Civ IV Difficulty Questions

[Cheddar]

That mod is robot JESUS.  Everyone needs to DL it and try it out; there are a ton of leaders, techs, and an alignment system.  It is love.

[stray]

Right on. Reading Dostoevsky gets you laid and the movies we like are windows into the soul.

Well, when you take it to the point of creating threads about Tom Cruise (creating), whining about everyone's hate for him, testifying that all his films are top notch, and then going even further by saying hilarious E Channel shit like "Fuck you guys! He's living the dream. What have you done?", then yes, it's a window into your soul.

What have I done? I've been laid simply by the mere act of quoting Dostoevsky.

But of course, I have other good qualities. I could be mistaken.

[dusematic]

That's hyperbole, but yes, I think he's a great actor.

[stray]

[EDIT]

I'm getting bored of this. 

I think I'll download that mod now...

[Strazos]

England gets Churchill for a Warlord leader. Rome gets Augustus.

Surely, if Stalin was a valid choice for Russia, then they could have done something better for those two.

Huh?

[Cheddar]

[EDIT]

I'm getting bored of this. 

I think I'll download that mod now...

Getting into an argument with Douche is futile.  I am enjoying this mod immensely... every leader plays out different (Tried about 3 so far over a few hours time, tomorrow I will do true catass).  Best mod in any civ ever; I would paint this as a free expansion.  Its that good.

[stray]

England gets Churchill for a Warlord leader. Rome gets Augustus.

Surely, if Stalin was a valid choice for Russia, then they could have done something better for those two.

Huh?

"Better" as in "more consistent".

Like, instead of Augustus, they should have just used Caligula then. That's more in line with the absurdity of Stalin-esque rule.

Augustus may have been a fuckhead Roman emperor, but relatively speaking, he was a judicious one. During his rule, Rome enjoyed the longest period of peace it ever had. The only real "wars" he was involved in were in staving off Anthony and hunting down Julius' assassins. He was the reason the term "Pax Romana" was even created. Doesn't make much sense to make him the warlord leader, and then put Stalin in for Russia.

[dusematic]

Augustus was a fuckhead emperor?   

[dusematic]

[EDIT]

I'm getting bored of this. 

I think I'll download that mod now...

Getting into an argument with Douche is futile. 

Only when I'm right.

[stray]

You've never been right. Except that one time when you mentioned a Melanie song.

Augustus was a fuckhead emperor?  

Sigh.

"Fuckhead emperor" as in "The OFFICE of Emperor" is NOT a good thing. Damn.

Emperors are bad mmkay. I'm just saying he was better than Caligula. He didn't make his horse Consul of Rome or execute people for mentioning the word "goat" in public.

[Strazos]

You editted.

[dusematic]

I think our main problem is miscommunication.  But still, hard to knock authoritarian rule considering it had a brief flash in the pan in Greece and only resurfaced  relatively recently.


Edit: I mean considering democracy had a brief flash in the pan, and only resurfaced recently.

[stray]

You editted.

Yeah, it was a mouthful.

I can add a bit of what I was going to say:

In order to be consistent with Stalin, we'd have to replace a lot of world leaders with fuckhead equivalants.

Instead of Cyrus for Persia, then we should play the Ayatollah Khomeini.

Instead of Augustus, we get Caligula or Nero.

Instead of, say, Hammurabi, we should play Saddam Hussein for Iraq.

Instead of Wang Kon for Korea, we get Lil' Kim.

Instead of Churchill, we get Richard III.

Instead of Roosevelt, we get Dubya.

[dusematic]

What I was saying is that they weren't "trying to be consistent" with the Warlords themed expansion.  That's why nothing fits as you've  noticed.  they were just going for the most recognizable faces to their respective governments.  Or trying to.  And they did a pretty good job. 

[Strazos]

I think Xerxes or Darius would be better for Persia.

[dusematic]

That reminds me.  Gates of Fire by Stephen Pressfield was pretty good.  I haven't really liked his later work, but that first one was pretty gripping.

[stray]

What I was saying is that they weren't "trying to be consistent" with the Warlords themed expansion.  That's why nothing fits as you've  noticed.  they were just going for the most recognizable faces to their respective governments.  Or trying to.  And they did a pretty good job. 

OK, I get it.

