Technology or Peace

[Polemists]

So do to boredom, the fact it isn't march yet, and the fact Megas cannot beat me in number of polls on site :P (yes that is a challenge.)

I decided to do another one.

So we don't know everything but what we do know is you get slots, and you can build schools.


Schools will lead to faster technology, but more liberal ideals and faster changes in government. The downside is that those liberal ideas and faster changes also lead to unhappiness.

So how will you balance it?

Tech blitz?

Hold back and just move slowly so you can keep monarchy as long as possible?

Use trade to get what you need?

Anyway a variety of choices in the poll, and a something else.

So feel free to reply and post why your going to go the way you are :)

[peacemaker]

im gonna try to get rid of monarchy as soon as possible, since democaracy is the way to go, or at least that's my dad's way of thinking. I figure I'll immediately go for tech and if it sparks a revolution, so be it. As long as I get the cool tech like bayonets or faster rate of firing etc.

[Sheogorath]

As Russia, it is my solemn duty to develop the technology required to get bear cavalry as soon as possible :P

[Polemists]

As Russia, it is my solemn duty to develop the technology required to get bear cavalry as soon as possible :P

Someone played a little to much red alert 3 :P

[pevergreen]

For my first serious campaign, I will be switzerland and I will tech up and only have one army.

[Ishmael]

As the Ottamans, i think im going to have to tech up fast, so lots of schools for me. I hate being at a technological disadvantage.

[pdoyle007]

Do advancements through stealing count against you?

Tech up the military then as you invade provinces with new farming methods etc implement them back home? Can you reverse engineer social avances as well as ships?

Will you be able to tech up merchant vessels to carry more, or different, trade resources, as these could then fall prey to my 104 gun first rate flagship 'The Death Star'

[Fisherking]

I want to see how all this works together. Government type effects alliances and relations. It is going to be a delicate balancing act.

Sheogorath you tech up as much as you want but remember it is your Sacred and Most Important Duty to keep your Tsar in Power no matter what the peasants say!

Russia‘s only classes were Nobles and Slaves anyway. It is your moral duty to keep those peasants down!

[Sir Beane]

Since I'll be playing as the British first I'm going to make an attempt to keep us as a Constitutional Monarchy. I guess that might mean less schools and less education.

Which is odd when you consider that Britain was at the forefront of the industrial revolution and wasn't a Republic.

[ArtillerySmoke]

As much as I'd like to stick around as a Monarchy for the whole game, it's a disadvantage in my eyes right now. (With as much as I know about the game).

I'll play as France first - and get a liberal democracy with the best technology I can afford working in my favor.

So, lots of schools for me it seems.

[Beskar]

I think early game, Monarchy is the way to go, but as the game progresses, it will slowly all turn into Constitutional Monarchies and Republics.

Out of the starting nations, I believe they are the following:
France - Monarchy
Sweden - Monarchy
Ottoman Empire - Monarchy
Great Britain - Constitutional Monarchy
United Provinces - Republic
Russia - Monarchy
Spain - Monarchy
Prussia - Monarchy
Poland-Lithuania - Republic
Austria - Monarchy
Marathas - Monarchy

I am not entirely sure if some of those monarchies are constitutional, I am just working from my base knowledge.

[Monk]

I am gonna go the route of the benevolent monarchy, until someone gets out of line. Then, off with their heads! I will brutally surpress any republics that pop up as well! God save the King!

I'll try to advance my tech in a way that doesn't create a clamor for reforms, more focused on military tech and the like but after a while it may be inevitable that I have to brutally put down some rebels.

[Beskar]

I believe the problem was, with the Sweden player, is because they focused all the research on the Military, is why people got upset, instead of them researching on how to feed people better, comfortable beds, etc. So I believe advances in social areas will keep a monarchy in power, not advances in them will bring about the opposite, as after all, the population would be happy.

[Sir Beane]

I believe the problem was, with the Sweden player, is because they focused all the research on the Military, is why people got upset, instead of them researching on how to feed people better, comfortable beds, etc. So I believe advances in social areas will keep a monarchy in power, not advances in them will bring about the opposite, as after all, the population would be happy.

The idea is that advances in social and cultural technology result in a better educated population. And a better educated population start to wonder about why they don't have rights, and votes, and why the nobles have all the money when the citizens do all the work. And then they get angry and its pithfork uprising time.

[Beskar]

Says a lot about now. We are giving up our rights to the government in order for them to stomp all over them in the interests of safety and security.

I was guessing the case was, that the advances in certain areas keep people happy, as lets face it, many people if given a far easier life of luxury wouldn't be thinking "Last week, I will working in a pig sty, now I am in a big fancy clean factory earning 4 times as much, this country is so awesome."

[Monk]

The idea is that advances in social and cultural technology result in a better educated population. And a better educated population start to wonder about why they don't have rights, and votes, and why the nobles have all the money when the citizens do all the work. And then they get angry and its pithfork uprising time.

Indeed that is my understanding as well. I like polls of this kind, so long as we dont go overboard with them! We cant play the game, but we can talk about our strategies and what we wanna do with all the new features.

[Sir Beane]

Says a lot about now. We are giving up our rights to the government in order for them to stomp all over them in the interests of safety and security.

I was guessing the case was, that the advances in certain areas keep people happy, as lets face it, many people if given a far easier life of luxury wouldn't be thinking "Last week, I will working in a pig sty, now I am in a big fancy clean factory earning 4 times as much, this country is so awesome."

