Search results

No, the turn count just starts again from the beginning :snowcool:

I disagree. All this change makes is that you have to build a lot more artillery and the importance of strategic positions is diminished because the artillery can't bombard enemies from strategic positions anymore. Civ3 artillery had collateral damage and you couldn't rush a enemy civ with...

Have to agree. The siege weapon system in Civ4 sucks. Hope someone could mod the Civ3 siege weapon bombardment to Civ4. In my opinion the range should be 1 for early siege weapons and cannons and 2 for artillery and battleships.

Great idea. I don't know is it moddable ?

I like the idea, but I can't mod in Civ4 yet.

You mean Hungarians (Not Ukrainians ;) ).

Nuh Uh does make good points.

Screenshot ?

Well, that is nothing compared to that we Finns get called Scandinavian most of the time ! Now that is an insult ! :D

Ok, first of all garric stop sending me death threats you silly kindergartner. (Side note: I agree with you on Stalin.) Arg.. I can't believe I even have to defend myself from this. Ok, last "you are a nazi post or PM" I answer: I am not saying Jews controlled the world in 1930s ! I am...

Huh huh, there is so much BS in this small post so in short: 1) I do have a lot of sympathy for the German people for how they were treated after WW1, but that doesn't make me a Nazi. And to make sure you understand: I am not a Nazi. 2)The Soviet Union attacked Finland twice in the second...

Well, at least we don't smoke crack all day. :p

Kremlin could give a significant defensive bonus to the city it is build in or be a unifying national symbol (what gives the 50% benefit) ? Half-jokingly: I could even believe that the American school system and their media teached to some Americans that the Soviet Union build the Kremlin, but...

Couldn't have said it any better. But you didn't have to move your artillery inside the city. If the infantry died in the city you would still have your artillery. Now you lose the artillery even if you still have infantry units outside the city.

Oh, come on ! A FACT is a FACT. Why do I meet online so many AMERICANS who have these, in my view point, "brainwashed" opinions that you can't say something what is true, because it might insult someone or that someone in history used it as a point ? And if we continue on this road, you do know...

And the Germans fought incredibly well also and had a extremely high moral. They continued to fight even to the point that all other nations in the world except Japan were at war against them. And I have to add that after living in Germany in the period after the Versailles peace treaty I also...

Just to pump out more arguments in this thread: Didn't Stalin and the Soviet leadership kill almost 22 million people in the first years of their leadership ? And to my knowledge the Romanov dynasty didn't Mass slaughter it's people. Even as the Romanov dynasty ruled for centuries over very...

Yes, You are correct. And a good point. "If I were you, I'd rethink using that as a foundation for an argument" Wow, that sounds like a threat ? Interesting. I'll take a step further and repeat that comment: When Germany's leadership surrendered there were no foreign soldiers on German soil...

The Russo-Japanese war was a greatly successful naval war for Japan, but as a land war in Russian Eastern Asia it was a huge disaster. After the initial successes in the land war in Eastern Siberia against the small Russian garrisons there the Japanese land war was a huge disaster when the main...

Very true and also the Japanese did their industrialization faster than the Europeans or the Americans, but I want to add that the Japanese did copy the industrial technologies from the Europeans, but fast started to even improve the technologies by themselves. Also I want to add that the...