Question about EB mod

[Achillon]

hi all new here!
i loveee this mod amazing atmosphere with this one...but i have a question...i noticed on the site says that the mod comes with new music and a bonus latin vocie over...i thing is i got RTW 1.2 with EB 0.7.4 and i still have old musics and no latin voices for any of roman army....

whats the problem...am i doing something wrong?

thx for any help

[Teleklos Archelaou]

That's for the next release. The one that the betatesters and team are playing now. We're trying to get it out to you as soon as possible, but it's not ready quite yet. I will say that today I've played some battles with many many new units that I've been waiting a long time for though. :2thumbsup: A big step, but we're not ready yet.

[tk-421]

Those features are not included in version 0.74. We are currently working on 0.8 which will include music and the Latin portion of the voice mod.

[Achillon]

Ohhh i see...well...then i can't wait this 0.8!!!:dizzy2:

thx for fast answer:2thumbsup:

[Puupertti Ruma]

My romans speak latin in 0.74. Actually my greeks speak latin too, so have I been a total dufus not realising that my romans speak actually greek and not latin?

[Dayve]

That's for the next release. The one that the betatesters and team are playing now. We're trying to get it out to you as soon as possible, but it's not ready quite yet. I will say that today I've played some battles with many many new units that I've been waiting a long time for though. :2thumbsup: A big step, but we're not ready yet.

Should have sent me the beta... I've got all the free time in the world thanks to the British government paying me enough money every week to live off of without me having to work for it...

But no matter, your loss.

[Simmons]

Should have sent me the beta... I've got all the free time in the world thanks to the British government paying me enough money every week to live off of without me having to work for it...

But no matter, your loss.You know Dayve sitting here feeling like crap about to go to work just one more time this week your comments really make me think about the welfare system why is it the governments responsibility to take care of people who won't take care of themselves? Why should my hard earned tax dollars go to someone like you (and of course they don't we live in different countries) at least why should it be in the form of a payment you can do anything with that isnt your money its the peoples.

Anyway I will have to leave it at that gotta go to work now and I would like to have enough time to eat something on the way.

[fallen851]

why is it the governments responsibility to take care of people?


Why you ask? Well I'm writing a book about this.

Because the reason people formed into societies and government's in the first place was for mutual protection. Before society and governments people lived in the state of nature, where ones possessions and life could be taken at any moment by others. Thus their possessions and lives were not secure, and they wanted to secure them.

So people willingly formed into groups, and all of them give up their natural rights to kill, steal and use violence to the government for the collective good.

The government now has a monopoly on violence, and this makes possession and lives more stable than if each individual could use violence. So the government provides you with protection from others by taking away their right to kill and steal, and in turn you protect society by giving up your right to kill and steal.

Thus you give up the natural right to protect yourself by killing and stealing (so you can't steal to get food anymore, or kill to gain possessions for instance), and in exchange the government is supposed to provide those for you, since you provide them yourself as you gave them up.

This is the unwritten contract between the government and an individual.

So if someone is starving on the street, the government is morally obligated to help that person. Why? Because the government does not allow them to kill and steal (which they would do in the state of nature) which are natural rights, to acquire food.

You only give up your natural rights in exchange for the guarentee that you will be protected. No one would give up their right to kill, if they knew others would not, for instance (or at least they would be foolish too).

If you are starving on the street, the government is not protecting you, so you would be better off reverting back to the state of nature and killing and stealing. Thus killing and stealing should be legal, unless the government can provide and protect everyone. And since killing and stealing is illegal, the government is obligated to provide and protect everyone.

The reason we formed societies is to avoid the state of nature. You would not join a society if it meant you were going to starve to death, you'd rather be in the state of nature. Thus we must provide the benefits of society to all to the extent where they would be better off living in society, than in the state of nature.

Simple enough?

