I have just recently purchased EU and I am still getting familiar with the game. I have managed to make it to 1590 playing the Iriquois on the fantasy scenario. I reached West African shores for the first time around 1540 and when I landed units to explore I was a little shocked to see that the province I had landed in traded slaves. I've played other games of this type from this time period (Uncharted Waters-N16 & Imperialism-Win98) and neither game included slaves as trading commodities. After recovering from my initial shock at discovering this existed in EU I was able to settle down and come to grips with the fact that it was a hard reality of the time frame covered by EU. I was a little surprised that it was included in the game because slave trading represents a 'taboo' element of trading to me because I live in the United States and I have a deeply ingrained consciousness on the subject because the United States was the final destination for this trade and ironically, I'd be willing to bet that the target market for this game is the U.S.; the final destination of the very trade (slavery) we try to to put behind us as a national conciousness. So, it wouldn't surprise me if other American players have a bit of difficulty adjusting to this aspect of the game. Fortunately there are many other African provinces in the game that do not trade slaves and it can be easily avoided if one so chooses to establish colonies or trading posts in Africa.
I do admire EU's courage for being upfront in dealing with the issue of slavery in it's game. You have crossed a boundry no other game seems to want to touch. And though I admire you for having the resolve to deal with 'taboo' issues, I feel you fell a little short in 'going all the way' on the matter of taboo trading subjects. Just as slave trading was a hard reality of the world from 1492 - 1792, so was the trading of drugs a hard reality then, and still is today. As proof to the truth of what I say, one only needs to do a little research into the Opium War fought between England and China in the early 1840's. Yep, that's right, a documented drug war involving the trade of illicit substances. In a dissertation on the Opium War, Richard Hooker (www.wsu.edu/~dee/CHING/OPIUM.HTM)states 'by the 1830's, the English had become the major drug traffiking criminal organization in the world; very few drug cartels of the 20th century can even touch the England of the early 19th century.'
I'm not asking EU to add drug trade to the game; it would really be 'politically incorrect' and I could see where it might cause legal problems for marketing and distributing. I guess my whole point to this is: why did you decide to cross one taboo boundry and not the other?
I do admire EU's courage for being upfront in dealing with the issue of slavery in it's game. You have crossed a boundry no other game seems to want to touch. And though I admire you for having the resolve to deal with 'taboo' issues, I feel you fell a little short in 'going all the way' on the matter of taboo trading subjects. Just as slave trading was a hard reality of the world from 1492 - 1792, so was the trading of drugs a hard reality then, and still is today. As proof to the truth of what I say, one only needs to do a little research into the Opium War fought between England and China in the early 1840's. Yep, that's right, a documented drug war involving the trade of illicit substances. In a dissertation on the Opium War, Richard Hooker (www.wsu.edu/~dee/CHING/OPIUM.HTM)states 'by the 1830's, the English had become the major drug traffiking criminal organization in the world; very few drug cartels of the 20th century can even touch the England of the early 19th century.'
I'm not asking EU to add drug trade to the game; it would really be 'politically incorrect' and I could see where it might cause legal problems for marketing and distributing. I guess my whole point to this is: why did you decide to cross one taboo boundry and not the other?
