Napoleon

[HazieDaVampire]

Originally posted by Andrew Cory

"Defenders always start the wars. The guy on the offense just wants to conquor, he dosn't want a war..."
[paraphrasing] -Sethra Lavode

Those damn war law things, the whole reason why Germany has a good economy now is because…
1. England Declared war on Germany
2. England bombed the hell out of the Rehn (The place where Germany made all its tanks and bullets and weapons.

Because England Declared war on Germany and we destroyed the factory’s, we had to pay ‘insurance’ to the German company who lost factory’s and machinery in the bombing, and we didn’t have to pay for the price of the same versions of that factory stuff. We had to buy the newest models!

So that’s just a little into declaring war first for you! Next time they do anything, we aren’t going to declare war then wait for attack, we’ll just sit there with a big gun!

[Lawrence of Arabia]

Originally posted by Akka le Vil


Russian's communist's political party's symbol is a hammer.
Guess than hammers are communists then ?

Guess so Akka le Vil, if hammers can be politically active.

[Andrew Cory]

Originally posted by Ethelred
The line you sorta quoted of course.

Sethra is the voice of the pragamatist in most cases. One of the better characters in the series. I just wish Brust could develop better stories outside of it. He is doing a good job of going on after he seemed to have hit a dead end. His two Dumas inspired books just aren't as good but the do give a nice pre-history to the Vlad Taltos stuff.

I wasn't sure. And yes, he does seem to have hit his stride again. Have you read Issola? Good stuff...
I think two of his non-taltos books are well worth reading: The sun, the moon and the stars, and Cowboy Feng's Space bar and grill. The latter feels a bit like Calahans at first, but _man_ does it rock. Hell, I picked up my battle cry from that book...

[Ethelred]

I am not sure if I have read Issola, the darn titles all run together. However I don't see it anywhere around. I may have decided to wait till it comes out in hardback. I think Dragon was the last I read. I re-read them all last after that one came out.

Got the other two but I haven't read them. I have a lot of books I haven't got around to reading.

[Andrew Cory]

Originally posted by Ethelred
I am not sure if I have read Issola, the darn titles all run together. However I don't see it anywhere around. I may have decided to wait till it comes out in hardback. I think Dragon was the last I read. I re-read them all last after that one came out.

Got the other two but I haven't read them. I have a lot of books I haven't got around to reading.

Issola came out sometime Q3 last year. I had just started working at a bookstore. *grin* 30% discount sure does rock!

[Coracle]

Originally posted by nato
. . . he found it necesary to start wars all over the place. Maybe some of the wars were not his fault, but when one guy is involved in sooo many, you have to start figuring maybe it has something to do with him! So he is responsible for a lot of wars and all the killing and misery that causes.

So I would say definitely not evil like a Hitler, but guilty of starting a lot of wars.

Napoleon was a progressive force in a reactionary world of corrupt monarchies.

As for "Hitler" references, the British were responsible for the killing of millions in the 1840's by deliberately forcing Opium on the Chinese in the infamous Opium War, and by allowing a million Irish to starve to death. Why did the Irish starve when the potato crop failed? Because English landlords controlled the grain crops in Ireland and exported for their profit grain from that country. So it was the British who were like Hitler.

As for "starting wars", all the various "Coalitions" declared war on France, and they often did so after Britain paid them off. Even in the case of Russia (1812) and Spain (1808) they were violating various trade agreements made with Napoleon. The British were behind it all, and THEY were the war-mongers.

[Akka]

Originally posted by Coracle
As for "starting wars", all the various "Coalitions" declared war on France, and they often did so after Britain paid them off. Even in the case of Russia (1812) and Spain (1808) they were violating various trade agreements made with Napoleon. The British were behind it all, and THEY were the war-mongers.

Well, it's painful for me to deny defences for one of my childhood idol, but I have to contradict you.

Though it's true that UK often paid other countries to go to war against Napoléon, it's not the case.
The Spain war was triggered by the forced abdication of the Spain's king in favor of Napoléon, while Spain has been a loyal ally for some years (many of the ships at Trafalgar were Spanish, fighting with the French).
The campaign of Russia was because Russia violated the continental blocus it has agreed with at the treaty of Tilsit. Though less obvious than in the Spain war, it's still Napoléon who decided to invade.

[Spiffor]

If the Brits were warmongers, I can only agree with them : Napoleon was a danger for the whole balance on the continent. If the Brits weren't able to ally with / manipulate others rivals of France, we would probably have a former wholly French Europe, which would have violently exploded. you'd tell me it has, twice )

[nato]

Napoleon was a progressive force in a reactionary world of corrupt monarchies.

I didn't say it like that, but I did specifically say he modernized and reformed places.

As for "Hitler" references...

Yeah, I said twice that I didn't think Napoleon was like Hitler.

As for "starting wars", all the various "Coalitions" declared war on France, and they often did so after Britain paid them off. Even in the case of Russia (1812) and Spain (1808) they were violating various trade agreements made with Napoleon. The British were behind it all, and THEY were the war-mongers.

