Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Stalin in Civ?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • My impression from your post was that they've been forgiven/ignored because they've become icons of pop/capitalist culture.
    THEY!!111 OMG WTF LOL LET DA NOMADS AND TEH S3D3NTARY PEOPLA BOTH MAEK BITER AXP3REINCES
    AND TEH GRAAT SINS OF THERE [DOCTRINAL] INOVATIONS BQU3ATH3D SMAL
    AND!!1!11!!! LOL JUST IN CAES A DISPUTANT CALS U 2 DISPUT3 ABOUT THEYRE CLAMES
    DO NOT THAN DISPUT3 ON THEM 3XCAPT BY WAY OF AN 3XTARNAL DISPUTA!!!!11!! WTF

    Comment


    • No, they´ve become icons because they were less of a threat to the capitalist culture than Hitler was.
      I love being beaten by women - Lorizael

      Comment


      • OK, I guess you're right in saying that we disagree on that
        THEY!!111 OMG WTF LOL LET DA NOMADS AND TEH S3D3NTARY PEOPLA BOTH MAEK BITER AXP3REINCES
        AND TEH GRAAT SINS OF THERE [DOCTRINAL] INOVATIONS BQU3ATH3D SMAL
        AND!!1!11!!! LOL JUST IN CAES A DISPUTANT CALS U 2 DISPUT3 ABOUT THEYRE CLAMES
        DO NOT THAN DISPUT3 ON THEM 3XCAPT BY WAY OF AN 3XTARNAL DISPUTA!!!!11!! WTF

        Comment


        • Indeed
          I love being beaten by women - Lorizael

          Comment


          • - IMHO, in the next patch, Hitler must be added.. and before anyone bashes me, No, I'm not a Nazi..

            - I dunno why some Civs have 2 or more leaders while some have only 1 leader..?

            Comment


            • some civs, we can only think of 1 decent leader. . Malinese, Inca, Aztecs come to mind.

              I'm surprised no one added a third american leader. Lincoln comes to mind.

              Hitler isn't needed. Germany is fine with 2. But he should be added if they do a ww2 scenario. But other than that, we have no use for his kind. What would we make him? Aggressive and industrious? I'd have to check the book, but we probably already have that combo. Or aggressive and imperialistic. Sounds like a powerful combo. I doubt they'd go for it.

              Of course england and russia should have 3, and they do.

              I really can't think of anymore right now. I'd rather see the babylonians in the game. Maybe poland.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Dis
                Maybe poland.
                Do the twins count as one leader or would you get to choose?
                I'm not buying BtS until Firaxis impliments the "contiguous cultural border negates colony tax" concept.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Dis
                  What would we make him?
                  Charismatic/Industrious

                  I'd still put Barbarossa ahead of Hitler (and the Hapsburgs ahead of the Poles).
                  LandMasses Version 3 Now Available since 18/05/2008.

                  Comment


                  • The Incas had Viracocha, considered the Alexander of the Americas. They could have two.

                    I could see China with three, considering the history, otherwise, no-one else, really. Still waiting for Suleiman (Ottomans), and Japan has had a couple of important leaders, so they could have a second. Most of the others, I'm happy with one. I just change their names to someone else I considered important, anyway. Not a big deal to me.

                    Comment


                    • Agg/Ind is already in the game (Stalin), as is Agg/Imp (Genghis).
                      Participating in my threads is mandatory. Those who do not do so will be forced, in their next game, to play a power directly between Catherine and Montezuma.

                      Comment


                      • - Agg/Exp..?

                        - More Leaders = More Fun :-)

                        Comment


                        • Agg/Exp = Shaka
                          LandMasses Version 3 Now Available since 18/05/2008.

                          Comment

                          Working...
                          X