Re: UM question
 

Oh yeah,

The UM is great stuff, and I'd absolutely buy the CD (of course I'm in Canada so 5-10 USD is like 7-18 CdnD. Don't suppose we could get it on par, eh? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif ).

Oh, and sorry 'bout the confusion on the Gravity tech stuff, I thought that I had communicated that I was offering it to both the "Ultimate Universe" and the "P&N Universe". In both cases I gave the rights away to the creators of these two mods, so I'm sure that both mutated to better fit their respective universes.

Happy New Year and all that
jimbob

Re: UM question
 

Hadrian Aventine, I'm playing with starting a strategy guide/tactical. your hosting would fit in with what I'm thinking. A pure stategic\Tactical site. I threw the idea to the message board and I think that the ideas would meld nicely.email me at petemmer@earthlink.net

Re: UM question
 

I agree, I'm all for buying the mod if it helps keep Se.org Online!

[ June 14, 2003, 18:05: Message edited by: General Talashar ]

Re: UM question
 

<blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr>The Religious techs are broken down by religions with each religion having seperate strengths and weaknesses.<hr></blockquote>

So, does this mean that we wouldn't choose "religious" as a racial trait. Rather each religion is a separate racial trait? This would be good because it would maintain game balance.

UM is great, keep it coming!
jimbob

Re: UM question
 

I hope it's kept to the most basic portions, i would hate to see Se.org endorse any kind of religion in the UM.

[ June 14, 2003, 18:04: Message edited by: General Talashar ]

Re: UM question
 

Buddhism is a form of pantheism as is Hinduism, not theism. da?

The development of technology depends more on a generalized philosophy or world view rather than a more specific religeon.

It would be easier to script techs based on broad world views rather than religeons. The tech areas would then also be easier for the end user to understand.

You could also do it by paradigms, but you'd have to invent most of your own because they are really broad.

Re: UM question
 

I always felt as technology advanced, religion for space faring civilizations would decline.

[ June 14, 2003, 18:02: Message edited by: General Talashar ]

Re: UM question
 

Errr...

I wonder if assigning specific effects to actual religions might just cause a wee bit of angst amongst their actual devotees due to the inevitable 'stereotyping' that must occur when simplifying.

For example we can see Christianity being attached to everything from genocide (Spanish Crusade) to absolute benevolence (Mother Theresa) and a great deal between. Buddism practitioners range in 'flavor' from theist to atheist, and can be considered to harbour pantheist in their midst as well (the latter being Tibetan if I'm not mistaken). Extreme examples could probably be given for every major religion, including Secular Humanism http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Is it possible to keep things generic, like Monotheistic, Pantheistic, etc. to avoid these problems?

Just my 2 bytes.
jimbob

[oh, and Astrology and Islam are believed by many to be the catalysts for the synthesis of advanced mathematics. The blame for calculus can be laid squarely on the shoulders of Newton however http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif ]

[ 18 January 2002: Message edited by: jimbob ]</p>

Re: UM question
 

Edit, nevermind.

[ June 14, 2003, 18:01: Message edited by: General Talashar ]