Civilization: India
Difficulty: Settler
Game Speed: Normal
Not much to report this week, except that I'm greatly impressed with the Indian "Fast Worker" unit. I only chose India for a little variety, but now I'm glad I did. India (the geographic location) has a crazy amount of resources, and Fast Workers allow you to take advantage of them. Anyway, it's early in the game, and my new strategy has yet to reach the stage of full implementation, so this will be a short post. However, you can expect longer posts in the coming weeks as my scheme comes into its full glory.
What is this glorious scheme? World conquest! I have finally given up notions of peaceful, diplomatic victory and intend to wage a full-scale war of domination against my rivals. The plan is to focus on technological development and expansion early in the game, then, when space starts to run out and my military is sufficiently superior in technology and size, seize capitals and incorporate the fallen empires into my own. Thus far, I'm in the stage of technological advancement, which (following my conclusions from my last game) is proceeding extremely well. I don't expect this stage to last much longer, though. Eurasia is already getting tight, so by next week I should be able to report some action.
I do have more in mind than blood-lust. Thinking like an economist, I'm curious to find out what large-scale and long-term conflict will do to the economic growth of my civilization. It could be detrimental, diverting resources that would otherwise go toward growth to the continuation of conquest. However, assuming that I am successful in my conquests, incorporating resources from other empires and bringing them up to speed should swell the imperial coffers. In short, conquest could go either way, helping or hindering economic development. It's a balance, and it will be interesting to see which side of the scales I wind up on.
One final note: This week's reading in Colander talked about growth theories. Of specific interest to me was the new growth theory, which "emphasizes the role of technology rather than capital in the growth process" (Colander 575). This concept and the accompanying discussion on the role of technology in growth supports my conclusions from last week's experiment. And I anticipated this central concept in modern economics! Too bad I don't get points toward my place in history; surely this would elevate me above the level of Dan Quayle, the only person to whom my leaders have ever been compared. . . . This game will be different. Conquest has to at least get you to Nero. . . .
References
Colander, David. Economics. 6th ed. New York: McGraw-Hill, 2006.
Saturday, April 14, 2007
Saturday, April 7, 2007
The Results Are In . . .
I'm beginning to think that China is blessed. Both of my games as China have far surpassed my other games, and my strategies, while varying slightly, have not been radically different. I can only conclude that there is something innate in the Chinese soil, the Chinese air, that is highly conducive to prosperity.
But enough mysticism. If you remember, I focused this game on technological advancement, equating research with capital investment and hypothesizing that increased technological research would increase my prosperity. When I left off last week, the early signs were that my hypothesis had some merit, though it was too soon for victory dances. I've now finished the game; the results are in, and since I know you're dieing to hear them, I won't keep you in suspense any longer.
Technological advancement certainly has advantages. I researched every single technology, reaching (to my great delight) the mysterious future tech and discovering that, once you've discovered everything else, you just keep researching future tech. I reached about future tech 16. Since this adds health and happiness to your cities, I wasn't complaining. Health and happiness is where I saw the biggest difference from my first game as China (the best game for comparison). In the first game, my emperor's approval rate was 79% and the average life expectancy was 73 years. In this game, the approval rate reached 83% and life expectancy hit 82 years. Maybe that's why so many rival cities along my borders revolted and joined the Chinese empire. When rival averages were 65% approval and a 63-year life expectancy, who can blame them.
Advanced technology also allowed my to prepare for a space race victory, building all but one part until about three turns from the end, while pursuing other avenues of victory. I'm really keen to get a diplomatic victory, but I think it's nearly impossible. I built the UN, was elected Secretary General eight times, passed every single resolution, and tried nine times--nine times!--for a diplomatic victory. Each time I was the leading candidate but didn't get enough votes. This just goes to show that being technologically advanced won't make people like you.
Two other statistics were higher than in my first game as China: Imports/Exports (666/365 vs. 588/290--units are million gold) and GNP (1229 million gold vs. 1129 million gold). GNP, like GDP, is a measure of wealth. My civilization was wealthier the second time I played China than the first time, even though it's only by 100 million gold. Given that the first time I played China I had more land, a larger population, high crop yields, and produced more manufactured goods, the fact that I wound up wealthier in the second game (even by a small amount) is significant. To me, it indicates that technological advancement does indeed correlate with prosperity, since in this game it compensated for lower crop yield and population, which also correlate strongly with growth and prosperity.
So there you have it: it pays to invest in technology. In future games I'll definitely keep technological research as high as possible. I'll also be more aggressive. In this game I was nice to my rivals because I wanted to achieve a diplomatic victory, but after nine failed attempts, I've given up for now. I could have crushed some of my neighbors so easily with my planes and tanks and artillery, but I refrained from doing so since I thought it would put me in bad standing with observing nations. Not any more. Next time, I'm going for a land victory, conquests included.
But enough mysticism. If you remember, I focused this game on technological advancement, equating research with capital investment and hypothesizing that increased technological research would increase my prosperity. When I left off last week, the early signs were that my hypothesis had some merit, though it was too soon for victory dances. I've now finished the game; the results are in, and since I know you're dieing to hear them, I won't keep you in suspense any longer.
Technological advancement certainly has advantages. I researched every single technology, reaching (to my great delight) the mysterious future tech and discovering that, once you've discovered everything else, you just keep researching future tech. I reached about future tech 16. Since this adds health and happiness to your cities, I wasn't complaining. Health and happiness is where I saw the biggest difference from my first game as China (the best game for comparison). In the first game, my emperor's approval rate was 79% and the average life expectancy was 73 years. In this game, the approval rate reached 83% and life expectancy hit 82 years. Maybe that's why so many rival cities along my borders revolted and joined the Chinese empire. When rival averages were 65% approval and a 63-year life expectancy, who can blame them.
Advanced technology also allowed my to prepare for a space race victory, building all but one part until about three turns from the end, while pursuing other avenues of victory. I'm really keen to get a diplomatic victory, but I think it's nearly impossible. I built the UN, was elected Secretary General eight times, passed every single resolution, and tried nine times--nine times!--for a diplomatic victory. Each time I was the leading candidate but didn't get enough votes. This just goes to show that being technologically advanced won't make people like you.
Two other statistics were higher than in my first game as China: Imports/Exports (666/365 vs. 588/290--units are million gold) and GNP (1229 million gold vs. 1129 million gold). GNP, like GDP, is a measure of wealth. My civilization was wealthier the second time I played China than the first time, even though it's only by 100 million gold. Given that the first time I played China I had more land, a larger population, high crop yields, and produced more manufactured goods, the fact that I wound up wealthier in the second game (even by a small amount) is significant. To me, it indicates that technological advancement does indeed correlate with prosperity, since in this game it compensated for lower crop yield and population, which also correlate strongly with growth and prosperity.
So there you have it: it pays to invest in technology. In future games I'll definitely keep technological research as high as possible. I'll also be more aggressive. In this game I was nice to my rivals because I wanted to achieve a diplomatic victory, but after nine failed attempts, I've given up for now. I could have crushed some of my neighbors so easily with my planes and tanks and artillery, but I refrained from doing so since I thought it would put me in bad standing with observing nations. Not any more. Next time, I'm going for a land victory, conquests included.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)