Probably a thread about this exists already, but oh well.

India: Found five religions? I know they did Bud. and Hin., but seriously: Christian/Islam Indians? :crazyeye: We got 2 definite religions down, and I guess since Buddhism inspired Taoism, they could have that, but that pretty much leaves Judaism and Confucianism, which they did NOT found. Could somebody tell me if Moses/Confucius was related to the Indians?

Greece: Be first to cicumnavigate Earth? Who thought up that? I never heard of the Greeks beating the stuffing out of the Mayans! :confused: Seriously, WHEN in history did they ever do that?

Persia: Control seven world wonders? Which ones did they control? I can't name any I know of. :scan:

Japan: Be first in score by 1500? The 1500s where when they got crushed by the Koreans! (Also known as Independant Leader :p ) And, they didn't really become almighty until modern times, so how'd they get so far in progress?

Ethiopia: Found one religion? Geez, by the time you actually get on the map, all that's left is Christianity and Islam, which were definitely NOT founded by them. Where are Rhye's sources? :king:

Germany: Be the first to complete the tech tree? I'm definitely sure they haven't done that! I don't remember Germany having Genetics or Fusion! :eek:

Russia: Complete the Apollo Program by 1950? The Americans beat them to it, and that was in 1960! Where does all this information come from? :rolleyes:

Aztecs: Enter the Industrial Era by 1820? I thought the Aztecs were Mesoamerican, therefor making them slightly primitive! Besides harvesting rubber, I don't see how they managed to get there! Seriously, the Aztecs with Assembly Line! That's both unrealistic and scary! :cry:

Americans: Build the UN, Statue of Liberty, and the Pentagon by 2000? It was the French who built the Statue of Liberty, not America! It even says in the French UHV! :sad:

I'll probably get banned for posting this, but I'm willing to take the risk! ;)

^^

The idea is to achieve what they tried to achieve, but failed in it.

India: Who says it'd be Moses and Confucius founding those religions in your game's world?

Greece: There's a thread on that somewhere.

Persia: Mausoleum of Mausolos (sp?). I think. They also controlled the Pyramids for a while, and tried to get the Greek ones (you saw 300, yes?)

And so on.

In addition to what H-L said, my understanding of this mod is that it's an Earth simulator. Not an exact replica of Earth. Think of it like a racing or sports simulator-game where depending on how things go differently at a given moment the outcome changes. This is in contrast to a video recording of a given race/game.

If the same thing happened in every game exactly in accordance to what happened with history, well, that wouldn't be a lot of fun, at least not for me :)

^^The idea is to achieve what they tried to achieve, but failed in it.

Even so, I agree with the OP. In order to deserve its name, a so-called "UHV" should match more closely the civ's actual historical accomplishments. Alternatively, remove the word "historical" from the description and call them "What-if Victory Conditions."

This is ridiculous. The point of a UHV is that it wins the game! It's not designed to reflect what civilisations actually achieved, it's designed to reflect what they would have to have achieved to be regarded as the greatest civilisation in the world.

Hello everyone by the way.

In real life i can't see anything like "Alexander has won UHV" so I can't say that UHV isn't realistic.

Why would you be banned?

Persia Wonders

Great Pyramid of Giza - Yes
Hanging Gardens of Babylon - Yes
Statue of Zeus at Olympia - On the peloponese so No
Temple of Artemis - Turkey Yes
Mausoleum of Maussollos - Yes built by a persian Starap
Colossus of Rhodes - Yes perisa invaded
Lighthouse of Alexandria - Not built when Achaemenid (Ancient) Persia controled egypt. But Sassanid Empire did capture Alexandria briefly before passing back to Byzantium just before the Start of the Arabic Empire

So 5 and a half 6 out of 7 isnt bad. Persia also attempted to conquer Greece if they had they would have had all 7.

Seems a fitting UHV.

Again its things they could of achieved / should of but just didnt.

bah.

Then what should Indian goal be? Found 2 religions? :lol:

The Russians? "Build the Apollo Program after America"? Actually there was no Russian program called Apollo IRL

and the Aztecs? "Don't research Assembly Line"? Or should all modern techs be forbidden to them?

Enough.

Motherfukin snakes on this mother. .. .. .. .in plane

bah.

Then what should Indian goal be? Found 2 religions? :lol:


I think I suggested this in another thread but: Build a lot of temples (like 20+) before the renaissence era.

