GRAPHICS: Winston Churchill Animated Leaderhead

[ccm01]

Winston Churchill Animated Leaderhead v 1.0


Made By: ccm01

Description:
This modification replaces Queen Elizabeth with Winston Churchill as the leader of England. Only the PCX and FLC files have been changed. If you desire to use this modification, you will have to edit the civ3mod.bic yourself to change the English leader's name to Winston Churchill. The facial expression changes are very subtle, but are accurate reflections of the leader's mood. I also opted to not make modifications to the images to represent the four different time periods in the game (this will come later if I become more motivated).

Installation:
Please back up your files before using this. If you blow up your machine after installing this, don't blame me (as you were advised to back up your files). To use, simply extract and copy the contents of the archived folders into the corresponding folders in the Civilization III\Art directory (i.e. Churchill\Advisors\LZ_all.pcx to ...\Civilization III\Art\Advisors) and say "Yes" to overwrite the existing files.

You can download it here (2.02 MB):

http://ccm01.sphosting.com

Hope you enjoy.

ccm01

 

[MetalChild]

looks nice to me, and i also liked the hitler and stalin additions.

but as there was once a fair number of women among all the civs' leaders, i think with kicking out catherine (russia) and now even the english queen we're RAPIDLY running out of female leaders... couldn't you do a couple of new ones next time?

never mind, just kidding.

although, some more women actually WOULD be nice.

 

[Wolfshanze]

The women to men ratio of national leaders is just another fine example of Sid Meier's political correctness.

Though 50% of the Earth's population may indeed be female, certainly there has NOT been a 50% ratio of female national leaders over the years.

Like including Communism but not Fascism, giving as many women national roles (even when they never were, such as Joan of Arc), one must wonder just how much adherance Firaxis has to the "Political Correctness" crowd!

 

[MetalChild]

well, i do agree with you in your point that firaxis' motives for putting that many female leaders in there were most obviously their need for political correctness (what else, i might ask).

then again, i also agree on the point (actually mine ) that more female leaders provide some additional game atmosphere. well, of whatever nature, but i like it in some way.

speaking of the leaders... generally, i don't like most of the default ones. joan of arc fofr france instead of napoleon is ridiculous IMO, and catherine for russia is even a tad worse.

queen elizabeth/victoria (i don't remember which one actually is ion the game, right now...) - well, ok. if they really like her, they can have it like this. thinking of significant english great leaders there's nobody coming into my mind anyways... but i'm no historian after all.

err...what was this thread originally about?

 

[ccm01]

Elizabeth is certainly a worthy leader for this game. I am basically trying to make alternative leaders for era specific mods. My primary goal is the World War II leaders (if you haven't figured that out yet)...

Again, thanks for the interest in my work...

ccm01

 

[Selous]

yea ... elizabeth would be an excellent leader! ... and when she was a young queen she was soooo beautiful!!

and i dont think that the addition of women as leaders was any kind of "political correctness" but mebey making none of them striking beautiful was? or u could say the fact that u couldnt choose to be male or female to be a bit of lazyness on firaxis? ... but keep these head mods comming in!! they are GREAT!

 

[das]

Joan d' Ark WAS NEVER A RULER! We must make Louis the Great or Good Old Charlie the Gaullian the French ruler!

 

[MetalChild]

...and i don't see any point why prefer joan of arc instead of napoleon, either.

that is: joan of arc as the french leader is as ridiculous as catherine for russia.

no, i don't hate women.

 

[datarush]

Isn't it true if i put in Stalin's head files that I'm eliminating the file that has Churchill in it? I think it would be great if you could put together one mod file with Stalin, Churchill, Napoleon, Washington, Hitler, etc... It would be like an alternate Civ universe!

 

[Wolfshanze]

Stalin and Churchill are two completely seperate mods... each NATION gets one ruler, so England can have Churchill OR Elizabeth... France can have Napoleon OR Joan, Russia can have Stalin OR Catherine... those are the only choices to make.

