Discussion - Is EU4 more complex than Chess?

[MCMartel]

Sorta? But the question is so closely linked to one's definition of "complexity" in a game as to be kinda meaningless.

 

[TheAtreides84]

Chess is a stupid game. It implies that a battle is fought on equal sized armies, same composition, absolute knowledge of enemy positions, clear terrain, top morale, top discipline and the king is present....

Moreover there is no luck involved. Thousands of battles have been lost due to bad luck. Imagine in chess that your queen can't move this turn because she is sick...

No battle is ever that fair. In eu4 you control all these + diplomacy + 100000 more things.

That's because chess isn't a wargame. It can educate someone about skills that are useful in real warfare, as general rules of conduct (like, anticipating your foe's moves), and so has been included in the education of lords and kings across the ages, as a less expensive alternative to real-file drills and wargaming. But also hunting and sports could teach you things about warfare, for instance. At its core, chess is a game about math, not about war.

 

[Chief of Staff]

Comparing Europa Universalis IV and chess game is like comparing apple vs. orange. I don't think it's possible to compare those two.

 

[Grand Historian]

I think the main difference is that chess is a game of complete information, while EU4 (and real war) is a game of incomplete information. So the complexity in EU4 is greatly increased by the fact that you must make up possible scenarios for what you can't see.

This would be true if you knew what your opponent was thinking. You can see all the board, but since you only have one move per turn, you can only act so much on that information. This, of course, is assuming that players even bother to take a look at the whole board before making a move.

 

[GMOEU]

Depends if playing EU4 against the AI or playing EU4 against other humans.
Playing EU4 against humans can become complex.

 

[TheAtreides84]

This would be true if you knew what your opponent was thinking. You can see all the board, but since you only have one move per turn, you can only act so much on that information. This, of course, is assuming that players even bother to take a look at the whole board before making a move.

Not just this. I was saying that there is a relatively small amount of moves your opponent can make every turn, while in Europa Universalis there are almost endless possibilities.

 

[Shaaaq]

Ok, chess isn't that complicated. It is simple enough that computers can beat grandmasters through brute forcing every possibility. In fact, after the first few moves (2 or 3 I believe) chess has been solved.

Computer chess variants are usually not that good.
Since they rely on brute force and not an overall strategy you can still beat them consistently by developing your board in specific ways.
No computer program can consider moves far ahead enough in a game to understand the end goal of an opening and as such some moves are hard coded (such as the openers) and this leaves further room to probe.

Not just this. I was saying that there is a relatively small amount of moves your opponent can make every turn, while in Europa Universalis there are almost endless possibilities.

But how many of these possibilities have a direct impact on your way of play?

 

[endorken]

Comparing Europa Universalis IV and chess game is like comparing apple vs. orange. I don't think it's possible to compare those two.

Apples and Oranges - A Comparison

 

[Chief of Staff]

Apples and Oranges - A Comparison

Yes, I am aware of that problem with the phrase but since the phrase is often used in common conversations, the intended meaning is immediately understood by the audience and my point remains about the comparison of EU4 and chess.