Japan kind of an odd choice?

[DooberGuy]

I am kind of perplexed as to why the developers decided to add Japan as a playable country over the Ottomans or the Chinese. I believe that both of those countries will be added by modders and may also get added in DLC, but until they add China as a playable nation it seems like Japan will be pointless in Multi-Player and fairly uneventful on Single-Player.

Other than modernizing the country, taking Korea, and a war with Russia at the turn of the 20th century what else happened in Japan during this time period?

I will probably play the Japanese at least once, but it just seems like they have few options as to where to expand. Please help me out and tell me what else I can do with the Empire of the Rising Sun?

[marcusjm]

I think the choice was quite simple. Japan had imperialistic plans during this era while China was quite the opposite. Japan had a remarkable development from uncivilized to industrialized nation during the same period. The Ottomans were in serious decline and in no position to do much. Also, the Korean conflict was not really a small affair, neither was the Russian conflict but if I am not mistaken they were also in some conflict with Chinese also?

In the players hand perhaps more can be done but I think it is fine that the default options are historical, unlike certain other designers of these type of games .

Spain and Portugal or even Belgium should not be forgotten, all were active in the colonial struggle for Africa. The Ottomans were not.

Of course I hope to play Sweden at some point and see if I can make some un-historical choices.

[John Sedgwick]

Quite a lot happened in Japan in this time period, in addition to what's already been mentioned, there was the Sino-Japanese War in 1894, opening the country to trade (by signing the "unequal treaties" with western powers), the Meiji restoration and constitutional reforms, they were involved in the Boxer Rebellion in 1900... lots going on there. I think it makes perfect sense to include Japan as a playable country, even if there isn't much going on at the start date - Japan successfully navigated the treacherous path to modernity and went on to become a major imperial power by 1920, whereas China and the Ottoman Empire fell to pieces (which is not to say that they mightn't have been as successful had things turned out differently...). Anyway, I'm sure there will be an easy way to play other countries as soon as the game is released. The Ottomans were always one of my favourite nations to play in this period, since I like playing the underdogs... you don't get much better than "the sick man of Europe" I'd also like to play the Dominion of Canada eventually, too.

Another thing to consider is that a lot of people like to play as Japan, presumably including the large number of Japanese gamers.

[DooberGuy]

It still seems like it will be a single-player only country. I mean, what's the point of playing them in multi-player when the only human player you could possibly run into is Russia after about 80 years?

I do like the modernization part, that's why I'm going to play them at least once. I just feel like once China is added as a playable country Japan will become much more entertaining.

[Franciscus]

Japanese players buy games. Chinese...not much...

[John Sedgwick]

Hmm, I see your point Dooberguy, in that it might be a boring choice for a multiplayer game, at least for the first few decades, but not necessarily. There was a fair bit of interaction between Japan and the other imperial powers, not just of the warlike variety - it was the USA that opened them to trade in 1854, after all... lots of competition with Russia for what I guess in game terms would be called "colonial penetration" in Korea and Manchuria long before the Russo-Japanese War... Japan was the first to entice Britain out of her "splendid isolation" with the Anglo-Japanese Alliance in 1902, and so on...

But given the enormous time investment that a multiplayer game would entail, you may be right, perhaps Japan will be a singleplayer only country. I suppose only time will tell.

[marcusjm]

Not sure if Japanese buy these type of games though, maybe if they could squeeze in some bikini clad anime units .

But I see the point with Japan being a bit boring in mp. In my book any mp game should at least first fill up the major players before considering minor (including Sardinia).

A game with UK, France, Russia, US and Prussia could be really fun.

[Baris]

I had the same impression when I saw the color-coded map of the colonial penetration zone in the demo. I though that should be the portrait of "sick man of Europe".. But what inspires me to continue with hope is Pocus's post on the paradox forum.
http://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/showthread.php?539178-One-feature-a-day-articles-22-Formations-and-rules-of-engagement&

At the picture there was the OOB of Ottomans in which consist of a "Sipahi Cavalry" with 17-17 offense-defense rating ,7/45 assault damage that no other cavalry can match his strenght !!

There were also "Tımars" from Bosnia,Macedonia and even Wallachia to protect the Ottomans and "the straits" in case of Russian attack. They are no good though in case of a war with Italy in the deserts of Libya. But allies were always to be found. The war in Libya would indeed shaped differently if Macedonia didnt rebel and ships from Constantinople werent blocked (By other nations) to move supplies and reinforce troops there in 1911.