-Ties in with having a lot of religons and relgious sites much like India in real life (but means you don't have to found them, though it certainly helps)
-Fits with all the relgions that originated outside india (Hinduism arriving in part from Aryan-Iranian, Buddha being from what is Nepal nowadays ;), Juduism, Islam, and Christianity arriving on sea trade from the middle east) but then took root.
-Hard but less luck based than the founding UHV.
-Presents an interesting challenge of balancing piety and military and economic growth to meet the other victory condition.

I think I suggested this in another thread but: Build a lot of temples (like 20+) before the renaissence era.

-Ties in with having a lot of religons and relgious sites much like India in real life (but means you don't have to found them, though it certainly helps)
-Fits with all the relgions that originated outside india (Hinduism arriving in part from Aryan-Iranian, Buddha being from what is Nepal nowadays ;), Juduism, Islam, and Christianity arriving on sea trade from the middle east) but then took root.
-Hard but less luck based than the founding UHV.
-Presents an interesting challenge of balancing piety and military and economic growth to meet the other victory condition.

O_o, That sounds fun, yet challenging!

Actually I'd like to point out the Buddhist texts that suggest that Jesus might have traveled to India and studied Buddhist teachings.

So, it might have been possible for Christianity to have been founded in India if the Buddhists had persuaded him to stay there.

bah.

Then what should Indian goal be? Found 2 religions? :lol:

The Russians? "Build the Apollo Program after America"? Actually there was no Russian program called Apollo IRL

and the Aztecs? "Don't research Assembly Line"? Or should all modern techs be forbidden to them?

Enough.

OH CRAP!! IT'S RHYE HERSELF!! I BETTER RUN!!

Actually I'd like to point out the Buddhist texts that suggest that Jesus might have traveled to India and studied Buddhist teachings.

So, it might have been possible for Christianity to have been founded in India if the Buddhists had persuaded him to stay there.

The Buddha vs. Jesus. Yikes. Major religious war!

Well, you have to remember that some things cannot be done in game, so they have to be represented as best as possible.

India was full of religions, but since many are not represented in game, we have to make use of the others. Note, when I refer to India, I don't mean the modern country, but the historic area that has been considered India. Off the top of my head, India could claim creadit for: Hinuism, Buddhism, Sihkism, and Jainism. Then with your arguement about Toaism, we have 5 (note that I know next to nothing about any of these religions). If we added more religions into the game, they would get way too crowded, so using other religions is the most viable option.

For Greece, if you ever watch "Alexander" you will see Alexander's attempt to circumnavigate the world. It also helps to represent their advanced culture.

Persia: already said by others.

Japan: Well, China contributed significantly to Japan's defeat. Plus 1500 is nearly a century before Japan tried to invade Korea. And throughout the time period Japan was in general, the most advanced East Asian nation during this time period. It does seem to be more for gameplay than history though. I wouldn't mind if a condition to conquer China and/or the East Indies was present (to represent their goals in WWII).

Russia: again like India, the Appolo program is the only thing to do with the (historical) space race in game, and the Russians pushed hard to complete their version of it. It seems a very nice to represent Sputnik, Lika, Gagarin and numerous other Soviet accomplishments in space.

Aztecs: what options are there other than a what-if scenario? Kill on Spanish unit? Be conquered by 1600? Aztecs had so little contact with other civs in the game that it is difficult to do a hitorically correct UHV.

Americans: The Statue of Liberty is in the US. Now it wasn't built there, but it is not possible to have it built in one place and moved to another. So this is the only reasonable way for a major US symbol to be present in the US.

The Greeks' ships were very advanced for their time and they colonized much of the med. In the game, I guess their time goes on and their seafaring ways pay off.

OH CRAP!! IT'S RHYE HERSELF!! I BETTER RUN!!

Rhye himself.

@Norton II: King? Shouldn't that be Emperor? =)

Actually I'd like to point out the Buddhist texts that suggest that Jesus might have traveled to India and studied Buddhist teachings.

So, it might have been possible for Christianity to have been founded in India if the Buddhists had persuaded him to stay there.

