Jump to content


Photo

Country Borders


  • Please log in to reply
95 replies to this topic

#51 SupSuper

SupSuper

    Programming Department

  • Xenocide Programming Department
  • 2,418 posts

Posted 30 November 2003 - 05:47 PM

how come USA is never grouped with more countries, it always funds alone? :whatwhat:

too bad, now you will never know the ancient secrets of supsupers long gone avatar ;)

Posted Image


#52 Cpl. Facehugger

Cpl. Facehugger

    Creative Text Department

  • Xenocide Inactive
  • 3,749 posts

Posted 30 November 2003 - 05:56 PM

Because USA doesn't need to group with other countries. We are so rich and powerful that other countries need to group together to even come close to our power.
I'm only partially inactive. :P I can still be reached at cpl.facehugger@gmail.com, and via PM. Preferably the former.

*Coming back? Avast! Facehugger, finish your assignments!*

Posted Image

#53 Deimos

Deimos

    Colonel

  • Forum Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,591 posts

Posted 30 November 2003 - 07:46 PM

I think the most diplomatic answer here would be for v1.0 stick to the original country listing from xcom.

#54 Breunor

Breunor

    Creative Text Department

  • Xenocide Inactive
  • 3,234 posts

Posted 30 November 2003 - 09:56 PM

Yes, for gameplay we know it worked. I suppose we can look at a more inclusive model after v1 is out. One of the reasons game play would be affected by having more countries, is that the area to search for alien activity drops when you have stats segmented into smaller areas. If Sri Lanka suddenly shows lots of activity, it's easier to search than if it's Africa.

#55 red knight

red knight

    Xenocide Project Leader

  • Xenocide Inactive
  • 3,310 posts

Posted 30 November 2003 - 11:22 PM

With the contraindication that makes the game easier...

Greetings
Red Knight
Sourceforge Nick: flois - Federico Andres Lois
Visit my blog at: flois.blogspot.com

Posted Image

Pookie cover me, I am going in.

#56 Puasonen

Puasonen

    Creative Text Department

  • Xenocide Inactive
  • 2,911 posts

Posted 30 November 2003 - 11:43 PM

instead of having "cuntries", what about uniting them into bigger parts? (USA, Europe, Scandinavia, South Amarican Unition, mid amarican republic, Canada, South Pole, North pole, Russia, Near East Foundation, Far East Foundation, West african republic, North african republic, and South African republic)

It would be a huge loss to lose one of those big areas to alien pact. I prefer the original..
There's no need for a sig..

#57 mikker

mikker

    Artwork Department

  • Xenocide Artwork Department
  • 2,211 posts

Posted 01 December 2003 - 02:04 PM

then what about that alien infiltration just lower their payment by, say, 10%? of cause, if its one of the bigger ships, and you are already doing bad, they would sign imidietly.

Some people say that dreams are a portal to the subconscious. If that is so, I am a very disturbed person.

the truth about scientology

#58 Breunor

Breunor

    Creative Text Department

  • Xenocide Inactive
  • 3,234 posts

Posted 01 December 2003 - 02:40 PM

Coming up with a system like that would need to be a v2 feature, as it would require lots of playtesting to determine a proper balance.

#59 Breunor

Breunor

    Creative Text Department

  • Xenocide Inactive
  • 3,234 posts

Posted 01 December 2003 - 02:43 PM

how come USA is never grouped with more countries, it always funds alone? :whatwhat:

I think becasue the US is similar in size to Europe, and tends to fund things at a higher rate than individual European countries.

#60 Puasonen

Puasonen

    Creative Text Department

  • Xenocide Inactive
  • 2,911 posts

Posted 03 December 2003 - 12:30 PM

I can't find a reason to change perfectly working funding system although I always like new ideas if they are good ones..
There's no need for a sig..

#61 coolp

coolp

    Captain

  • Forum Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 117 posts

Posted 08 December 2003 - 11:19 PM

Thats what I was just thinking... it seems like the current funding system works just fine. Also, why should Luxembourg and all of the small countries be in the alliance? They are getting the same benefits as the larger countries for less money... I think that they should be on their own or something...

