Civ of the Week: Russians

[Ironwood]

SCIENTIFIC?!

Well, that was my first reaction when I read their CSAs. Expansionist definately applies, but scientific? I suppose my objectivist background causes me to react to that poorly.

Then again, the USSR managed to keep pace with the US for a while despite the fact that their system attempted to quash any form of individual thought. Their form of government was still little more than an advanced form of "Despotism" (at least during Stalin's years).

Still, though they may have achieved Rocketry sooner than we, our development of "Advanced Computing" ensured we'd pass them up quickly and easily.

[Dauphin]

Although they are a good idea and add flavour to the game, it seems as if those unique units are unevenly shared between civs.

Depends on when the best time to have a golden age is. If having it early is beneficial, then having late GEs is set off against having better UUs.

[LoD]

So the Cossacks are Russian UUs. Laughable .

[Dark Scorpion]

The fact that it's a real word was probably the reason it slipped through the spell check...

I don't know that many people who consider Stalin a "great ruler" (Megalomania does not equal greatness), though a fair number prefer Peter over Catherine. I don't; Catherine the Great is by far my favourite historical leader, an intelligent, unscrupolous and sex-mad monarch with truly Machiavellian characteristics. [/QUOTE]

They are both very good rulers, but you should also consider Alexander II the emperor which freed farmers, largely expanded borders and made great achievements in industrializing Russia. But the monarch from which Russia has truly started its way to European superpowers is Peter the Great!

[Dark Scorpion]

Re: SCIENTIFIC?!

Originally posted by Ironwood
Well, that was my first reaction when I read their CSAs. Expansionist definately applies, but scientific? I suppose my objectivist background causes me to react to that poorly.

Then again, the USSR managed to keep pace with the US for a while despite the fact that their system attempted to quash any form of individual thought. Their form of government was still little more than an advanced form of "Despotism" (at least during Stalin's years).

Still, though they may have achieved Rocketry sooner than we, our development of "Advanced Computing" ensured we'd pass them up quickly and easily.

Really!!!??? The Russian scientist were always at its peak if you start thinking from 1800. TNT was first used in Russian laboratories, the table of elements which helped to discover aluminium and helped chemistry a lot. Radio and heavy bombers were first invented in Russia. And I think that the H-bomb is also worth mentioning. And the US didn't even kept with Russia until the 20th century! As a matter a fact before world wars the US was just a far village. And if you consider todays weaponry: MIG29 is better than F15. If you compare the Russian tanks and US tanks during the history, the Russian tanks were always better. US even today doesn't have good air defense that can compete with S300 which was designed 30 years ago . And what is the favorite assault rifle in the world? Kalashnikov NOT M16. So the Russia is truly scientific nation.

[JellyDonut]

Expansionist/Scientific suits Russia perfectly.

Expansionist: They're the largest nation in the world!
Scientific: They made it into space first!

[Col Bigspear]

Will the Mig be available as a normal unit?

[JellyDonut]

Originally posted by Col Bigspear
Will the Mig be available as a normal unit?

I sincerely doubt it. All the planes in Civ II were general descriptions (Bomber, Stealth Fighter, etc.) and not specific models. Plus, the old images specifically said "Russian MiG" (Capital M, lowercase i, Capital G, properly spelt, or else capital M, lowercase backwards N, capital upside-down L ).

[red_jon]

Scientific does not describe the Russians, seeing as they stole much of their tech from the west.

[ancient]

this sucks



I dont want no saggy assed queen for russias rulers

give me Lenin, Stalin or at least Peter..

And for the cossack, its not bad but the anticipated Mig would have been better and would also have fit in with a Stalin leadership.

This is really horrible!

Also they should be Mil/Sci. It would be more suitable. They are definately militaristic. and there space program and nuclear projects were scientific id say.. H-bomb first man in space satelight in space intercontinental missile..

[JellyDonut]

Originally posted by red_jon
Scientific does not describe the Russians, seeing as they stole much of their tech from the west.

Along that logic, we stole gunpowder from the Chinese and the alphabet from the Phoenicians!

No, they developed on info already discovered by the West.

[Dauphin]

Scientific does not describe the Russians, seeing as they stole much of their tech from the west.

Actually many mathematical thesis and physics postulate made in Russia in the 60s were only developed in the West in the 80s. Only after the collapse of the USSR was this scientific advancement truly realised. Before this time the Russian scientists/mathematicians were prevented from sharing their discoveries, or had no forum to discuss them with.

[d_dudy]

Re: Re: SCIENTIFIC?!

Originally posted by Dark Scorpion
And what is the favorite assault rifle in the world? Kalashnikov NOT M16. So the Russia is truly scientific nation.

well, it helped that they mass produced them and gave them away tp every revelutionary they liked

[d_dudy]

Re: Re: SCIENTIFIC?!

damn dp

[JT3]

And if you consider todays weaponry: MIG29 is better than F15. If you compare the Russian tanks and US tanks during the history, the Russian tanks were always better. US even today doesn't have good air defense that can compete with S300 which was designed 30 years ago . And what is the favorite assault rifle in the world? Kalashnikov NOT M16. So the Russia is truly scientific nation.

The MiG-29 is not a better aircraft than the F-15. I promise you that if you put a squadron of F-15s against a squadron of MiG-29s with roughly equal pilots and ground support the F-15s would come out on top.

As for the S-300 SAM, yes, it is quite good. But, Good Lord, have you ever heard of the Patriot? Definitely outclasses the S-300.

Just because one weapon was produced in greater numbers does not mean it's better. There are more T-72s in the world than there are M1A2s. Does that make the T-72 better? I don't think so. The AK-47 was popular because it was asoundingly cheap and because any country or group that wanted to become Communist or at least support Communism wasn't going to be getting any Western guns. Put a squad on infantry in a trench during the next big war and they'll pick an M-16 over an AK-47 every time.

Now, as for real Russian superiority in the sky, try the Su-27. A few European NATO countries did some major testing with it against the F-15 and it managed a 1.3:1 kill ratio. Of course, in a couple years America will have the F-22, which will dominate over anything else out there. The nearest Russian competitor, the Su-37, is more maneuverable but doesn't support such an advanced electronics suite, equal weapons, or stealth.

The new S-400 SAM provides the Patriot with some real stiff competition. I'd say the two are about even, though the "big" version of the S-400 designed to take out slow craft like AWACS and cargo planes (and perhaps B-2s if they can get a radar lock) is a unique design.

I'd say that the M-16 is still one of the better rifles out there, though by now it's been outclassed by new bullpup configuration rifles in Europe. The USA's designing one of those, too, but it won't enter production for a couple more years. Russia doesn't have any, and as far as I know, isn't designing any, either.

In the past two decades, Russia has been ahead in unorthodox war technologies more than orthodox ones. Electromagnetic technology, supersonic cruise missiles, scramjets, and tank defenses are a few of the areas in which Russia has a lead over America. The edge in orthodox stuff (tanks, planes, ships, submarines) is still the USA's.