Shield Bearer
-
Posts
1.610 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
5
Posts posted by Shield Bearer
-
-
Really good stuff
This ship looks really good! But notice how the background and the color of the boat are almost the same. That's not good for visibility 
-
I rest my case. One cannot argue with you on this matter it would seem. I bow to your superior knowledge. Ave to you!
Oh and here's a Latin quote for you: "volentes esse legis doctores non intellegentes neque quae loquuntur neque de quibus adfirmant."
-
Typical barbaric tone. sigh.......
And extremely hypocritical. You expect me to provide sources when you yourself haven't? lolz
And dude.
**BANGS MY HEAD AGAINST THE WALL**
wtf is this...........
Europe were the barbarians!!!!! Hello?
Somehow, it's like... impossible for you to make sense? Holy @#$% dude.
Hahahaha! Tell me this, where is Rome situated? Try and belittle me if you wish, its getting you nowhere. As I said before, give substance to you arguments.
-
Either your arrogance is completely clogging your ability to process the facts, what's actually going on here is, you all I shall mention 4 of you in this thread have a underline misogyny for Rome.
Completely unpatriotic, and therefor intolerant of the glorious civilization that ever roamed the Earth in Ancient times and indeed AD.
Just embrace Rome.... Feel the power. The POWER. Let it soar through your veins like and eagle of adrenalin. Feel the exuberant rush of pride.
The power is and was Rome. Our symbol of might, rule and law.
Fail to embrace Rome you fail to embrace your own species and therefor "Like a bee that rejects her hive has neither both a future or hope."
Stop acting like rejects and accept and embrace the love and beauty of Rome....
Oh, please. The Romans knew how to have a civilized argument. You expect me to give you sources, when you haven't done so yourself. Be specific. Give substance to your arguments. Learn from the people you look up to.
And when did I not admit that Europe was primitive? That is the whole point of my argument. Europe had to start from scratch because of the barbarian invasions. Despite that, they overtook the middle east and the far east.
-
This threshold over the curriculum the church had was to enforce what the church claimed to legit and abiding by the word of god rather than from other sources that drove man away (i.e. the scientific shepherd leading his sheep unto the furthest reaches of knowledge and wisdom, elevating him beyond the simplistic yet very basic dogma of that church has dumbed people down with) now this wasn't an attack on Christianty and if it was, than just take alook at what we learn today in Uni and schools? Never in your wildest imagination will this today be accepted then and you would of been burned at the stake.
I will ignore the complete scarcity of facts here. The Church has always held that Science and Religion, understood properly can never contradict each other, because they had the same author. This goes back to even before the middle ages, to the time of St Augustine! To say otherwise, would show how little one knows about anything of the Church. Where do you think these universities originated from? The middle ages, the age, which you say 'was against learning'.
And, if you say that the Church is 'very much Roman' (a claim which apparently you know nothing about) then what's to say that the Church in 'trying to enforce what was legit', didn't inherit it from the Roman Empire?
-
Gothic architecture evolved from Romanesque architecture
I wonder where those Medieval streakers got those skills in masonry from...
But also, apart from that, they can be credited by building them, what was their purpose and driving force?
What drove them to build it?
Ah, wait... Roman Catholicism!!!
Again the Romans twice claim the crown of sweet glory.
I think you are as confused as you are arrogant. Just a few posts back, you say Christianity had zero tolerance for 'science and learning' and now you admit that Gothic Architecture was a fruit of Christianity. Tell me, is architecture not part of learning? As you said before, the West was full of barbarians who burned all the knowledge and learning of the age before. So you explain yourself, where did they get 'the skills of masonry from?'
And FYI, the Gothic Arch was a completely new discovery, one that neither Rome nor Romanesque architecture can account for.
And thinking that just because Roman Catholicism has Roman in it, makes it part of ancient Rome (or its legacy) is not a very clever assumption. Its called Roman, because its head is in Rome and because of its Latin rite.
I don't know, but I think you just destroyed your own credibility.
-
I'd like to be able to turn all graphically irritating and distracting stuff off to get the most possible space for information and interactive UI.
Don't get me wrong, I like the style! But for me this projects value is the game and it's usability. Focusing more on graphics means focusing less on playability and usability.
We can't become too minimized either, there's a perfect balance between the two, and that's what we must try to achieve
-
The fortress will be able to fire arrows as well as produce military units I suppose, won`t it?
You should really try playing the game
-
3
-
-
quantumstate thank you for unlocking the thread.
This was a representation of history itself in a way.
Roman VS Barbarian. In this case I Burzum VS Shield Bearer.
I possess a more civilized approach to the conversation, and I try keep it orderly without letting it slide off into oblivion of nonsense, (i.e. promoting progress) Whereas Shield Bearer imitates a more barbaric way in veiling messages with sarcasm with a undercurrent of derogatory.
This is why Rome was great and why people hated her outside the Empire.
I don't think you understand why this topic was locked in the first place...
but, besides that, this a very good example of biased opinion! Let the others decide who the barbarian is amongst us.
Anyway, call me a barbarian if you wish. I'll gladly be one, if the credit for building the Gothic Cathedrals came to me
-
1
-
-
We have put all this under the table like gum, promise. As a naughty school kid would.
What's your point in mentioning it then?
-
As you wish, continue your discussion. I completely understand why you don't want to answer that question
-
I see you have very nicely deluded yourself. Congratulations! So nothing I say will ever change your mind.
Your second question I will refrain from answering if you really want my honest opinion and view on that matter. All I can say that I probably will be labeled a sterotypical supremacist.lol.
