Has time passed me by?

[Kidlicious]

I have no issue with Cruz supporters and I would have voted for Cruz if he got the nomination. I have an issue with the cultists who thought he was some sort of prophet from God.

No one thinks he's a prophet. People think he's a conservative, unlike Trump.

[Kidlicious]

I hate to break it to you Rah, but Republicans like me have been the silent majority for years. Trump is inarticulate and an imperfect messenger, but he will serve the purpose of attracting more nationalist populists to the party and pushing out the neo-cons and globalists. The Republican party must embrace that direction and shed the globalist, nation building, open border, corny capitalist core that it currently has. I cheer every time I hear a Republican call trump a racist xenophobe, or hurl Islamophobia his way because they help to push the party further in my direction. It's time to clean out the trash in the Republican party and turn it into a party that puts America and Americans first.

Do you know the difference between a populist and a conservative?

[Dinner]

Hi eyes...

I have to agree with you on Civ V. And while I'm not optimistic that VI will be any better, I can still hope.
Civ has never really been developed for MP. It's always been a SP game first with MP being an after thought.
You would think with the market demands for MP games, that they would take a hint. But no, I don't expect to see them look to MP players as a core market.

Supposedly Civ 4 was designed from the ground up for MP and the deliberately streamlined the design so that turns wpuld be faster and thus MP would be more fun.

[rah]

I thought MP was barely functional when vanilla IV came out. If that was their focus, they failed.

[DriXnaK]

No one thinks he's a prophet. People think he's a conservative, unlike Trump.

Conservative has come to mean many things over the past 30 years. I don't consider the Bushes, McCain, and Romney to be conservatives. Trump is conservative in the most important aspects for this election year. Also, I consider conservatism largely dead and it has been a long time. GWB was nothing more than a socialist; a socialist globalist neo-con. Oh but he was anti-gay marriage and he believed in cutting taxes! Pay no heed to the debt, expansion of government, misuse of our military, open border policies, etc. Long live populism and nationalism.

[DriXnaK]

Do you know the difference between a populist and a conservative?

It depends on what definition of populist you apply and how far back you go. I would define a populist as someone who takes an America first approach and puts American workers before free trade and maximization of profits. Anti-immigration, smaller government (I think Trump fails here), anti-free trade (at least in its current form), anti-socialism, with a libertarian lean and pro nationalist is what I would define it as. I would also say that modern populism is anchored in the belief of Western ideological superiority; something that is fueling the uprising across the Western world as globalists see every culture as equal. From a foreign policy standpoint, I would say there is a definite strain of isolationism behind it and it is a backlash against the nation building of the past 16 years. People are tired of wasting our time and money and lives on countries who don't share our values in the first place.

Today's conservatives are pro-immigration and free trade; after all, they take plenty of donations from corporations who want the cheap labor. They are also firm believers in the global police force and nation building. There is actually very little difference between establishment Republicans and Democrats, which is why you see so many of them easily going and voting for Hillary. There is obviously overlap between conservatives and populists, but I would say the main difference is the approach to immigration and free trade for this election.

[OneFootInTheGrave]

Civ V is on 92% discount right now during Steam Summer Sale, and I am not buying it. I would not download it, if they were giving it away.

[Kidlicious]

It depends on what definition of populist you apply and how far back you go. I would define a populist as someone who takes an America first approach and puts American workers before free trade and maximization of profits. Anti-immigration, smaller government (I think Trump fails here), anti-free trade (at least in its current form), anti-socialism, with a libertarian lean and pro nationalist is what I would define it as. I would also say that modern populism is anchored in the belief of Western ideological superiority; something that is fueling the uprising across the Western world as globalists see every culture as equal. From a foreign policy standpoint, I would say there is a definite strain of isolationism behind it and it is a backlash against the nation building of the past 16 years. People are tired of wasting our time and money and lives on countries who don't share our values in the first place.

Today's conservatives are pro-immigration and free trade; after all, they take plenty of donations from corporations who want the cheap labor. They are also firm believers in the global police force and nation building. There is actually very little difference between establishment Republicans and Democrats, which is why you see so many of them easily going and voting for Hillary. There is obviously overlap between conservatives and populists, but I would say the main difference is the approach to immigration and free trade for this election.

A populist doesn't really stand for anything. All they do is tell people what they want to hear. That's what Hillary Clinton does. She's a liar and so is Trump. Do you really want to support a party of liars who are just talking to to voters with the lowest common sense and intelligence? Do you really think those people are going to be good for America? That's insane. People are just going to get dumber and dumber. The party you hope for would be little better than the democrats. Conservatism isn't dead yet, but if it does die this country is up **** river without a paddle.

[DriXnaK]

A populist doesn't really stand for anything. All they do is tell people what they want to hear. That's what Hillary Clinton does. She's a liar and so is Trump. Do you really want to support a party of liars who are just talking to to voters with the lowest common sense and intelligence? Do you really think those people are going to be good for America? That's insane. People are just going to get dumber and dumber. The party you hope for would be little better than the democrats. Conservatism isn't dead yet, but if it does die this country is up **** river without a paddle.

