Discussion in 'Civ4 - The Second Revolution' started by GarretSidzaka, Sep 13, 2006.
Would this unit be only for USA 'n friends?
Nah, sounds more like a universal unit.
well, someone should make a pickup truck for a unit!!
Now THAT I would really like to see. Paticularly a pickup truck defeating a tank, I can just see the battle in my head.
I figure there could be two versions, one with a chain gun, and another with a bazooka. They'd get bonuses against gunpowder units and armored units, respectively.
OK, I'm going to request a truck!
yeah a technical would be awesome...
btw i wonder why they call them technicals? ...
maybe they picked at random !
if the US army named them, then probably (and it probably involves alcohol too)
It is general Pietrus that found the name perhaps.
I think it's comic irony. For some of the third world, that is high-tech. If you think I'm kidding, I must inform you that I saw a documentary filmed about a movie theatre in some backwater nation. The "theatre" was a normal-sized TV in a room withj folding chairs in it.
yeah, the astonishing poverty of the third world is staggering for westerners (which i assume that everyone in this forums are)
unfortunately for us (depending how you look), i envision the western ideals of consumerism will eventually crumble, along with it the middle class. I feel that when i die an old man, i will be living in a third world slum, along with the rest of the teeming masses.
We(sterners) have huge responsibility in the current state of the world. The main reason is/was assymetric trade relations. Particularly, Africa still suffers from the slave trade and colonial borders. Actually, WTO tends to balance things with globalization but it often seems to be at the expense of western people ( and advantage of western companies ). I don't think consumerism will crumble but natural resources is going to be the weak link of the current system.
yeah, hence the endless slum scenario. the highest population density regions of Earth also happen to be the lowest resource consuming population. What that means is the ghettos ect all have more people living there with less consumption.
If mankind even survives the Greenhouse Cliff, this will be the new form of our "cities"
Consumerism and natural resources seem to be pretty stable in the short term. Like always, the poor will get hit with any problems that arise. When peak oil comes, the cost for the biofuels will be on their shoulders. As global warming increases the severity of hurricanes and snowstorms, the rich will move to the safe areas, and the poor will only be able to afford the dangerous areas they leave behind. Anything the government can handle it will, by providing contracts to rich people and taxing the poor. This is where the short term instability lies. The rich don't really have anything to tie them down in the US. Countries like China or India would be happy to accept them. They can feel free to draw as much money out of the country as possible, as quickly as possible, and flee went the country collapses like the Soviet Union. Keeping us perpetually at war is a good way to keep those no-bid contracts flowing until the country has been bled dry and mass poverty ensues. As soon as they move their investments to China or India, you get mass unemployment, like the Great Depression. Eventually the country will rebuild, and the cycle will start all over again.
What I personally think should be done is to keep globalism, but shift it to a more regulated form that has the average man in mind.
Part of the problem is that while economic giant countries like the USA try to help the rest of the world, some of it isn't necessarily the right way. The aid is too centered around foreign investment and spread of corporations. Since they come from far wealthier countries, they can afford to pay workers better wages than the local businesses, and can afford to import cheaper capital. But the local businesses suffer as a result, so while certain men employeed by or investing in the foreign corporations prosper, the country's economy as a whole does not grow.
In the USA and similar nations, the other extreme is causing problems. On paper, economic growth is substantial, because enough businesses are still based in the USA and they are still measured and taxed, but the effect of the profits on most citizens is small, because most of the money is flowing overseas. A few American corporations prosper, but the average American workers are finding it harder to find jobs. And that's not just the menial labor anymore, either. Now skilled labor is being outsourced as well.
I believe the UN should be more empowered and take a proactive role at regulating world trade. Rather than being invested in, countries should simply be paid to develop their own business and infrastructure. I do think we need to keep some degree of New World Order, because as long as nations can negotiate and trade with each other, they are less likely to start wars. But there should be more of a safety net to solve what problems do exist.
