[Freeciv-Dev] Re: It's a game already!

[Jason Todd <idjason@xxxxxxxx>]

Dan Ward wrote:
> 
> Finally a voice of reason. In case anyone's in any doubt Freeciv is a game
> not a history book; it's supposed to be fun.

Yeah, but why not make it somewhat historically acurate?

> Splitting the game up into historical, ancient & modern civilisations is a
> really bad idea; IMO mixing eras was one of the reasons that made PayCiv
> great. In what way does this arbitrary separation make the game more fun the
> play?
>
> On the subject of city & civ names I'd suggest sticking to names that are
> generally identifed with a particular civ in particular I can see no benefit
> in renaming the Chinese to Han or English to Anglo Saxon expecially as the
> latter is very non-PC.

Now with this I agree. There really isn't much of a point to renaming
civs if no-one has ever heard of the new name. Thats where I would draw
the line.