There are better explanations for buddhist/christian parallels. I'll also note there are abundant parallels between new testament christianity and hinduism. (Specifically the Baghavad Gita, which is thought to have made it to the middle east by shortly after Christ's lifetime, if not earlier). It is more likely that the people who wrote the new testament borrowed material from other sources - especially since none of the books of the new testament are written by anyone who *actually knew jesus*. (The earliest books in the new testament are some of the letters of Paul, whose never meeting Jesus is even mentioned in the Bible - Acts I believe. All of the gospels are written 50+ years after Jesus's death).

In fact, the problems with treating the new testament as a historical source are so glaring and pervasive that its almost impossible to know who the historical Jesus was. Partially because there is no independent confirmation of his existence (Jesus is mentioned in exactly one surviving Roman record, only mentioned in that record in an offhand way (paraphrased: 'there was this jesus person but he wasn't very important'), and by a writer who was both born after Jesus death and had never been to Judea and was relying on second or third hand accounts). Add to this the fact that even from the biblical account it is clear that he was different things to different people (some wanted him to be a political/war leader to drive out the romans, some wanted him to be a spiritual leader, etc...), which means the version of Jesus in the canonical gospels is just one point of view (specifically, the one that was voted in during the council of Nicaea). And given the time lag between the events and their recording, its almost certainly true that the new testament has been embellished to match expectations.

Which isn't to say that its "wrong". Its just not history. Stories about things that never happened can still contain truth, and that's what is important for religion, not historical verifiability.

Besides, Jesus didn't found Christianity. He was Jewish Rabbi preaching to the Jews. He even says as much in the gospels; paraphrased: 'I came not to change the Law but to complete it.' (note, Law == Torah). Arguably, it is Paul who founds Christianity as a distinct religion.

Well, you have to remember that some things cannot be done in game, so they have to be represented as best as possible.

India was full of religions, but since many are not represented in game, we have to make use of the others. Note, when I refer to India, I don't mean the modern country, but the historic area that has been considered India. Off the top of my head, India could claim creadit for: Hinuism, Buddhism, Sihkism, and Jainism. Then with your arguement about Toaism, we have 5 (note that I know next to nothing about any of these religions). If we added more religions into the game, they would get way too crowded, so using other religions is the most viable option.

For Greece, if you ever watch "Alexander" you will see Alexander's attempt to circumnavigate the world. It also helps to represent their advanced culture.

Persia: already said by others.

Japan: Well, China contributed significantly to Japan's defeat. Plus 1500 is nearly a century before Japan tried to invade Korea. And throughout the time period Japan was in general, the most advanced East Asian nation during this time period. It does seem to be more for gameplay than history though. I wouldn't mind if a condition to conquer China and/or the East Indies was present (to represent their goals in WWII).

Russia: again like India, the Appolo program is the only thing to do with the (historical) space race in game, and the Russians pushed hard to complete their version of it. It seems a very nice to represent Sputnik, Lika, Gagarin and numerous other Soviet accomplishments in space.

Aztecs: what options are there other than a what-if scenario? Kill on Spanish unit? Be conquered by 1600? Aztecs had so little contact with other civs in the game that it is difficult to do a hitorically correct UHV.

Americans: The Statue of Liberty is in the US. Now it wasn't built there, but it is not possible to have it built in one place and moved to another. So this is the only reasonable way for a major US symbol to be present in the US.

Wow..... Now here's somebody Firaxis needs! A guy who can make sense out of historically inaccurate information! :king: Well, anyways, you've cleared up a lot of things for me. Thanks!

Rhye's a "he"? :eek: Geez, people need to post there genders in their signatures or something! I end up calling gangsters "ladies" and 5-year old girls "dudes"! :blush:

Why would you be banned? For trolling?

Wow..... Now here's somebody Firaxis needs! A guy who can make sense out of historically inaccurate information! :king: Well, anyways, you've cleared up a lot of things for me. Thanks!

Rhye's a "he"? :eek: Geez, people need to post there genders in their signatures or something! I end up calling gangsters "ladies" and 5-year old girls "dudes"! :blush:

Or maybe you need to stop making assumptions about people's genders.

Or maybe you need to stop making assumptions about people's genders.

