Expansion Pack PREVIEW!

[Brianwolfe]

It was Hadrian who's boyfriend drowned, traved around the empire, and built hadrian's wall in northern England, and Coligula went insaine and killed thousands how could he be the second leader, If there was to be a second leader of rome it should be Constatine who reconqured the roman empire after it was split under the leadership of four emperors. But alot would see him as a Byzantium leader b/c he moved the capital to the the greek city of Byzantim and renamed it Constantinoble.

 

[IntruderAlert]

the 3 lions is Denmark flag

http://www.crwflags.com/fotw/flags/dk.html

Ni its, an alternative english one.

Look here:
flag

 

[CivGreece]

Yup, the purple flag with the yellow symbol is most deffinetely for Byzantium used by Constantine. It is actually the symbol Byzantines (and orthodox christians) used for Jesus Christ. The letters are from the Greek alphabet. The symbol consists of 3 letters, Ι, Χ, Ρ. Its to depict the Greek words for Jesus, Ιησους Χριστος. I is for J(esus), and Χρ is for christ. (note: P is R in Greek).

 

[zeeter]

It was Hadrian who's boyfriend drowned, traved around the empire, and built hadrian's wall in northern England, and Coligula went insaine and killed thousands how could he be the second leader, If there was to be a second leader of rome it should be Constatine who reconqured the roman empire after it was split under the leadership of four emperors. But alot would see him as a Byzantium leader b/c he moved the capital to the the greek city of Byzantim and renamed it Constantinoble.

Constantine - also the first Christian emperor, IIRC

 

[mitsho]

It was Hadrian who's boyfriend drowned, traved around the empire, and built hadrian's wall in northern England, and Coligula went insaine and killed thousands how could he be the second leader, If there was to be a second leader of rome it should be Constatine who reconqured the roman empire after it was split under the leadership of four emperors. But alot would see him as a Byzantium leader b/c he moved the capital to the the greek city of Byzantim and renamed it Constantinoble.

Constantinoble? The Byzantians were much, but noble? Not at all, decadent, arrogant, luxurious, pious and fanatic, but certainly not noble...
What you were searching for is Konstantinopolis, the polis of Constantine --> Constantine's city simply put...

Secondly, Constantine is overrated imo, his only claim to fame is that he accepted Christianity and "founded" Constantinople. On the contrary, he split up the empire, nullified some of the (necessary) reforms (for example of the now much hated - because under him, the Christians were persecuted, but that should have no influence whatsoever on our judgement of his capability - Diocletian) and well - as you stated - is thought of being the founder of East Rome, something that was an entirely different civ in civ3.
So, NO to Constantine, I don't want him just because he once saw a big glowing cross in the sky! And just ask Xen on Constantine, he is much more into that topic (bashing Constantine... ).

mitsho

 

[sweKangaroo]

Ni its, an alternative english one.

Look here:
flag

The 3 lions are used i many national symbols/shields etc. I dont know where the symbol comes from, but the lions appear on lots of diffrent royal/monarchist symbols.

Isnt the 3 lions the national symbol of the british people?
*hmm, i think the 3 lions also is the symbol of Finlands national hockey team. (correct me if im wrong )

 

[Alistic]

Why lablel this as an 'expansion' pack? Why not just an update. Man this whole expansion pack crap has gotten way outta hand. There was a time when few games made an expansion pack, now it's like people expect one. Realize that game companies are chopping up their games and selling them seperatly. Fleece me some more.

Posts like this just encourage them. They already said earlier in a press release they hurried the game to get it out because of what happened over that 'hot coffee' stuff in gta. With talk like this, instead of releasing the rest of it in patches, they probably will make us buy an expansion.

