Am I the only one happy in my ignorance?

[RedRalphWiggum]

With DW about to come out there has been loads of discussion about exactly how the new mechanics will work, etc, and it occurred to me that many if not most posters seem to have a way, way deeper understanding of how Paradox's games work than I do.

I actually like not knowing exactly how every single thing functions, I feel if I know everything about the mechanics the game stops being a game and becomes an excersize in precise calculation and mathematics. Anyone else get this? I like there to be some mystery as to why some things work as they do.

 

[Kriegsspieler]

I am of the same mind -- except on those games I have beta'ed, where knowing the meachanics is crucial for seeing whether they work!
But in most cases I do not play the game with an eye toward finishing as Supreme Ruler of the World and mining every posible idiosyncrasy. I just want to explore how to play them well, enjoy different approaxches to playing, etc. This is one reason why the new "Paradox Connet Achivements" leaves me entirely uninterested. More icons -- *yawn*.

 

[Teurlinx]

With DW about to come out there has been loads of discussion about exactly how the new mechanics will work, etc, and it occurred to me that many if not most posters seem to have a way, way deeper understanding of how Paradox's games work than I do.

I actually like not knowing exactly how every single thing functions, I feel if I know everything about the mechanics the game stops being a game and becomes an excersize in precise calculation and mathematics. Anyone else get this? I like there to be some mystery as to why some things work as they do.

As a player: yes. I support MM policy of removing the accurate BB number and giving you only a vague idea for one.
As a modder: you'll need to know.

 

[Silktrader]

Personally, I seek to arrive at a complete and correct understanding of the game's mechanics — which is obviously unattainable. A good grasp of the game's rules is necessary to conceive a strategy, which is where the fun is at for me.

The game of chess, for instance, is one which features relatively few, well-known, rules: despite this fact, chess still retains its "mystery". That is due to the disarraying complexity and long learning curve that its few rules engender.

I think that a good game would still retain its charm after being dissected and analysed. The elegance of its design should exclude a "silver bullet" solution and push one to tailor strategical choices to constraints and goals.

 

[Teurlinx]

Personally, I seek to arrive at a complete and correct understanding of the game's mechanics — which is obviously unattainable. A good grasp of the game's rules is necessary to conceive a strategy, which is where the fun is at for me.

The game of chess, for instance, is one which features relatively few, well-known, rules: despite this fact, chess still retains its "mystery". That is due to the disarraying complexity and long learning curve that its few rules engender.

I think that a good game would still retain its charm after being dissected and analysed. The elegance of its design should exclude a "silver bullet" solution and push one to tailor strategical choices to constraints and goals.

Some things are better not to know: for example how the AI will move its navy in HoI2. After some research you'll find out and don't need to patrol anymore but can just camp the 'right spots'

 

[Angelos]

I am of the same mind -- except on those games I have beta'ed, where knowing the meachanics is crucial for seeing whether they work!
But in most cases I do not play the game with an eye toward finishing as Supreme Ruler of the World and mining every posible idiosyncrasy. I just want to explore how to play them well, enjoy different approaxches to playing, etc. This is one reason why the new "Paradox Connet Achivements" leaves me entirely uninterested. More icons -- *yawn*.

Not the supreme ruler of the world?? I am shocked ! But i have to agree that the whole Achievements idea does not really excite me either. After all, i almost never play the vanilla version of the games, as i am a big mods enthusiast !

 

[Kriegsspieler]

Personally, I seek to arrive at a complete and correct understanding of the game's mechanics — which is obviously unattainable. A good grasp of the game's rules is necessary to conceive a strategy, which is where the fun is at for me.

The game of chess, for instance, is one which features relatively few, well-known, rules: despite this fact, chess still retains its "mystery". That is due to the disarraying complexity and long learning curve that its few rules engender.

I think that a good game would still retain its charm after being dissected and analysed. The elegance of its design should exclude a "silver bullet" solution and push one to tailor strategical choices to constraints and goals.

I don't think chess is a good analogy here, because the game mechanics are completely transparent. The question is whether you prefer to only have a contingent grasp on a game's mechanics and be forced to refine it as you gather more experiences from it.

 

[Captain Gars]

With DW about to come out there has been loads of discussion about exactly how the new mechanics will work, etc, and it occurred to me that many if not most posters seem to have a way, way deeper understanding of how Paradox's games work than I do.

I actually like not knowing exactly how every single thing functions, I feel if I know everything about the mechanics the game stops being a game and becomes an excersize in precise calculation and mathematics. Anyone else get this? I like there to be some mystery as to why some things work as they do.

Totally agree. I've never been playing with a calculator and spread sheet beside like many seem to do. I have no idea what the "best" idea to picks is, or the optimal strategy to form nation X etc. I guess I'm more of a roll-player, playing more for a fun experience (which sometimes can include actually losing!) then "winning".

 

[RedRalphWiggum]

Totally agree. I've never been playing with a calculator and spread sheet beside like many seem to do. I have no idea what the "best" idea to picks is, or the optimal strategy to form nation X etc. I guess I'm more of a roll-player, playing more for a fun experience (which sometimes can include actually losing!) then "winning".