#62 mikker

mikker

    Artwork Department

  • Xenocide Artwork Department
  • 2,211 posts

Posted 09 December 2003 - 06:54 AM

Thats what I was just thinking... it seems like the current funding system works just fine. Also, why should Luxembourg and all of the small countries be in the alliance? They are getting the same benefits as the larger countries for less money... I think that they should be on their own or something...

i think more of size. its pretty hard if luxenberg (a city) is alone, because then you would need to crash the ufo down ONTO the city to get them to give you more. size matters.

Some people say that dreams are a portal to the subconscious. If that is so, I am a very disturbed person.

the truth about scientology

#63 j'ordos

j'ordos

    Alien Concept Task Force

  • Xenocide Artwork Department
  • 5,059 posts

Posted 09 December 2003 - 03:50 PM

Luxembourg IS a nation, but if you have trouble finding Belgium on the map don't even bother with looking for the 'Grand Duchy of Luxembourg' :D
"You can't trust your eyes if your imagination's out of focus" - Mark Twain
"The mind is like an umbrella, it functions best when open" - Walter Gropius
Posted Image
SNEKK BLOG U-LAR MEKHH! GAHGHH! RK!
GRRGH RGGHH SNORRTT GHACKHGG

Now presented in DoubleVision™ (where drunk)

#64 Guest_drewid_*

Guest_drewid_*
  • Guests

Posted 09 December 2003 - 05:21 PM

The vatican must be smaller.

oops there goes the Basilica

#65 Kamikazee

Kamikazee

    Captain

  • Forum Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 188 posts

Posted 21 April 2004 - 02:04 PM

can we not say there was a kick ar$e war or something which grouped a lot of the smaller more volatile countries.
We only really need to worry about far eastern europe asian and some african countries as they are the most volatile ones and are probably likely to change.

#66 Robo Dojo 58

Robo Dojo 58

    Colonel

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,001 posts

Posted 21 April 2004 - 02:46 PM

We only really need to worry about far eastern europe asian and some african countries as they are the most volatile ones and are probably likely to change.

The Middle East and Africa have tons of border changes. It's practically an annual thing in those areas.
I think China and India might want to do a little expanding, though. They've got 2 billion people in those two countries alone. Heck, they may even want to start colonizing the ocean soon enough. That'd lead into X-COM 2, at least. :rolleyes:
Posted Image Haha! I'm now the Supreme Commander of X-COM. Time to kiss Earth goodbye.

My first order of business: Homeless people make cheap rookies, and are great at opening UFO doors. Heck, they're so cheap, I'm going to replace all personel with them!
Secondly: This organisation takes too much money to run. Weapon shipments will come from Siberia from now on. Costly maintenance is to be cut on all facilities. That includes venting.
Thirdly: We have a new colonel. His name is Facehugger, he loves aliens, and I want you all to treat him with respect.
Lastly: I'll be in my condo on an undisclosed island, if you need me. Good day.

FMIX-The General Stores

#67 Guest_drewid_*

Guest_drewid_*
  • Guests

Posted 22 April 2004 - 06:48 AM

can we not say there was a kick ar$e war or something which grouped a lot of the smaller more volatile countries.
We only really need to worry about far eastern europe asian and some african countries as they are the most volatile ones and are probably likely to change.

instead of countries we could have things like "east african alliance" "indonesian treaty organisation" kinda like dealing with NATO.

#68 Puasonen

Puasonen

    Creative Text Department

  • Xenocide Inactive
  • 2,911 posts

Posted 22 April 2004 - 09:15 AM

can we not say there was a kick ar$e war or something which grouped a lot of the smaller more volatile countries.
We only really need to worry about far eastern europe asian and some african countries as they are the most volatile ones and are probably likely to change.

instead of countries we could have things like "east african alliance" "indonesian treaty organisation" kinda like dealing with NATO.