 

[BAD MOJO]

Secondly, Constantine is overrated imo, his only claim to fame is that he accepted Christianity and "founded" Constantinople. On the contrary, he split up the empire, nullified some of the (necessary) reforms (for example of the now much hated - because under him, the Christians were persecuted, but that should have no influence whatsoever on our judgement of his capability - Diocletian) and well - as you stated - is thought of being the founder of East Rome, something that was an entirely different civ in civ3.
So, NO to Constantine, I don't want him just because he once saw a big glowing cross in the sky! And just ask Xen on Constantine, he is much more into that topic (bashing Constantine... ).

mitsho[/QUOTE]

Actually when constantine first appeared the empired was devided into 4 diferent rulers. It was Constantine who united the roman empire, even though it did not last very long after him.
Your not given him enough credit.
If there is a leader that fits perfectly into the civ game is him.
1. He unified the empire.
2. He moved the capital to revatilize a dying economy.
3. He adopted Chirstianity, not nesesarally because he was a believer but because already a big part of the Romans where in fact followers of the christianity movement, so he adopted this religion because it was the strongest at the time. And the empire defenetly needed a big change if it was to survive.

So on that note I can't think of many other roman leaders that change their civics so drastically in order for his civilazation alive.

 

[mitsho]

Stop stop stop! It was not divided into 4 different kingdoms. The Roman empire was one state with 4 governours! Quite a difference, and something which was necessary for the time (since the empire just was too big!
It might now be debated wether the reunification and the resulting splitting up of the empire is somethin which had to happen, but I am not that a materialist to say so.
So, point 1 of yours is invalid, but I can perfectly agree on point 2. That certainly was a very clever deed of him.
Christianity on the other hand: You know all the story of Constantine. He believed all the time in Christianity, but he only got baptized on his death bed. Since, after Christian belief, all your sins are cleared and now, you should start a new life as a Christian, your sins now being counted a new for the final decision (of Heaven or Hell). And, you all agree, that you cannot sin much on your death bed, do you? This way, Constantine assured that he died sinless! Quite an opportunist, wasn't he? And someone like this you would want to make a leader of Rome!, no my dear, sorry..

mitsho

PS: and to quote you have to put the [*QUOTE=mitsho] tag also at the beginning, naturally without the asterix (*).

 

[Red Door]

Just a question:
Why would Denmark be put in over any other of the qualified civs?

 

[mitsho]

Perhaps as a representative for the whole Viking culture? (they didn't want to 'invent' a new civ, and thus making only a part of it?)

m

 

[Garand]

Quite an opportunist, wasn't he? And someone like this you would want to make a leader of Rome!, no my dear, sorry..

Yes, because well know that no Roman leaders were opportunists. Certainly Constantine was a singular instance of a clever and opportunistic leader! Shame on him! Argue it any way you want, but Constantine was recognized as a great leader by his people, and though history turns a speculative eye on him as it often does, you cannot deny his importance in the history of Europe.

So perhaps you don't think he belongs among the leaders of glorious Rome - an idyllic Rome which ceased to exist long before Constantine - but that doesn't mean he doesn't have a place in the game. Byzantium became the seat of a very unique Christian society steeped in Greek and Roman Culture, populated largely with Greeks - so why not make him a second Greek leader after Alexander? And if not Greece, why not give Byzantium its rightful place back in the game?

 

[Sexton]

First post!

*hmm, i think the 3 lions also is the symbol of Finlands national hockey team. (correct me if im wrong )

And no, it's just one lion. (The other two died due to the cold weather up here ) Anyway the symbol is an imitation of the coat of arms of Finland.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coat_of_Arms_of_Finland

And as far as that banner is concerned, i think it's the red and white in it that make us associate it with England (naturally).

Edit: Bad typo!

 

[BAD MOJO]

Stop stop stop! It was not divided into 4 different kingdoms.

mitsho

(*).

I nefer said kindom. I said rulers.

As to his change of religion wheather it was faith or just political it has no relevance. The point is he adopted christianity as state religion despite almost 700 years of paganism.

 

[joequality]

And Sulla isnt close to Julius Ceasar?

Julius basicly took over after Sulla.