All I can say is I still stand by what I said in my earlier posts. I do not think the British were totally innocent either, but it would be crazy to deny that Napoleon was a war monger of the first order.

I think you would be very very lonely arguing that. Like Flat Earth Society lonely.

I like Napoleon. I even used to have a copy of the painting of him at Leipzeig up! But I don't like that he started wars in which lots of people died.

I will admit that other nations, especially Britain, were vying for power too, and that they probably would have fought even without Napoleon. But I don't think there would have been so many wars, so big, so many places, if it weren't for Napoleon's boundless ambition and thirst for conquest.

[The Rook]

Wow,

I posted this just before taking a long weekend, and I didn't expect this kind of a response.

I just want to add; if you guys think Joan is hot, you need to get out more. I'm not really impressed with any of the femmes in game.

[Andrew Cory]

Originally posted by The Rook

I just want to add; if you guys think Joan is hot, you need to get out more. I'm not really impressed with any of the femmes in game.

Joan is hot.
Bald Joan is _really_ hot...
Damn my punk-rock origions anyway...

[Jethro83]

Originally posted by Andrew Cory

Joan is hot.
Bald Joan is _really_ hot...
Damn my punk-rock origions anyway...

No offense dude, but while she may be hot by computer generated polygon standards, she can't possibly look as good as pretty much all of the attractive REAL women out there.

I seriously don't see what the point was to try and "sex-up" the game. I play to conquer worlds, not to check out women. When I want to check out women, I go through my Ralph magazines (BTW Ralph is a men's lifestyle mag in Australia and New Zealand responsible for showing some of the hottest women you're ever likely to see. OK, OK, I already mentioned this in a previous thread, but I say it again nevertheless.)

But I guess that you can't deny this fundamental fact: Sex sells.

[Akka]

While it's true that the main interest in Civ-like games is to play and not to look the female leaders, I have to admit that I was never be able to betray Lady Deidre in AC. Now, THAT is a hot chick


Ok, I need to go out a little more

[Jethro83]

Originally posted by Akka le Vil
While it's true that the main interest in Civ-like games is to play and not to look the female leaders, I have to admit that I was never be able to betray Lady Deidre in AC. Now, THAT is a hot chick


Ok, I need to go out a little more

Don't worry. That isn't as bad. I mean, Dierdre may have been hand-drawn by a graphics artist deep within the darkest recesses of the Firaxian dungeon, but she still looks more real than Joan of Arc or Cleo in Civ III.

But still, since she isn't real, she can't substitute for a real woman. I didn't want to betray her either. But that was because she was one of my more powerful allies (since I usually pick Democratic, Green, Knowlege, she, Lal and Zakharov are my "League of Factions" united against the "Axis of Factions" comprised of the Believers, Hive and Morganites. Even if the axis powers sometimes don't get along, I still like to think of it that way)

[The Rook]

I don't think it was to "sex-up" the game. It was to give equal time to females. I am not a chauvanist by any means, but I just don't agree that EVERYTHING needs to be 50/50. Political correctness to the extreme makes me want to puke. Like when they use feminine pronouns, she, her, etc in texts. It's not the use of the pronouns that bugs me. It's the fact that somebody complained about it.
Napoleon deserves to be the leader for France. He had a far greater impact on the world than Jeanne D'Arc. The only reason she is there is to be politically correct. I have no problem with Cleo, Catherine, and Elizabeth, though if Russia's preferred government type is communism, then Lennon would probably be more appropriate. I just don't see how Joan fits into the equation.


By the way, great Napoleon Mod. Any way to put him in a toga and armor for the earlier ages?

[Andrew Cory]

Originally posted by LordAzreal
No offense dude, but while she may be hot by computer generated polygon standards, she can't possibly look as good as pretty much all of the attractive REAL women out there.

I agree. That's why I don't play Civ while my GF is over. Although, I _did_ have to introduce Civ to the "other woman, the one who has been taking so much of my time away from your pixilated goodness..." My GF got a good laugh...

Originally posted by LordAzreal
I seriously don't see what the point was to try and "sex-up" the game. I play to conquer worlds, not to check out women. When I want to check out women, I go through my Ralph magazines (BTW Ralph is a men's lifestyle mag in Australia and New Zealand responsible for showing some of the hottest women you're ever likely to see. OK, OK, I already mentioned this in a previous thread, but I say it again nevertheless.)

But I guess that you can't deny this fundamental fact: Sex sells.

Ummm, I forget: Ralphs has nude women or no?

[AJ Corp. The FAIR]

Originally posted by UberKruX


considering the panzer is the UU for germany, i would have considered Hitler the best leader for germany.

Are you one of those that just love combat boots, violence, etc.?

Hitler not only ruined millions of lifes of his 'enemies', but also brought misery and death to millions of his own citizens. The horrors committed by Hitler's regime are thought in schools around the globe, to prevent megalomanic, psychotic maniacs like him to gain power again.