Especially for a game like this where to all intents and purposes, there is no 'winning'. I could see why someone would figure out the mechanics in a game where you need to get to a new level, but with strategy games? Pointless.

 

[Kriegsspieler]

Especially for a game like this where to all intents and purposes, there is no 'winning'. I could see why someone would figure out the mechanics in a game where you need to get to a new level, but with strategy games? Pointless.

Take Victoria (I or II) for example: you know you're not going to win, because the UK does. So I like to sit back and see what I can do with a country like Persia, or Spain, or Mexico, or . . . .

 

[Zolotaya]

On the one hand I love learning the mechanics as much as possible, because it gives me a better appreciation of the accomplishments that the coder/scripter has achieved. It also helps avoid frustrations that can lead to not playing the game.

On the other hand, min/maxing the mechanics often shortens the lifetime of the game. Once I know the "optimal" choice, any other pales in comparison. Also by min/maxing, you miss a lot of the fun in "discovery" and in the journey itself.

As a result, I normally play each of my games in two separate modes, and switch between them, depending on which I am in the mind of at the moment.

 

[Wetew]

I'm happy with my ignorance But at the same time impressed by those who take the time to understand the whole game (especially when the make excellent posts about strategies for us lazy bastards )

 

[Angelos]

Take Victoria (I or II) for example: you know you're not going to win, because the UK does. So I like to sit back and see what I can do with a country like Persia, or Spain, or Mexico, or . . . .

I totally agree. I believe turning minors into Great Powers is all the fun in EU and Vicky games. But some times, i just enjoy destroying the obvious winner. I must have done that Channel crossing a thousand times .

 

[Raph]

Take Victoria (I or II) for example: you know you're not going to win, because the UK does. So I like to sit back and see what I can do with a country like Persia, or Spain, or Mexico, or . . . .

I prefer learning the mechanics and using my skills in precise computation and so on to actually defeat the UK

 

[Benandorf]

I prefer learning the mechanics and using my skills in precise computation and so on to actually defeat the UK

I have to agree with this, pretty much. Maybe not the exact example, but as a player, the more complex the better. I don't play with calculator and spreadsheet next to me, but I do like to go through the precise computation and mechanics in my head as I play.

 

[Kriegsspieler]

I totally agree. I believe turning minors into Great Powers is all the fun in EU and Vicky games. But some times, i just enjoy destroying the obvious winner. I must have done that Channel crossing a thousand times .

You see, i'm not even that good a player.
I did manage to take the US out a couple of times when playing as Mexico, back in the time of Vicky-Revolutions. But that was with a lot of save-and-reloads. Hardly the stuff of stirring AAR's, I would wager!

 

[Enewald]

Noobs cheat.
Real men know how to make the game more realistic, by knowing how the game works and what must be changed to make playing it a more interesting experience...

 

[Balesir]

With DW about to come out there has been loads of discussion about exactly how the new mechanics will work, etc, and it occurred to me that many if not most posters seem to have a way, way deeper understanding of how Paradox's games work than I do.

I actually like not knowing exactly how every single thing functions, I feel if I know everything about the mechanics the game stops being a game and becomes an excersize in precise calculation and mathematics. Anyone else get this? I like there to be some mystery as to why some things work as they do.

Oh, yes - I'm (mostly) with you. For design, modding, etc. you really need to get some picture of how the actual game works, but for pure "fun" play I like to just try to immerse myself and "feel the history". It works, not by modelling history in niggling detail, but by placing myself in the position of making the sort of decision historical people had to make, with just the information (and understanding) they had to make it with.

Noobs cheat.
Real men know how to make the game more realistic, by knowing how the game works and what must be changed to make playing it a more interesting experience...

I think you conflate three things. To make the game fun as you play, you don't need to know the game's mechanisms - you just need to know something of the world at the time (and not that much, to be honest). To modify or design games, however, you do need to know how the game works. But you also need to be able to discriminate what detail/'realism' to add - and what to leave out. These are not scientific simulations, after all - they are games, and as such they need to be enjoyable by reasonably 'ordinary' folks!

 

[ashandresash]

With DW about to come out there has been loads of discussion about exactly how the new mechanics will work, etc, and it occurred to me that many if not most posters seem to have a way, way deeper understanding of how Paradox's games work than I do.

I actually like not knowing exactly how every single thing functions, I feel if I know everything about the mechanics the game stops being a game and becomes an excersize in precise calculation and mathematics. Anyone else get this? I like there to be some mystery as to why some things work as they do.

You've spoken for some of us, as it's seen. Playing against the AI in such complex games gets interesting only when you "roleplay" a little. Immersion is essential in Paradox games.

I suppose multiplayer is quite different.

 

[Polar Mongoose]

For me the real reason I like to fully understand game mechanics is so that I can stop things I don't want to happen from happening (inflation in EU3 and other things like that), rather than seeking to crush the AI.