Definitely my favourite of the series. I think the hex grid and single unit per tile of later games encourages more strategic thinkingnwith combat, but 4 offers the best overall version of Civ. Later games add more and more systems on top of the basic formula and I think they detract from the overall experience
Definite recommend, and if I hadn't had this since release, I would be getting it now!
"The argument goes something like this: 'I refuse to prove that I exist,' says God, 'for proof denies faith, and without faith, I am nothing.' 'But, says Man, the Babel fish is a dead giveaway, isn't it? It could not have evolved by chance. It proves you exist, and, by your own arguments, you don't. QED.' 'Oh dear,' says God, 'I hadn't thought of that,' and vanishes in a puff of logic. 'Oh, that was easy,' says Man, and for an encore goes on to prove that black is white and gets himself killed on the next zebra crossing."
The liberal wokerati strike again! So much for freedom of speech! What is the world coming to when you can't even have a music festival where we all sing about white power and murdering Jews and Brown people anymore!
Anyone know a way I'll be able to watch streams of NHL games after they're finished? I'm in the UK and can't realistically watch games that start at 3am. Waiting to see the inevitable price rise now that nhl.tv is going to dazn and I miss the days of Lazyman.
I think 4 is better balanced than 3 but I do still play both. 3 still suffered the same problem as 1 and 2 in that more cities = win. 4 introduces a pretty harsh penalty to expanding too fast.
The problem with emboldening small parties like Greens, New Party, etc is that with the way individual constituencies are won by first past the post, splitting votes just means the larger parties win all the seats. Look at how Labour won such a huge parliamentary majority last go around despite losing a share of the popular vote.
Without wholesale electoral reform, this country will never have a government that reflects the population, and I say that as someone who knows that having a Proportional Representation system would mean more MPs for Reform who are the antithesis of who I would want in charge.
My vote, for example, has never been useful because I live in a majority Conservative area and have to vote tactically to try and overturn that, and it doesn't work anyway. My only recourse left is to start spoiling my ballot.
Firstly, there's a basic issue with semantics: there's no such thing as an illegal immigrant. You have migrants, who use established immigration pathways to legally enter a country (for example, nurses who get recruited from Singapore to work the the NHS). You also have asylum seekers, the majority of whom have no legal mechanism to enter the country (as until their asylum claim is accepted, they have no right to enter the country) and so who enter the UK through an illegal route (such as crossing the channel on a small boat via a people smuggler).
When I last looked at the statistics, there's a 2/3rds majority in favour of people legally migrating into the country and asylum seekers form a smaller proportion.
The biggest issue with the system as it stands is the delay in processing asylum applications and appeals which has dragged on to take more than a year, the entire length of which time we're obliged to house and feed them. Should a claim be successful, they become a legal migrant to the UK and earn an indefinite right to remain. If its unsuccessful they're returned either to their country of origin or the last safe country they left before entering the UK.
Legal migration is a vital part of our economy, without them we would have not enough nurses, farm workers, care home workers, street sweepers, and all the other jobs that British citizens now no longer are able or willing to do.
Asylum receiving is our legal and moral obligation but the system has been horribly under funded and managed and allowed to become the flash point issue we're now seeing.
Obviously there's going to be some among both the legal migrant community and the asylum seekers who are exploiting the system, there are those who are criminals and paedophiles but we can't use those as an excuse to say "we're closed" despite what an increasingly large proportion of the country (fueled by bad actors and populist demagogues) believe.
I love how all tankie defense boils down to "dO yOuR OwN ReSeArCh"