Moderator: Cartographers
Incandenza Posted: 18 Dec 2007 04:03 Post subject:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If nothing else, I'm 99% certain that there were only 15 SSRs, but that's sort of moot in that this is not supposed to be a perfect, atlas-accurate map of the USSR. ian has a point with the byelorussia thing, but given space constraints, I don't think any hard-core Communists would have a problem with 'belarus'.
qwert wrote:Incandenza Posted: 18 Dec 2007 04:03 Post subject:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If nothing else, I'm 99% certain that there were only 15 SSRs, but that's sort of moot in that this is not supposed to be a perfect, atlas-accurate map of the USSR. ian has a point with the byelorussia thing, but given space constraints, I don't think any hard-core Communists would have a problem with 'belarus'.
I dont mine,but when i work on WWII EASTERN FRONT map,people do care and any mix of rusian,ukraine,or belarus -english translation is been rejected,and people tell me that i must take only one translation,then i make to all names have russian-english translation because Russian have diferent names for some republic or cities(example-Kiev-kviv),i hope that these is not change now.
Workers of the world, unite!" is just a different translation than "Proletarians of all countries, unite!", at least I've gathered that from my research and what people have said in this thread.
Yes, but "Worker's of the World, unite!" is the more common translation in English, as "Proleterians of all countries, unite!" does not roll off the tongue the same ways as the aforementioned.qwert wrote:"Workers of the world, unite!" is just a different translation than "Proletarians of all countries, unite!", at least I've gathered that from my research and what people have said in this thread.
Im from Serbia and i understand what these mean,and belive me its not same,but if you dont want to be proper word,then ok,its yours map.
lanyards wrote:I think it doesn't realy matter. Leave it.
militant wrote:Is there going to be any updates soon? I am really looking forward to playing this map.
pepperonibread wrote:militant wrote:Is there going to be any updates soon? I am really looking forward to playing this map.
Soon, hopefully. I'm working on it now.
AndyDufresne wrote:The portrait of Lenin looks nice, but as always, make sure it isn't a copyrighted image.
--Andy
Wikipedia wrote:This file is in the public domain in Russia. It was published before January 1, 1954, and the creator (if known) died before that date (For veterans of the Great Patriotic War, the critical date is January 1, 1950). Works belonging to the former Soviet government or other Soviet legal entities published before January 1st, 1954, are also public domain in Russia. (This is the effect of the retroactive Russian copyright law of 1993 and the copyright term extension from 50 to 70 years in 2004.)
A Russian or Soviet work that is in the public domain in Russia according to this rule is in the public domain in the U.S. only if it was in the public domain in Russia in 1996, e.g. if it was published before 1946 (1942 for WWII veterans) and the creator died before that year, and no copyright was registered in the U.S. (This is the combined effect of the retroactive Russian copyright law of 1993, Russia's joining the Berne Convention in 1995, and of 17 USC 104A with its critical date of January 1, 1996.)
Dictionary wrote:1)as for the motto in russian it is not correct. the last word should be _Объединяйтесь_ instead of _Соединяйтесь_.
2) are you sure about the font? it is really one hard to read
pepperonibread wrote:Dictionary wrote:1)as for the motto in russian it is not correct. the last word should be _Объединяйтесь_ instead of _Соединяйтесь_.
2) are you sure about the font? it is really one hard to read
Maybe these are just different versions? Going on googlefight.com , my version got three times as many hits. From what I got from the results on google, it seems like one means join, the other unite? I really have no idea, tho, and seeing that you're the one actually Russian, you probably have a better understanding than me. I'm hesitant because there are a handful of people in this thread that are saying they have the right translation, and I don't know who's right. Any help would be appreciated in this area.
natty_dread wrote:I was wrong
I agree whith this but I think that it must begin as a neutral territory so nobod can get that bonus in the 1st round.militant wrote:my only concern is the 1 army bonnus for moscow.In thebegining of a 1vs1 game even 1 army is crucial and it would sway the game from the offset. I would prefer for it to be removed.I cant wait to play it.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users