Tegan的最近内容

It is currently down. The entire 1066 section of the site was deleted so we're working on trying to do it all over again.

The commercial version of 1066 is not identical to the last free version.  The shields and "viking suits" you've mentioned are not in the commercial version, and were never intended to be. 

The shields cannot be used regardless of modders' permission, as the textures used are taken directly from a sheet of transfers for miniatures sold by Little Big Men studios.  The shields currently in game are modifications of native meshes, with original textures by me.  If you wish to see examples you can check the screenshots on livinghistorygames.com (which, in case you didn't figure it out, get bigger if you click on them).

I would estimate that about 95% of the current modified graphical content is original meshes and textures by me.  Several modders have contributed various items; all were offered compensation; some accepted.  Anything other models and textures are directly from native Mount & Blade, for which we of course have full permission.

All scripting was done exclusively by me and Colt, with the exception of the formations script, which is used with permission.

If anyone has a question regarding 1066 or LHG, you can email me or Colt at any time.  I would suggest, however, that you refrain from further public speculation about any business's conduct, at least until you have your facts straight, in view of laws against libel.

http://www.livinghistorygames.com/forums/

Kissaki 说:

jpgray 说:

"To whom are you supposed to turn?"

点击展开...

"Who are you supposed to turn to" simply sounds and flows better. No one actually says "to whom are you supposed to turn" in everyday speak.

And how should you properly ask, "what are you talking about?" "About what are you talking" makes you sound like a literati wannabe.

That one should never end a sentence with a preposition is in any case an artificial rule, invented in the 18th century simply because it's a rule that exists in Latin grammar, and Latin was considered an exalted language. By introducing the Latin rule to the English language, the inventor thus intended to exalt English. If anyone could name the fellow I'd be much obliged -- I can't seem to find my "Who Cares About English Usage" by David Crystal.

There are lots of silly rules which, if followed slavishly, make for a plain, boring and directly unpoetic language. Another such rule is that one should never split the infinitive. But does "to go boldly" or "boldly to go" sound better than "to boldly go"? Not to my ear. Abiding by such rules without exception takes all the flavour out of the language. Shakespeare, the greatest hero in English literature, frequently ended his sentences with prepositions. He split infinitives, and even used double negatives. Did that make him sound like a two-year old? Hardly.


"I lately lost a preposition;
It hid, I thought, beneath my chair
And angrily I cried 'Perdition!
Up from out of in under there.'

Correctness is my vade mecum,
And straggling phrases I abhor,
And yet  I wondered, 'what should he come
Up from out in under for?"
-Morris Bishop

点击展开...

All grammar rules were made up by someone, at some time, for some reason.  Take, for instance, conjucation of "to be".  Until, I believe, the 1700's, it was perfectly acceptable to say "you was" as well as "you were", but someone (can't remember who, someone rich) decided "you was" sounded low brow.  At least when things follow rules, however silly the rules may seem, they generally follow some sort of logical construct, and are thus easier to learn and understand than if convention was held as the standard.  It actually bothers me that English is far more arbitrary than other languages because it's such an amalgam of different influences.  Think how much simpler it would be if we only had to follow Latin grammar instead of Latin, Greek, Old French, German and some weird little kinks all our own. 

What would you consider "real harm"?  The argument I just made has nothing to do with self-image or appearance.  Saying that the foreskin has a very real purpose doesn't mean there aren't instances where it needs to be removed, but that doesn't excuse the way it is practiced on non-consenting infants with no medical justification.

By the way, as with most controversial medical findings, multiple studies have yielded widely varying results on the subject of circumcision and AIDS.  The study where you may have gotten this idea was a longitudinal study, reported in the Wall Street Journal, of 3,000 young South African men, half of whom were circumcised; after a year, the circumcised group had 30% the rate of HIV infection that the uncircumcised group did.  Incidentally, this study has yet to be published in any peer-reviewed journal.  It failed to document other contributing factors to the men's risk of infection and ensure their status as a representative sample, such as other STD's they might carry, socio-economic status, and their sexual practices such as the regionally popular "dry sex" (drying the vagina by douching it and absorbing the vaginal fluid, which dramatically increases the risk of transmission) and the status of the female as circumcised or not (again, circumcised females appear to be far more likely to transmit AIDS and other STDs, but the exact effect of female circumcision cannot be known because not a single study has ever been published on the subject, in comparison the more than 40 studies on AIDS and male circumcision.)  Several similar studies on the same subject have also been subjected to heavy peer criticism of their methodology (among them accusations of trumping up an easy solution out of desperation), and many have, again, never been published in any medical journal.

Another common basis for arguing for circumcision as a solution to AIDS in Africa, first noted in the 1980's, is that African cultures that do not practice circumcision generally have a higher occurence of AIDS than those that do circumcise; however, this fails once again to take into account other sexual practices that differ culturally alongside traditional circumcision practices.  It's also important to note that although, among the industrialized countries, the United States has far and away the highest rate of circumcision, it also has the highest rate of AIDS infection.