Excellent idea, I don't think civilized countrys will start wars nowadays just to expand borders. Alliances on the other hand is a great idea. Though if you think about EU for example as a ONE funder, that's a huge amount of money!!
There's no need for a sig..

#69 Breunor

Breunor

    Creative Text Department

  • Xenocide Inactive
  • 3,234 posts

Posted 22 April 2004 - 09:25 AM

The key is making groupings that not only make sense as far as economic alliances are concerned, but also large/small enough for game balance regarding base placement and funding losses.

#70 Aosar

Aosar

    Captain

  • Forum Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 392 posts

Posted 22 April 2004 - 10:44 AM

how come USA is never grouped with more countries, it always funds alone?


We could group USA with Finland, and call it the Finnish Conglomerate..? Well, perhaps not...

I say that we have the original X-Com map for economy, but display actual modern day borders as lines on the map, how's that?
-Aosar
-------------------------
Pardon the engrish,
I'm Finnish...
"No Worries!"

#71 mikker

mikker

    Artwork Department

  • Xenocide Artwork Department
  • 2,211 posts

Posted 23 April 2004 - 07:37 AM

I say that we have the original X-Com map for economy, but display actual modern day borders as lines on the map, how's that?

Too much ripped off. It would be better we make our own.

Some people say that dreams are a portal to the subconscious. If that is so, I am a very disturbed person.

the truth about scientology

#72 MagicAndy

MagicAndy

    Captain

  • Forum Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 300 posts

Posted 29 April 2004 - 12:06 PM

I think that there should jsut be continents. After all the organisation is the Council of Funding Nations. Not just the "Funding Nations". I.e. the nations which are coffing up the dough have elected representatives to sit on a council (this can all be included in the Xnet Database entry). These representatives collect the money fromt he participating countries in thier area and then meet and pool what they have before passing it on. Then you would need less (though still a fair few) regions:

Western Europe
Eastern Europe
Western Russia
Eastern Russia
Eastern Orient
Weaster Orient
Northern Oceana
Southern Oceana
Northern Africa
Southern Africa
Northen America
Southern America
Antartica
Arctic

or somthing like that

#73 SupSuper

SupSuper

    Programming Department

  • Xenocide Programming Department
  • 2,418 posts

Posted 29 April 2004 - 12:31 PM

i like the idea. just some notes on your council list:
- i think Europe is far too small to have Western Europe and Eastern Europe. and Western would probably fund much less than Eastern ;)
- Russia doesn't need to be split into western and eastern. The country alone funds as much as any other council.
- It's Western/Eastern Asia, not Western/Eastern Orient
- hmmm... Antarctica, I wonder who they've got to fund us :P

too bad, now you will never know the ancient secrets of supsupers long gone avatar ;)

Posted Image


#74 Cpl. Facehugger

Cpl. Facehugger

    Creative Text Department

  • Xenocide Inactive
  • 3,749 posts

Posted 29 April 2004 - 01:32 PM

- hmmm... Antarctica, I wonder who they've got to fund us :P

Baby seals.

But SupSuper is right, we can't really have a few isolated researchers in the antartic funding us, now could we? We should stick to North and South America, Europe, Asia, Africa, and Indonesia/Australia. That way, there is less confusion. (imo)
I'm only partially inactive. :P I can still be reached at cpl.facehugger@gmail.com, and via PM. Preferably the former.

*Coming back? Avast! Facehugger, finish your assignments!*

Posted Image

#75 MagicAndy

MagicAndy

    Captain

  • Forum Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 300 posts

Posted 30 April 2004 - 01:41 PM

all good points

Country borders should still exist and coverage of each contry will give the total for each area and at the end of the month the player is given a report like:

Council of Funding Nations Convenes 31st of March 2014
Minutes:

Councilor for [Region]: "All/most/some/no governments in my region have recieved exellent/good/average/bad/poor/ coverage and protection this year. They hope that X-corps will consider constructing a facility in the region soon/The construction of a new facility this month has brought jobs wealth to the region/We all feel relativly/reasonably/very safe knowing there are [#] facilities currently now operating in our area. We have decided to increase/decrease/maintain level of funding."