And now you, Uberkrux, call him 'the best leader for Germany?'



AJ

[punkbass2000]

best does not necessarily refer to morals. I would say he was the most influential, which may be the most important factor.

[Cyclotron]

Originally posted by AJ Corp. The FAIR


Are you one of those that just love combat boots, violence, etc.?

Hitler not only ruined millions of lifes of his 'enemies', but also brought misery and death to millions of his own citizens. The horrors committed by Hitler's regime are thought in schools around the globe, to prevent megalomanic, psychotic maniacs like him to gain power again.

And now you, Uberkrux, call him 'the best leader for Germany?'
AJ

What Uberkrux was referring to is the erroneousness of the idea that a civ's leader should be based off the civ's UU, as somebody suggested that because France's UU was the Musketeer that King Louis should be the leader.

Uber was proving that statement wrong, not advocating Nazism.

[Auwi]

So who is more popular in present-day France, Joan or Napoleon?

I think that would be the best criteria, present-day popularity.

[Akka]

Napoléon, hands down.

Jeanne d'Arc is known as a spiritual figure as much as an army leader. She's rather the "soul", some kind of medieval hero. Rather a romantic icon of the country revolting against oppressor, and restoring the crown to the rightful king.
Which was quite a coward and bastard, but well that is only historical fact, not as interesting as tales...

Napoléon is a political man, a military man, a leader of army, a creater of laws, structures, buildings, administration...

He fits the shoes of a civilization leader ten times better.

Louis XIV on the other hand, still is considered the builder of the modern France, as he erected the basis of the country, which was at its zenith in nearly every subject under his reign.

[AJ Corp. The FAIR]

Originally posted by cyclotron7


What Uberkrux was referring to is the erroneousness of the idea that a civ's leader should be based off the civ's UU, as somebody suggested that because France's UU was the Musketeer that King Louis should be the leader.

Uber was proving that statement wrong, not advocating Nazism.

I don't know if you're familiar with European languages, but

'Uberkrux'

doesn't sound 'friendly' at all.



AJ

[Chronus]

Jeanne d'Arc is known as a spiritual figure as much as an army leader.

Napoléon is a political man, a military man, a leader of army, a creater of laws, structures, buildings, administration...

He fits the shoes of a civilization leader ten times better.

All right, then. Who do you think the leader of India should be?

By the way, this thread reminds me of a thread from long ago when everyone was drooling over that Foreign Advisor chick from Civ 2.

[Andrew Cory]

Originally posted by Chronus
By the way, this thread reminds me of a thread from long ago when everyone was drooling over that Foreign Advisor chick from Civ 2.

the hottest advisor of all time was the MoO2 elarian (I forget, the elfish ones) millitary advisor. I always played custom races, but used them as a background _just_ for her...

[Cyclotron]

Originally posted by AJ Corp. The FAIR
I don't know if you're familiar with European languages, but

'Uberkrux'

doesn't sound 'friendly' at all.
AJ

I never said Uberkrux was friendly. I simply was pointing out that you were taking his post somewhat out of context.

[Andrew Cory]

Originally posted by AJ Corp. The FAIR
I don't know if you're familiar with European languages, but

'Uberkrux'

doesn't sound 'friendly' at all.
AJ

For those of us unfamillier with the launguages of the EU, please translate...

[nato]

I think he is talking about the Uber, which might make him think of Ubermensch, like the Nazi idea of a superior man ... however I think Uber is becoming more and more used in slang to just mean ultimate.

No idea about the krux, I just figured he made it up.

To me, uber will always be the red faced avatar guy with the quote "Civ is coming out on October 17 or Firaxis is getting torched". Ah, memories ...

[AJ Corp. The FAIR]

Originally posted by Andrew Cory

For those of us unfamillier with the launguages of the EU, please translate...

IMO UberKrux refers to fascist ideologies, it certainly seems very political incorrect. Normally don't mind, but there are exceptions. Calling Hitler best leader for the Germans proves what I thought long ago: just another neo nazi around, like the kid in Erfurt probably was.

I could be mistaken about Uberkrux though, I hope so.

AJ

[Spook42]

Originally posted by Akka le Vil
Napoléon, hands down.

Napoléon is a political man, a military man, a leader of army, a creater of laws, structures, buildings, administration...

He fits the shoes of a civilization leader ten times better.

Maybe if Corsica could be adapted as a game-civ, then Nappy could be used to lead that instead?

[Spook42]

BTW, it's as LordAzreal mentioned earlier. Cyber-image women don't hold a candle to real ones. Otherwise, it could be argued that pixalated men are better than real men, and then ALL of us male gamers would be out in the cold.

But as far as comparing the "hot" women leaders of Civ3 to others generated on computer, they're not even fifth-string. The attached would be moving in the right direction for a mesmerizing leader (though perhaps better for MOO or SMAC. Remember the Elerians?).