CivIV: Warlords - New Leaders shown here!

guerra, but surely italians (includin me) and spaniards would still have a more north african look about them today? i heard that it was greeks and indigenous etruscans and volscians etc who made up the southern italians.
 
Looks like Babylon isn't going to make the cut again. Just tell me what is the use of having 3 Leaders/Civ if basic Civs like the Vikings, the Babylonians and the Iroquois aren't included????

Anyway, let's just wait and see, if the expansion won't include AT LEAST some of what I listed above, Civ has lost one of its greatest fans... and I'm more than certain that I won't be the only one...
 
then what was your idea of vassal states? what was it and what would it do?
 
Smidgey said:
Augustus' full name was Augustus Gaius Julius Caesar Octavianus. Just to clear it up.

Anyway, I am so pleased he is in the game, a much better Roman leader than Julius! I think his leaderhead should be younger than it is, considering there is no portrature of Augustus older than 35 (we presume). He looks older than that in that leaderhead. They captured Julius Caesar's portrature quite well in previous civ games. If you want to know what Augustus looks like heres the famous Prima Porta statue:

http://www.students.sbc.edu/smith04/AugPrimPort.jpg

Of course, it is an idealised portrate of him, but so are the busts that Julius is based upon.
Click to expand...

Romans did not have full name as we intend it nowadays.
 
I normally don't double post in a single thread, but I feel it is necessary at this time. I thought it would be nice to point out a few things that should be obvious to people, but sadly are not. Is this do to a dehumanizing of today's youth? I have no idea, that's a topic all on its own that should not be discussed on a public forum - due to its complex nature - anyway. Plus, I think this could be a wonderful topic to write an essay on. If I do write one, I would be more then happy to send an advanced copy to a few people before I send it out to print or hand it to my students for fun.

What should be obvious is this : It doens't matter if it's just a video game. It's a tasteless act on the part of the developers. Don't change the argument to fit your response and commit an obvious fallacy. There is a difference between teaching a young one about murderers in history class, and allowing them to play the part of one in a video game. (again, lets make it clear that I'm talking about REAL people. No GTA referenced rebuttals please) This isn't a case of censorship, this is a lack of respect to the people who are still with us today. This is not "selective history" as I heard one or more people say. That is a very dangerous concept that has some very heavy weight. This is about giving the necessary time for old wounds to heal. The 20th century may seem like a distant time for some of you on here, but for myself and perhaps a few others, it's all too clear. Hell, I'm only 28 and I understand.

What perked my fingers to do this evil double post, was the comment by Silver 2039. It wasn't what he said, but the fact that not a single person responded to his sickly ignorant attitude, "And I agree. Big whoop 100 million faceless, nameless indivudals died 60 years ago whatever...how does that affect me now?" My God! You need help.

*side note*
Churchill has nothing on Elizabeth I. I'm not going to argue that point. History books do a fine enough job of that.
*end side note*

I understand why Stalin was placed in the game. Hell, the key demographic are teens and early 20's who think communism and the soviet flag are cool. I'm shocked by how many hammer and sickle t-shirts I see. If that same person was wearing a nazi symbol on his shirt he would be beat to a pulp. Lenin destroyed the idea of communism. It was the proletariat who were supposed to lead the revolution. Fine, lets all play as Stalin. I hope the collectors edition comes with a free mustache and a pair of blood soaked hands.

Anyway, I'm sorry for the double post. I believe that's a form of trolling. I just thought this would be a good waste of time before I go about business. Making sure Stalin is not in this game is a very easy task for the properly motivated individual. However, I feel it's the right of the company to place him in the game. I was simply saying that it was sick and tasteless. If someone does want to start something, I would be more then willing to use my weight to assist in your plight. It could be fun and I love exercising some passive power. Don't all of you turn into neo-nazis too quickly.

Love,
Broken Clock
 
Wow, I feel like an idiot. I was thinking Kutuzov not Zhukov. Sorry about that.

and back to the Italian thing. Greeks, Etruscans, and the like are white. When the native peoples of Italy mixed with Moorish and North African invaders, thats when they became darker. So modern day darker Italians and Spaniards, with dark hair and a tan look like they do because of the mix between North Africans (many times Arabs) and indigenous Italian tribes, like Etruscans.
 
mitsho said:
Augustus is a bad pick, but I must think he got chosen due to a scenario. Why is Augustus a bad pick, I hear many screaming? Simply because Rome's history spans from 756 BC to 457 AD (or so) and they chose "Uncle" and "nephew". (I know, there's a difference, but they are still way too near to each other. What about a Hadrian, a Trajan, a Diocletian, a Pius Antoninus, or even the highly disputed Constantine, then we got non-emperors who shaped Rome like Scipio Africanus (who btw. could have been used well for a scenario) or Marius, or even some "fun-choices" like Nero (He'd make an interesting opposite and you could phrase far funnier sentences than with Ceasar's Salad), Caligula or female Aggripinna (younger preferably).