You can have every nation with a WWII leader if you so desire.

 

[Dan Magaha FIRAXIS]

Originally posted by Wolfshanze
The women to men ratio of national leaders is just another fine example of Sid Meier's political correctness.

Though 50% of the Earth's population may indeed be female, certainly there has NOT been a 50% ratio of female national leaders over the years.

Like including Communism but not Fascism, giving as many women national roles (even when they never were, such as Joan of Arc), one must wonder just how much adherance Firaxis has to the "Political Correctness" crowd!

The game is not now, and has never been strictly about historical realism. If it were, perhaps we'd have a game laden with brutality, slavery, terrorism, and other horrors of humankind's past. And while some of you may think that including these things into the game would be a good thing, there are myriad reasons we don't.

Dan

 

[datarush]

Thanks
I think what is a bit confusing is the Churchill mod file pack seems to have more in it than just the files for him, although now that I've looked at the Hitler mod it was a matter of one file having folders and the other just files in one group. The Hitler mod appears to be just for Germany tho so I can see now how it works.

Walt

 

[Wolfshanze]

Wow... someone from Firaxis is reading up over here!

So why is it that the Call to Power games had Slavery and Fascism built-into their "Civ" games, but the "real" Civ line never has?

Obviously the CTP games still managed to gain a following, even with slavery and fascism in the game(s)?!?!?!

Certainly my own Fascist Patches have always been popular with the Civ line of games.

The history of man has had plenty of dark spots on it's record... I don't see that whitewashing of history does anybody any good.

Certainly warfare for 6,000 years isn't healthy, but that's included in Civilization! I guess it's just "selective" picking that gets my goat. The ability to drop a 10-megaton nuclear weapon on a neighboring Civ is okay, or representing the brutality of communism is okay, but the ability to have a fascist state is not.

Just seems like faulty logic that I've never understood Microprose or Firaxis to be so selective.

" The game is not now, and has never been strictly about historical realism. If it were, perhaps we'd have a game laden with brutality, slavery, terrorism, and other horrors of humankind's past. And while some of you may think that including these things into the game would be a good thing, there are myriad reasons we don't. "

So why is nuclear warfare and communism okay in the game, but fascism was verboten?

 

[MetalChild]

i don't think that firaxis' reasons for leaving out some things and some others not have that much to do with pretent political correctness.

it rather seems that these were design decisions that had to be made, e.g. for they didn't want to have too many government types at once. so they had to pick some of them, and they picked those that they thought were the ones more important/significant/whatever. and they probably had a look on what was in the original civ I and what not.

such design decisions simply *have* to be made, and there has never been any computer game that made all of its players completely happy.

however, if a game offers that great ability to easily getting modified to meet each player's personal preferences, i think that it is not necessary at all to gripe at those players actually doing it.

and when they want to have a new government that is called fascism, then let them goddamn have it.

this is no flame at firaxis, of course, but rather at those guys saying stuff like 'when firaxis left it out, they had sensible reasons for it - so at any rate it's wrong of you adding it'.

 

[Dan Magaha FIRAXIS]

Originally posted by Wolfshanze
Wow... someone from Firaxis is reading up over here!

So why is it that the Call to Power games had Slavery and Fascism built-into their "Civ" games, but the "real" Civ line never has?

Obviously the CTP games still managed to gain a following, even with slavery and fascism in the game(s)?!?!?!

Certainly my own Fascist Patches have always been popular with the Civ line of games.

The history of man has had plenty of dark spots on it's record... I don't see that whitewashing of history does anybody any good.

Certainly warfare for 6,000 years isn't healthy, but that's included in Civilization! I guess it's just "selective" picking that gets my goat. The ability to drop a 10-megaton nuclear weapon on a neighboring Civ is okay, or representing the brutality of communism is okay, but the ability to have a fascist state is not.

Just seems like faulty logic that I've never understood Microprose or Firaxis to be so selective.