With the effort made by to prepare this OOB , I think it would be a waste to leave Ottomans as unplayable. Ideas:

1- Very near to Europe peninsula. And it is directly effected by power struggles that shaped balkans,middle east and north Africa.
2-It should be a struggle for the player to protect the borders in result it enhances the gameplay.
3-Colonial aspects of the engine can be disabled for Ottomans and her existance can be related to her ability to make alliances and suppressing rebellions by very simple 1 or 2 additional options to the game.
4- I m %99.99 sure it will enjoyable to play even with the restricted options for Ottomans. OE would be more enjoyable to play then to build up industry with hitting next turn button.

[John Sedgwick]

@Baris: The Ottomans should no doubt have some colourful units to play around with, I look forward to helping the "sick man" get better

Not sure if Japanese buy these type of games though, maybe if they could squeeze in some bikini clad anime units

Tsk tsk, marcusjm, that's a very unfair, if amusing, stereotype But that does remind me, although I've been drooling over the prospect of a historically accurate 19th century grand strategy game for some time now, I'm also obsessed with all things "steampunk" - a steampunk mod of PoN would be a lot of fun, wherein an ahistorically overpowered Japan would make a lot of sense, I think (steam-powered mecha, anyone?)

[OneArmedMexican]

Ottomans seem to be the clear favourite amongst the people of this forum. I guess that means there is a fair chance you might get your wish granted.

Personally, I would love to see another country playable: China. In my opinion it makes more sense than having Japan: China had a highly turbulent century: internal conflicts (just think of the Taiping Rebellion which was - if I am not mistaken - the bloodiest conflict in the entire 19th century). Struggles with foreign powers trying to impose their influence which culminated into several wars (opium wars, boxer rebellion, ...). At the same time, there were (rather unsuccessful) attempts to reform the country. It might be a very interesting experience. Although the role as "victim" might make the gameplay implementation challenging.

But for now, let's wait for the game to get released and enjoy the nice selection AGEOD has chosen for us.

[McNaughton]

The main reasoning for choosing the top 8 was that this was either their era of peak performance, or one of rise in performance. Each of the top 8 have a chance of success (not necessarily having success equate the same thing, but, each had potential in all areas).

When looking at China and the Ottoman Empire, they had been in decline for decades before Pride of Nations start. Playing the Ottoman Empire or China would be pretty much like combining the negatives of all of the top 8, without any of their strengths.

They were extremely corrupt, industrialization was pretty much non-existant, they were the target of many of the top 8 nations (the Ottomans have it somewhat lucky, in that they have support of about half of the top 8, but for China, everyone is keen on knocking her down!).

I am really interested in seeing these nations modded into the game though. I believe that playing them in Pride of Nations will be one of almost constant survival, as no matter how much you try to cultivate your nation, the best you can hope for is survival (some of my most favourite parts of strategy games was that first era of survival).

In my research for the military leaders, I learned a lot about Spanish history of this era, and like China and the Ottomans, would probably be another nation that would be a viable playable nation (a lot in their history). There are a few other South American nations with colourful histories as well.

[John Sedgwick]

@OneArmedMexican: I get the impression it'll be fairly easy to mod any country to be playable; in any case I'm sure you'll get your wish as well. I still think Japan makes more sense, for the reasons McNaughton just stated (performed much better on the world stage), but it certainly would make for a very interesting game. Actually, to be fair, it wasn't until about the middle of the 19th century that China ceased to be the economic centre of the world (for example, even during the preceding age of colonialism, most of the silver coming out of the New World was going to China to buy silks and whatnot), and even as late as 1894, China was considered far stronger than Japan by most outside observers - even the Japanese were pessimistic about their chances of winning the first Sino-Japanese War (seems to be recurring theme in modern Japanese history), so a strong case can certainly be made for having China as a playable nation. Indeed, China's relative weakness in this period is quite the anomaly when you look at the rest of world history - and if you extrapolate the current trend, the Middle Kingdom may rectify this situation in our lifetimes

@McNaughton: Agreed, I often have the most fun when I'm fighting for survival in strategy games. By the way, I approve of your namesake - fascinating guy, one of our most underrated military leaders in my opinion.