I think Augustus is a very good choise, we should get leaders for there famousness and not for there date in history. Augustus did many things, amongst wich he was the one to organized the Preatorian Guard, wich happens to be Rome's UU.

true true. Its just hard to name good Romans prior to Caesar. wait, I just thought about Scipio Africanus! Anyone who squared off against Hannibal should get some recognition

 

[Xen]

On COnstantine
Horrible emperor; virtually nullified the benificial military reform sof Diocletian which had helped put the empire back on trace by incresign the size of the Roman military with permanent garrison troops and rotating companies of national full time military troops, and high echelon of Imperial troops; Constantine virtually aboloshed all of this by taking away the real power of that orginization, the companies of national troopers rotated around the empire, and made them stationary, greatlly increaing both corruption, and ineffectiveness of troops, as they werent exposed to the different commanders and different styles of trainignt hat gave the Diocletian system the edge.

Constainte continued the economic reforms of Diocletian, but that in itself was no longer enough, and it only surved to further put the empire into a bad economic situation; only emphiszed by his whoel sale support of trunign freemen tenatn farmers into what in the middle ages woudl be known as serfs, more ro less, little more then slaves with a few legal rights; and augumenting this the estbalishment of hereditary jobs, such as that of baker or butcher was implemented under his authority, yet again setting the stage for the truelly vast reduction of liberities and rights of the common people durign the middle ages.

he was solelly responsibel for the civil wars that "reunited" the roman empire, but in reality it was killing of the great political reform of Diocletian, which had split the united empire into multiple sub rulers to be be able to handle the situation in thier particuler portion of the empire; a trick that seemed to work, mind you, with Diocletian and his Co-emperor in the west (Diocletian stationed himself in the east) gaining substantial victories over the empires enemies.

Costantine; crap administrator, useless assesor, incompitent leader of a nation, and authoritarian extrodinair, the only credits that be go to his name are that he did know how to win a battle, it just happend to be agianst his own nation, and not the enimies of it, andhe had the right idea of lettign free religion reign; until he started to stronglyl favor christianity, which tipped the scale.

did any Roman emperor change the state as much as he did? No, no one did. But the big difference is, in all cases where the state had changed before it had been for a concrete reason for concrete benifits, under constaine, all that resulted was an empire that would never recover, because his own reforms for ever crippled it.

 

[mitsho]

@bad mojo, but the term 'reunifies' implicits that there have been 4 seperated political entities!

@Garand, ok, I excuse, I might have used the wrong words, I didn't mean to say that Constantine totally doesn't deserve to be a leader, just that he is imo on the lower ranks of the ladder, probably just somewhere before Nero.. There are just so many better Roman leaders to be chosed before him.

mitsho

PS: @Xen, Thanks, finally, but I think you had a tad too long to post this. I was waiting for this post for the whole time...

 

[Paragon]

Just a question:
Why would Denmark be put in over any other of the qualified civs?

Well, Denmark IS the worlds oldest still-existing monarchy, having been independent for more than 1000 years. Through history, Denmark has conquered all of Scandinavia, the British isles and a good part of France, Poland and even the western Russian territories (Lithuania etc.).

The "Vikings" thing could play a part too (thus the many conquests).

 

[Xen]

I nefer said kindom. I said rulers.

As to his change of religion wheather it was faith or just political it has no relevance. The point is he adopted christianity as state religion despite almost 700 years of paganism.

actually this is false;

1)he most certinally converted for political reasons, the only people who will differ on this are fervent christians; thier is clear evidence that he first favored the God Mars, the Prima God of Diocletians worship, and was a prime syimbo of the tetrachy that is when the roman government was splt into east and west as grand regions of sub rule under two senior emperors, and each had a junior emperor under them, in this fashion the Roman empire was still unfied in civil law, but the governing, and dfence of it was made more managable. Adopting the God mars as apatron was to further his ligitmacy in this political setting.

2)augumenting this we find that he soon adoipts the primary god of the soldires, Sol Invictus, more comoonlly known today by his Persian name, Mithra, or Mithras, with a story virtually indentical to the one he woudl eventually use for when the Christian god woudl becoem his prime god; despite this, he only actually converted to christianity on his deathbed, and at first wanted harmony between all the faiths.

3)as the final point of contention it was a later emperor with the name constantine who actually abolished paganism, and made Christianity the sole religion fo the empire.

 

[DeltaV]

The flag with the black eagle might also be the Holy Roman Empire. The German and Prussian eagles are based on that. That would make Charlemagne the leader.