Tweet
Well, ive finally finished the game that I documented in "Whither Spain".
It was my first game, and my general goal was to learn the game and have fun. And to see what EU2 was really all about, how it modeled history, what it was like from a gaming, and roleplaying, and history sim perspective.
I started writing Whither Spain, as a sort of AAR. To show folks where Id gotten to. And also to get feedback on particular choices I faced - what to do next in the mid 16th century. It seemed both possible, and fun to write it up "in character" as if I were writing the history of this alternative time line. As Alternative History fiction, rather than as a conventional AAR. In the course of doing that, I decided to use the story itself to explore some specific questions about the game. In particular whether every gameplay mechanic could be expressed in alt historical terms, and whether most alt historical questions had meaning in gameplay terms. While there were occasions where I fell out of character to ask or express something, that was largely for the sake of convenience. I am convinced most things that occur in the game CAN be expressed in alt historical (or if you prefer, roleplay) terms. And the amount of alt history that can be expressed in gameplay terms, was surprisingly large. It was particulary interesting that as i said things in character, no one asked what gameplay mechanic was being referred to. That is a sign to me that the gameplay maps so well to alt history that it wasnt necessary to explain (either that, or no one was paying attention,
)
I began to test one particular question among all others - can the game be used to roleplay, and how can that be integrated into playing to win. I wanted to roleplay a Spain in keeping with the historic character of Phillip the Second, and the decisions i had already made in the game - a bit of pragmatism, some nationalism, but a lot of Roman Catholic messianism, with some difficulty seperating out the Spanish nationalism and dynastic interest from the Catholicism. After a certain point this conflicts, certainly in the short term, with what it takes to "win". I explored this, with the self-insertion character (don de la frontera, an obvious translation of "lord of the mark") standing for me, trying to play to win, arguing with various historical or made up characters, trying to force me to a more historical RP approach. I tried to explore how a game pragmatic approach, could, within limits, be feasible historically.
This led to what was really a second POD (point of departure). In alternative history, a story always begins with a point of departure - a change, that leads to differences in the course of history. Now when we play the GC, the POD is always 1419, because thats when history begins to diverge. We can try to play our country historically if we like, but other things will happen differently. In my game I played Spain differently from the beginning - i conquered Granada very early, for ex. OTOH i had not yet formalated a formal what if, and i was still to new to the game - I was really just trying things out. By the 1540s or so I was ready to wrap the above speculations, into a what if, which could be tested in EU2 (at the same time testing EU2 for plausibility)
The premise was that the changes in Castillian history from 1419 on, had butterflied a change in personnel - an otherwise obscure noble family, emerged as dominant advisors to the throne. This particular family was unusually pragmatic for 16th century Spain - a change, but not implausible, as it assumes that the relatively pragmatic approach of Ferdinand of Aragon is continued, and I posited that the first DDLF had risen under Ferdinand, and was influenced by his approach.
The result was that Spain, while continuing to pursue Catholic and nationalist goals, did NOT attempt to retain control of the Netherlands. And, following from that as well this greater pragmatism, did not go to war with England in the late 16th century. Thus enabling it to focus on internal and colonial development. Which made it much stronger during the "decline" period in the 17th century, which of course went much differently. Spain emerged as the dominant power of a world in which Protestantism is much weaker. Only a part of this I think can be attributed to the "human edge" as i was still making mistakes well along. I think it largely shows how Spain could have done better by a more pragmatic policy under Phillip II. I am thus satisfied that in SOME circumstances, and handled well, EU2 CAN be a good alt history simulator.
But only within limits, of course. By the end - post 1780 or so - I was basically coasting, avoiding wars in Europe as much I could, and mainly just colonizing and exploring. At that point there was only a little roleplaying left (though the final Spanish events were fun) If I was powergaming of course that would have been the point to go on a conquering spree.
I found it most interesting to combine playing the game and writing the AAR with reading Spanish history. I was inspired to read G. Parkers "Grand Strategy of Phillip II" and Henry Kammen's "Empire" as well as rereading Elliots "Imperial Spain" I like it when a game gets you to do that.