Funding Change: + $600,000
Funds Recieved: $2,300,000

Councilor for [Region]: ... etc...


With this system we can have a "show region borders" button and a "show country borders" button on the geoscope and everyone is happy ^_^

Edited by MagicAndy, 30 April 2004 - 06:55 PM.


#76 Kamikazee

Kamikazee

    Captain

  • Forum Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 188 posts

Posted 30 April 2004 - 03:22 PM

Microsoft fund more than the entire world, should they be a nation? :)

#77 Kamikazee

Kamikazee

    Captain

  • Forum Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 188 posts

Posted 30 April 2004 - 03:24 PM

on a more serios note, the funding should be unbalanced, that way its more strategic. eg. aliens capture europe and usa so you must cover twice as much area to make up for lost profit protecting the countries with smaller pockets.

#78 mikker

mikker

    Artwork Department

  • Xenocide Artwork Department
  • 2,211 posts

Posted 30 April 2004 - 03:26 PM

Microsoft fund more than the entire world, should they be a nation? :)

we COULD....

but that should be under "private founding". They should vary diffrent. Like, a terror-site outcome changes it. Most civilians died, founding goes down. Let UFOs land for abduction missions, founding goes down.

Some people say that dreams are a portal to the subconscious. If that is so, I am a very disturbed person.

the truth about scientology

#79 kchickenlord

kchickenlord

    Sergeant

  • Forum Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 28 posts

Posted 12 July 2004 - 07:11 PM

in reality the combined wealth of all european nations would far surpass that of the us, someone should look up an encyclopedia or the WTO for the stats but i think this could be an area for further research, i could do it if you want, just say the word.

#80 54x

54x

    Sergeant

  • Forum Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 30 posts

Posted 18 July 2004 - 09:56 PM

Western Europe
Eastern Europe
Western Russia
Eastern Russia
Eastern Orient
Weaster Orient
Northern Oceana
Southern Oceana
Northern Africa
Southern Africa
Northen America
Southern America
Antartica
Arctic


Heh, neither antartica nor the artic can fund you :D

I think there are some redundancies in your groupings. Here are some basic groupings:

Northern Africa
Southern Africa
European Union
United Kingdom (should probably be seperate as it isn't all that integrated with the EU :D )
Northern Europe (this would include countries like greenland, iceland, norway, finland, etc...)
Eurasia (Russia and former soviet satellite states that are not yet in the EU)
Middle East
Northern Asia
Southeast Asia
Australia
New Zealand
Pacific Islands
Canada
USA
Mexico
South America

This makes exactly 16, and covers the world, but has some pretty large groupings. It'd be kinda nice if the countries were grouped together by rough regions, (ie. europe, eurasia, asia, africa, middle east, pacific, (NOT Oceania! :P) north america, south america) and funding was listed by these regions. Then you could expand them into countries, and for the larger countries, these would extend again into states- and when all of the expansion is done, THOSE areas would be the individual building blocks that could be subverted by aliens- so you don't even lose the whole USA or EU, when the aliens sign a treaty, but you may lose Michigan or Spain.

I'd agree though that at first that sort of system is too complex.

#81 fux0r666

fux0r666

    Alien Concept Task Force

  • Xenocide Artwork Department
  • 1,028 posts

Posted 18 July 2004 - 11:54 PM

The arctic would be northern canada and russia, america, finland, norway, sweden and greenland. I bet that quite a bit of funding would come from those countries.

Here I go an angry brother gonna make his move
But can I buck him in the city so I never lose?
See I'm a get him in the crowd with a couple heavies
And lay the barrel to the ground, hold the gat steady
And now I'm ready for my adversary, talk is cheap
I'm looking for a way to make a plan gonna keep it neat
So don't be telling me to get the non-violent spirit
'cause when I'm violent is the only time the devils hear it
'cause all I want to see is m****f***ing brains hanging


Posted Image

#82 54x

54x

    Sergeant

  • Forum Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 30 posts

Posted 19 July 2004 - 02:24 AM

That doesn't seem like a very natural grouping though. Why would those countries be allied? How does the artic tie them together?