[Foot]

You know Dayve sitting here feeling like crap about to go to work just one more time this week your comments really make me think about the welfare system why is it the governments responsibility to take care of people who won't take care of themselves? Why should my hard earned tax dollars go to someone like you (and of course they don't we live in different countries) at least why should it be in the form of a payment you can do anything with that isnt your money its the peoples.

Anyway I will have to leave it at that gotta go to work now and I would like to have enough time to eat something on the way.

My suggestion would be to find a good book on the welfare system and read it. Head down to your local library and read, if this is a concern with the political system, but please, please do not act in ignorance. Once you have understand the issues around the welfare state and the arguments both for and against, then you can make a reasonable judgement. It concerns me that so many registered voters have such little understanding of the issues that they vote upon; it is one of the many failings of democracy, and you wouldn't like to hear about my other opinions on democracy.

Foot

[fallen851]

My suggestion would be to find a good book on the welfare system and read it. Head down to your local library and read, if this is a concern with the political system, but please, please do not act in ignorance. Once you have understand the issues around the welfare state and the arguments both for and against, then you can make a reasonable judgement. It concerns me that so many registered voters have such little understanding of the issues that they vote upon; it is one of the many failings of democracy, and you wouldn't like to hear about my other opinions on democracy.

Foot

One of things I've wondered about is why classical philisophers have such a problem with Democracy.

Aristotle, Socrates, Plato, they all slam democracy in one way or another...

The name of my book "The Society of the Ship", is a reference to Plato's Republic, where Plato (speaking through Socrates) describes a captainless ship, where people jockey for position to become the captain.

But the one who will become captain will not be the best suited to be captain, he will just have been the best at jockeying for the position...

And most modern "democratic" states (actually they Republics but whatever) are very similar to this ship in how they choose their leaders.

I actually would like to hear what you have to say Foot. The problem with reading books is, many authors are stupid, even well regarded ones. And most arguements have holes in them, and the author isn't right there to defend the holes, so people often think "ha I'm smarter than this author" and disregard what they say.

Thus, debate is far more useful. Which makes me wonder why I write.

[Simmons]

Wow talk about creating a discussion I wish I had time to go on but I only have a 10 min break and its someones birthday so everyone is looking over my shoulder

I seem to have given the impression that I'm "against" having the welfare system although I was selectively quoted


Originally Posted by Andronikos Kypriakos
why is it the governments responsibility to take care of people?is not entirely what I said

Originally Posted by Andronikos Kypriakos
why is it the governments responsibility to take care of people who won't take care of themselves?

I simply believe that welfare payments by themselves do nothing to help a person better themselves other systems need to be in place to achieve this end it is at this point of the system that government's seem to fail but the government is not the only one who should take the blame here individuals need to take some of the responsibility as well.

[fallen851]

It doesn't matter if the payments are helping people "better" themselves or not. Better is subjective. The payments are only to put people in a better situation than they would be in the state of nature, so they don't revolt and start killing and stealing. So it is better to have food stamps everyday, then to maybe get a meal, or maybe not in nature. And the latter is better in turn than starving because the government gives no food stamps, and not being able to kill animals or steal.

My point orginally was that people cannot take care of themselves under a government. There are rules and laws that take away the nature ways of taking care of yourself (killing pets to eat or stealing food for instance). Thus since we cannot fend for ourselves in certain circumstances (when in extreme poverty for instance) the government must support us. It is also in the government's interest to support us, so we don't kill and steal.

If individual's took responsbility for their own lives, the poor would kill and steal to get what they need to survive. Much better to give them welfare, according to the government.

Well some people have dreamed (including you?) that welfare system is not designed to keep the poor from revolting, rather it was created to actually help people get out of poverty, until we decide collectively that what makes men great is how much they give, rather than how much they collect, and decide to drop capitalism, or embrace Adam's Smith's ideas without (this is hard for every government, because people always want the best for "their nation", but so long as people care about how much they give not collect for nation it will work) government interference, welfare will never be more than giving people the bare minimum necessary to keep them from trying to overthrow the rich.

