Bris

Originally posted by: Cobraroll While OKC certainly has a lot of influence in the midwest, there are way bigger projects out there.quote> you said it: Influence in the midwest - the Midwest of the US - that's a tiny little portion of planet earth, so please, could we stop talking about Oklahoma? Originally posted by: Cobraroll 'd say (again) that Istanbul, Turkey would be the perfect spot. Stable politics and economy, while not too dominating either, and it's located where Europe, the Middle East and North Africa meet. The old trade routes from the Far East also pass through the city. quote> Geographically and historically, I agree. But the politics in Turkey aren't anything near ideal. First, Turkey is a NATO-member, so Russia and China could never accept it, and secondly, the Turkish domestic politics don't satisfy modern standards of freedom of speech, religious belief and so on. The handling of the pkk for instance or the court system just aren't "good enough", to let this city "rule" the world. Originally posted by: Cobraroll Another candidate would be in Antarctica. No countries own it, so it's as neutral as can be. There has never been fought a war there. Humanity has yet to large-scale exploit the continent. It has no religious, historical or cultural meaning to anybody.quote> That's right. It's just so stinking cold there although... climate change could help And the moon might just be a bit to expensive But there are anough uninhabitated islands around the world. It could even be possible to build an artificial island in shallow water - that would still be way cheaper than building a world capital in antarctica or even on the moon ^^ Edited for language- SC4Meister

To be realistic: A hypothetical capital of the world could never ever be a city in the US. It's politically just impossible. Ever wondered, why neither Paris nor London are EU-capital? Well, both countries "hate" each other and could never accept the European capital to be in the opposed country. Same with the US. There are just toooo many countries in the world, that would never accept the world capital being NY or any other US city. That would only work in a fool's paradise. So the most propable cities on the list would be very neutral cities like Brussels (for being Belgian - and nobody rarely cares about Belgium ^^) or Geneva (for just being Swiss - thats neutral enough ^^). But the most propable city of all is not on the list: A new one. It worked in Australia (Canberra), in Brazil (Brasilia) and numerous times in ancient and medieval Europe (like Valletta in Malta or Karlsruhe in Germany). Any other choice would lead to war, which leads to more war, which, of course will lead to even more war, since mankind isn't capable of learning from it's faults... Originally posted by: pona12 in my own opinion either Wilmington or Oklahoma Cityquote> Oklahoma City? Isn't that some dusty hicksville in the middle of nowhere? And Wilmington? Nobody, really nobody outside the US has ever heard about this small town... We are talking about a WORLD Capital, so wake up my friend

Originally posted by: XL Originally posted by: gabry85 Hi gidget123c, welcome to Simtropolis! SC4Terraformer works perfectly under Vista.quote> Are you using a specific workaround? Because I'm using Vista and I cant get it to work at all. Are you using the latest version of SC4T? EDIT: SC4T now works. But I had to download the DX9 dlls and install them in order to get it to work.quote> Well, I'm using Vista too but can't get SC4 Terraformer to work. I've just installed the DX9 files but it's still not working. After the "choose a directory" dialog nothing happens. Need help (SC4Mapper doesn't work on Vista either)