ChipNES II: A World Asunder

[tommy_toon]

Yes, I concur with Alex, as I stated before on this (though I backed off). I thought about it again and came roughly to the same conclusion, despite exposure to European technologies they are not on par with them.

This was really about Great Britain though, as Sheep has yet to post or check in, I assume Britain remains NPC and will send all diplo to you Chip.

 

[Luckymoose]

Fear the Might of the Italian Republic...in the future.[/ignore]

 

[tommy_toon]

Army (Training):8 Divisions(God)

I'm wondering if this was done on accident or purposefully

 

[alex994]

The Indian Armies of the late 1700s were equal to those of Europe in training, equipment and leadership. Indian factories produced cannon of equal or better quality than those produced in Europe.

The capability to produce superior cannon isn't what makes the Early Industrial Age the Early Industrial Age The ability to mass produce weapons via factories on a massive scale was a feat never replicated by Indian nations bound by the caste system so while they were able to make cannons perhaps equal or better then European ones, the process was a slow one and produced relatively few in number

Also, Indian nations and most of the nations I mention fail to produce "replaceable parts" continuing to rely on caste methods to make weapons. Thus if a piece of weapon is broken, the weapon needs a specific replacement by a craftsmen. Indian Princes were perhaps able to have equal armies in terms of weaponry and equipment, but in terms of leadership, training, and organization they were far outclassed by Europe.

The Early Industrial Age, is the Early Industrial Age because mainly of the industrial capabilities that were introduced, not the weaponry used at the time.

 

[Drake Rlugia]

TO: Lombardy
FROM: The Austrian Empire

A NAP is acceptable.

 

[Birdjaguar]

Alex, I'm not sure this is the time or place to discuss the 18th C military/economic history of the subcontinent. It will detract from Swiss's effort in this NES.

 

[alex994]

But the point I'm tryig to get across is that the said nations aren't supposed to be in the Early Industrial Age And that swiss should change their stats to better reflect their current situation in comparison to European nations.

 

[Birdjaguar]

But the point I'm tryig to get across is that the said nations aren't supposed to be in the Early Industrial Age And that swiss should change their stats to better reflect their current situation in comparison to European nations.

I think that the backwardness of the region shows up in other ways that will hold the region back. Things like infrastructure, National intelligence and living standards. In those the whole region is awfully primitive. Toe to toe, the battles were anything but preordained, while in the basics of living and lerning they were, as shown, far apart. Progress for the Europeans, I assume, will be much faster than for those of us mired in poverty and squalor. I think if you map out the costs to get to the next level, you'll see just how far ahead you are.

 

[alex994]

Progress will of course be faster for Europeans, but the point of the matter is, we're not supposed to start out equally As I said before, the nations I've listed are not in anyway equal in techology to Europe! Technology. Not its infrastructure/education/living standard! Yes, it will be much more difficult for you to get into the next age then us, but you're not supposed to be in the same age as us at all!

 

[Kentharu]

you could have help....

 

[Birdjaguar]

Progress will of course be faster for Europeans, but the point of the matter is, we're not supposed to start out equally As I said before, the nations I've listed are not in anyway equal in techology to Europe! Technology. Not its infrastructure/education/living standard! Yes, it will be much more difficult for you to get into the next age then us, but you're not supposed to be in the same age as us at all!

If by technology you mean instruments of war that are available for use, then India and Europe were at parity. I'm sure that some of the other areas in Asia were not, Oman perhaps, maybe Burma and New guinea. Don't forget that Antwerp was a lively arms market from which "technology' was shipped all over the world. And keep in mind that the Brits won India not on the battlefield, but economic pressure, subterfuge, political adroitness and exploitation of local weaknesses.

Are you asking Swiss to make battlefield victories easier for Europeans when fighting in Asia? Say, 1 portuguese div. can take on 5 local divisions and win handily?

 

[Kentharu]

you can have the technology, but that doesn't mean you have the structures to make anything, the factories and what not, i think that is what he means, so either put the training of the asian units at very low (the lowest even) or put them out of the industrial age.

 

[Sheep]

Britian signing on, will catch up when I get home from work today.

 

[Birdjaguar]

you can have the technology, but that doesn't mean you have the structures to make anything, the factories and what not, i think that is what he means, so either put the training of the asian units at very low (the lowest even) or put them out of the industrial age.

The Indians may not have had the most modern factories, but they did have up to date armaments. Labor was cheap in Asia and the EIC brought technology upgrades to the region. Indian troops were as well trained as Europeans of the age, so that is a bad scenario.

Currently, many of the Asian nations are at the bottom of the Early industrial Age stats, I think, I could accept putting them at the top of the previous age. I'm not exactly sure what that would mean in game terms and EPs. But at a minimum it should mean increasing national intelligence to academic or enlightment. I'm not sure what else goes into gaining levels.