I really, really hate Stalin though. He was Soviet not Russian (also he was Georgian, not Russian). Was a fuckhead who put monthly death quotas on his own people. Not a warlord.

Hell, even though he might have been more "noble", Peter the Great was more of a warlord than Stalin was. All Stalin did was inherit Lenin's legacy, and then proceeded to drive it into the ground......Until his own generals made him choke on his own shit.


-------

I'm having bad luck downloading that FoH mod. File Planet and 3d Downloads keep hanging. Will try tomorrow.

[Lum]

While I really hate to interject reason and sanity into a perfectly decent flamebait thread, the reason why Stalin was included and Hitler excluded is quite simple: in Russia representing Stalin in a video game is not against the law. There are laws on the books about representing Hitler in video games in Germany. (In German localizations of Hearts of Iron the leader of Germany is "Alphonse Hister" or something similar).

Even aside from that (after all, Firaxis could have simply dropped the Hitler leaderhead from the German version), Hitler has a far more visceral reaction for most Westerners than Stalin. Whether or not Stalin killed more people (and he did, by most accounts) Hitler defines evil for the majority of Westerners and thus it's usually not appropriate to include as a possible role to play in a game. Stalin is less visceral in his reactions. However, note that he wasn't included in the original Civ 4, while Peter the Great was. Along with an ahistorically waaay-too-sexy Catherine the Great.

[WayAbvPar]

Don't forget- Joe had a much better moustache than Adolph too. Although Catherine the Great could possibly beat them both. Thankfully Polaroids weren't around then...

[stray]

While I really hate to interject reason and sanity into a perfectly decent flamebait thread, the reason why Stalin was included and Hitler excluded is quite simple: in Russia representing Stalin in a video game is not against the law. There are laws on the books about representing Hitler in video games in Germany. (In German localizations of Hearts of Iron the leader of Germany is "Alphonse Hister" or something similar).

Even aside from that (after all, Firaxis could have simply dropped the Hitler leaderhead from the German version), Hitler has a far more visceral reaction for most Westerners than Stalin. Whether or not Stalin killed more people (and he did, by most accounts) Hitler defines evil for the majority of Westerners and thus it's usually not appropriate to include as a possible role to play in a game. Stalin is less visceral in his reactions. However, note that he wasn't included in the original Civ 4, while Peter the Great was. Along with an ahistorically waaay-too-sexy Catherine the Great.

Barring strictly historical ww2 simulations, I don't think Hitler would be included even if there weren't certain legalities involved. Especially in Civ. It'd be in incredibly bad taste to have his fuckhead avatar pop up whenever he wanted to trade clams and beaver skins with you.

The thing is: Stalin is in incredibly bad taste as well, but Hitler is such a byword in popular culture that he's able to soak up even Stalin's reputation.

Hell, calling someone a "Nazi" or "Hitler" are some of the most common insults on the net. They've become synonymous with anything bad about human beings, even if those bad qualities actually have nothing to do with Hitler himself. People never want to bring up Hitler these days unless they're insulting someone.

Well....I think that status should be accorded to Stalin as well.

[Merusk]

I think you're just looking for something to be offended by, yet again.

Or you're trolling.  I'm really not certain which.

[stray]

No, I'm serious. I've always felt that way about Stalin. If there had been a way for me to mention it earlier, I would have.

In fact, I'll take this time now to commend Haemish for being one of the only people I know on the net for regularly using Stalin as a derisive word.

Also, I don't troll as much as you think I do. Except in MMO Discussion.

[Sky]

Maybe if we're lucky america will pass a law banning the name and likeness of W.

[WayAbvPar]

Maybe if we're lucky america will pass a law banning the name and likeness of W.

That would put Mad Magazine out of business.

[Sky]

I have a 'What Me Worry?' belt buckle I wear to work sometimes. My dad gave it to me when he retired :)

[WindupAtheist]

Your average guy can't tell you who Boris Yeltsin or Mikhail Gorbachev is

What?

[dusematic]

Are you reneging on our Non-Aggression Pact?  I supported you through your darkest hour, UNCOOL man, uncool.

[WindupAtheist]

Uh... I meant... uh... "what" as in... WHAT IS A YELTSIN?  IS THAT LIKE RETSIN?  YOU SPEAK WORDS ME NO UNDERSTAAAND!

[dusematic]

Retsin is what they put inside the really high-tech mints right?