Israel has more tanks than England and about the same amount of Nukes (But no ICBM).
So it would be more reality-like if you give Israel a few modern armours, and one or two tactical nukes, and one nuclear submarine (Israel has about 3).
dang thats akward I havent heard much about the top 3 world powers today
1.USA
2.China
3.Russia (of course they probably wouldnt even make the top 5 if it wasnt for there massive arsenal of ICBMs. By the way once I get the senario though Im gona tear-up the world soviet-style :soldier: )
I think Isreal should be a division of the US. Mainly beacuse I find it hard that the border allaince with turkey and SK would with the current diplomatic limitations of the editor make it easy for them to be allies with the US in witch they are. I think they should all be part of the US until the diplomacy gets better.
Israel has more tanks than England and about the same amount of Nukes (But no ICBM).
So it would be more reality-like if you give Israel a few modern armours, and one or two tactical nukes, and one nuclear submarine (Israel has about 3).
Independent Alaska, or Tibet? I don't think they have a chance of winning, one's tundra, one's in mountains; Make the UK independent from EU is better.
And yes, the Koreans would not like it that they are called japanese, how about instead of Japan, we can have Korea.
Originally posted by pi8ch
Impressive!
A serious question:
How much of the state's income is used for militaric things? 40%?
Or are they presents of the US?
That's without any sarcasm, im just interrested!
(You know, you can only lough about the Austrian Army with a budget of 0.8% of the states income, its 20 fighters and 500 old tanks...)
The Security budget of Israel takes a decent amount of the Pie, but a lot of the weapons (Such as infantry arming) are due to the "Coupons" we get from the US to buy American weapons.
According to 1999, the military expenditures of Israel are about 9.4% of the GDP, about $8.7 billion a year.
That figure might have grown larger since the outbreak of the recent intifadah was at 2000, and these figures are from 1999.
Yes a united europe would be a military super power, but I dont think even them combined could match the American nucular arsenal or superior equipment...
@one_man_assault
Yes a united europe would be a military super power, but I dont think even them combined could match the American nucular arsenal or superior equipment...
1) I never sayed that Europe would be Number one
2) I'm proud that there is not enough nuclear power in the EU to destroy the planet
3) We all know that the USA is only succesfully in wars if they could bomb down the enemy from above...
If the USA wins a war it's only because they had more material.
The "quality" of the US forces is their number and their top-technical equipment behind, but not the quality of tactics...
But I have to admit that they are the militaric power Nr. One at the moment...
I disagree the US army is about half of what it was in Dessert Storm its quality is not in numbers but in its in small forces that are highly trained and superiorly equiped to complete the objective and get out. and they use Soviet battle tactics (with no shame I might add) witch most millitarys use today so how can there tactics be of low quality? And of course US does need massive air power but thats what makes us better than the rest. But maybe that would have been true during the Cold War
Matrix, u asked for leaders a few pages ago. I know that Vicente Fox is the President of Mexico. I think he would make a good leader for Middle America (he's the only decent politician there).
BTW, how long does it take all of you to load this scenario? It's taking me like, 45 minutes.
hmm.....i know what you mean about straying from the point.
are you forgetting that civ deals with thing on a much wider scale and generalises over the amount of detail that you are pouring into this thread?
Politics is perhaps an almost circular argument..it never really ends. one issue often leads to more, or the actual act of dealing with an issure creates issues of their own, which creates further issues......you see my point?
think of the vast librarys of books written on politics....think of the programs , the discussions...does it end? nope
just generalise, please. Try and refer these issues to Civ.
ok..there goes my opinion on politics. not my fav subject.
heres something to add ...perhaps sizing countries (or areas of a particular civilisation
this would lead to a very distorted map...for example..africa would be fairly tiny , where as america would be huge...some common sense is required here. This is more for the benefit of countrys like britain, japan and so forth. this is where the mod-maker has a choice , do you want a game where people will exercise political power, or a game that would be realistic, and not perhaps as much fun to play
also....not being much of a regular here, does the scenario editor allow for city size to be set? thus giving bigger players resources and so forth
perhaps this will tear the conversation away from the politcal nitty-gritty, the fine detail, back to the mechanics of a game. A game that is meant to be enjoyed
Just a suggestion: I don't think nukes should even be in the game, because nuclear disarmament is currently in place, noone is crazy enough to use a nuke in these times, and the AI just loves to push the red button... it would be a nukefest. Or at least get rid of ICBMs...
what ur saying is very true I hate it when some nation unloads its entire ICBM arsenal on me with out a care, (almost in a mocking way like I can nuke u but I can survive your best shot ). Even though they only 1/5 squeeze through when I have the SDI system its still a pain to have 2 or 3 citys wrecked I think the computer dosnt see it as a deterant as we do. And since the computer wont usually nuke u if u have a bigger arsenal than them, youll be constantly be in a cold war like situation building nukes and troops to prevent a calculated massacre on the higher difficulty levels when the civs are ruthless. The good side is that having tactical nukes is that we will compete with our neighbors and not another power a world away who might sent 20 nukes ur way at any moment. But the bad side is this is a real possibility, anything could happen and by removing ICBMs we isolate our influence in our intrests a world away and also then makes nukes almost obsolete beacuse tacticle nukes can only go so far.... and what do u do if your australia? deploy some nucular submarines on the worlds hot spots and have it heavly guarded and pray u can get it a shore and launch it before the enemy gets u or destroys the nuke? this is a tough one to decide on....
Hear, hear... That's exactly what I wish to accomplish.
tctatheel7, thanks, for the name of Vincente Fox.
Loading a scenario takes a very long time indeed. For me about 15 minutes, but I got a 850 MHz processor and 256 MB RAM.
About nukes: they're there and therefore they will be in the scenario. What the AI does with it is their business. Ohwell, indeed in real life they'd never use them, but in real life Europe and North America would never go to war with each other. Here they just might.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
China too except for the fact that they don't have units yet. 
). Even though they only 1/5 squeeze through when I have the SDI system its still a pain to have 2 or 3 citys wrecked I think the computer dosnt see it as a deterant as we do. And since the computer wont usually nuke u if u have a bigger arsenal than them, youll be constantly be in a cold war like situation building nukes and troops to prevent a calculated massacre on the higher difficulty levels when the civs are ruthless. The good side is that having tactical nukes is that we will compete with our neighbors and not another power a world away who might sent 20 nukes ur way at any moment. But the bad side is this is a real possibility, anything could happen and by removing ICBMs we isolate our influence in our intrests a world away and also then makes nukes almost obsolete beacuse tacticle nukes can only go so far.... and what do u do if your australia? deploy some nucular submarines on the worlds hot spots and have it heavly guarded and pray u can get it a shore and launch it before the enemy gets u or destroys the nuke? this is a tough one to decide on....
America gave me a lot of work! 
