Tweet
I have been thinking about this for some time now, and would very much like to try an experiment.
The purpose of the experiment is to use tangents to promote new, unusual, and unexpected ways of thinking to the problems and challenges we face here, in this game. To that end, and because I have enjoyed the group-creative process that I have seen in my active participation here, I came up with a way to extend that to a tangent, in hopes of sharpening our own thinking here.
So….if anybody would be interested in joining me on a little side experiment, here’s what I propose:
There are a lot of people who hype the differences between EU2 and Civ3, and the differences are great indeed.
They are also though, quite similar at the core. Similar enough, I believe, that one can be utilized to promote “unusually-directioned” thinking in the other, and since we currently face a deep strategic puzzle, I thought it might be intriguing to see what sorts of insights a “demo-EU2 game” run here on our own forum might provide in terms of our current situation in the Civ3 game we’re neck deep in.
To that end, I propose to set up a game on “hard” level (one off from max difficulty, on par with Monarch in Civ3), pick a country, and develop it, using the same basic team dynamic that already exists here….the way I see it working is that I’ll play out the game until faced with a decision (random event, or in-game choice), and bring it here, to everyone’s attention for discussion.
For some stuff, the response is entirely self-evident (ie – if there’s a rebellion and you have troops available, you crush it), so I’ll not bog us down with problems for which there is an obvious solution….no need….that’s not the kind of problem that will provide insights into the Civ3 game, which is the ultimate point, so aside from regular updates—and plentiful screenshots--I will only bring those issues to your attention which “fit the mold” we’re looking for….problems that can be related back to, or problems that focusing on there, will help us here….
An interesting idea, or not something you’d care to try?
If I GET any takers here, I was thinking that Scotland would be a fine choice for us. England is, IMO, simply too strong….too easy to run away with the game, but Scotland begins as a land in deep, deep trouble. Much smaller than her next-door neighbor, quite poor, and neck-deep in a war (shades of the Voxian conflict from Vox’s perspective).
It will be quite challenging just to survive, much less grow to the point where we are now, in the Civ3 game, but that is an adventure that, if taken together with all of you, I think will provide numerous insights into our current situation.
Further, if there are any takers for the idea, then right off the bat, and in order to get us going, there are a number of things which need to be discussed and decided.
First and most importantly would be, what will our official position be regarding the war with England and Burgundy? Should we try to extend our lands into English territory, or opt for a more defensive posture in the war? In terms of financing it, should we make use of war taxes (increases war exhaustion = increased chance of armed rebellion), mint coin (causes inflation), or take loans (can lead to bankruptcy…very nasty). Should we try to beat the English fleet, or focus exclusively on winning land battles? At what point should we appoint tax collectors (before we appoint tax collectors, we’ll only have access to 25% of our annual census tax…OUCH, but if we don’t keep a strong military presence in the field against the English, we won’t have any lands to place tax men in!)…..also, we get to adjust our government one “notch” at the game’s opener….how should we spend that (I can post a screenie of the sliders and explain what they do for those who do not have the game but are curious).
What should our position be regarding the religions of the world? (our “tolerance sliders”).
Very important questions, and very (unexpectedly?) relevant to the Civ3 game we are playing.
An interesting note for those who are curious about how this experiment plays out. The Scots have Gaelic culture, which they share in common with Eire, the English province of Wales, and Brittany’s three provinces in what is today France. Same-culture and same-religion provinces are worth more in absolute terms than off-culture and/or off-religion (to the point that if we gain an off-culture AND off-religion province, it’s almost not even worth having—can be made useful, and still useful in terms of a “raw dollar” and denial standpoint, but it’s a much longer-term investment). So long as it’s either our culture or our religion tho, we can generally count on it to be productive—which might influence our strategy somewhat….
-=Vel=-
The purpose of the experiment is to use tangents to promote new, unusual, and unexpected ways of thinking to the problems and challenges we face here, in this game. To that end, and because I have enjoyed the group-creative process that I have seen in my active participation here, I came up with a way to extend that to a tangent, in hopes of sharpening our own thinking here.
So….if anybody would be interested in joining me on a little side experiment, here’s what I propose:
There are a lot of people who hype the differences between EU2 and Civ3, and the differences are great indeed.
They are also though, quite similar at the core. Similar enough, I believe, that one can be utilized to promote “unusually-directioned” thinking in the other, and since we currently face a deep strategic puzzle, I thought it might be intriguing to see what sorts of insights a “demo-EU2 game” run here on our own forum might provide in terms of our current situation in the Civ3 game we’re neck deep in.
To that end, I propose to set up a game on “hard” level (one off from max difficulty, on par with Monarch in Civ3), pick a country, and develop it, using the same basic team dynamic that already exists here….the way I see it working is that I’ll play out the game until faced with a decision (random event, or in-game choice), and bring it here, to everyone’s attention for discussion.
For some stuff, the response is entirely self-evident (ie – if there’s a rebellion and you have troops available, you crush it), so I’ll not bog us down with problems for which there is an obvious solution….no need….that’s not the kind of problem that will provide insights into the Civ3 game, which is the ultimate point, so aside from regular updates—and plentiful screenshots--I will only bring those issues to your attention which “fit the mold” we’re looking for….problems that can be related back to, or problems that focusing on there, will help us here….
An interesting idea, or not something you’d care to try?
If I GET any takers here, I was thinking that Scotland would be a fine choice for us. England is, IMO, simply too strong….too easy to run away with the game, but Scotland begins as a land in deep, deep trouble. Much smaller than her next-door neighbor, quite poor, and neck-deep in a war (shades of the Voxian conflict from Vox’s perspective).
It will be quite challenging just to survive, much less grow to the point where we are now, in the Civ3 game, but that is an adventure that, if taken together with all of you, I think will provide numerous insights into our current situation.
Further, if there are any takers for the idea, then right off the bat, and in order to get us going, there are a number of things which need to be discussed and decided.
First and most importantly would be, what will our official position be regarding the war with England and Burgundy? Should we try to extend our lands into English territory, or opt for a more defensive posture in the war? In terms of financing it, should we make use of war taxes (increases war exhaustion = increased chance of armed rebellion), mint coin (causes inflation), or take loans (can lead to bankruptcy…very nasty). Should we try to beat the English fleet, or focus exclusively on winning land battles? At what point should we appoint tax collectors (before we appoint tax collectors, we’ll only have access to 25% of our annual census tax…OUCH, but if we don’t keep a strong military presence in the field against the English, we won’t have any lands to place tax men in!)…..also, we get to adjust our government one “notch” at the game’s opener….how should we spend that (I can post a screenie of the sliders and explain what they do for those who do not have the game but are curious).
What should our position be regarding the religions of the world? (our “tolerance sliders”).
Very important questions, and very (unexpectedly?) relevant to the Civ3 game we are playing.
An interesting note for those who are curious about how this experiment plays out. The Scots have Gaelic culture, which they share in common with Eire, the English province of Wales, and Brittany’s three provinces in what is today France. Same-culture and same-religion provinces are worth more in absolute terms than off-culture and/or off-religion (to the point that if we gain an off-culture AND off-religion province, it’s almost not even worth having—can be made useful, and still useful in terms of a “raw dollar” and denial standpoint, but it’s a much longer-term investment). So long as it’s either our culture or our religion tho, we can generally count on it to be productive—which might influence our strategy somewhat….
-=Vel=-
Comment