[freeciv-data] Re: Cities in rulesets
[Top] [All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index] [Thread Index]
scripsit Miguel Farah:
> To a Spaniard, yes. To a mexican, the city was freed from its evil
> oppressors, only to be taken by OTHER oppressors. To an american, it was
> taken off its miserable existence and brought into progress. }:->
(I chuckle because I'm writing this from what a (Anglo) Political
Science prof I had calls "U.S.-occupied Northern Mexico".)
> Then again, this presents a whole new set of problems: a city is lost to
> rebellion based on its happiness, not on its name - if I have a
> rebellion, and Los Angeles is happy and, say, Tarragona is unhappy, I'll
> lose the second city.
How is this a problem? In a game, it's just as likely that the
Singaporeans or the Mordors will gobble up the "liberated" Los Angeles
than the Americans anyway.
> Other problem is repeated names: there's Linares in Spain and in Chile.
> There's San Antonio and San Francisco in several Latin American
> countries. There's Santiago in at least five different countries, where
> everyone calls its local city by that name and identifies the other ones
> by a compound name (for example, Santiago de Chile is simply Santiago to
> a chilean, and he calls the argentinian one Santiago del Estero, the
> spanish one Santiago de Compostela, etc.).
That's no different from the myriad homonymous cities in the U.S. There
are many Springfields, for example, and even multiple Kansas Cities--not
to mention the Berlins, Parises, Cairos, and Babylons.
Consider that "Berlin" on the old Civ 1 maps took up all of pre-1919
Germany, and "Paris" was larger than France. We oughtn't worry too much
about the game being able accurately to model the "real world" map!
Web Developer, Information Technology
Graduate Student, Department of History
Arizona State University
Tempe, Arizona, U.S.A.
Ash nazg durbatulûk, ash nazg gimbatul,
Ash nazg thrakatulûk agh burzum-ishi krimpatul