Nevertheless, let's :coffee: (drink tea) and wait.... ;)

mitsho
Click to expand...

nope, you may be right about the history timeframe but wrong about Augustus. A bad pick for Rome is Julius Caesar, compared to Augustus. Augustus was one of the best emperor Rome had, and the most acclaimed and loved by the romans. He was a true leader for Rome, instead J.C. was rather a Great Military Leader, in Civ3 terms. Of course, since romans were voted for war, this made of him very famous, but he wasn't the leader of the roman civilization, if you get what I mean. Look at his end....
 
Brave Jay said:
then what was your idea of vassal states? what was it and what would it do?
Click to expand...
This is what I wrote to firaxis few months ago (I saved the text to my computer). The text isn't very clear because I wrote it pretty quickly:

I'd like to see client states/puppet governments in Civ4. Those states would be like normal civs expect they would have several limitations. They would have to obey their owner when ie. making diplomatic decisions and they have to allways give in demands of their owner. Client states would be unable to win the game.
You can become a client state when you are losing a war to stronger civ but you don't want to lose your game.
If you don't want anymore be a client state you can declare war against your owner and if you can hold out for 20 turns you can be recognized by other civs (chance to be recognized depends on attitudes of other civs towards your owner civ). If you are recognized then the owner civ gets attitude hit from other civs if he declares a war against you in next 20 turns.
Click to expand...
It's very unlikely that Firaxis would have listened to just my idea because I'm sure that other people have had the same kind of idea.
 
The Civ4 model of Churchill just doesn't quite look like Churchill -

The model's mouth and chin are not broad enough, the mouth doesn't capture Churchill's characteristic mouth (in photos, his mouth always seems to slant slightly down to the left rather than being perfectly symmetrical), the model's eyebrows are too light, the real Churchill had a little hair on the top part of his head (rather than the completely bald top they show in the model), and the model's head is somehow not big and jowelly enough.
 
Broken Clock said:
I normally don't double post in a single thread, but I feel it is necessary at this time. I thought it would be nice to point out a few things that should be obvious to people, but sadly are not. Is this do to a dehumanizing of today's youth? I have no idea, that's a topic all on its own that should not be discussed on a public forum - due to its complex nature - anyway. Plus, I think this could be a wonderful topic to write an essay on. If I do write one, I would be more then happy to send an advanced copy to a few people before I send it out to print or hand it to my students for fun.

What should be obvious is this : It doens't matter if it's just a video game. It's a tasteless act on the part of the developers. Don't change the argument to fit your response and commit an obvious fallacy. There is a difference between teaching a young one about murderers in history class, and allowing them to play the part of one in a video game. (again, lets make it clear that I'm talking about REAL people. No GTA referenced rebuttals please) This isn't a case of censorship, this is a lack of respect to the people who are still with us today. This is not "selective history" as I heard one or more people say. That is a very dangerous concept that has some very heavy weight. This is about giving the necessary time for old wounds to heal. The 20th century may seem like a distant time for some of you on here, but for myself and perhaps a few others, it's all too clear. Hell, I'm only 28 and I understand.

What perked my fingers to do this evil double post, was the comment by Silver 2039. It wasn't what he said, but the fact that not a single person responded to his sickly ignorant attitude, "And I agree. Big whoop 100 million faceless, nameless indivudals died 60 years ago whatever...how does that affect me now?" My God! You need help.

*side note*
Churchill has nothing on Elizabeth I. I'm not going to argue that point. History books do a fine enough job of that.
*end side note*

I understand why Stalin was placed in the game. Hell, the key demographic are teens and early 20's who think communism and the soviet flag are cool. I'm shocked by how many hammer and sickle t-shirts I see. If that same person was wearing a nazi symbol on his shirt he would be beat to a pulp. Lenin destroyed the idea of communism. It was the proletariat who were supposed to lead the revolution. Fine, lets all play as Stalin. I hope the collectors edition comes with a free mustache and a pair of blood soaked hands.

Anyway, I'm sorry for the double post. I believe that's a form of trolling. I just thought this would be a good waste of time before I go about business. Making sure Stalin is not in this game is a very easy task for the properly motivated individual. However, I feel it's the right of the company to place him in the game. I was simply saying that it was sick and tasteless. If someone does want to start something, I would be more then willing to use my weight to assist in your plight. It could be fun and I love exercising some passive power. Don't all of you turn into neo-nazis too quickly.

