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

["martin.mcmahon" <martin.mcmahon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hello Falk 
you cant use a rule which stop one nation playing if another is used ,were do
u stop with this rule as I said early on this month what if someone picks the
romans that means most of the euro countries r out plus the usa (the
"founding nations" dont start).I dont mind playing with towns cities with the
same name.the last count there were 54 Hamiltons 20 glasgows 5 Perths ect in
the world :) no wonder the airlines get luggage lost. 

On 21-Apr-00, Falk Hueffner wrote:
> Cameron Morland <cjmorlan@xxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> 
>> > I am sure your effort in contributing to the Freeciv project is
>> > appreciated by all. But still, I have to respectfully disagree on adding
>> > the Taiwanese as a new nation. First of all, I don't see any demand for a
>> > Taiwanese nation, so your first argument doesn't apply. Secondly, you
>> > can't compare Taiwanese with Mordor or Dunedain. It's not a fantasy
>> > nation. In fact, it's not a nation at all. Its offical name is Republic
>> > of China, and its people is still Chinese. It is not a new nation, not
>> > even in the sense as used in Freeciv. Finally, I just want to remind you
>> > again that not that long ago Germany was divided into two countries. I
>> > don't suppose you would make two nations for the Germans as well, would
>> > you?
>> 
>> 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 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.
> 
>> But, to try to see things from the other point of view, I would not
>> consider it correct, being a Canadian, if a Quebec "nation" were
>> created for the game (without the other provinces & territories
>> created as well).  (You may know that some people in Quebec wishe
>> the province to separate, and hold a plebiscite on the topic every
>> few years.) But this isn't the same, as Quebec is not (yet?)
>> sovereign in any sense of the word.
> 
> Quebec is a bit difficult, since it has never been independend. Still,
> I wouldn't object to a Quebecois nation.
> 
> 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.
> 
> The problem with making that few restictions is, of course, conflicts
> between nations which share cities, like the British and the UK, or
> the Canadians and the Quebecois, or the Chinese nation at a time where
> Taiwan belonged to it and Taiwan. It would really nice if this
> conflicts could be set into the rulesets, so that no two conflicting
> nations can play at the same time, as has already been suggested.
> 
> Generally, I think more emphasis should be put on points 2 and
> 3... This is a game, after all...
> 
>     Falk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
Regards
-- 
http://starradioscotland.cjb.net
  
Chat on #Rabble  uk3.arcnet.vapor.com port6667
see http://rabbled.cjb.net

Get Freeciv at http://www.freeciv.org

Member of G.A.U.G (Glasgow Amiga User Group)
gaug-subscribe@xxxxxxxxxxx