No please, answer it, I want to hear it
I want to know how you think the rest of the world was left behind with its superior knowledge while the West triumphed with its naked Germans -
Islam got their knowwledge from all over and were the preservers of it.
You in no place to tell me to revise my history...lol Both of you have a phobia to my statement about religion and it explains your low remark about it.
Intolerable to Christian pilgrims yeah, but not knowledge. Two different things and deems that statement irrelevant.
Crusaders fought in the middle east not for Jurusalem only like many of you mainstream folk like to believe, but the whole significance of Knight Templer and Teutonic Knights were to capture artifacts, ancient knowledge and relics. They had nothing to do with safe guarding pilgrims... lol
You really have the wrong idea bud...
The evolution of Islam over the decades have slowly made more and more intolerable. I think you yourself need to look into this further.
About me being misinformed...lol you entilted to your opinions. But don't portray your opinion so as to make you know any better, because from what I've seen you say, the sources you have provided, and the questions you have asked, I can conlcude the same dear friend.
My advice to you is before you add your 2 cents and criticise someone, read and understand them properly otherwise you make yourself look like an idiot.
So, you mean to say Christian Europe did not preserve knowledge?
I see that you have not provided any sources either. And I also see that you are avoiding my more direct questions, with irrelevant ramblings. Answer these questions for me if you will.
1) You say Christendom was intolerant toward Science and Education. On what basis do you make such a claim?
2) If Christian Europe was so far behind in its knowledge, how did it come back on its feet AND overtake other cultures with its scientific breakthroughs in a much shorter period?
3) Do you claim that Christian Europe did not preserve knowledge?
I do not contest the Islamic contributions to Science, they are many and laudable.
You have not provided a single source for your information and yet you laugh at our 'source'?
I'd say they were fought for many complex reasons. Opening trade routes, opening a "steam-valve" for population release, politics, economics, and religion. Also, keep in mind that Islam had been conquering Christian lands for hundreds of years. A counterattack was inevitable. It wasn't until the Siege of Vienna were the Turks finally pushed back from taking over all of Eastern Europe. It wasn't until the Battle of Tours did the Franks stop the Muslims from taking over Western Europe.
Yes, of course. I wasn't going into the details.
-
Infact a lot of things came from the East.
Gunpowder, etc etc. That's far east.
I wasn't saying the western world were dark, but that christianity has zero tollerance for science and knowledge. Islam preserved much of ancient and Medieval knowledge and history that the west mainly burned to ash.
Islam and their religion were not interested in building upon western knowledge because it wasn't Islam and Islam also impededed their progression.
Only difference is who was the most tolerable.
You say Islam was tolerant? You didn't even answer any of my questions, I observe. Please read your history again. See why the crusades were fought (to gain back Jerusalem, because the Muslims were attacking the pilgrims that came to visit the holy sites...tolerant?) Islam got its knowledge, a good part of it, from ancient Greek and Roman writings (as we know Constantinople-Istanbul was the capital of the Eastern Roman Empire), which the West did not have. The West did not have many manuscripts because they were burned by barbarian hordes when they were pillaging the areas. But still the West thrived. The barbarians were taught and formed modern day Europe, which then went on to conquer the world. If China, India, Istanbul etc. were such centers of learning, how in the world did the Europe overtake them?
Like I said, read about the Carolingian Renaissance, educate yourself.
The "church had no tolerance of science" thing is an old stereotypical view of the Middle Ages that no one really subscribes to today.
No one but our misinformed friend here
-
So it is. And I'm sure you will also agree that, if that's the case, the West sure got back on its feet in record time... I wonder why...? If the history of Science and Education of the West is just 800-500 years old (not counting the time before the 'Dark Ages'. That these ages were 'dark' is not a fact btw. See the Carolingian Renaissance and the High Middle Ages.), how did it come so far, in so little time, discovering things that the educated and age old East did not?
-
Now, I am please you sensible lot of added the Muslims into the equation.
I'll just say this. Who were the people that preserved education and built libraries when Europe were running around in the Dark Ages....?
T h e A r a b s ....................................
Credit is due right there... You know what I mean?
So, you're saying that the Middle East was developed and educated for a longer time than the West, right?
-
For some good ocean water, see Anno 1404. The water there is spectacular
-
Give credit where credit is due
-
We must also not forget the extensive part played by the monks of the Middle Ages in preserving culture after the fall of Rome. One could very well say that it was them who formed the West into the great super power we have today.
-
1
-
-
I have long wished for a minimalistic UI. A step in the right direction. (The old golden bars never really did give a feeling of antiquity, rather just seemed too baroque-sque to me.) If only the GUI was revamped; it would be so much easier to mod it.
Pureon, if you could stretch it to be a bit more modern (muted tones, less "shiny"/web 2.0), it would be perfect with the new website theme I've been envisioning for a while
Keep in mind that this is a game set in a pre-modern world, where beauty was more than 'less is more'
We wouldn't want a Starcraft/Crysis like GUI for this -
Oh, and maybe the bottom 'scrolls' could point down, instead of up
-
This. Is. Awesome!!! To quote leper: "
" It's so elegant, it's so sauve, its just spectacular!
-
Looking good
The cape and the shield lack clarity, those designs on the shield won't be noticed when scaled down EDIT: Look at it scaled down, the shield and the cape are sharp enough
The head gets lost though... -
I think that animation is actually the 'capture' animation intended for buildings, played a lot slower. Ideally, I would prefer if there was just a flash of light around the unit.
Unit portrait pipeline
in Art Development
Posted
Nope, I was talking about the upper part, same with the ballista. Try giving it a blue background, see if it stands out more?
To fix the water, you could give a blue tint.