[Baris]

From my readings through the forum in past weeks I imagined and anticipated PON as a plausible historical strategy game with a crisis model implemented to the engine. From that I understand if one manages to play all the way to 1920, the prestige points will declare the winner. Again from my understanding from this abstract prestige points ; If sardinya piemonte player manages to be successfull about handling diplomacy,colonizing,industrilization and managing crisis successfully he/she will be able to achieve more prestige points maybe than ex.Great Britain in the end date 1920. As a conclusion if he/she manages to do that it will be historically plausable(?) but totally uncorrect likewise if Ottomans weren't lucky about getting the support from at least 4 Great Powers(open for discussion) she will eventually have a possibility to be kicked back to anatolia leaving Constantinople and west cost of Turkey to some of the Great powers or there were some possibility preserving lands in Bosnia, macedonia or Kerkuk(The last one was very difficult).
But my question is: was this very clear in 1850?
I got the impression both Ottomans and China weren't that weak in terms of military at least, And I remind you Ottomans"almost constant survival nation" was a front in ww1 both defended Dardanelles against British,Anzacs and east border against Russia even in that turmoil.

It will be enjoyable to play China and Ottomans trying to survive through rebellions and influences(also with the help of alliances to some great powers) re-write some parts of history in the most plausable way . I think it would be very difficult with just modding.
Sure there are other even more colorful candidates for playable nations but when I hit the F10 button I see Ottomans and China on the spot!

[caranorn]

More realistic choices for playable countries:

Belgium; who established a huge colony in the Congo, first the privately owned Congo, later the state run Congo, also one of the greater industrial powers of the era, not to mention a strong and modern military considering it's relatively small population...

the Netherlands; colonies in Asia and America, globe spanning military and merchant fleets, was already in decline but would continue to be a colonial power until WWII...

Spain; colonies on three continents plus the Pacific, has already started decolonialisation (then again, both France and England have already lost colonies too), will not fare well in the period...

Portugal; colonies on two continents plus the Pacific, economically in serious trouble but will still play a minor role in WWI...

Of these four at least Belgium should regularly top some of the currently playable powers in the game in areas like industrial output, economical might, trade, merchant fleets, colonial penetration etc.

[Baris]

Indeed there are "more realistic choices" of colonial nations that can be added to the playable nations list. But as the title asks a question about the Japan's fun factor connecting to the fact where she is surrounded with few Great powers, big neighbour China is not playable and needs time industrialize. My concern is when another colonizer country is added to the playable list it can result ahistorical outcomes on the Colonial penetration map. AFAIK historically those 8 had the strenght to colonize and influence every part of the world that other colonial nations can not.
Related to Ottomans and China, I have the impression that they are the relatively stronger minor organized nations in the world that represents somehow resistance to colonial powers influence. Especially Ottomans were very dependent on Great powers protection to able to extent her life cycle. Diplomatic alliances were crucial for the Ottomans to protect herself from immediate Russian threat. GB and France were the earlier protectors. Then Prussia was valuable ally. But what really extended the life cycle of Ottomans was the disagreement between the great powers about the areas they want to influence and control. I had hoped this could be represented in a game by playing Ottomans. From the fact that in all ageod games there is always weaker side,stronger side concept with a pratogonist leader(nation) against the antagonist.

[NefariousKoel]

More realistic choices for playable countries:

Belgium; who established a huge colony in the Congo, first the privately owned Congo, later the state run Congo, also one of the greater industrial powers of the era, not to mention a strong and modern military considering it's relatively small population...

the Netherlands; colonies in Asia and America, globe spanning military and merchant fleets, was already in decline but would continue to be a colonial power until WWII...

Spain; colonies on three continents plus the Pacific, has already started decolonialisation (then again, both France and England have already lost colonies too), will not fare well in the period...

Portugal; colonies on two continents plus the Pacific, economically in serious trouble but will still play a minor role in WWI...

Of these four at least Belgium should regularly top some of the currently playable powers in the game in areas like industrial output, economical might, trade, merchant fleets, colonial penetration etc.

Spain. Definitely should be one of the first additions, also, whether by mod or add-on later. They still had some oversea colonies and such.. not to mention some run-ins during this period.

Ottomans, definitely, and Belgium would be nice though not as brutish as others of course.

I'm assuming these extra ones need leaders, events, and such but can still be played in some kind of "sandbox" mode with the full game? That's the way I understood it.. just didn't have any custom events or general photos?

[JaguarUSF]

I wish they would have just given you the ability to play as most everybody, even without specialized events. Just put them on several pages, "second class" nations (Ottomans, Spain), "third class", etc.