[Chester]

Fallen 851, cool posts. Since you seem to know something about this, I have a question for you.

I heard in an arguement that Welfare has actually destroyed some communites by hurting the social fabric within it by promoting lathargy and laziness. The person used black communites as an example.

He claimed to have evidence that showed the following.

When blacks were suppressed and segragated from society, they were very poor and lived in pathetic conditions. While this went on though, black communities were actually safe places for not only the blacks but also for white people.

Since Welfare systems took hold, the poor communites, such as the black ones, have had their social system injured through dependency on the government to supply their basic needs. IE it promoted laziness. Crime rates in these communities skyrockted and so on and so forth.

This is not my opinion but one I heard it from some one else I don't know and will never meet again (party scene, on balcony smoking a doobe)

Is this like comparing a decrease in priates with an increase in global warming? Or is there some truth to it? I had no comments on the conversation since I know little about this sort of thing.

PS- I thought Socialism was used to save Captialsim from Communism.

[fallen851]

First I take on your "PS". Capitalism works, and it works perfect, if followed. The problem is governments introduce Socialism into the picture, like the USA, by subsidizing farming, controlling prices, adding import fees and tariffs, breaking up monopolies and generally screwing with the economy. They do so to "benefit the people" of nation, so the US economy is essentially Socialist. It is very, very far from the Capitalism that Adam Smith envisioned.

And now to your main point: That is an interesting but very ignorant arguement. The simple answer is that is like comparing global warming to pirates, but you won't learn much from that. The long answer is below:

Welfare is essentially anything that redistributes wealth from one area, to an area in need. Thus when you pay taxes, every bit goes to welfare. The roads, the schools, the military, it is all welfare.

You still pay taxes to send your kids to local schools even if they go to private schools. That is welfare, you are supporting those who can't afford to pay for their kids to go to private schools.

You are supporting those who can't afford to build and maintain their owns roads (not very many can afford to do this, so this is popular), by paying taxes to the road system.

You are supporting those who can't afford their own army when you pay in the military, ect, ect, ect.

Now the problem with giving to the poor people have is, that most people can afford to survive, so why should they give to the poor? Why can't the poor just work like them?

Well if most could afford to build their own school, people would hate giving money to build the poor schools, but since most can't afford this, they love being able to get "free schooling" (paying only a small percentage of what it would cost to hire a private teacher...ect) for their children and they don't consider it "welfare", because to them welfare is for the poor. Poor is a relative term of course.

Now that we see welfare as it is really is we move on after I address the one major challenge. One could now argue, "well just as people have given up building roads because we have a welfare system that gives out roads, people will give up trying to work because we have a welfare system that gives out money."

This would be true if people actually did stop working when they were on welfare, except they don't. The majority of the people on welfare, work, and are on welfare for less than two years. And those who do not work, are children or the elderly. If you had to pick out the person who best represented those on welfare in America, it would be a white female child.

So did welfare make black communities bad? Well if welfare was providing the blacks with what they need, so they could be lazy, why the crime?

Petty crime (killing and stealing) results when the government fails to provide people with a better existence than the state of nature could provide. So people are better off robbing the corner store for 100 bucks (and entering a state of nature of sorts), then taking the 10 dollar check from the government.

It has been become harder and harder for people to live. 150 years ago, even if you had nothing, you could find some cheap land, get a loan, and start a farm. You can't even dream of that today. The welfare system has not kept up with the actual cost of living.

The real problem with black communities is that the USA is racist. Plain and simple. Why were most of people left in New Orleans black? Why are most the people in New Orleans that are poor black?

People say (such as Bill Cosby) that blacks use racism as an excuse for not empowering themselves and making their lives better. He says that black just don't fit in. The real problem is blacks have generated a society that whites don't respect, so blacks don't recieve the opportunities white recieve, unless they embrace "white society" and essentially say that the society whites have created is best thing since sliced bread. And why don't whites respect black society?

Racism.