No he musn't :) :) :) but he'll better be prepared :confused: :confused: :confused: for the consequences!!!!!!!!!:lol: :lol: :lol:

No he musn't :) :) :) but he'll better be prepared :confused: :confused: :confused: for the consequences!!!!!!!!!:lol: :lol: :lol:

Now i'm tempted to start a poll about my gender. Its really too bad GSoIP* is just a fanciful idea and not reality, it would make for a great consequence :mischief:

*Grapefruit Spoon over IP. Highly sought after method of castrating people on teh internetz.

does Rhye really sound a female name? :crazyeye:

Russia could be: build the appolo program and the Kremlin, it would make it more difficult.

does Rhye really sound a female name?
Honestly, I would think of it as rather indifferent, leaning slightly to female. Plus as your username online, people can never really know.

Actually I'd like to point out the Buddhist texts that suggest that Jesus might have traveled to India and studied Buddhist teachings.

So, it might have been possible for Christianity to have been founded in India if the Buddhists had persuaded him to stay there.

The Buddha vs. Jesus. Yikes. Major religious war!

Actually, the Orthodox Christian tradition (and I'm sure Catholics too) have these books where they record the story of the saints they remember. One of these stories is of St. Joasaph/Ioasaph who was a prince from the East who became Christian - and a recognized saint remembered by the Christians.

Well, the prince in that story is the Buddha himself, who led the same life and Ioasaph! Click here (http://ocafs.oca.org/FeastSaintsLife.asp?FSID=103329) for a short version and here (http://omacl.org/Barlaam/#note) for the whole story.

Giga your complaint doesn't make sense what are you asking for a total historical recreation? I think the UHVs are one of the better designed features of Rhys mod, and it has some things to be improved but I don't think for the reason you listed. My position on UHVs are that 1)if anything Rhy should add more how about 4? per country? 2)the UHVs are too historical...that is while I like recreating historical objectives I also like to project into the what if a bit as well. That is had France become the global superpower and not England what would it have done? In this way you can create UHVs that are zero sum so that if one person gets it another person cannot. For example, a good UHV for both England and France might be to dominate India...only one can and therefore only one of them will be able to win a historical victory. Along this line I think rivalries should be more integral so that a good UHV for France might be to have more culture than Germany expressing the historical attempt by France to keep Germany weak. 3)some of the UHVs are anti-climatic so that if you get one of them the others don't serve much point because you have already won such as Germany whose UHV of control France and Italy by 1870 effectively makes the Germans the winner because they have hegemony over Western and Central Europe. This one always deflates me because Germany is one of the most fun to play as in Rhys but once you get to 1870 the game usually feels like its over....unless you leave France and Italy alone or something.

So I would say some of the UHVs need to be more "open ended" so that the game doesn't just fizzle out as much. Rhys is such a fun and challenging mod for the middle ages, renaissance and beyond that it shouldn't just crap out at the end the way it often does. In otherwords IMO too much of the game is decided by the time you get to the industrial age that it takes away from the overall challenge just when the game should be getting interesting.

A good example of an open ended UHV is the one for the Arabs of spread Islam to 40% of the cities in the world. This is great because the longer you go in the game the more cities there will be and thus the harder it gets even if you control a lot of territory. I feel that 40% maybe too low but thats beside the point, this is the kind of UHV which can make the game interesting and challenging because its vague enough so that to get it, you have to make it a policy to go get it affecting the trajectory of your civ i.e. perhaps you become less militaristic less developed etc etc.

So overall my critique of the mod on UHVs is that it is very good I'd give it high marks here. The UHVs might not be mixed well but they usually have some historical validity behind them.

@Norton II: King? Shouldn't that be Emperor? =)

:lol: I think you're the first person to get that!

Just as a suggestion, I wouldn't mind seeing the Apollo Program on the American UHV along with some AI incentives for a Cold War between Russia and America.

Actually, ya know, I also wouldn't mind having UHVs with more requirements. As long as the score reflected the difficulty of the tasks, that seems reasonable.

i think you miss the point of these UHVs... its not to be exactly what happened in history, but to provide in a fun way, a slightly more difficult counter-history to strive for. it is more fun to try and meet and beat history in civ, especially in RFC so these UHVs are perfect the way they are, though admittedly they sometimes need to be tweaked (ie rome and mongolia)

India: Ok, you are really off here. in the historical india, hinduism, buddhism, jainism, sikhism (though later) and i would argue that that yogic traditions all fit in. and buddhism in NO WAY AT ALL EVER inspired taoism. taoism is a religious/spiritual set of beliefs that existed in china and never really became organized into what we think of as a religion today. it is more like a chinese version of a native/animistic/spiritual mythos. in china taoism and buddhism together helped form the Chan/Zen tradition of buddhism, but buddhism did not "inspire" taoism.

