How many people actually play or played in India?

[jsadams]

I have, once I united India, I conquered all the middle east along with Tibet. I had a very intricate imperial government that gave lots of power to the nobles. The very beginning of the unified empire saw the imperial crown as an elective head, but than once my dynasty got ousted from a 200 year reign...I got kinda ticked, so I committed treason and over threw the emperor to reclaim my birth right. After that, things were pretty good, considering that my empire never got struck by the black plague while the rest of the world did. If you ever plan on unifying India and controlling the west, keep your capital in Debul. Debul is part of the silk trade with three different routes going through it, makes for a very rich economy.

 

[persianfan247]

I'd play in India more often if I were not so alarmingly ignorant of the history and cultures.

For people like this may I recommend this book, "India: A History"

https://www.bookdepository.com/search?searchTerm=india a history john keay&search=Find+book

I have to agree that knowing the history of a place makes it far more interesting to play.

 

[LowTartare]

India is pretty interesting region to play and much more dynamic setting than it seems. To be honest, it suffers heavily from procedurally generated problems. Realms and dynasties blend together between same looking cultural flags and not so easy to remember names. It takes a little time to be accustomed to the background and constant changes in the actual balance of power and from geographical to dynastic names doesn't really help to do that. If you can remember that Rashtrakutas are Indian Karlings while Rajputana is just a titular kingdom and not the other way around, it can pretty interesting to follow intricate web of dynamic of relationships between rulers.