Complete.Org: Mailing Lists: Archives: freeciv-dev: April 2000:
[Freeciv-Dev] Re: A patch for 4 new nations

[Freeciv-Dev] Re: A patch for 4 new nations

[Top] [All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index] [Thread Index]
To: Falk Hueffner <falk.hueffner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: FreeCiv Developers <freeciv-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [Freeciv-Dev] Re: A patch for 4 new nations
From: Tony Stuckey <stuckey@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 21 Apr 2000 14:32:10 -0500

On Fri, Apr 21, 2000 at 05:43:41PM +0200, Falk Hueffner wrote:
> Cameron Morland <cjmorlan@xxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> > I don't see any reason not to include Taiwan when considered by
> > itself; the island is clearly sovereign, its government is about as
> > different from China's as possible. When Germany was separate, it
> > would have made sense to have two nations; they were sovereign.

        I think this is taking too narrow a view of "nation".

> I think it would still make sense. The "nations" in FreeCiv are all
> historical; they really don't need to mach a nation that still exists,
> or else we wouldn't have the Babylonians etc.

        Right, but part of the selector for the original Civilization was
some measure of historical impact as well.  A nation can be extinct now,
but have affected the course of world development over hundreds or
thousands of years.
        And there is a reason that the "Indians" were chosen over
"Harappans", "Maurya", and "Sikhs", to name a few examples.  Aggregation is
pretty much key.

> Quebec is a bit difficult, since it has never been independend. Still,
> I wouldn't object to a Quebecois nation.

        I would, for reasons that are hard to articulate.
        Similarly, I would object to a Creole nation.  It's not just that
they aren't independent.  It's that they really are subsumed into a larger
culture, in this case the French.

> I think we shouldn't look that much on political stuff when deciding
> which nations to include. I would suggest these rules:
> * The nation had a "national identity", i. e. language and culture etc.
> * Somebody wants to play it.
> * There is a nice flag and a set of leaders and cities, which are
>   historically consistent.
> Generally, I think more emphasis should be put on points 2 and
> 3... This is a game, after all...

        I would put more emphasis on point 1 myself.  However, I would add
a point 4, which is the extended historical impact.
Anthony J. Stuckey                              stuckey@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
"And they said work hard, and die suddenly, because it's fun."
        -Robyn Hitchcock.

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]