Conservatism is definitely dead as defined by the past 30 years. Then again though, it all comes down to your definition of conservatism. Is nation building a conservative stance? How about "compassionate conservatism" in the Bush sense? Is replacing every American worker with cheap foreign labor through visa expansion and open borders conservative? How exactly does that serve the country? Is being a conservative putting America first or is it part of being in a global coalition? Does being anti-gay marriage but doubling the size of government make you a conservative? For that matter, should gay marriage even be on the platform if we believe in smaller government? Why should the government be involved in marriage in the first place?

Even if we assume for a moment that Trump is a liar and won't do anything he says, I will still take an unknown possibility over what I already know will happen with an establishment Republican. The Bushes, McCains, and Romneys are the worst thing to happen to the Republican party and every last one of them must be purged. The Republican party must become a party that puts America and Americans first and does not work to enrich politicians and the corporations who fund them.

[Kidlicious]

Conservatism is definitely dead as defined by the past 30 years. Then again though, it all comes down to your definition of conservatism. Is nation building a conservative stance? How about "compassionate conservatism" in the Bush sense? Is replacing every American worker with cheap foreign labor through visa expansion and open borders conservative? How exactly does that serve the country? Is being a conservative putting America first or is it part of being in a global coalition? Does being anti-gay marriage but doubling the size of government make you a conservative? For that matter, should gay marriage even be on the platform if we believe in smaller government? Why should the government be involved in marriage in the first place?

Even if we assume for a moment that Trump is a liar and won't do anything he says, I will still take an unknown possibility over what I already know will happen with an establishment Republican. The Bushes, McCains, and Romneys are the worst thing to happen to the Republican party and every last one of them must be purged. The Republican party must become a party that puts America and Americans first and does not work to enrich politicians and the corporations who fund them.

Free-trade is conservative, but not to the point where it erodes the manufacturing base and causes strife. Our trade policies are outdated. They worked up until about 1970. I think we should have changed course then, but not radically. I don't like our trade policy with China at all. We have just about made them a superpower, and we've gotten little from the deal if anything as a nation.

Immigration, I just want it to make sense. Illegals need to be deported. I'm not really anti-immigration though.

What I hate is this executive order crap. I didn't like Bush doing it, and I really don't like Obama doing it. And I want candidates to be respectful and decent. I'm also a Christian and certainly don't think Trump is. If he's ever been to church he must have slept threw the sermon. Nobody say's Two Corinthians. I don't think he will stand up for Christian principles.

edit: Nation building is neo-conservative. That movement is definitely dead. Do you know of any neo-cons in the game right now?

[DriXnaK]

Free-trade is conservative, but not to the point where it erodes the manufacturing base and causes strife. Our trade policies are outdated. They worked up until about 1970. I think we should have changed course then, but not radically. I don't like our trade policy with China at all. We have just about made them a superpower, and we've gotten little from the deal if anything as a nation.

Immigration, I just want it to make sense. Illegals need to be deported. I'm not really anti-immigration though.

What I hate is this executive order crap. I didn't like Bush doing it, and I really don't like Obama doing it. And I want candidates to be respectful and decent. I'm also a Christian and certainly don't think Trump is. If he's ever been to church he must have slept threw the sermon. Nobody say's Two Corinthians. I don't think he will stand up for Christian principles.

I'm an atheist; I don't give a damn about your Christian principles. Only the best should be allowed into this country, and you put America before your religion and place of origin. Muslims will always put their religion first, and they are not compatible with Western ideology anyway, and therefore should be banned from the Western world. The people waving Mexican flags and saying "Make America Mexico again" should be executed for treason if they are American citizens, and deported immediately if they are not. It's time to stop being so tolerant and start taking pride in Western civilization and America. Finally, it's time to stop allowing the socialists to keep getting away with what they are doing. We need to make it a cultural norm that socialists aren't tolerated. They must be ridiculed and dehumanized. The weapons of mass destruction weren't in Iraq, they were in academia and the left; the Democrat party. Every horrible regime is some form of socialism, be it Communism, Nazism, some worthless form of Islamic ape cult, or your run of the mill South American third world hell hole.

[Kidlicious]

Putting your country before your religion means you don't believe in your religion. That's what a populist would say. Principles first. When the people of your nation have principles your nation will be great. Otherwise it will go down the ****ter.

[DriXnaK]

Yes, but you don't need religion to instill those principles. Our education system right now is dominated by leftist socialists who actively engage in indoctrination in the school system. If you want to instill principles, then fix the school system. That doesn't mean you make every school a Christian school, that means you clean house and start ostracizing socialists and eliminate control of the system by Democrats and the teacher's union. Charter schools are the cure for that for the most part, which is why Democrats and their allies are fighting it.

[Lorizael]

The people waving Mexican flags and saying "Make America Mexico again" should be executed for treason if they are American citizens...

This is an outrageously contemptible thing to say. Thankfully, the First Amendment protects your right to say it.

[Aeson]

I thought MP was barely functional when vanilla IV came out. If that was their focus, they failed.

It was a focus from day 1, and a large portion of the playtesting group was from the Civ III Ladder. I'm not sure how it was received there, but seemed rather popular with the PvP testers and a lot of the SP players were also playing MP regularly in testing. But it may be a playstyle thing, as most of the playtesters were those who were involved in the Civ III community, so that would have likely lead to a type of game that many who didn't like Civ III wouldn't have liked as much. I personally liked the release version better than when they added on the Warlords and Beyond the Sword stuff.

It was certainly far better MP than Civ III at release (no PvP until PtW) or Civ V. Not that that is setting a high bar.