There is also much data to indicate that male circumcision actually increases the risk of both male to female and female to male transmissions.  The prepuce in both males and females secretes in its mucosa the enzyme lysozyme, which breaks down the cell walls of bacteria that can otherwise form lesions on the genitals that increase the risk of infection.  There is in fact some evidence that lysozyme may even help destroy HIV directly.  In addition, circumcised men are at higher risk for infection with gonorrhea, syphillis, and genital warts, all of which can also cause lesions that, again, increase susceptibility to AIDS transmission (the risk of other lesion-causing STDs, HPV and herpes, is equal regardless of circumcision).  In the US, circumcised men have been proven more likely to engage in risky sexual practices such as unprotected sex, sex with multiple partners, and anal penetration; it's possible that they see their circumcision as a license to engage in risky behaviour because they believe it offers protection; it's also possible that the psychological effects of the circumcision cause them to want to experiment with unconventional practices: either way, there is a risk of more irresponsible sexual behaviour in regions where circumcision is introduced as a protective measure, especially if it is seen as a replacement for the healthy, sanitary conduct that has been stressed previously by medical workers. 

Finally, a large number of studies show either a direct corellation between male circumcision and AIDS infection, or no corellation at all.  In a Johns Hopkins University study of 5690 women in Rwanda, several risk factors were identified, including having a circumsized partner, as well as more expected factors like a history of prostitution, multiple partners, socioeconomic status, smoking, and a history of other STD's.  Of two studies in the journal AIDS that each selected a random sampling of adults age 15-54 from representative areas of rural and urban Tanzania, one found no evidence of any correlation between circumcision status and HIV prevalence; the other again listed male circumcision along with other factors as adding to the risk of infection.  A retrospective study of patients at an HIV care clinic, which took into account their marital status, class, religion and other factors, showed no difference in the rate of infection among couples where the male was circumcised and where he was not.      And a study of infected U.S. Navy personnel found no signifcant difference between the rate of infection in those circumcised (84.9%) and those uncircumcised (81.8%),  although among risk groups defined by other factors such as marital status, sex with multiple partners, condom use, and history of other STD's, the rate was exponentially higher.

All in all, there is simply not enough conlusive data to recommend circumcision as a preventative measure against AIDS; there is a very real risk that beginning large-scale circumcisions could at worst increase the rate of transmission, or, even if merely ineffective, cost billions of dollars in funding that could have been used for education about safe sexual practices, or for remedying Africa's economic situation that leaves so many people with nothing to do but ****, and no way to make money but to get ****ed.  This is substantiated by USAID's support of research on the subject of circumcision, but refusal so far to give funding to AIDS prevention programs that actually circumcise or encourage circumcision.

He does, because he's overwriting Native with the mod files.

There's no reasonable way to automate combining multiple mods.  There would be no indication of which mod you wanted to override the other in any areas that they conflict upon, and in all likelihood the files wouldn't even be compatible because of different item and troop names and such.  So no, don't expect a mod-merging utility to crop up.

That said, with a small mod like this, if you learned the basics of the module system you could transfer it manually into another expansion sort of mod (like Expanded Gameplay, for example) with relative ease.  You might only need to copy and paste the dialogues and mission templates pertaining to the trainer.

You could try a google image search for just "brass", or perhaps "brass bar" or "brass sheet".  Sometimes, especially with metals, an abstract picture of the material will work quite well for certain parts of an item.

Did anyone else bother to wiki her after seeing that?  She can recognize and respond to speech, and apparently there was another model made afterward, based on a child, that babies couldn't recognize as not human.  I agree with Hraefn, it's very nifty and not creepy at all.

Nooo!!  Don't go to the dark side, Hussey, there's still hope!  On the whole, painted textures blow, especially of metal.  If you need evidence look at stoned-dude's work from when he was painting textures, and from later when he started UV mapping his weapons to photographs: like night and day.  Usually if there's any problem, you can just use clone stamp tool and a small amount of painting to correct any problems with lighting, etc., in a real image.

Actually simple pole-lathes have been in use by all classes since very early times.  The basic design is that the pole you're working on rests on a support at either end.  There is a strap of leather that twists around the pole, attached to a pedal on the floor and a springy branch above.  You push the pedal and let it spring back, and the friction grinds away the wood at a decent rate.  This design was definitely in use around the time of the American Revolution (if you're ever in atlantic Canada, go to Port Royal historic site and you can try one out), so I see no reason you wouldn't see tables with lathed legs during that period.

So . . . if I understand correctly, there is no way to transfer the new font mapping to M&B without having Excel?

Haven't you been reading people's explanations for why they dislike it at all?

Quothe Dr. Dean Edell:

The foreskin has three known functions: protective, sensory, and sexual.

During infancy, the foreskin is attached to the glans and protects it from urine, feces, and abrasions from diapers. Throughout life, the foreskin keeps the glans soft and moist and protects it from trauma and injury. Without this protection, the glans becomes dry, calloused, and desensitized from exposure and chafing.

Specialized nerve endings in the foreskin enhance sexual pleasure.

The foreskin may have functions not yet recognized or understood.

点击展开...

Sure, you don't "need" the foreskin.  You can live without it.  You can also live with one hemisphere of your brain cut out, and sometimes such is necessary for certain types of pharmacoresistant epilepsy.  But we don't slice up the brains of half our infant children; we wait and see if they actually have a problem.  Even though you don't "need" that brain hemisphere, it sure is nice to have it for things like reading, listening to speech, word-image assosciation, and plenty of other handy functions.  It's pretty nice to have intact genitals that perform all of their initial functions, too.

Being turned on by something =/= consenting to it.  Believe it or not, some men have brains as well as penises