I thought it would make much more sense to keep canada seperate, or at most, have it allied with the US or other high-north countries. Russia is enormous enough by itself that it doesn't really need any more allies at all- it only gets the rest of "eurasia" because it doesn't make much sense to lump them in with any other groups. Thus the "northern european" grouping, too, encompasses the remaining countries around the artic.

ANYway, I think it's kinda irrelevant. If we have countries work sorta like a nested tree that you can expand, with countries inside alliances, and for large countries, states inside countries, it would kinda render the whole thing irrelevant. The problem with that approach is that you then need to know the boundaries and names for each state you plan on incorporating, in addition to the countries, and set individual funding levels for each of those. I think eventually this would be a good idea though, as it sorta merges the problem of "regionality." XCOM activity in the territory of an alliance pleases all alliance members, and pleases the specific country it is in even more, and where applicable, the specific state even more, too. This would be a complex solution though and would take a while to code.

I think a list like either mine or MagicAndy's would be fine for the first version. This would give us a much better initial spread of funding areas than UFO had- for example, there was little incentive to protect africa or the middle east when you could build bases in Europe/America first, cover the one you missed next, and then cover asia and the pacific with the same base, wheras it would probably have made your third base a more difficult choice between Asia/Pacific and Africa/Middle East if those areas had been filled out with all their funding nations.

Oh, and please please please, don't call it "Oceania" ingame. Only Americans call it that, and the words we use are recognisable, too :D Over here's it's either Australasia or the Pacific.

#83 Caid

Caid

    Sergeant

  • Forum Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 27 posts

Posted 23 July 2004 - 02:27 PM

Make at least a region "central Europe", I don't want us (Slovaks) to be behind the same border as Germans in western or with Russians in eastern Europe. I think european borders should be more detailed. I can't imagine what would aliens do on empty plains of Siberia, Sahara or Gobi, here they have plenty to do.

#84 fux0r666

fux0r666

    Alien Concept Task Force

  • Xenocide Artwork Department
  • 1,028 posts

Posted 23 July 2004 - 03:35 PM

Are there for an reasons extra continental division other than the fact that some of those in the former yugoslavia feel apart from the rest of europe?

Edited by fux0r666, 23 July 2004 - 03:40 PM.


Here I go an angry brother gonna make his move
But can I buck him in the city so I never lose?
See I'm a get him in the crowd with a couple heavies
And lay the barrel to the ground, hold the gat steady
And now I'm ready for my adversary, talk is cheap
I'm looking for a way to make a plan gonna keep it neat
So don't be telling me to get the non-violent spirit
'cause when I'm violent is the only time the devils hear it
'cause all I want to see is m****f***ing brains hanging


Posted Image

#85 54x

54x

    Sergeant

  • Forum Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 30 posts

Posted 26 July 2004 - 11:49 AM

Heh. Although insensitive, it might make more sense if they were grouped with western europe, "northern" europe, or eurasia. Failing that, they can be middle-eastern ;D

Seriously though, if there were a "central europe," (I'd personally call it "eastern europe") what would it consist of?

#86 Blehm 98

Blehm 98

    Colonel

  • [Global Moderators]
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,626 posts

Posted 26 July 2004 - 01:30 PM

Germany and denmark only. good point. There would only be eastern and western.
Top Secret Xenocide Status report

BF2 Hackers =5SF= have busted
]sD[ Engageo <-- couldn't get him banned though, no screenshot of him ingame
]sD[Nomisser
an AK guy
The anti-logarithm of the logarithm of X plus the logarithm of Y equals X times Y, or 10^(logX + logY) = XY
Posted Image
I hate spider solitaire...

