone who studied Chinese history 1911 to 1976, from a variety of sources (if you think Wikipedia is a source for serious academic study then you're not serious about studying - it's informative, but Wiki is useful only if you know it's limits), I'm actually very happy with Dale's decision-making. I think within the scope of what he had to work with, he's made sound choices, representative of the "best fit". More importantly I think he's done a good job balancing between historical purism and gameplay.

For the record, I'd like to see any evidence that Jiang Jieshi (Let's not mix Wade-Giles and Pinyin up, people) did anything in the war period other than put up a token resistance. Almost all credible evidence points to Jiang sitting on an ever growing stockpile of US supplies during the war and doing comparatively nothing with them - something that played against him when CCP Cadres were able to exert considerable influence over regional leaders after Japan's defeat.

Those who would imply that Jiang was *the* leader of China and exercised some semblance of control over regional leaders and warlords during the war would need to explain how the CCP managed to subvert that supposed powerbase in under 12 months after the Japanese surrender, and would also need to explain how someone can be said to exercise effective Command and Control in an immense Area of Operations when he can't even speak the same language as the warlords who are apparently flying his colours. Jiang Jieshi was not the leader of China. He was the leader of the Guomindang. BIG Difference there kiddies.

Again, Dale, top effort. Have only been able to take a cursory look to this point, but mate, splendid job as always....

...Well done, that man. :goodjob:

lets go back to the game,if the leader is Mao.wont you feel ridiculous when you see he controled so many cities including Nanjing?Also Mao didnt have much time and chance to negotiate with those world leaders except Stalin.All the people who have learnt something about this war will quikly point out that the game want to show KMT's fight against Japan.I certainly know Jiang made many unforgivable silly decisions,but most respectful genenrals and soildiers of KMT is unbending and brave.

Don't you think this arguement is now pointless? :lol:

KMT has been in for weeks now.