(I may have made this even more confusing for some, because they don't see racism as the problem and it may take some explaining, but think about the difference between white and black society, their values, their goals. Think about the difference between male and female society to help illustrate this (how and why females don't get the same opportunities, get paid less, ect). Be careful not look at stereotypes).

[pezhetairoi]

wow, fallen851, who -are- you? I'm learning a lot from these few posts...

[MSB]

:focus:

[Tellos Athenaios]

- Seconded.

[Dayve]

Also, to whoever is pissed off because i don't work yet get free money from the government to live on, i'm not just scrounging, i'm actually diagnosed with Agrophobia, and suffer from panic attacks quite regularly.

Modern society has made me this way. The commercials on TV that show you pictures of skeleton like half dead African children who don't have food to eat... The constant news reports of someone being shot or stabbed, the constant news reports about threats of new wars... The society these governments made thousands of years ago, that society to which i was born into, given a number and brainwashed, has made me develope the way i have developed, which is mentally ill, therefore the government should give me what i need because i can't go out and work like everybody else can.

And besides, you live in Aus. Your tax dollars don't go to me, they go to Australian bums.

[MSB]

Just to make it very clear I wish to say the following before I PM a mod:
Get :focus:

[Tellos Athenaios]

My romans speak latin in 0.74. Actually my greeks speak latin too, so have I been a total dufus not realising that my romans speak actually greek and not latin?

Well, whatever your Romans do speak, it's clearly not some Ancient Greek: they say things like "Equites ad fundum" for example. A imaginative translation of the English "Riders in Wedge Formation". :juggle2:

Anyway to answer your question: the problem isn't due to Romans speaking the wrong language, instead the problem is part of the hardcoded culture group issue. And since the Successor states are based on the CVP Roman factions those Greeks actually get to speak Latin too in the Mod.

Using the fact that the culture issue isn't persistent in RTW 1.5, the EB team has managed to solve this rather weird and unwanted feature. And as far as I know they had thoughts of including a Greek Voice Mod too, so if I'm correct EB 0.8 will feature Latin voices for Romans, and Greek voices for Greek ones. :2thumbsup:

And then the only thing that remains (except of course all those other tongues) is this: will they manage to remove those anoying 'English' sentences you hear whenever some event (like a ram arriving at the enemy walls, or an enemy general slained) occurs, and replace them with their Latin or Greek counterparts? :idea2:

[pezhetairoi]

I'm certainly hoping I can see that about the rams and the victory announcements, I got so sick of it I just muted all voiceovers in the game just because of it!

I'm certain the EB team can get this done, because they've been so thorough even the routing troops shout 'run away, run away!' in latin. *is impressed*

Now, I'm just hoping I can hear the Greek and Celtic voiceovers. Speaking of which, the Britannic, um, Britons also spoke Celtic, didn't they?

[GMT]

Just to make it very clear I wish to say the following before I PM a mod:
Get :focus:

My God you are an annoying little twit, now go PM that to a mod ~:rolleyes:

[Teleklos Archelaou]

"Just everyone cool out. Cool out!!"

[MSB]

Now, I'm just hoping I can hear the Greek and Celtic voiceovers. Speaking of which, the Britannic, um, Britons also spoke Celtic, didn't they?
I think that there were several Celtic languages (although I am not sure). However I would think that most of these languages would be very similar. Generally, however, in culture the Celts were usually the same with a few distinct differences that varied depending on where the Celts in question lived. I can't wait for a Celtic voiceover, both because I hate hearing them speak Latin and I want to see what the Celtic language was like.

GMT, I will ignore that comment for now, unless you make another one.

[GMT]

GMT, I will ignore that comment for now, unless you make another one.


My God you are an annoying little twit, now go PM that to a mod ~:rolleyes:

Thank you for proving my point

[Teleklos Archelaou]

I can't believe less than an hour after I asked people to cool it they have to keep pushing things. Can you not understand english? :wall:

Take this crap elsewhere. This thread is closed.