Greece: first to circumnavigate the earth does not mean contacting the mayans... you can go around the straights of magellan. but anyway it seems fine to me. the greek world map was very different than what we know today so it seems to me that having greece try to get to the ends of their world (yes, as in alexander) would inevitably lead to a circumnavigation, had things gone differently.

Persia: This was already covered... they had most of the 7 ancient wonders of the world and would have had all (of the 6 that existed at this point) if they took greece.

Japan: crushed by the koreans or not, in 1500 japan was much stronger and more influential than korea. china was also now in the ming dynasty, which undid all the advances made by the mongols and essentially brought china back, which in game terms would mean that their score decreased, especially due to purposely "forgetting" techs...

Ethiopia: this is definitely hard, but it makes sense to me. i would argue that since christianity started as an offshoot sect of judaism, the coptic christianity of ethiopia could easily be seen as the "true" christianity and therefore could have christianity's holy city.

Germany: well given that germany in-game (and in history) is all about rapid tech progress and advancement, it makes sense that a goal they could have is to develop these unknown technologies, such as fusion... just so you know, genetics has been known for over a century... its not a future tech at all, which is a problem with civ in my opinion, but whatever. the tech should be renamed genetic engineering, which represents the application of the scientific knowledge that has been around since mendel.

Russia: I just have to make sure you are aware... russia won the space race. they got sputnik into space before america got anything into space. after losing, the americans redefined the race to mean "first to the moon" instead of "first to space" so it makes total sense that they would finish it first. and anyway, 1950 is a good date, since saying like 1955,1957, or whatever is just a tiny difference that doesnt matter to me.

Aztecs: actually, mexico was pretty strong in the early 1800s, especially when it was propped up by the french. and although the 1820s is early, it makes sense that they would try to push themselves to be more industrially developed than america, who was starting to go through the industrial revolution around this time.

Americans: ...duh

GigaNerd, King Coltrane just explained pretty clearly what my intentions were.

I chose the 1820s for the Aztecs because around that time they declared independence from Spain.
I'm going to move it to 1860 to make the goal easier anyway.

Hakim the mad has some good ideas IMO, open end UHV do sound nice.

When I play Germany I'm allways bored to death after conquering France during the renaisence, knowing there will not be a large industrial or modern age war.

Often I miss an industrial age war (a WW) or even a modern war.

Maybe a new starting date not focusing on the UHV but on industrial age palying would be nice. BtS was created to focus on the beyond teh sword wars, was it not. I would like to see a 1870 start (Germany and Italy got united in this year) with all colonial and Imperial powers preparing for a WW.

does Rhye really sound a female name? :crazyeye:
I think it has more grassy connotations.

I just don't like the extreme militaristic bent of the German UHVs its as if saying that Nazism was an inevitable outcome for Germany which it wasn't. The Germanys of the 18th century was a country of philosophers, poets and composers e.g. Goethe, Mozart and Kant so IMO there has got to be some way to represent that in German UHVs. Also I think its a little ethnocentric given that I doubt many Germans would like their country be portrayed that way. Heres an idea for a German UHV...since Germany has won many world cups in football maybe they should have to build Wembley by 1990 or whenever?

The Germanys of the 18th century was a country of philosophers, poets and composers e.g. Goethe, Mozart and Kant so IMO there has got to be some way

1772, 1793, 1795.

I just don't like the extreme militaristic bent of the German UHVs its as if saying that Nazism was an inevitable outcome for Germany which it wasn't. The Germanys of the 18th century was a country of philosophers, poets and composers e.g. Goethe, Mozart and Kant so IMO there has got to be some way to represent that in German UHVs. Also I think its a little ethnocentric given that I doubt many Germans would like their country be portrayed that way. Heres an idea for a German UHV...since Germany has won many world cups in football maybe they should have to build Wembley by 1990 or whenever?
Germany has an extremely militaristic (and expansive) history, sure they had philosiphers, but even ignoring the Nazis you could easily include large wars.
As it stands one of their UHV conditions is actually hampered by large conquests, ayways.
The Arabs had many great artists and philosiphers, yet 3/3 of their UHV conditions are conquest oriented (for Arabs conquest is easiest way to spread religion and they are mos likely going to have to conquer at least 1 holy city).

