And now I finish off this round of Hearts of Iron II with a handful of thoughts and an aggregation of the game years so that I can maybe find it again if I ever need to. (Also, I'm shocked to find that I started playing this game in September 2009!)
The game keeps track of enormously many statistics, mostly related to things like supply consumption or the number of ships sunk or such. It has a weakness in assembling these into the impressive yet dubious tables of data that fill out the appendices of a History Of The War tome. It also doesn't try to keep any track of how many people die in the wars, possibly because that might be too much to even start to calculate (think of how populations move around in wars, even before aerial bombardment begins), possibly because the game designers had a fit of worrying about the sorts of players who'd like to see who can kill the most people.
I tend to think in these games of winning and losing by different terms: if I can complete the war faster than happened in real life, that's a win. Here, I spent more time at war, but many more people live free. Both that increase in time and increase in free people come from the Soviet War. The German war was an eyeblink, and even the Japanese war surprisingly swift considering I had to occupy nearly all of China. I admit I'd like to know if more of the world survived that decade the way I went through it. I'm pretty sure I'd find that to be a rather better winning.
Here for my convenience and nearly sole interest, then, this war:( Collapse )
Trivia: The first news report received by Reuters over the (1866) trans-Atlantic telegraph cable was datelined 29 July, from New York: ``The representative of Tennessee has been admitted to Congress. Congress adjourned yesterday.'' Source: The Power Of News: The History Of Reuters, Donald Read.
Currently Reading: Indian Givers: How Native Americans Transformed The World, Jack Weatherford.