[Baris]

If the engine can handle by itself for preventing unhistorical behaviours (game rules, Ex: Ottomans had claims on newly independent Egypt, but British influence is/ will be high to make it impossible in game turns ) when Ottomans playable with changing script file or by modders than it will be easy to unlock it. But if can not handle,it will need few additional official rules or events for Ottomans in expension or dlc.

[poweraxe]

But I see the point with Japan being a bit boring in mp. In my book any mp game should at least first fill up the major players before considering minor (including Sardinia).

A game with UK, France, Russia, US and Prussia could be really fun.

I agree, though I'm sure that playing Japan in MP is still quite fun, even if you don't get into conflict with other human players as often. I'd like to see if it's possible to make Japan into a Great Power that can compete with the other (human-controlled) major powers.

By the way, you forgot Austria in your list of major powers.

[marcusjm]

This is not Victoria. This game is about reflecting real history not fantasy land.
I think mods can take care of those wishes if anyone feel like it.

The nations included are the ones that made any kind of impact during this period and those are the most logical choices. Just play the classic Pax Britannica and you will see the same choices .

And of course Austria-Hungary belongs in this list .

[McNaughton]

From my readings, both the Ottoman and Chinese Empires were in decline for decades before 1850. Neither of them were really seen as nations of logevity, but rather either places needing to be a buffer (Ottomans vs. Russia) to a great power, or a place for all great powers to take a share of (China vs. Europe).

A common note in both Ottoman and Chinese history of this time was that both were in a constant state of reform (political and military), and neither really took on. While both, at times, managed to be equipped with the best equipment on the planet, and with the best advisors on the planet, this could not be maintained. The Fleets of both nations were impressive, on paper, but in reality were poorly maintained, poorly trained, and even poorer equipped. The armies as well, may have had modern equipment and direction from advisors, but the system of military (functions of command and tradition) resulted in none of these reforms from ever 'taking hold'.

One goal of Pride of Nations is not to take every nation and turn them into a 'Germany' or 'Great Britain' (i.e., modern, strong, industrial, cutting edge, etc.), but rather to take a nation in its role and do the best as that role. For example, as Russia (probably the best comparison of the Great 8 to match China or the Ottomans), your goal is not to become modern, but rather to become the most 'brilliantly backwards nation' you can be, crushing revolts (not avoiding them) and spreading your territory well beyond what they reasonably could control (hence the name 'Pride of Nations' ).

As China, or the Ottomans, the goal would not to 'win' as in be comparable to any major nation, but rather to come off in 1920 without losing as much as they historically did. Otherwize, it becomes too sandbox (i.e., in order ot allow for this to happen, a lot of historic realities have to be ignored).

However, a mod is a mod, and is based upon the direction of its director.

[Baris]

I didnt play Victoria so I dont know how Ottomans handled.
But my understanding and desire from "historical plausible strategy game" does not consist of world conquest with Ottomans

Indeed Ottomans decline were way before 19th century. After the failure of the second siege of Wien, Rulers started to question the empire and started to get more passive in foreign diplomacy. In the 7 years war advanced army technology,formations ,lack of bourgeois class were heavily lacking in Ottomans.

In 1850's gap was increased much higher. Abdülmecid had an excellent French(he had high diplomatic relations wtih the Queen of Great Britain, and German Prince Wihelm also) and decided to modernize the army and navy by taking loans resulting empty budget. The dept to the west was incredible high that they unvoluntarily have to sell cheap valuable raw materials to the west.
My point is if the game engine can prevent ahistorical behavour if Ottomans chosen by the player it will be easy to do with changing playable nations.(as well as other nations).I gave the "Egypt" as an example fro the claims of Ottomans. It will be difficult to gain control as there is heavy British influnce in the game.
The aim here is to survive not world conquest

McNaughton: I remember Ottomans were a front in WW1 even with the turmoil. This wasnt a forced front like British forcing arabs to attack to Ottomans from south. Take a look. Is that an impossible task in game then historical reality?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gallipoli_Campaign

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caucasus_Campaign

[Baris]

The main reasoning for choosing the top 8 was that this was either their era of peak performance, or one of rise in performance. Each of the top 8 have a chance of success (not necessarily having success equate the same thing, but, each had potential in all areas).

When looking at China and the Ottoman Empire, they had been in decline for decades before Pride of Nations start. Playing the Ottoman Empire or China would be pretty much like combining the negatives of all of the top 8, without any of their strengths.

The nations included are the ones that made any kind of impact during this period and those are the most logical choices. Just play the classic Pax Britannica and you will see the same choices .

And of course Austria-Hungary belongs in this list .