Germany has an extremely militaristic (and expansive) history, sure they had philosiphers, but even ignoring the Nazis you could easily include large wars.

Yeah but so does France. Why not have a UHV for France to conquer Mainz, Milan and Rome by 1800?

And the English had one of the most racist/militaristic societies in the history of the world as evidenced in its daughter civilizations in America and South Africa. So if we are going to start constructing UHVs in such a manner lets do it for every civ and make sure they reveal the true uglinesses. Maybe England should have a UHV where they have no foreigner populations within England or America at 1700.

The Arabs had many great artists and philosiphers, yet 3/3 of their UHV conditions are conquest oriented (for Arabs conquest is easiest way to spread religion and they are mos likely going to have to conquer at least 1 holy city).

Yes and I am not totally happy with the Arab UHVs either in particular because they are very easy...conquer NAfrica/Spain and India and you're there. I like the spread Islam one but I think the other two are a bit repetitive.
I'm also not sure you can get to 40% just by conquest. I've tried that and it usually doesn't work because of stability issues. The best way is to build some cities especially in India and missionize which does reflect a certain historical reality.

1772, 1793, 1795.

And as I'm sure you know the partitions of Poland were far more a swipe at France than anything else. And if you are going to hold Germany accountable for this why not Russia as well. So wouldn't that just prove the militarism of Slavic culture? No this is much to simple a view given that the partition while exceptional for its time was only moderately so. There were tons of little states who were consumed at this time in just such a manner by states that were none German. You could read the "Age of Empires" and the Age of Imperialism by Eric Hobsbawm for more about that. Besides that one can assert the claim that neither Prussia and Austria could claim the mantle of German leadership since both were defined by large ethnic minorities of non Germans including Hungarians in Austria and Poles in Prussia. So why can't the partition be seen as an example of pole on pole violence?

I stand by my original assertion Germany was no more militaristic than any other for much of its history and having its UHVs be defined by a scant 70 years of it seems to be "unrealistic" and ahistorical. The extreme militarism of Germany had far more to do with the colonial powers of European neighbors like Russia, England and France than it did with anything innate about Germany.

Goals must be varied, they can't all be of the same types.
And if one european civ deserves a militaristic victory, it's Germany.

Goals must be varied, they can't all be of the same types.
And if one european civ deserves a militaristic victory, it's Germany.

The first part of this seems to contradict the latter. Germanys UHV are not varied it is all conquest conquest conquest and it is very boring. Being the first to finish the tech tree is sort of like who cares, so what and why bother. If you suceed in conquering Russia, Scandanavia, England, France, Italy and Greece who else is gonna have a chance to finish it before the Germans...the Aztecs? LOL The current UHVs are very anticlimatic because achieving one necessarily means you are more likely to complete the others. That is if you conquer France, Italy and Greece on or before 1870 then taking down Russia should be no problem. Moreover the advantage of having what should be highly industrialized and technologically advanced cities should make it very easy to out tech all comers, and if its not then you just need to build them up a little.

And if one european civ deserves a militaristic victory, it's Germany

Yes but if you had read what I said you'd know there was nothing inherent about German militarism and no logic to them developing Nazism as opposed to anyone else. Perhaps thats a Euro myth I don't know. What I do know is that both countries before and after Germany tried to unifying the continent under their flag including the Italians, French and Russians so why should Euro domination be a GERMAN goal? I don't have a problem with some militaristic goal being thrown in there but as it is now the goals are too unbalancing to the game and too easy to get. Its really not that hard to take down France when it only has 3-4 cities, and Italy isn't a challenge either. I think different goals that touch on some the same themes would be more challenging and preserve more of the raison d'etre of playing.

My problem with your German UHVs is that unlike some of your others these are the least imaginative, and I assumed they were the product of fatigue over programming and so you just throw the easiest ones you could think of together. IMO they are a bit lazy.

What I would suggest is

1)a militaristic goal of some sort-I'd suggest either Ally with or conquer either Russia or France or ally with one to conquer the other.

1b)Be elected to the head of United Nations-one could get this either through conquest and control of the number of needed electors or through skillful diplomacy. Given that Russia and France tend to have a great deal of emnity towards Germany this could be difficult and could be made more so. This would in effect replicate the German push to unify Europe under its flag and doesn't imply some of the racist overtones about Germans that the current UHVs do.

