Admiral Vostok Posted March 25, 2004 Share Posted March 25, 2004 Yes, quite right saberhagen. It's an argument on semantics. Put the argument about whether Naboo was defeated or not as the stupidest argument to ever take up this many posts on this forum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FroZticles Posted March 25, 2004 Share Posted March 25, 2004 Exactly it's very stupid but what else can come out of his stupid ideas?. Something great I don't think so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Windu Posted March 25, 2004 Share Posted March 25, 2004 once again, left with nothing intelligent to say, forzo resorts to personal insults. How sad... As for wether the Naboo were defeated or not, i agree, it has no relevance, and we should be discussing the relative merits of combining the Gungans and Royal Naboo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Majin Boba Fett Posted March 25, 2004 Author Share Posted March 25, 2004 i cant beleive yall are arging over whether naboo was defeated... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lukeiamyourdad Posted March 25, 2004 Share Posted March 25, 2004 This is by far not the stupidest thread ever posted. *Republic Gunship Thread* Shudder*.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FroZticles Posted March 25, 2004 Share Posted March 25, 2004 Yea it does seem that the top 5 dumbest post all with the author named Windu anyone surprised??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Majin Boba Fett Posted March 26, 2004 Author Share Posted March 26, 2004 froz - i too am sensing the barrage of personal insults, but since they dont include me or offend me i will blindly ignore them as if they never happened... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FroZticles Posted March 26, 2004 Share Posted March 26, 2004 Nitro I'm still waiting for you to make a post with a point and some logic behind but I'm still waiting..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lukeiamyourdad Posted March 26, 2004 Share Posted March 26, 2004 Now now kids behave. Froz for flinguing insults and Nitro for jumping in and taking a bullet for nothing. This thread is dead and let it die. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Majin Boba Fett Posted March 26, 2004 Author Share Posted March 26, 2004 <plays taps> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Admiral Vostok Posted March 26, 2004 Share Posted March 26, 2004 Froz - actually Nitro was the author of this thread. Nitro - I meant no offence by saying this thread belongs to you, just that Froz is wrong in blaming Windu. Windu - actually shouldn't we be discussing the Naboo-Gungan merger in the Naboo-Gungan thread? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FroZticles Posted March 27, 2004 Share Posted March 27, 2004 Well we were until Windu started going on about Naboo and Gungan merger just after the Battle of Naboo and it went from there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sithmaster_821 Posted March 27, 2004 Share Posted March 27, 2004 Windu, you are shooting yourself in your foot by suggesting that the naboo need to be merged with the gungans so that the Hutts can move in. Nobody, except you and Nitro, support them. So give up already. And quit with the history lessons. And don't insult Holland. Naboo wasn't defeated, they were losing, but far from defeated. I support merging them out of necessity. Its either they're both cut or they're merged, cause even 6 civs is a little too big for uniqueness and balance. Now, having said that, I think that my idea addresses some of the main problems presented by various people. If they are kept separate, but under one leadership, it stays relatively canon, and a good comprimise between Windu's absurd complete merger and the complete separation, which really cannot happen because of gameplay complications. It also gives them a definite weakness, aside from lacking heavy mechs and decent troops until later. That is logistics, the forced coordination between two baes. If you expand mostly your gungan areas and your enemy comes at you with massed troops, you are screwed. Big time. Vostok-thats cause the Naboo/Gungan forum is discussing the Hutts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Windu Posted March 27, 2004 Share Posted March 27, 2004 Sith - no-one here has convinced me yet of a good reason as to why the Hutt Cartel shouldnt be in. Nor has anyone sugested a replacement for them, so where is the motivation in my removing them? As for the Naboo, they were defeated. Accept it. Move on with your life. Finally, with Holland, dont EVER think that you can tell me what i can or cannot say about Holland. My oma suffered in Holland under the Nazi's, and my mother is dutch as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sithmaster_821 Posted March 27, 2004 Share Posted March 27, 2004 Windu, it took more than 17 pages, 600 posts, and countless personal insults to "prove" to you that your gunship idea was bad (something that I don't think you actually have stated publicly though), so people have given up on "proving" things to you. Its liek talknig to a brick wall. As long as we hae a forum-wide consensus minus Windu, its a consensus. EDIT: My Opa suffered under Nazi rule there too, and my mother is dutch as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lukeiamyourdad Posted March 27, 2004 Share Posted March 27, 2004 Originally posted by Darth Windu Sith - no-one here has convinced me yet of a good reason as to why the Hutt Cartel shouldnt be in. Nor has anyone sugested a replacement for them, so where is the motivation in my removing them? That's because you never listen to anybody else then you. If we disagree, you end up with "I'm right, you're not" arguments. We've come up with various reasons why they shouldn't be in and the only answer you can give us is "prove it"... Why do we need a replacement? Less Civs means better balance. BALANCE! I used to believe myself that we could possibly balance 8 unique civs but now it seems too hard for nothing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Admiral Vostok Posted March 27, 2004 Share Posted March 27, 2004 Exactly, Windu. Perhaps no one has convinced you because in the your entire history on this forum, which is almost two years now, you've only ever changed your mind - been "convinced" - twice. Stop coming back with childish retorts like "PROVE IT" and accept that our arguments are entirely valid. I'll put the items that should convince you in point form, for ease of reading: The Hutts are most closely associated with underground crime sydicates like the Mafia in our world. As such they don't march to war, they fight in underhanded, secretive ways. Therefore including them in a game all about marching to war is wrong. They don't need a replacement because eight totally unique civs is twice as much as anyone has successfully accomplished. Six is the best we can hope for, even that is pushing it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.