Well very much depends on the perpective of course but I dont know about how the player could expand(or successfull) with Austria-Hungary empire in historical-plausable way. AFAIK Austria-Hungary empire was consist of many ethnic groups just like Ottoman Empire with much stronger economy but lag behind heavily compared against GB and FR and had a destiny to come apart(Just like Ottomans). Again as far as I know, Austria send troops in 1845 to rebellious Egypt with the support of Great Britain to help comprimise between Ottomans and Egypt. Other than that her destiny is nothing but to decline if conquest of Bosnia-Herzegovina is not defined as huge success against falling apart Ottomans.

If the logic behind the argument about choosing playable nations be negletting military aspects of the game, then I think second less enjoyable nation to play is Austria-Hungary.

Edit: Board game looks good.

[marcusjm]

It was still a major player in European politics.

Take a look at this map
http://www.boardgamegeek.com/image/471342/pax-britannica

As you can see it is basically the same setup as this game (since they are loosely connected).

I would be fine with Ottoman Empire but I am also equally fine with it being modded in or added later as DLC etc.

Somewhat(or very) OT but how come no-one ever tried to do a game about the rise of Ottoman Empire? Except maybe for EU but it would be nice to see a game that focused on the creation of this Empire. Maybe something for AGEOD to consider since they like investigating rarely seen topics .

[tagwyn]

Like pics of the Swedish womens' volleyball team!!!!!!!

[Baris]

Somewhat(or very) OT but how come no-one ever tried to do a game about the rise of Ottoman Empire? Except maybe for EU but it would be nice to see a game that focused on the creation of this Empire. Maybe something for AGEOD to consider since they like investigating rarely seen topics .

Yes actually it is pity very few developers(or not at all) did make a game about Ottomans.(more or less 600 years lifespan)

There are many wars of Ottomans from long to short battles.* There are also very interesting units in the Ottomans army. From janissaries,Sipahi cavalry(horse archer,armored cavalry) , Bashi-bazouk (irregular mercenaries) akıncı (irregular fast light cavalry archer from family clans. like cossacks in Russia)

But the problems about making a game about OE:

1- OOB wil not be easy or not possible to find with correct leaders.
2- Even leaders found, many leaders will be missing portraits.
3- Ottoman army had a different formations that needs a tactical battle. (I dont think it is necessary)
4- Engine needs ranged combat. Archers and archer cavalry can represent range combat? maybe.. Armors can represent protection value of units. Luckly there was artillery in that time *
But if it is to be done, Ageod can do it nearly perfect but maybe crimean war can be more easy to design.


*Battle of Mohac was a short war by concensus from historians. Even that was short war, Hungarian empire had one of the strongest armies around time frame that can match the strenght of Ottoman troops . "Akıncı"'s tell from generations about the battle ability of the Hungarians.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Moh%C3%A1cs

[Flop]

As China, or the Ottomans, the goal would not to 'win' as in be comparable to any major nation, but rather to come off in 1920 without losing as much as they historically did. Otherwize, it becomes too sandbox (i.e., in order ot allow for this to happen, a lot of historic realities have to be ignored).

In the case of China, one goal might be to keep the Qing alive, untill the end of the game. I'm not sure if the game mechanics really allow for that, though.

Anyway, I'm pretty sure that the eight playable nations were chosen, at least in part, because they were considered the 8 great powers of the world at the turn of the century, although Japan had only just joined the club at that point.

[Meagher]

I am kind of perplexed as to why the developers decided to add Japan as a playable country over the Ottomans or the Chinese.

[...]

Other than modernizing the country, taking Korea, and a war with Russia at the turn of the 20th century what else happened in Japan during this time period?

I think Japan's modernization is reason enough to make it a playable country. Japan's transformation from an anti-modern, quasi-feudal state to an undisputed great power is unparalleled during this period. That's a little bit like asking: "Other than develop some physics theories, what did Albert Einstein ever do?"

Playing Japan in MP would definitely get more interesting as the game went on.

[John Sedgwick]

"Other than develop some physics theories, what did Albert Einstein ever do?"

Unbeknownst to most historians, Einstein started down the road of professional basketball before an ankle injury diverted him to science...

Sorry, couldn't resist the Gary Larson reference

[KCDennis]

I just tried out Japan in the demo. Doesn't it seem a little strange that a closed country is given the opportunity to offer subsidies for imports of coal and steel?
I'm curious whether Admiral Perry's visit is an event or a decision undertaken by the US?