" The game is not now, and has never been strictly about historical realism. If it were, perhaps we'd have a game laden with brutality, slavery, terrorism, and other horrors of humankind's past. And while some of you may think that including these things into the game would be a good thing, there are myriad reasons we don't. "

So why is nuclear warfare and communism okay in the game, but fascism was verboten?

Well, for one thing, in Civ III, nukes are significantly less a factor than in previous Civ games (and this is something a lot of people disagree with). For a lot of people, nukes were a goal in Civ II, they were almost glorified. I don't think this is the case with Civ III, but let me know if you feel differently.

Secondly, and this is not meant to knock CTP or CTP2, but the potential Civ III audience is significantly larger than with either of the CTP titles. CTP2 sold less than 30,000 units to be precise. I don't chalk that up to the inclusion of slavery or fascism at all, but it's a bit of a stretch to compare the CTP series to the Civ series in this regard.

It's not a coincidence or a mistake that Civ III is the kind of game parents feel comfortable buying for their kids.

The tone of Civ III was intentionally humorous, harkening back to the original Civilization. I personally saw it as an opportunity to highlight the more upbeat stuff and to have some fun, and I don't think any rational person would classify slavery or Adolf Hitler as "fun".

Dan

 

[Wolfshanze]

Dan,

" The tone of Civ III was intentionally humorous, harkening back to the original Civilization. I personally saw it as an opportunity to highlight the more upbeat stuff and to have some fun, and I don't think any rational person would classify slavery or Adolf Hitler as "fun". "

Well, I have to agree with you there, but I come from the old "grognard" wargamers camp, not from the casual family gamers camp, so I've always looked at Civ more as "wargame lite" than as a fun family game... I guess it's all a matter of perspective.

I can see no Adolf Hitler (obviously controversial), but I guess I'll never understand why Communism, which surely was "an Evil Empire" as Reagan put it, was included while Fascism (with or without Hitler) never has been included.

Still, I don't mean to complain, I have always prefered the Civ series to CTP, but the inclusion of Communism with the exclusion of Fascism has always seemed odd to me. Civ3 is a ton of fun, and I'm glad you at least left in editors for us to do with it as we like, so have a beer on me!

 

[Dan Magaha FIRAXIS]

Wolf,

We're seriously threadjacking here but it's an interesting discussion. I'll summarize by saying we wanted to try to satisfy hardcore fans and still keep the game family-friendly and accessible at the same time. Hopefully we succeeded.

As for the editor, it's also not a coincidence that the government page is one of the few pages with functioning add and delete buttons in the shipping version of the editor

Enjoy, and thanks for a constructive and thoughtful discussion!


Dan

 

[J C Woodman]

Originally posted by Dan Magaha FIRAXIS


The game is not now, and has never been strictly about historical realism. If it were, perhaps we'd have a game laden with brutality, slavery, terrorism, and other horrors of humankind's past. And while some of you may think that including these things into the game would be a good thing, there are myriad reasons we don't.

Dan

Thank you! I agree completely! These mod packs (all of them) alow us to adjust the game to our respective tastes, and while civ3 may not be all things to all folks it is a supurb effort, AND with these packs we can do what we want. I for example dont want to think of the Germans and Russians as being singularly identified w/ Adolf and Joe S. BUT do see the place for them as an option. As it has been stated @ length throughout these sites... This is not a dedicated "war Game", or some sort of world history sim, though lets remember... IT IS A GAME!! If ya dont like it Mod-it! Or play somthing else! Damn it! And... oh yeh... great job on da Winnie image! :slay:

 

[ccm01]

Thanks for the compliments on my work...

This place is much better for feedback than Apolyton, which has become somewhat of a black hole as far as I'm concerned...

 

[skywalker]

Yea, nothing happens at apolyton anymore. I've stopped going there entirely; I don't like wasting my time. They're not even sending out their newsletter anymore, which was the only thing they had over this place.