2)found 3 corporations(to simulate the real life import of IG Farben, Siemens et al

3)Have either 5 or 7 cities(or some other number) with a requisite amount of culture

3b)Have no sizable ethnic minorities(flexible on how to negotiate this) within "historic Germany" which could include greater Poland to simulate the crusader teutonic knights efforts to Germanize and Christianize the eastern slavs

4)be first to finish tech tree and or get to modern era. I think both are good but the issue of whether the latter is to easy seems possible

5)Rename the Broadway wonder "Opera" and move it up earlier in the game and make Germany have to build it to simulate the popularity of German composers e.g. Mozart

6)Have a higher GNP and aggregate industrial production than the regions of France, Britain, and Russia combined(Would this be possible?? It would be interested to find out and would push Germany naturally to hyper industrialize as in real life)

I could continue to argue the point that Germany doesn't deserve super aggressive UHVs but I'd rather suggest some that reflect more of a blend and assume that Rhye merely slacked off a little on these to finish the mod sooner. I don't think any of these are completely unfeasible or exceptionally difficult to implement into the mod as compared to many of the other UHVs. Some may be too hard, or unfeasible but I think that can be tweaked, and I included a list to let others decide which of these on this list they feel would be the best in the mod. I'd like to hear from Rhye as to why he will or why and his reasoning because I have noticed from him a real tendency to drag his heels on modification despite his supposed claims to be "open to suggestions".

The mod has been wide open to suggestions from the beginning of 2006 to the release of BTS. It's widely known that the major development is over.
http://forums.civfanatics.com/showpost.php?p=4248943&postcount=2
It would be plain stupid to change basic stuff again after magazines have published strategy guides.

And for variation, there is no contradiction. Certain civs have more militaristic goals, others have colonization or cultural or trade, etc.
It's clear that a diplomatic victory or one about corporations (which would be BTS-only, by the way) are inappropriate.

P.S. There is no Broadway in the mod

Goals must be varied, they can't all be of the same types.
And if one european civ deserves a militaristic victory, it's Germany.
This is very important.
with this mod you have the chance to test yourself with many different game-styles, from buildier to conquest.
This is a great value for the mod and extremely fun to play.

However one of the criticism I could make is that the "lenght" of various UHVs is very different.

Many civilizations had their peak (represented by the UHV) but in some cases they did have different "souls" in different ages.
For example Germany was the core of Holy Roman Empire and later on after a long time of almost non-existence as a state reborn as modern Germany.

To cover this type of evlotion it will be nice to have not only one UHV but two.
For example let's take the Roman (it seems one of the most well known).
We could keep the original UHV as it is (maybe twik it a bit), and add a second one based on reconquering a full control of mediterranean... it also has some historical value (Bizantium's reconquest of the west in 6th centuryAD and Italy in the 1st half of 20th century)

Players could have two dates to join their selected Civ.

What do you think?

I say ban Giganerd for Trolling, Arrogance, Failing to check his facts then insulting other people for not knowing and posting a dumb non-contrusctrive whiny post.

Phew! The only thing that compares to this guy is "Urkraine the great" Cossack.

I say ban Giganerd for Trolling, Arrogance, Failing to check his facts then insulting other people for not knowing and posting a dumb non-contrusctrive whiny post.

I guess we shall have to ban you as well for failing to check facts since it was I not Giganerd that made the post. ".....And the land of of the NOT free"

Pretty typical Euro-American response to dissent...violent repression. I guess Amer-Euros haven't changed much in 60 years

It would be plain stupid to change basic stuff again after magazines have published strategy guides.

See this is my problem with you on development as evidenced here. I personally would not review your that high partly because I have indicated on many occasions how and why I think it is unfinished. Now I realize that you get many good reviews from many sources but so too do the worst garbage films. Getting good reviews is not a sign you've accomplished something, getting good reviews from well know harsh critics is. When you can win those people over then you can rest on your laurels a big until then from my point of view you've got work to do.

And I say that because from the beginning of mod creation for Civ2 I have felt that most were inferior, subpar and pathetic half attempts and were only lauded because most people couldn't really tell the difference between garbage and great. Rhys and fall is the most promising modpack I've seen because it shows creativity, imagination and praticality but it hasn't resolved all its issues and I guess its clear that it never will because Rhye is "stuck in his ways" which only encourages me to program my own mod which will outdo rhyes. Given how easy it is to please the Civ community when given something really outstanding they should be shocked.

