Playing without westernising (DW 5.2)

[wobbit]

So after getting fairly proficient running western nations, I've had a brief experiement with other tech groups (namely Moscovy and the Ottomans, nothing too tricky). I'm curious as to how feasible it is to play through to endgame without westernising. Eastern, Ottoman and Muslim seem to be viable, although the placement of these nations puts them likely to come into extensive contact with the westerners, but has anyone done this with the more "backwards" tech groups?

I should point out I'm not aiming for world conquest or anything. I'm more interested in games around becoming a local power and surviving the arrival of the Europeans.

 

[Felicity]

The gap between you and the West can only grow. Likewise, with a non-westernized military, only early Muslim units can hope to compete, and those go out of date soon enough anyway. Surely you can become a local power, but coming in contact with western powers will just be a game of survival than anything else.

Just like in real life, nations need to reform to be able to survive. Japan is a good example of this.

 

[Dustman]

You can do it, relying on heavy artillery armies for ground combat, and on huge modern fleets for mobility and flex defense. In my Ragusa game I am researching ahead of time, and not able to Westernize due to Western Europeans being backwaters of the continent. Sure, troops are inferior, but artillery plus a good general compensate for that quite nice.

 

[jdrou]

"Quantity has a quality all its own." (within limits)
Also it's possible for a human to have a high enough income to out-tech AI powers in higher tech groups (basically the above quote applied to tech progression instead of armies). Even moreso if you are primarily a land power that can ignore naval tech.

 

[Slym]

Or even more so if you're a naval power that can just keep westerners from ever landing on your shores.

 

[Nunn45]

I had a large powerful Zaporozhian sich Nation (edited in at start date ) that despite being large and eastern tech was incredibly far ahead of everyone else in Tech.

So it is defintaly possible with the Eastern Tech and maybe Muslim tech, though you go further you will need such a huge economy that you can overcome the restrictions.....though that may be achievable in SP.

 

[n0thin]

Well, especially in rich areas (or as small traders) in the ottoman or eastern tech it's actually not that hard to stay on par with the latin tech countries. If you however go as low as muslim tech, it becomes really hard. I would think, everything further behind (next step is indian tech with 50% efficiency) is almost impossible.

 

[chgrogers]

How feasible is it just to westernize but not Modernize?

 

[Nunn45]

You could but you would always have the negative effects of westernising, IE western influences.

 

[DDRJake]

How feasible is it just to westernize but not Modernize?

Your troops will always be sub-par but not quite as bad as otherwise since your land tech will still rise as fast as your western friends meaning you'll get improved fire and shock multipliers. Still expect to get steamrolled by napoleonic-era troops if you don't modernise, particularly as a Chinese/new world nation.

Oh, and you will always have Western Influences which you will have to resist via event every 10 years (for a -2RR bonus)

 

[alexti]

So after getting fairly proficient running western nations, I've had a brief experiement with other tech groups (namely Moscovy and the Ottomans, nothing too tricky). I'm curious as to how feasible it is to play through to endgame without westernising. Eastern, Ottoman and Muslim seem to be viable, although the placement of these nations puts them likely to come into extensive contact with the westerners, but has anyone done this with the more "backwards" tech groups?

I should point out I'm not aiming for world conquest or anything. I'm more interested in games around becoming a local power and surviving the arrival of the Europeans.

It's certainly possible. Outteching AI is not a problem even in Chinese group. You won't have very good land units, but combination of a diplomacy and strong navy should keep you save.

If you want relatively easy nation to try it I would suggest Malacca or Brunei. Good sliders, plus you can form Malaya within 15-20 years getting a lot of cores making you the strongest nation of the region. Assuming that you want to somewhat roleplay (instead of annexing Europe as fast as you can) you could colonizes number of good provinces in Indonesia and perhaps vassalize your corner of SE Asia. That should be enough to keep Europeans out (and destroy their fleets if necessary).

 

[unmerged(80402)]

Well except for playing ming, i don't see a reason NOT to westernize. IF you will take all the innovate + free subject moves possible you get ~40% tech cost decrease, which allows you to become quite decent in tech, and if you are rich and/or free trader, you can gain quite good enough income to outtech most of AI countries.

