6 ms·

> I'm a heavy gamer. I like lots of strategy games. Politicians should have to play several hundred hours of 4X games (Civ 4/5/6/7, Stellaris, Europa Universal

> I'm a heavy gamer. I like lots of strategy games. Politicians should have to play several hundred hours of 4X games (Civ 4/5/6/7, Stellaris, Europa Universalis, Hearts of Iron) before they're allowed to run for office. * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/4X https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/4X If they can't beat some of these videos at the highest difficulty settings they should not be allowed to break things IRL.

bix6 1y ago
Any 4X recs for mobile? I had fun with Polytopia.
dzhiurgis 1y ago
If this is such a good filter - has it been used elsewhere? I know US military tried to hire gamers before to fly drones. On a flip side - politics is deeply social game. My mental image of gamers is very opposite of social (yes I know many games nowadays are social).
- throw0101a 1y ago
  > On a flip side - politics is deeply social game. My mental image of gamers is very opposite of social (yes I know many games nowadays are social). On the flip-flip side, the US has a president which seems to have a high 'charisma score' and very little grasp on reality. Being able to wrap your head around the interconnectedness of resources in something as simple as a video game is just one factor. I'd like to know how much candidates can deal with the complexities with something as 'simple' as video game society: they could suck at it, and that could be fine if they have other qualities, but it could be a useful data point.
mizzao 1y ago
Can confirm, building a startup scratches much of the same itch as playing Civ — I would say one of the primary differences is that it requires immense growth in interpersonal skills to be able to execute any strategy effectively.
sebastiennight 1y ago
I'm curious on your take on the necessity for political leaders to master the "exterminate" prong of the 4X? The thing is, a game is a tool with a surface-level set of rules, and a ton of implicit belief systems of how the (game) world works. You could say someone might become a shrewd negotiator by playing Monopoly, but that is based on a narrow set of winning negotiation strategies which either the game builders have consciously built their game around, or emerge due to their cultural/personal biases or even come up unexpectedly from the rules of the game. So filtering your leader(s) this way requires agreement that the ideology promoted by the game(s) is what the people want to live under.
- throw0101a 1y ago
  > I'm curious on your take on the necessity for political leaders to master the "exterminate" prong of the 4X? Civilization, for one, has scientific and cultural victory conditions, and not just military. Stellaris takes economic and technological factors into account. But the main skill in being able to "win" is the ability to balance various needs of the population: economic, technology, happiness, crime, foreign threats. And it may not even be able "winning" but about how you play the game: all potential candidates could be given several randomly generated seed, and their gameplay is available for evaluation. Some seeds could be militaristic species, others pacifists; some capitalists, some collectivists; etc, with the expectation that you don't (necessarily) play how you'd like the society to be, but role play as the species at it is: so you may be a pacifist, but you have to play as a militarist if that's what the species is in-game. If you can't wrap your head around the interconnectedness of resources in something as simple as a video game, what chance do you have IRL? Further, this can be a filter and not the filter.

bix6 1y ago

Any 4X recs for mobile? I had fun with Polytopia.

dzhiurgis 1y ago

If this is such a good filter - has it been used elsewhere? I know US military tried to hire gamers before to fly drones. On a flip side - politics is deeply social game. My mental image of gamers is very opposite of social (yes I know many games nowadays are social).

throw0101a 1y ago
> On a flip side - politics is deeply social game. My mental image of gamers is very opposite of social (yes I know many games nowadays are social). On the flip-flip side, the US has a president which seems to have a high 'charisma score' and very little grasp on reality. Being able to wrap your head around the interconnectedness of resources in something as simple as a video game is just one factor. I'd like to know how much candidates can deal with the complexities with something as 'simple' as video game society: they could suck at it, and that could be fine if they have other qualities, but it could be a useful data point.

mizzao 1y ago

Can confirm, building a startup scratches much of the same itch as playing Civ — I would say one of the primary differences is that it requires immense growth in interpersonal skills to be able to execute any strategy effectively.

sebastiennight 1y ago

I'm curious on your take on the necessity for political leaders to master the "exterminate" prong of the 4X? The thing is, a game is a tool with a surface-level set of rules, and a ton of implicit belief systems of how the (game) world works. You could say someone might become a shrewd negotiator by playing Monopoly, but that is based on a narrow set of winning negotiation strategies which either the game builders have consciously built their game around, or emerge due to their cultural/personal biases or even come up unexpectedly from the rules of the game. So filtering your leader(s) this way requires agreement that the ideology promoted by the game(s) is what the people want to live under.

throw0101a 1y ago
> I'm curious on your take on the necessity for political leaders to master the "exterminate" prong of the 4X? Civilization, for one, has scientific and cultural victory conditions, and not just military. Stellaris takes economic and technological factors into account. But the main skill in being able to "win" is the ability to balance various needs of the population: economic, technology, happiness, crime, foreign threats. And it may not even be able "winning" but about how you play the game: all potential candidates could be given several randomly generated seed, and their gameplay is available for evaluation. Some seeds could be militaristic species, others pacifists; some capitalists, some collectivists; etc, with the expectation that you don't (necessarily) play how you'd like the society to be, but role play as the species at it is: so you may be a pacifist, but you have to play as a militarist if that's what the species is in-game. If you can't wrap your head around the interconnectedness of resources in something as simple as a video game, what chance do you have IRL? Further, this can be a filter and not the filter.