TheLastOne36
Deity
- Joined
- Jan 17, 2007
- Messages
- 14,045
Hopefully they'll take ideas from the forum.
Hopefully they'll take ideas from the forum.
so that next time Firaxis wont do it again so that we dont have as many spam threads.
But i still see no reason why not to include Charlemagne as a Stand alone Leader with no specific leader since the new Mix-and-match option is in the game.
Firaxis' decision has pissed off that part of the community which is concerned with historical accuracy and fairness.
Honestly, the best way to fix the "problem" at this point is not to get upset about it. They are in, and there's nothing that can be done. I am actually looking forward to it now after being surprised initially. They seem to have a good UU and UB, and it looks very interesting. I now support the HRE!
The Holy Romans are coming! Make no mistake: whether we bring our enemies to Holy Rome, or Holy Rome to our enemies, Holy Rome will be done.
Totally agree with you, my fellow Octavianphile. There are just as many people who are happy with HRE's inclusion as there are writing these silly threads every five minutes. Their inclusion is not a "problem"-- your constant anti-HRE threads are the issue. If you don't like the HRE, don't play them! There are 33 other civs to choose from. It's that simple.
You say that when they add the Roman Republic as a separate civ, and you end up fighting the Empire and Republic in one game.
You say that when they add the Roman Republic as a separate civ, and you end up fighting the Empire and Republic in one game.