I think that researching food supplies and things will keep people happy in the short term, and will certainly please the nobility. In the long term though education breeds Republics.

[Megas Methuselah]

Imma be a monarch, but I will still build a lot of schools and research techs. Any educated peasant dogs who seek to rebel will be crushed like beetles beneath my heel.

[batemonkey]

Education, Education, Education - as previously stated by a well know war monger

No point ruling over ignorant peasants, who's going to make all those fancy items to decorate my imperial palace

[Alexander the Adequate]

Lusted has already stated that simply researching additional technologies is not what brings revolution, researching technologies of a decidedly liberal variety is what causes it.

If you want to tech up in areas other than the sort of "philosophy-related" areas, I don't think it will cause a revolution.

[quadalpha]

Lusted has already stated that simply researching additional technologies is not what brings revolution, researching technologies of a decidedly liberal variety is what causes it.

If you want to tech up in areas other than the sort of "philosophy-related" areas, I don't think it will cause a revolution.

(You and Pretty Good should have a match.)

[ArtillerySmoke]

Lusted has already stated that simply researching additional technologies is not what brings revolution, researching technologies of a decidedly liberal variety is what causes it.

If you want to tech up in areas other than the sort of "philosophy-related" areas, I don't think it will cause a revolution.

That makes far more sense...thanks.

[Beskar]

That makes far more sense...thanks.

No it doesn't make sense at all, the world does work like that at all.

I can throw up millions of examples in the real world to prove my point.

French Revolution - Was it too much education or the fact people are starving to death, the pain, the anguish and unhappiness?
American Revolution - Was it the tax without representation or the did America just decide throw a big tea party and had a merry good time.
Russian Revolution - The Tsar took great care of his people, with plenty of education. That's why they got upset, surely. Nothing again, due to people dying, starving, shooting their own citizens...

The list goes on and on.

The fact is, people hate change. I will throw up again, many real life examples. In Britain, people cry about changing to metric from imperial. Even though metric is better, they cry, they don't want the change. Have you ever heard grandparents talking of the dark ages without consoles, computers and the dawn of the television speaking on how all this change is evil.

That's right, people hate change, the only time great changes occur are in times of war, times of misery and depression.

No one is going to through a revolution over you finding ways to make them sleep better at night, they will only throw one if you are starving them, or just wasting large amounts of money on big battle ships when people are dying.

Being honest, if Empire:TW comes out saying that things like Linen are better than wool causes a revolution, the game needs to be modified for great justice.

[A Very Super Market]

I will RP it. Maybe have one or two techs researched, as random discoveries, but if I'm doing fine, no changes in government for me.

[Beskar]

The world doesn't work like that.***

(Seriously, this forum needs an edit function. I might throw a revolution so there can be one. :P)

[Monk]

The world doesn't work like that.***

(Seriously, this forum needs an edit function. I might throw a revolution so there can be one. :P)

Once you're promoted to Member you can edit your own posts.

[Alexander the Adequate]

No it doesn't make sense at all, the world does work like that at all.

I can throw up millions of examples in the real world to prove my point.

French Revolution - Was it too much education or the fact people are starving to death, the pain, the anguish and unhappiness?
American Revolution - Was it the tax without representation or the did America just decide throw a big tea party and had a merry good time.
Russian Revolution - The Tsar took great care of his people, with plenty of education. That's why they got upset, surely. Nothing again, due to people dying, starving, shooting their own citizens...

The list goes on and on.

The fact is, people hate change. I will throw up again, many real life examples. In Britain, people cry about changing to metric from imperial. Even though metric is better, they cry, they don't want the change. Have you ever heard grandparents talking of the dark ages without consoles, computers and the dawn of the television speaking on how all this change is evil.

That's right, people hate change, the only time great changes occur are in times of war, times of misery and depression.

No one is going to through a revolution over you finding ways to make them sleep better at night, they will only throw one if you are starving them, or just wasting large amounts of money on big battle ships when people are dying.

Being honest, if Empire:TW comes out saying that things like Linen are better than wool causes a revolution, the game needs to be modified for great justice.

Right. But I fail to see what this changes exactly. Granted, I don't have any cemented evidence, but my understanding is that revolutions are ultimately triggered by the public order level. Obvious, right? What I think Lusted means is not that philosophical advances will be the only catalyst for revolution. Rather, I think they will simply contribute, along with a great variety of other factors, to the growth of civil unrest throughout your nation. Surely that's not too a-historical an approach. I mean, the philosophical treatises and books written by the likes of Voltaire and such are widely considered the inspiration for the French and American revolutions, at the very least.

[Beskar]

There are differences, for example, the communist manifesto, but no one cared anything for it in the time period when they were happy and dandy.

It just seemed this thread was on the basis that advancing technology would cause an revolt on itself. For examples, there are options such as "I want to keep a monarchy as long as possible, so low tech."

People are forgetting that for example, the German Empire had no problems and even then, a republic was forced onto them after the first world war. They were the most technological advanced nation at the time, rival of the British Empire.

Just saying that just because you want a high technology level won't cause mass revolution in itself.

[ArtillerySmoke]

Once you're promoted to Member you can edit your own posts.

lol, owned.

[pevergreen]

lol, owned.

lol, useless post. Don't make them.



I am hoping it will be a fine line between mass low tech or few high tech units.