Darth_Schmarth

Hey, Alanschu, will confessing that I am an Oilers fan increase my influence?

True. It's a bit like playing chess against yourself, if you like.

It's funny, 'cause that "Ok" reply reminded me of my sister's twoyearold in a cute way. Something like: My sister: "Do you want to play with the dinosaurs?" Her son: "OK".

It's a bit different to the blockyness of Wolf 3d to the almost photorealistic graphics of the next gen. What the game dosnt reproduce is the smell... When I was about the same age I was taken fox hunting. Not that I had a lot of say in the matter but it wasnt a nice experience. But then I dont go out of my way to kill anything even bugs and stuff unless they "attack" me. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I have a hard time believing video violence is related to the graphics. Then again, like I said, I have a hard time believing violence is related to video games in the first place. The fact that violent people have played violent games or watched violent movies remains an arbitrary coincidence. Perhaps the game has functioned as some sort of trigger, or even inspiration, but that only as a substitute for something inevitable.

I like how 50 Cent got the credit for that quote... :D

The length of Civ turns is very loosely based in reality. It's only there for reference, and has absolutely nothing to do with the argument. If the number of years per turn were the primary base for all movement, a modern-day war wouldn't take 30-40 years.

Yeah, every time the argument of violent movies/games causing violence in the real world comes up I just think "old people afraid of newness". I'm totally convinced that the percentage of video-gamers committing acts of violence is as small as that of non-video-gamers, if not smaller.

Trains didn't exactly move at lightspeed in WW1, which you referred to earlier. In Civ they move at the speed of light, while boats have to make do with a few squares per turn. The imbalance between land and sea movement becomes painfully extreme. While I won't dispute that you can rebase planes around the world, that feature on the other hand has proper limitations. Rebasing consumes the turn, while troops moving by train can be moved infinitely and attack in the same turn. I don't know whether you've played the boardgame EuroFront (a WW2 game), but there you have an elegant system where railing is limited and won't allow combat in the same turn.

It was that easy?

My alignment is Chaotic Apathetic. Allows me to wear some really kick-a$$ alignment-specific robes. The one I'm wearing as we speak (you could call it my work robe; I'm at work) grants me a +4 to DEX, for instance.

I fail to see the realism in bringing your entire army from one end of a huge empire to another in an instant like some freakin' giant strategic reserve. In WW1 the Germans moved troops by train, sure, but I don't understand how you can compare that to Civ? Of course railroad is used for troop movement in war, but that doesn't mean that it should take on absurd proportions that effectively ruin any element of strategic thought. The fact that land movement becomes faster than both sea and air movement is downright ridiculous.

Yeah! Hell, make it 80!

This argument is beyond me. There are no frontlines in Civ anyway, just stacks assaulting cities head on, instead of surrounding them and cutting them off. Only a supply system that doesn't even need to be all that complicated could create frontlines. The only trick would be getting the AI to manage and protect its supply lines properly, but don't come telling me that infinite rail-movement is the key to having realistic frontlines. It's the exact opposite, if anything.

It'd be nice to see the AI improve its war strategy too. How about making sea-borne assaults that actually consisted of more than two swordsmen, who just become sitting ducks on the coastline? Unfortunately, I heard they intend to keep infinite rail movement. That single-handedly eliminates any reason to think strategically when deploying your troops, and causes any AI land-attack in the post-industrial era to go awry. It seriously needs to go and that's been the case since Civ1, but they just don't seem to get it.

Where I come from we say "Pearls to the Pigs". Does that work in English too?

:D You know that there's a CD inside the box, Schmalax? That's the one you paid for, even if cuddling the box is more to your liking than installing and playing the game...

Your "opinion" was being rude when I made a self-distanced joke, which is a sure-fire way to activate Mista Evil Spamma From Hell Darth "Evil-Eyez" Schmarth. Now go away or I'll get unpleasant.

That's how the Empire saw it, yes, but it also cost them a lot of pilots who switched to the other side. ... <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Maybe they switched due to political allegiances, a lack of commitment to the Empire, rather than to fight on the side with better ships. I don't recall too many US troops switching sides to use the Panzer Type VI TIGER I, even if the Shermans were regarded as "Purple-Heart Boxes". :D <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Actually I was referring to the blatant disregard for the lives of their pilots that the Empire demonstrated, but there you go... <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Actually, Allied armour tactics in '44-'45 built very much on sacrifice. The basic idea was that it'd take four Shermans to take out one Tiger, which meant that three Shermans were to draw the Tiger's attention (and get virtually doomed in the process) while the fourth flanked it and fired from close range.

Exactly, and who turned it into something else? You kids! Since about the time you started having them.

I strongly agree that the X-Wing and TIE Fighter games were superb. I played TIE Fighter before X-Wing, but didn't really mind going back to lesser graphics and functionality. Both games consumed heaps of spare time in my youth, and Alliance carried that tradition on. It'd be absolutely Schmarthtastic if they were to make a new, large, enhanced version with campaigns for both the Rebs and the Imps. Damnit, why did you get me started? I want this game NOW!

17-yearolds are children, and all you have done is strengthen the very foundation which that notion rests upon.

And you would know, Diaperman?

Okay, I see what you mean, but the fact is that the Council repressed the dark side too. They chose not to play along with Revan's war, and they managed to repress the lure of the dark side.

No I think the only species that could ever qualify as Jedi would be the most avdanced of them all: The Vulcans.

I'm a real night owl too, my problem is I've got a daytime job! When I've been off a couple of weeks I usually stay up all night before going to work on Monday morning. No point in even trying to get some sleep...