Norrefeldt said:
However, I still fail to see the inconsistency.
THE INCONSISTENCY
You said:
"Fun is different to different people. Some like to sit in a corner and grow fat, and dream up rules how to get an even greater step ahead. Others, like me, find more fun in a competitive game with reasonably equal nations."
Then we conclude that you have probably never ever played a game with "reasonably equal nations" for the simple reason that there has probably never been such a game.
So, how can you know you find more fun in such a game if you never have played in it? And what is the meaning to say you prefer such games if they perhaps only exist in theory? That is what appears to be an inconsistency.
EQUALNESS AND FUN
But more important is: how can "equalness" have any signficant relation to the degree of "fun" at all?
When I play Portugal in a normal game I know I should not DOW France on my own but that does not mean it becomes less fun for me. Apparently it does for you. You would have preferred that POR was as strong as FRA or that POR would not be a selectable nation at all.
If I play France I know I can DOW and destroy Holland in most circumstances but that does not make it less fun for me. Apparently it is for you. You would have preferred that HOL was as strong as FRA or that HOL would not be a selectable nation at all.
For me the task is to perform as well as I can from each starting point. Each starting position constitutes a challenge initself that must be tackled in its own way, different from any other nation.
Indeed, the inequality between nations in fact adds to the fun as it means the challenge when we compare games will be bigger, not smaller. Because
the more a situation one have to face differs from one's experience the more challenging it is. And I want challenges, that is fun.
THE BALANCING ISSUE
The fixation at "balancing" that stalks large parts of this modding community is a real danger I believe. Because it moves their focus from the important angle, which is: how do we make the game as fun and exciting as possible. "Balancing" is not an aim in itself, only as far as it adds to the fun and excitement is it justified. It is just a part of a complex formula. But it is not entirely without meaning. Because
1. If there are very big differences one nation might be able to wipe out all the rest or perhaps all of the other nations would need to ally versus this nation and that would make each game like the previous one. So it is essential to avoid a setup that is so unbalanced that a situation similar to these two cases can occur. But as far as I know we are very very far from that. I have never seen a scenario where this was the probable outcome.
and
2. It is not so simple that differences are always good. If someone for example have perfect sliders from start (and the rest have not) then you have removed the slider challenge for him and you will also have eliminated the slider competition between this nation and the other. That is bad.
Perhaps (probably) there are more. I have no time to analyse that just now.
-------
Of course, if you aim at something different than having a fun and exciting game you may end up at different conclusions. But then we should not be discussing this, what we then should discuss is the basic approach to the game.
THE CONCEPT OF COMPETITIVENESS
You talk about a "competitive" indicating that it means player vs player wars. Apparently without realising that you can compete in EU in a lot of ways,
wars are but one of the ways. I have seen this simplification of the game a lot of times made by a lot of posters.
The truth is that the game of EU is much too rich to be reduced to a simple game of war. War is merely a subset of the competitive activity. There is competition going on
all over all the time. Not least on the diplomatic arena.
------
In fact, if there is one factor that is more important than any other in the competition in this game I would say it is the diplomatic factor. The one most skilled and successful in making bonds of friendship with key nations will normally have paved the fastest road to success in EU MP. As was the case in RL. (That holds true regardless of your degree of peacefulness. I add this just to remove any possible misunderstanding, i.e. the fact that forming strong bonds of friendship is so essential does not mean that being peaceful is the best strategy in the game.)
As someone once wrote in a guide (Archduke or ******, cannot remember); "whatever you do, talk to people, all the time, do not be silent, because then you will be the next target of your neighbours."
But now we have left the topic of the current discussion.
