More Unique than the Next Civ!

[LordShiva]

[Axxaer]

Im assuming its in Fedlish until someone translates

[Jeff061]

Why don't you just add an extra AI and pretend that's a barbarian.

Barbarian's are meant to be obstacles . If they were just like others Civs what would be the point?

[Paxman]

Jeff: Chronus9 seemed to get Axxaers point well, and so did I. It's a good idea and I'd also like to see the proposed Berzerker unit. Maybe someone could make a mod ?

[Jeff061]

Overlooked the second page, oops.

[Vinnnch]

Originally posted by Paxman

These tribes (Visigoths, Ostrogoths and Vandals) were not barbarian at all, but were labeled so by the Romans. An example of their exquisite and fine artmanship still stand today as the gothic cathedrals in Europe.

Hum...
I think you make a mistake, there. The "gothic" cathedrals were called such because, in their time, people found their style awfully excentric, weird, aggressive. So they called this style "gothic", but they could have called it "barbaric". So it is not a style created by the Goths.

And for the barbarian power...
The difference I make between a barbarian and a "normal" civilization in this game, is that I can't havec any diplomacy with barbarians.
In history, what european peoples called barbarians, were in fact other european peoples, with whom they finally could talk, in the end.
In the early middle-ages, the worst threat in Europe were the vicking raids. The french king Charles III finally negociated with the vicking Rollon, and they found an aggreement. France gave them the now-called Normandy (this name comes from "North Man"), and vickings did not raid France anymore.
In the same way, they were deals between Goths and Romans, and many others all over Europe

This to say that most "barbarians" were in fact others civilizations. So just let CivIV barbarians the way they are, they are great to make you live the fears of these times, but they should not be the major long-time problem of this game.
(I don't know if I am uderstandable...)

[player1]

There is a reason why there is no diplomacy with barbarians currently.

Fist every barbarian city is supposed to be for itself.
So if you enable diplomacy then all barbarians in the world will be bound by it.

[EternalSpark]

This thread has degraded into petty arguments and will obviously not achieve anything so there is no points continuing it. Just let it die quietly.

If your opinion wasn't getting its ass kicked in like a Fires deck playing against Dredge-A-Tog, I'd respect your concession. But I agree, there's no point to this thread - you don't have a Plat Angel in play, so the game's over.

I will reply to one thing, though, that caught my eye:

I have accepted from the start that barbarians are obstacles/speedbumps, that is exactly what I want to change. Whether that is what they should be, is entirely subjective

It's entirely not subjective. Barbs do what they are designed to do, and it'll always happen.

[DrSpike]

Well, no. Although I agree with the view that making barbs anything more than obstacles is a bad idea, the question of what role they should play is, of course, subjective.

[Ray Radlein]

Originally posted by Axxaer
Actually, don't bother replying to that. This thread has degraded into petty arguments and will obviously not achieve anything so there is no points continuing it. Just let it die quietly.

Without taking sides here, my Rule of Thumb has always been that once the argument becomes about the argument itself, the odds of extracting any useful discourse on the original topic of disagreement are effectively zero.

[Odin]

The main problem with barbarians is that they come as a fairly steady stream of single units instead of buikding up into stacks, turning the barbs into a whack-a-mole annoyance.

[LordShiva]

Originally posted by Odin
The main problem with barbarians is that they come as a fairly steady stream of single units instead of buikding up into stacks, turning the barbs into a whack-a-mole annoyance.

Exactly! Except on Highland maps, they're like pollution in Civ3

[Axxaer]

Originally posted by EternalSpark
If your opinion wasn't getting its ass kicked in like a Fires deck playing against Dredge-A-Tog, I'd respect your concession. But I agree, there's no point to this thread - you don't have a Plat Angel in play, so the game's over.

I will reply to one thing, though, that caught my eye:

It's entirely not subjective. Barbs do what they are designed to do, and it'll always happen.

Your arrogance doesn't cease to amaze me. I really don't care if you think that you were kicking the ass out of my argument like some obscure analogy. You are clearly an excessively stubborn arguer as you will not even concede that I had a point. What was my suggestion if not the point of this thread?

You also say that what barbs do is not subjective. Yet several people have voiced differing opinions in this thread alone. Just because you think they have one particular objective, does not make your view objective.

I am ashamed that in this day and age somebody would actually deny someone else the opportunity to end an argument that had been reduced to petty squabbling about issues that barely related to the OP. That you arrogantly choose to 'not respect my concession', is amazing. Especially considering I never conceded. Conceding is admitting you are wrong. I just decided that the thread had turned in a completely useless and had no point to continue.

I once again give you the opportunity to let this thread die. I am not "conceding" anything more than the fact that this thread had been rendered pointless due to arguments. Or are you so insecure that you must try and wrest a victory from someone who no longer wants to argue against you?

Thankyou once again to Imran, Paxman and the others who participated usefully.

[EternalSpark]

Just because you think they have one particular objective, does not make your view objective.

I don't think they have one objective. I know so. Civ taught me that. Civ 2 taught me that. SMAC's mindworms taught me that. Civ 3 taught me that. Civ 4 taught be that.

Civ 4 gave Barbs that had cities and stuff, but none of Civ's barbs have ever strayed into what you'd like. There's a reason behind it, and that reason has never deviated.

Conceding is admitting you are wrong. I just decided that the thread had turned in a completely useless and had no point to continue.

Proudly proclaiming that you're abandoning this thread is a concession.

[Axxaer]

Don't take threads personally. If someone wants to end a pointless argument just end it, please don't try and make it a matter of honour that you must try and pound them into the ground after they've told you they don't want to argue any more. It is pointless.

No matter what happens, I will still think I was right, you will think you were right, Imran, Paxman and whoever else will also think they are right. Continuing an argument which obviously has no rational end in sight is a pure waste of time and effort. There are much easier ways for us to get +1s.