Love,
Broken Clock
Click to expand...
I just want to say that its just a game which does involve role playing. If you ever play this game and take an army and wipe out another civ or destroy their city, you are just playing your part, you are not truly killing people. You need to get a grip on reality if you think that its morally wrong to play a video game which depicts real life history. Some people want to play as the Allies to crush the evil leaders. I just think its wrong to put a big giant stamp on everyone who wants a historically acurate leader head in their game as being just as evil as the leader himself.
 
Grohan said:
This is what I wrote to firaxis few months ago (I saved the text to my computer). The text isn't very clear because I wrote it pretty quickly:

It's very unlikely that Firaxis would have listened to just my idea because I'm sure that other people have had the same kind of idea.
Click to expand...


Actually they might have listened to at least some of it, and it sounds like a really cool idea.
 
Mrdie said:
How do you, or anyone else, know if there will be new civilizations or not? It's too early, and they won't tell us untill later.
Click to expand...

Urederra said:
It not the leaders for me, its the civilizations .

Can you tell me what civilizations have been added in the expansion, So far I don't know of any. So It is a rip off. Not buying it.
Click to expand...


Their announcement says there will be new civs:

http://www.2kgames.com/index.php?p=news&ID=199
 
Mrdie said:
How do you, or anyone else, know if there will be new civilizations or not? It's too early, and they won't tell us untill later.
Click to expand...


i don't know... that is why I said, so far, no new civilizations.

And is very bad that the announce the new expansion by adding a third leader to two countries and no more civs. Not good start. Not appetizing for me, which I am the potencial customer. I would expect new civs and new leaders in civs that only have one, The egypcian one is OK, It should be another leader for Rome and Greece, at least, that should be OK for me. But another leader for England and Russia? I don't like it and I am not interested so far
 
Broken Clock said:
What should be obvious is this : It doens't matter if it's just a video game. It's a tasteless act on the part of the developers. Don't change the argument to fit your response and commit an obvious fallacy. There is a difference between teaching a young one about murderers in history class, and allowing them to play the part of one in a video game. (again, lets make it clear that I'm talking about REAL people. No GTA referenced rebuttals please) This isn't a case of censorship, this is a lack of respect to the people who are still with us today. This is not "selective history" as I heard one or more people say. That is a very dangerous concept that has some very heavy weight. This is about giving the necessary time for old wounds to heal. The 20th century may seem like a distant time for some of you on here, but for myself and perhaps a few others, it's all too clear. Hell, I'm only 28 and I understand.
Click to expand...

Well... ROFL Broken Clock, the only danger for youth that I see here is that you seem to be allowed to teach them. Before you speak again, did you EVER play Civilization ? Basically you are stating that if a 14 years old boy plays Russia as the leader Katerine and wipes out his neighbours by pillaging their cities, or maybe nuking them, it's all right. But if he does all this while playing with a leaderhead that resembles Stalin (maybe with his favourite nickname of "Minny"), then it's all wrong.

Seriously Broken Clock, when you have time, instead of writing an essay try to learn about what is a game. And please ask your dealers for better stuff.
 
onedreamer said:
Well... ROFL Broken Clock, the only danger for youth that I see here is that you seem to be allowed to teach them. Before you speak again, did you EVER play Civilization ? Basically you are stating that if a 14 years old boy plays Russia as the leader Katerine and wipes out his neighbours by pillaging their cities, or maybe nuking them, it's all right. But if he does all this while playing with a leaderhead that resembles Stalin (maybe with his favourite nickname of "Minny"), then it's all wrong.

Seriously Broken Clock, when you have time, instead of writing an essay try to learn about what is a game. And please ask your dealers for better stuff.
Click to expand...
I concur
:crazyeye:
 
Actually,

I think even evil acts in Civilization will improve a child's mind better than playing Fear or some other hyperviolent first person shooter.
 
or watching TV... the bane of human's mind !
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

The_J
30 years Civ - all the little things you didn't know
2
Replies
32
Views
9K
Horizons
Horizons
P
Beyond the play - Community MOD
2 3
Replies
47
Views
17K
P&nny
P
F
Discussing some of the new leaders
2
Replies
34
Views
2K
KrikkitTwo
K
T
Stone Age Mod for 3.19
8 9 10
Replies
181
Views
65K
happygoluck
H
civvver
Ranking the AI leaders
2 3 4
Replies
69
Views
18K
DMOC
DMOC
Top Bottom