I'll admit, im an armchair historian. I find it an infinitely intriguing subject, from ancient history to modern, from Carthage to Serbia. Some bizarre facts, that sometimes seem obvious in retrospect, can be upturned with very little research. For instance, it had never occured to me before where the Turks originated from. Turkey, or more specifically the Anatolia, or Asia Minor, had been occupied by the Roman Empire, and later the Byzantine after the split, for hundreds of years. I origianally assumed the turks came from here, but the Turks of the Ottoman Empire, which toppled Constantinople and the last remnants of ancient Roman culture, were, in fact, part of the Mongolian invasion/colonisation westward. Obviously today interbreeding and cultural assimilation with both Europe and the Middle East has lessened their connection to their origins in the east, but I find still find that a bizzare, and yet strangely obvious, fact.
 |
| Modern Turkey. Anatolia is the central landmass, while Thrace, the site of Istambul, is in the North West |
My research into the origins of modern day Turkey were not spontaneous, though. In fact, all that up there was a preamble to what I really wanted to talk about in this post. Sorry about that.
You see, strangely enough the Ottoman Empire has become something of a recurring problem for me, with their aggresive expansionism and hordes of Turkish warriors. Time and time again they've scuppered my grandiose plans of conquest. For anyone who recognised the title this will, hopefully, make sense. For those not in the know, i've become somewhat OBSESSED with a little game called Europa Universalis. 3, to be precise.
There are few video games that have managed to hold my attention in quite the way that EU3 has managed to do, nor to my mind been such good value for money. Now, while this may be heavily influenced by my interest in history, and probably a latent God complex that's satisfied by altering the course or history, I also think it's good strategy game seperate of these things.
So, what is EU3? The player takes control of any nation of their choosing from 1399, Henry IV's accession, to 1821, the death of Napoleon, and though the timeline is somewhat reduced without the expansions it's still a significant chunk of history. The player is given control over military, diplomatic, religious, economic and, well, any aspects of a state that you can really imagine. This may sound daunting, and at first it is. In fact, even after a good deal of time playing it can be. It's extremely easy to win a war against a foreign power, and yet still bankrupt your nation and fall prey to internal divisions and rebellion. This balencing act, however, is part of the fun, and getting it right makes it all the more satisfying to drive your enemies before you.
Despite this, though, i'd argue that, as far as grand strategy games go, the user interface for EU3 is streamlined and, after a time, intuitive. Drawing a comparison to another of Paradox Interactive's outings, Hearts of Iron II, I found it extremely involving without being too overwhelming. Hearts of Iron II, a grand strategy game focusing on the second world war, was baffling to the extreme. While you could probably grasp the interface after a time, it's far quicker and easier to do so in EU3, or at least to grasp enough of the basics to make the game playable while you work out the more esoteric mechanics.
This ties in with another problem of grand strategy that I think EU3 manages to avoid. Frankly, Hearts of Iron II was boring because it was slow. Really slow. Unbelievably. Slow. I simply can't stress this enough. One strategy guide I came across actually suggested to have a book to read in the slower parts of the game. Now, im alright with slow gameplay to a degree, but if you have to keep yourself entertained with another form of media while you're already doing something which, logically, is supposed to entertain you, then I think something's gone badly wrong.
Hence why I like EU3, things are always occuring. When you aren't stomping on, or being stomped on by, your neighbours, you're trying to maintain religious unity, putting down rebellions, marrying your way into other lines, causing havock with spies, improving infrastructure and so forth. And all this remains entertaining because it can happen so fast.
Not that the game is without its problems, of course. For instance, the method for annexing other nations is somewhat unrealistic, putting a cap on the ammount of land you can annex in a single war, even if you occupy an entire state and have removed them as a military threat entirely. The technology system also lends its favour heavily to the computer, as they are far better able to take advantage of research bonuses that the simple, fleshy brain of the player. The game mechanics also tend to produce some very odd results from AI controlled nations, such the United Kindom forming, almost without fail, by the early 16th century, or the inevitable expansion of France throughout Spain and Germany.
Still, i'd recommend EU3 to anyone who had an inclination to try a grand strategy game for the first time. If you're awful at RTS, much as I am, then you may enjoy the change of pace. Likwise, if you have any interest in the historical content, or 'what if' scenarios then i'd recommend it. It also plays nicely to dellusions of granduer, becuase seriously, who doesn't want to be the Emperor of Everthing?
If you're interested, here's the official
site and the
wiki.
Thanks for reading, and if anyone's out there, i'll try to update more regularly than I have been.
Onion Head Hat