 

[alex994]

If by technology you mean instruments of war that are available for use, then India and Europe were at parity. I'm sure that some of the other areas in Asia were not, Oman perhaps, maybe Burma and New guinea. Don't forget that Antwerp was a lively arms market from which "technology' was shipped all over the world. And keep in mind that the Brits won India not on the battlefield, but economic pressure, subterfuge, political adroitness and exploitation of local weaknesses.

Are you asking Swiss to make battlefield victories easier for Europeans when fighting in Asia? Say, 1 portuguese div. can take on 5 local divisions and win handily?

I'm going to say this one more time, a "Technological Age" does not mean equal weaponry! Yes, the Indian states had perhaps European weaponry, but THEY WERE NEVER ABLE TO PRODUCE THEIR OWN WEAPONS ON PAR OF EUROPE! WHAT MAKES THE INDUSTRIAL AGE THE INDUSTRIAL AGE IS INDUSTRY! Which is something India and the other nations lack. Keep in mind that said superior economic, military, and political organization is what makes the difference between Europe, Japan and all the other nations that could not compete. Is it that difficult to understand the difference of "Early Industrial Age" and Late Enlightenment Age?

Yes, I'm saying battlefield victories should be easier for Europeans, and is supposed to be Because frankly, the armies of the Indian states could have the same exact weapons as the British, but their training, skill, organization, and level of leadership was no where near the British Army.

Do keep in mind that this is an alt-history and the Indian states or any other said state for the matter should NOT be equal to Europe in technology.

 

[North King]

Indian states should be inferior to European armies in discipline and training, but not anything else. Europeans should have to outwit them if they want victory.

 

[Birdjaguar]

I'm going to say this one more time, a "Technological Age" does not mean equal weaponry! Yes, the Indian states had perhaps European weaponry, but THEY WERE NEVER ABLE TO PRODUCE THEIR OWN WEAPONS ON PAR OF EUROPE! WHAT MAKES THE INDUSTRIAL AGE THE INDUSTRIAL AGE IS INDUSTRY! Which is something India and the other nations lack. Keep in mind that said superior economic, military, and political organization is what makes the difference between Europe, Japan and all the other nations that could not compete. Is it that difficult to understand the difference of "Early Industrial Age" and Late Enlightenment Age?

I believe that I did say that I might accept an "Age" adjustment.

Yes, I'm saying battlefield victories should be easier for Europeans, and is supposed to be Because frankly, the armies of the Indian states could have the same exact weapons as the British, but their training, skill, organization, and level of leadership was no where near the British Army.

If you read the alt history provided in the OP you will see that European military success was not a foregone conclusion at all. They suffered many setbacks and loses. If Asian Armies had current weaponry for battles against Europeans, then whether or not they produced it or bought it is irrelevant.

Do keep in mind that this is an alt-history and the Indian states or any other said state for the matter should NOT be equal to Europe in technology.

Where is that written? Since this is alt history there is no reason that Swiss couldn't make Asia more equal to Europe just because he wanted to.

Forget the rhetoric, what do you want in specific game terms that reflects your position? What advantage over the Asian nations do you feel you are owed?

Like I said earlier, this discussion is a distraction from the NES.

 

[alex994]

If you read the alt history provided in the OP you will see that European military success was not a foregone conclusion at all. They suffered many setbacks and loses. If Asian Armies had current weaponry for battles against Europeans, then whether or not they produced it or bought it is irrelevant.

It is relevant for one simple reason. The Early Industrial Age has its name because of industries! If you do not possess the Industrial base you can't obviously be in the Early Industrial Age Qing China in OTL for example with the Beiyang Army and other modern armies, cannot be considered to be in the Early Industrial Age because they lacked industry.

Where is that written? Since this is alt history there is no reason that Swiss couldn't make Asia more equal to Europe just because he wanted to.

It's an alt-history, that maintains similarity to the OTL progress in that Europe, is the center of technology, not Asia as of the moment as well as that Asia, is not equal to Europe, but inferior in technological capabilities as well as organization in various areas.

Forget the rhetoric, what do you want in specific game terms that reflects your position? What advantage over the Asian nations do you feel you are owed?

As I said, this is against all nations I've mentioned before with which I believe having "Early Industrial Age" is incorrect, and not just Asian nations. I merely desire that all of their stats be sent back to Late Enlightenment Age as they should be.

Like I said earlier, this discussion is a distraction from the NES.

This discussion is NOT a distraction to the nes as we are trying to improve the quality of the nes and the fact that the current stats show a skewed picture of the world. And any concerns involving the nes shouldn't be considered a distraction at all.

 

[Luckymoose]

I would liek to know if The Italian Republic has any major allies.I read parts of the alt hist but only came to the conclusion that France is a good ally of me.Anyone else know?Cause I have some thing to plan for once I know whos what and what not.

 

[Drake Rlugia]

TO: The Ottoman Empire
FROM: The Austrian Empire

We wish for warmer relations with the Turkish Empire. Thus we offer a five year NAP to you.

We would also like to inquire on the region known as Croatia. Would you perhaps be willing to sell it? Austria is in dire need of more ports, and Croatia has an access of them. If you are willing to sell said region, please offer a price.