 

[Mods]

Your troops will always be sub-par but not quite as bad as otherwise since your land tech will still rise as fast as your western friends meaning you'll get improved fire and shock multipliers. Still expect to get steamrolled by napoleonic-era troops if you don't modernise, particularly as a Chinese/new world nation.

Oh, and you will always have Western Influences which you will have to resist via event every 10 years (for a -2RR bonus)

And you'll always have 50 percent extra stability cost...
Always modernise eventually I'd say, you don't need to be innovative anymore (so you can start going narrowminded again) and you'd want to get to 5 centralization anyway

 

[Dustman]

And you'll always have 50 percent extra stability cost...
Always modernise eventually I'd say, you don't need to be innovative anymore (so you can start going narrowminded again) and you'd want to get to 5 centralization anyway

With decent tech rate Centralization isn't as important. Decentralized countries are easier to control and do not require as much effort to stay at +3 stab. Plus many events with Decentralization options become very appealing.

 

[Castios]

India has best early game Cavalry, better than Latin nations. But after you get this cav, it's not worth staying at backwards technology group. Thats not just penalty for being in backwards tech group. but also neighbor bonus, and only Latin nations have really good trade OPMs which provide awesome neighbor bonus for all others in that tech. group.

 

[unmerged(80402)]

Latin nations = best infantry, from LT 13 and on. Before it, best are ottomans, second are muslim and hordes.

Best early cavalry = Muslim nations, Second are ottomans and hordes, Indian get best cavalry at LT 15, but at LT 23(if i recall correctly) chinese get a little better cavalry.

Eastern nations are worst, because they lack in infantry, and their cavalry is pretty weak.

 

[wobbit]

Thanks for all the advice and comments!

The idea was to avoid westernisation to create a different type of game: to play as a nation struggling to survive and prosper as westerners arrived without having to effectively become a Western Nation. I wouldn't be looking to conquer Europe, just to survive it. I fully appreciate that remaining unwesternised is far from optimal gameplay, but it could still be interesting.

I may have an experiement with Malacca and cannon heavy armies...

On a related note, asside from having to rebuild every time you want to upgrade, what are the disadvantages of using troops built from foriegn cores (ie Timurids using Ottoman troops)?

 

[Gamera]

Latin nations = best infantry, from LT 13 and on. Before it, best are ottomans, second are muslim and hordes.

Best early cavalry = Muslim nations, Second are ottomans and hordes, Indian get best cavalry at LT 15, but at LT 23(if i recall correctly) chinese get a little better cavalry.

Eastern nations are worst, because they lack in infantry, and their cavalry is pretty weak.

I'm particularly sad about Eastern cavalry being so weak: around year 1600-1700, eastern cavalry is supposedly the strongest in Europe (polish cossaks, remember Wien 1683)...yet it's below par with Latin Nations...even if you're at the same level as them in tech.

I'm also very surprised that the Chinese group got such a strong cavalry...but oh well... really it's nothing compared to how weak are the Eastern Group.
It's even more sad as you could think that Eastern nations could be the prime candidates for a whole game without westernization (alongside the Ottomans)..guess it was done to balance the game? But really it's a pity

 

[gornard]

I'm particularly sad about Eastern cavalry being so weak: around year 1600-1700, eastern cavalry is supposedly the strongest in Europe (polish cossaks, remember Wien 1683)...yet it's below par with Latin Nations...even if you're at the same level as them in tech.

I agree, most the eastern armies where primarily based around cavalry until maybe the 18th century. Infantry of the east probably should be weak, but eastern cav should be top draw until rather late in the game where every european army would have been rather similar. In the 17th century the most important cavalry contingents usually come from eastern armies, transylvania, poland, finns, cossaks etc.

 

[Felicity]

On a related note, asside from having to rebuild every time you want to upgrade, what are the disadvantages of using troops built from foriegn cores (ie Timurids using Ottoman troops)?

Nothing, as far as I can tell from playing Byz a lot more in MP. Just the fact that they're only available as long as the core is there and you can't upgrade them. The same idea wasn't uncommon irl either.