Non-European Minors

[Sidney]

I think I've seen discussion about this before but what are the issues, if any, playing as a non-European minor?

 

[Griffon]

well, in the igc, if you want to play as iroquois, inca or aztec, be prepared to never go beyond tech level 0.

As for the others (China, Japan, etc.) I think the only issues are a longer ramp up time for technology. But they are vvery much playable. In fact, some have played Iraq and Persia and written some nice AARs.

Good luck!

 

[Dark Knight]

China and Japan can advance in tech, but can't build improvements, so it's best to stick with Middle-Eastern minors.

 

[unmerged(931)]

Is the improvements option hard-coded?

 

[Dark Knight]

Yes, it seems to be.

 

[unmerged(1457)]

Persia seems like it would be really interesting to play. Are the Indian nations in the same class as China?

 

[unmerged(1615)]

Persia & Indian nations

Robo, I've played both Persia and the Mughal Empire. They're both a lot of fun. I found no tech or building restrictions. Because they are termed Pagans, you do have a penalty in rate of achieving tech, but given the advantages of being a human player (at least pre-1.08), this actually enhances gameplay, IMHO.

 

[BiB]

I can tell you that Persia is very fun to play with. Jihad and all

 

[unmerged(548)]

Is the improvements option hard-coded?

I think Hartmann mentioned that the hard coded part is in the area of placement, not the nation tags as such.

Just though I would mention it.

 

[unmerged(528)]

However this placement restriction seems lifted in the Fantasia campaign?

 

[Dark Knight]

Yes, the whole point of the fantasia campaign is to get large, equal empires in all parts of the world.