George Orwell's 'Nineteen Eighty-Four' (1984)

[DiscordianFront]

The Discordian Front presents the doubleplusgood scenario, George Orwell's 'Nineteen Eighty-Four' (1984). Whether under the guise of Oceanic Ingsoc, Eurasian Neo-Bolshevism or Eastasian 'Death Worship', follow the tenets of oligarchical collectivism to conquer the globe! Take the role of Big Brother and guide your super-state to ultimate power over rivals! Take over the Disputed Zones and put their coolies to work for your state. Rain rocket bombs on the cities of your enemies. Use agitprop to unsettle your opponent's population. Set up death camps to process the enemy captured and dispose of them efficiently!

Altered Units:

Floating Fortress: (were Battleships) Move much slower (almost immobile) but immensely powerful with greater bombard range and upgraded anti-aircraft.

Proles: (were workers) The lowest echelon of workers in each of the super-states. Capture them and put them to work or take them back to your death camps for orderly execution.

The Brotherhood: (were barbarians) Secret organization of freedom fighters who strike at authority around the world.

New Improvements:

Death Camps: Bring your captured Proles back to your city-based death camps and execute them for a bloody extra 100 culture points!

Playable Super-states involved:

Oceania (Ingsoc)
Eurasia (Neo-Bolshevism)
Eastasia ('Death Worship')
Disputed Zones (Democracy)

Tactics: As predicted by George Orwell in 1948, the globe will remain static throughout this conflict, only the Disputed Zone being witness to most of the fighting and continuously changing hands.

 

[Serutan]

So how does the globe remain static? Unless you garrison the non Disputed Zone
civs with near invincible units, it won't happen. If you have done something like that, the scen won't be worth playing.

 

[DiscordianFront]

Serutan, I think you have misinterpreted me. You ask how can the world will remain static without garrisoning near invincible units in the Disputed Zone? This is not what Orwell states or is reflected in the game. As I stated, the globe remains static EXCEPT for the Disputed Zone which constantly changes hands. The Disputed Zone, according to Orwell, is a rough quadrilateral running from Darwin, Hong Kong, Tangiers and Brazzaville. It is constantly fought over by the super-states who continually seek to exploit the millions of "coolies" (Orwell, p.165) these regions contain. Orwell does not discuss the armed strength of the Disputed Zone but he infers that it is low. I have reflected it as such rather than with "invincible" units (observers note that Baghdad is close to the center of this quadrilateral, also reflected in H.G. Wells' 'The Shape of Things To Come' [1933]). Will conflict center around this Disputed Zone? Orwell says 'yes' in the guise of Emmanuel Goldstein in 'The Theories and Practices of Oligarchical Collectivism' (George Orwell, 'Nineteen Eighty-Four', [1948] (p.163). As Orwell suggests, the super-states constantly betray each other and realign in an attempt to control the Disputed Zones to place themselves in a position to destroy one of the three powers. It is then projected that their super-state will turn upon the final one and destroy it. But this is a day-dream of the Party! War is consumption and it is designed to keep the status quo in equilibrium. Each super-state has its own abilities which offsets it against the others (Oceania with its stretches of sea, Eurasia with its enormous landmass, Eastasia with the fecundity of its people). Each super-state fears using nuclear weapons but nevertheless stockpiles them for use in a back-stabbing fantasy plan of the future. How is this reflected in game play? Basically, the Disputed Zone gets eaten up quickly by the three super-states. Playing the Disputed Zone is next to impossible due to agitprop from the super-states (but interesting to attempt). Eventually the global superpowers meet one another and start hammering away at each other! Net effect: War is consumption 'cos there's easy money, easy jobs - especially when you build the bombs that blow the cities off the map 'cos guess who profits when they build 'em back up?

 

[Serutan]

Actually, I said non-Disputed Zone (i.e. Oceania, Eastasia, and Eurasia). And I remember from the book that there was a tacit agreement between the three powers to do their fighting in the area you specified. Oh well, I'll give it a shot and see what happens.

 

[DiscordianFront]

My apologies Serutan! So you did! Nevertheless it was an interesting area of discussion!

 

[Deth McBones]

Hmmm... this looks interesting... you can play as the Disputed Zone? Can they win any way other than Conquest or Domination? And who did you put as their leader?

 

[Serutan]

Ok, I've given it whirl (Regent) Played at bit of Oceania, Eastasia, and Disputed Zone.
Observations/comments follow.

1. The Disputed Zone is IMO not playble as is. I think you should either make it a non
playable side and keep the locked war aspect, or, if you want it to be playable,
there should not be locked wars. To stay true to the book, the first choice would
be the way to go.

2. You need to do something about cities starting up in starvation. This was true
with both Eastasia and the Disputed Zone. It's kind of hard for Eastasia to be
protected by the size of its population when said population is declining from the
start. One thing would be to use Communism as the government, so that the
food penalty for Despotism doesn't come in to play.

3. Ocenia looks to be really easy to play, given the AI incompetence at amphibious
warfare, and the fact that it has staging areas in South Africa and Australia for
offensive operations. I should note here that I set the optimal # of cities to 999
in order to defeat the most crippling corruption.

4. I think Eastasia will be the best challenge, because it's powerful enough that it
can't just be steamrolled, but it is enough weaker than Eurasia (I doubt Oceania is
much of a problem due to AI incompetency) to warrant care on the part of the
player.

5. When playing as Eastasia, I noticed that Oceania and Eurasia declared war on each
other a couple of times, and signed peace treaties not too long afterward. Oceania
declared war on me once (due to the sub placed in the English Channel),
but after a few turns offered peace, which I accepted. Eurasia has been busy snarfing up
the Disputed Zone cities in Africa. I managed to beat them to Baghdad, which I
suspect will be a primary battleground when we do finally go to war. I currently
control all of India, Indochina, Indonesia. Now in empire building mode, settling
gaps in South Asia and Korea, and generally trying to get my industrial base built
up before Eurasia decides it's time to take me out.

 

[Moosezilla]

I tried to nuke London on the first turn and...oops! You didn't say what you meant by that.




"What do we mean by that?"-Soupy Sales lol