SWEET VICTORY OF MINE

I know it. This game is an old one. And i know it is not a very dynamic one. Yes. I accept that.

But I love it so much. And now 1 love it even more. Why? Because the other day, after two years (since July 2003) I won it. Two years of frustration ended suddenly when i read in the middle of the screen YOU ARE VICTORIOUS. Damn Good!



This day and the next days, the World seemed beautiful, people were happier, and I realized that everything was possible.

I am talking about Legion, the Ancient Europe based strategy game.

The match was though. I was the Maetae tribe, at Pacifying the North screen, and after a serie of easy victories against my neighbours I faced a few, but terrible defeats, that put me in serious troubles. The situation went to worse when a southern tribe started a strong offensive and defeated the rest of tribes, except me. I was the next one.

In order to prevent my destruction, I rearranged all my cities. Those cities in the rearguard were assigned to develop economic activities (farms, ore and wood). Those cities in the frontguard were considered military centers in charge to protect the border and, if possible, to conquer new cities.




This strategy fullfiled, and turn after turn i was able to stop the enemy offensive and to develop counterattacks, occupying new cities and gaining more resources. It was fucking epic. And then when I was ready to storm with more than ten large armies two key cities, the computer told me I was the winner. Good, but…

Two considerations. First, I like Legion probably because I’m a History Graduate. But I also realize that this kind of strategy games, are not very popular between gameplayers. Sometimes they are boried and they need planification and patience. May be they are more adult games.

The second consideration i want to rise is more political or ethical oriented. During the match when i was short of some element (i.e. wood), I sent to a suicide battle some units of archers or javalinemen, wood consumers both, in order to decrease my need of such element. Once my units defeated, the wood display turned to positive sign. I guess, and that is the point, if this way of acting is also possible in the real world. In other words, is it possible that economic considerations make leaders to sacrify troops ? i think that the answer is a strong YES, adding that not only economic considerations are possible, but also other extramilitary considerations, such as ethnic or religious ones. For example, there are a large number of examples of military units composed by a national group that is sent to a suicide attack by the Supreme HQ, whose members belong to another national group. Examples: during the First World War, the French generals sent to death many military units formed exclusively by non french speaking soldiers, such as the “Catalan” 53rd Infantry Regiment, that took part in some of the bloodiest battles in the war. Of course the number of casualities were among the highest, provoking the loss of a whole male generation in the territory they belong to.



Well, may be i think too much. But that is an example of “Entertaiment without Responsibility” , a feature that some analysts have associated to digital games. It is true, but i think it can be avoided: for example, you can prevent generals to send his troops to suicidal battles if after a series of defeats, the moral of the rest of troops is low or there are signs of discontent and mutinity. If this is the case, generals (i.e. the player) will think twice before acting.