Many civilizations had their peak (represented by the UHV) but in some cases they did have different "souls" in different ages.
For example Germany was the core of Holy Roman Empire and later on after a long time of almost non-existence as a state reborn as modern Germany.

To cover this type of evlotion it will be nice to have not only one UHV but two.
For example let's take the Roman (it seems one of the most well known).
We could keep the original UHV as it is (maybe twik it a bit), and add a second one based on reconquering a full control of mediterranean... it also has some historical value (Bizantium's reconquest of the west in 6th centuryAD and Italy in the 1st half of 20th century)

Players could have two dates to join their selected Civ.

What do you think?

Well I live by the dictum that the best engineered is the simpliest and therefore you shouldn't over complicate things if it can be helped. I like your idea but rather than having 2sets of UHVs I'd rather have 2civs respawn in the same area so that Germany might start off as the Holy Roman Empire and if or when it collapsed which happens frequently, it would respawn as "Germany" and would have a completely different set of UHVs. This allows for exactly what you are talking about the HRE would naturally have different UHVs than "Imperial Germany" and it would allow that Germany to maintain the distinctly militaristic UHVs that people seem to want. However, the HRE could have UHVs which make the game for dynamic to play Germany with which is what I'd like to see.

To go further with this I think you could adapt this for other Civs as well. The Roman Empire could respawn as "modern" Italy. The Vikings could respawns as the Swedes and so on and so forth. This might solve some other problems as well. But I think you've got a good point.

See this is my problem with you on development as evidenced here. I personally would not review your that high partly because I have indicated on many occasions how and why I think it is unfinished. Now I realize that you get many good reviews from many sources but so too do the worst garbage films. Getting good reviews is not a sign you've accomplished something, getting good reviews from well know harsh critics is. When you can win those people over then you can rest on your laurels a big until then from my point of view you've got work to do.

Really, do you realize that it doesn't make sense?

Well I live by the dictum that the best engineered is the simpliest and therefore you shouldn't over complicate things if it can be helped. I like your idea but rather than having 2sets of UHVs I'd rather have 2civs respawn in the same area so that Germany might start off as the Holy Roman Empire and if or when it collapsed which happens frequently, it would respawn as "Germany" and would have a completely different set of UHVs. This allows for exactly what you are talking about the HRE would naturally have different UHVs than "Imperial Germany" and it would allow that Germany to maintain the distinctly militaristic UHVs that people seem to want. However, the HRE could have UHVs which make the game for dynamic to play Germany with which is what I'd like to see.

To go further with this I think you could adapt this for other Civs as well. The Roman Empire could respawn as "modern" Italy. The Vikings could respawns as the Swedes and so on and so forth. This might solve some other problems as well. But I think you've got a good point.

obviously you have not checked if this same thing has already been proposed here...

See this is my problem with you on development as evidenced here. I personally would not review your that high partly because I have indicated on many occasions how and why I think it is unfinished. Now I realize that you get many good reviews from many sources but so too do the worst garbage films. Getting good reviews is not a sign you've accomplished something, getting good reviews from well know harsh critics is. When you can win those people over then you can rest on your laurels a big until then from my point of view you've got work to do.

And I say that because from the beginning of mod creation for Civ2 I have felt that most were inferior, subpar and pathetic half attempts and were only lauded because most people couldn't really tell the difference between garbage and great. Rhys and fall is the most promising modpack I've seen because it shows creativity, imagination and praticality but it hasn't resolved all its issues and I guess its clear that it never will because Rhye is "stuck in his ways" which only encourages me to program my own mod which will outdo rhyes. Given how easy it is to please the Civ community when given something really outstanding they should be shocked.


There's no way I can win everybody's acclaim, as everyone has got his own point of view, like me "stuck in my ways".
So, yes, I consider the release with BTS and the following reviews a sign of accomplishment, simply because in this moment I'm not paid and I could stop improving the mod anytime.

However, if you examine the new patch, you'll notice that some of your suggestions about stability are included.
If this isn't enough, well, you are free to program your own mod as you say; I'm sure the community will be glad to have another choice.