It was my first game, and my general goal was to learn the game and have fun. And to see what EU2 was really all about, how it modeled history, what it was like from a gaming, and roleplaying, and history sim perspective.
I started writing Whither Spain, as a sort of AAR. To show folks where Id gotten to. And also to get feedback on particular choices I faced - what to do next in the mid 16th century. It seemed both possible, and fun to write it up "in character" as if I were writing the history of this alternative time line. As Alternative History fiction, rather than as a conventional AAR. In the course of doing that, I decided to use the story itself to explore some specific questions about the game. In particular whether every gameplay mechanic could be expressed in alt historical terms, and whether most alt historical questions had meaning in gameplay terms. While there were occasions where I fell out of character to ask or express something, that was largely for the sake of convenience. I am convinced most things that occur in the game CAN be expressed in alt historical (or if you prefer, roleplay) terms. And the amount of alt history that can be expressed in gameplay terms, was surprisingly large. It was particulary interesting that as i said things in character, no one asked what gameplay mechanic was being referred to. That is a sign to me that the gameplay maps so well to alt history that it wasnt necessary to explain (either that, or no one was paying attention,
)I began to test one particular question among all others - can the game be used to roleplay, and how can that be integrated into playing to win. I wanted to roleplay a Spain in keeping with the historic character of Phillip the Second, and the decisions i had already made in the game - a bit of pragmatism, some nationalism, but a lot of Roman Catholic messianism, with some difficulty seperating out the Spanish nationalism and dynastic interest from the Catholicism. After a certain point this conflicts, certainly in the short term, with what it takes to "win". I explored this, with the self-insertion character (don de la frontera, an obvious translation of "lord of the mark") standing for me, trying to play to win, arguing with various historical or made up characters, trying to force me to a more historical RP approach. I tried to explore how a game pragmatic approach, could, within limits, be feasible historically.
This led to what was really a second POD (point of departure). In alternative history, a story always begins with a point of departure - a change, that leads to differences in the course of history. Now when we play the GC, the POD is always 1419, because thats when history begins to diverge. We can try to play our country historically if we like, but other things will happen differently. In my game I played Spain differently from the beginning - i conquered Granada very early, for ex. OTOH i had not yet formalated a formal what if, and i was still to new to the game - I was really just trying things out. By the 1540s or so I was ready to wrap the above speculations, into a what if, which could be tested in EU2 (at the same time testing EU2 for plausibility)
The premise was that the changes in Castillian history from 1419 on, had butterflied a change in personnel - an otherwise obscure noble family, emerged as dominant advisors to the throne. This particular family was unusually pragmatic for 16th century Spain - a change, but not implausible, as it assumes that the relatively pragmatic approach of Ferdinand of Aragon is continued, and I posited that the first DDLF had risen under Ferdinand, and was influenced by his approach.
The result was that Spain, while continuing to pursue Catholic and nationalist goals, did NOT attempt to retain control of the Netherlands. And, following from that as well this greater pragmatism, did not go to war with England in the late 16th century. Thus enabling it to focus on internal and colonial development. Which made it much stronger during the "decline" period in the 17th century, which of course went much differently. Spain emerged as the dominant power of a world in which Protestantism is much weaker. Only a part of this I think can be attributed to the "human edge" as i was still making mistakes well along. I think it largely shows how Spain could have done better by a more pragmatic policy under Phillip II. I am thus satisfied that in SOME circumstances, and handled well, EU2 CAN be a good alt history simulator.
But only within limits, of course. By the end - post 1780 or so - I was basically coasting, avoiding wars in Europe as much I could, and mainly just colonizing and exploring. At that point there was only a little roleplaying left (though the final Spanish events were fun) If I was powergaming of course that would have been the point to go on a conquering spree.
I found it most interesting to combine playing the game and writing the AAR with reading Spanish history. I was inspired to read G. Parkers "Grand Strategy of Phillip II" and Henry Kammen's "Empire" as well as rereading Elliots "Imperial Spain" I like it when a game gets you to do that.