#87 54x

54x

    Sergeant

  • Forum Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 30 posts

Posted 28 July 2004 - 06:31 AM

It's still a problem though... as I would be tempted to say that for Western Europe the EU should simply be used... but the EU has snagged up a lot of states that could be called Eastern Europe quite recently... I mean, if you count all of those as Western Europe, there's not really all that much LEFT for Eastern Europe, is there? :D

#88 Caid

Caid

    Sergeant

  • Forum Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 27 posts

Posted 30 July 2004 - 07:41 AM

Heh. Although insensitive, it might make more sense if they were grouped with western europe, "northern" europe, or eurasia. Failing that, they can be middle-eastern ;D

Seriously though, if there were a "central europe," (I'd personally call it "eastern europe") what would it consist of?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>


Slovakia, Bohemia, Poland, Germany Austria, Hungary, perhaps Slovenia. In fact mathematical center of Europe is in western Slovakia. You need a lesson of geography :D Altough it's more cultural division, with "eastern Europe" are usually ment states with majority of orthodox christians, like Ukraine, Romania or Russia. What we aren't!

#89 54x

54x

    Sergeant

  • Forum Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 30 posts

Posted 30 July 2004 - 10:41 AM

Slovakia, Bohemia, Poland, Germany Austria, Hungary, perhaps Slovenia. In fact mathematical center of Europe is in western Slovakia. You need a lesson of geography Altough it's more cultural division, with "eastern Europe" are usually ment states with majority of orthodox christians, like Ukraine, Romania or Russia. What we aren't!


Hmmm. Geographically I'd say you're right, but the important consideration is actually politically. Germany, Austria, and Poland are all part of the EU, which is about as politically "western europe" as you can get. That leaves Slovakia, Bohemia, Hungary, and maybe Slovenia. Given that they're squished between two very convenient groups, (europe and russia/eurasia) is that really enough for them to be a politically distinct entity?

#90 Caid

Caid

    Sergeant

  • Forum Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 27 posts

Posted 30 July 2004 - 11:29 AM

Slovakia, Bohemia, Poland, Germany Austria, Hungary, perhaps Slovenia. In fact mathematical center of Europe is in western Slovakia. You need a lesson of geography Altough it's more cultural division, with "eastern Europe" are usually ment states with majority of orthodox christians, like Ukraine, Romania or Russia. What we aren't!

Hmmm. Geographically I'd say you're right, but the important consideration is actually politically. Germany, Austria, and Poland are all part of the EU, which is about as politically "western europe" as you can get. That leaves Slovakia, Bohemia, Hungary, and maybe Slovenia. Given that they're squished between two very convenient groups, (europe and russia/eurasia) is that really enough for them to be a politically distinct entity?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>



Slovakia, Bohemia, Hungary and Slovenia are in EU as well since may, as well as Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia, but they're still much different entities than Germany or Russia...

Detail is possible, on 320x240 of original XCOM it wasn't easy, but now we have technology for it. I would see it logical, if all countries will be contained on map, from Afghanistant to Zimbabwe. Some poorer countries like Sudan would have minimal or no funding, so it won't care if we'll forget about a UFO or two over them, but then imagine a hunt over Switzerland, where you would have a big motivation to shoot them down. Richest, strongest or largest countries would fund most, in this category would be ie USA, Russia, China, India or Germany, second category would be paying ie one tenth, there should be some as Egypt or Hungary, and then ones not involved in XCOM project. Total number of funders could be around 50, what might be balanced by alien infiltrations. To leave some motivation, XCOM funding should go trough UN, so if we leave alien operations over non-funding countries, it may still hurt funding trough some common discontent of funding members.

Edited by Caid, 30 July 2004 - 11:46 AM.


#91 54x

54x

    Sergeant

  • Forum Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 30 posts

Posted 30 July 2004 - 11:32 AM

<SNIP>

Slovakia, Bohemia, Hungary and Slovenia are in EU as well since may, as well as Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia, but they're still much different entities than Germany or Russia...

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>


Yeah, I realise that :) The problem is getting a good spread of areas for the first version, not permantly excluding anyone, as I read it...

Which for example would probably mean such attrocities as lumping New Zealand in with Australia, and Canada in with the USA...