I think you should read a book entitles Confessions of an Economic Hitman. Reading that pretty much wiped my slate clean of any vestiges of belief in the "Globalization" sceme. "Globalization is basically what norseman2 said will happen in the western countries. But it has been happening hardcore in the "third world" since the fifties and sixties. The United States and it's Investors and Corporations simply purchase the ruling class of already impoverished nations for cheap bribes, and then the ruling class signs over the rights to the nations resourses and workforce.
Well, with regards to the problems it causes in the third world, I completely agree with that, but I guess my question is, how would you see to fix that? Simply regressing to the sort of state-centric, mercantile economics that ultimately brought on WWI would hardly improve things.
At least in the first world, there is stability between nations, because they fight less over resources. Not that I am one of those quixotic idealists that think that any peace is desireable, even a one of vast wealth inequalities, but to return politics and econonomics to parochiality is not going to fix the situation.
In cases such as that of the Zapatistas, they are right to want more control over their own resources, but I see it more in terms of what all people deserve, rather than what individual regions deserve. A weak nation wanting more power and resources in its control is understandable. But when a nation that is already rich and powerful still wants more, it stops being patriotism and starts being imperialism.
Profiteering at the expense of those less fortunate visibly occurs whether the aristocrats belong to to a modern, private corporation, or the European Monarcies of the colonial age, but at least when it's multilateral and wealth is divided among countries, rather than nationalized, world powers fight less over the green pastures, and while being economically oppressed by other countries is unfortunate, so is being politically and militarily opressed.
I'm not saying that this situation is perfect, or even desireable. Hell, I'd like few things better than to murder every DeBeers executive and dye my protest banners red with their flowing blood. Still, I hold that improvement should be progressive, not regressive. We should probably switch from global capitalism to some sort of global socialism, but to adopt a system with no global elements whatsoever isn't even amiss, it's just flat-out impossible. The technology people have at their disposal these days means that regardless of what political measures pass, it is plenty easy to reach out and touch someone.
Government regulation of capitalistic behavior dominating this technology is not a very ideal solution, because governments will fall prey to capitalistic behavior themselves. The only body I can see fit for such regulation would be an empowered UN. The advantage of that plan would be that the members' own greed would cause them to regulate each other, rather than behave excessively, as they would when left to themselves. And while thus far, that sounds like capitalism, that's just the means. The ends would be redistributing wealth amoung poorer people of the world, and it would help that, instead of basing the redistribution around mere nationstates, it would be a multinational body that could look at people and their living standards as a whole, and decide what all people, themselves, deserve.
Back on subject of the mod, could we remove the international peacekeepers popup that flashes each turn? It slows the game down tremendously, and after the first time seeing it, it's not necessary to remind me I got the unit, as I'm always asked where to move it, anyway.
that peacekeeps pop up i wouldn't mind removing after its first showing. The problem is, when Second revolution 3.0 starts production, we will need competant coders to help us
as to your enjoyable rant, your heart is in the right place, but i don't think that the UN is up to the snuff of being a world government. I mean they can't even do much to help some poor ass countries from getting slaughtered, i don't think they will be the solution to the problems of man.
That's the current state of the UN. Maybe if it actually had teeth, it would do its job better. And while of course, it is only as strong as its member states let it be, I could see many of them contributing more to the UN in the future, as most members are pissed at the USA's new unilateral intervention, and could see reason to counter it. Not that I'm optimistic, but that would be the best way to do things, and that's how the UN currently handles rogue states like North Korea. If dealing with a much more powerful rogue, like the new USA, they would need to be more empowered, but could still use similar tactics.
One more thing about the mod itself. I've noticed that the bit of the core game that asks what you want to build in a city the momenht you capture it is not present here. Its absense makes the game more confusing. What happened to it.
hmm im not sure. there will have to be some recoding in the newer version. I would like to focus on simple python mods and merging existing Mod Comps.
The tricky part will be trying to find mod comps that will complement the theme of the game, and not detract or distract from it. Also i want to keep the turn lag short and maintain "vanilla style" unit balance and tech progression.
Perhaps we should lengthen the tech tree? should we greatly modify tech tree costs, or leave it more or less the same?
Wonders beyond the support wonders?
Separate names with a comma.