I guess we can just go with "European Union" for a whole category then and skip around the problem of eastern/western Europe entirely, leaving only the scandanavian areas to worry about ;)

#92 Caid

Caid

    Sergeant

  • Forum Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 27 posts

Posted 30 July 2004 - 11:55 AM

<SNIP>

Slovakia, Bohemia, Hungary and Slovenia are in EU as well since may, as well as Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia, but they're still much different entities than Germany or Russia...

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>


Yeah, I realise that :) The problem is getting a good spread of areas for the first version, not permantly excluding anyone, as I read it...

Which for example would probably mean such attrocities as lumping New Zealand in with Australia, and Canada in with the USA...

I guess we can just go with "European Union" for a whole category then and skip around the problem of eastern/western Europe entirely, leaving only the scandanavian areas to worry about ;)

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>



Well, as you don't like New Zealand merged with Australia, what should I say as a Slovak, if my country would be merged with ie Hungary, with whom we had struggles for about 1000 years :D

#93 centurion

centurion

    Programming Department

  • Xenocide Programming Department
  • 800 posts

Posted 30 July 2004 - 02:01 PM

Just managed to get stirred up...

[...] In fact mathematical center of Europe is in western Slovakia. [...]

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

They show the center of Europe in Ukraine, too, I've seen it :D

Well, as you don't like New Zealand merged with Australia, what should I say as a Slovak, if my country would be merged with ie Hungary, with whom we had struggles for about 1000 years  :D

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

<_< From the very time the Hungarians arrived to the area, heh? (and you would be merged with the Czechs anyway :devillaugh: )

Now, that this post looks suspiciously political, I'll add my 0.02. Central Europe could easily consist of Poland, the Czech Republic, Slovakia, Hungary, Slovenia, maybe the Baltic states and some/all states of the Balkans (I know, I know, it's Southern Europe and all); but it would be more sensible IMHO to have a 'Western Europe' consisting of current EU and the Scandinavian region, and Eastern Europe to handle the rest of the countries up to Russia (or maybe even have CIS as a funding body :naughty: ). If we are to have <20 regions, there isn't any simple and sensible way to do it AND separate NZ from Australia; maybe currently existing blocs could be used, but then there would be a lot of countries unaccounted for. Or maybe we could do all the calculation on the individual countries' level and lump them into essentially arbitrary groups, so that the player could oversee the situation as a whole and could look for his/her own (favourite) country's data as well without having to associate him/herself with any other country (oh, oh, do we include Taiwan? please, pretty please?)
Endure; in enduring, grow strong.
- Dak'kon

Help us getting Civ2 code: http://forums.civfan...p...age=1&pp=20 !

#94 kchickenlord

kchickenlord

    Sergeant

  • Forum Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 28 posts

Posted 31 July 2004 - 11:30 AM

This has gotten very political, the way the nations are laid out should be either in order of how rich the country is (the gpd site listed earlier is based on information that is YEARS out of date), or, and i prefer this, just list continents (leaving out antarctica!).

I mean you cant list north america and then list all of europe as one if youre going by cash alone, france, germany, britain etc. are all very wealthy nations, combined they would put out far more cash than the US, then theres a good few very wealthy small nations that are too small an area for the map but their money would bring them onto the world stage.

I say list the continents and have their funding as a random amount which can rise or fall, that way its easy to do and you only annoy people who think their country is the richest just because they live there!

And it can always be revised later when theres time!

#95 Caid

Caid

    Sergeant

  • Forum Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 27 posts

Posted 02 August 2004 - 05:21 AM

Centurion, with Czechs it would be no problem, I opposed the partation :D

#96 Monkeyboy

Monkeyboy

    Artwork Department

  • Xenocide Artwork Department
  • 11 posts

Posted 18 September 2004 - 03:16 PM

Imo, there should be Europe and Scandinavia.
Europe is a little round dot on the world map, while the scandinavians countries are above that dot. If you get my draft.

Have you dicsused a broder aspect of the diplomatic issues in the game ? if so, where is the thread.

By the way, us vikings from the northland will never surrender for some stinking aliens! :spank:
Elling "monkeyboy" Hauge
X-com fan and Dark Age of camelot addict
3d artist