Geography impacts nations

[besilarius]

http://www.military-history.us/2015/02/book-review-the-revenge-of-geography-by-robert-d-kaplan/

A very interesting book covering an influence that is too often not addressed.

[MetalDog]

I realize that it is not at all the same, but, one of the principles followed in the games we play IS geography!.  Whether it's a map of our Earth or a purely fictional one, the topography and geography of said map determines the flow of populations, resources and conflict, just as in the real world.  Not sure how many people look at it that way when they are in the midst of playing, but, stepping back, you'll see exactly that.

Having said that, and reading the review, it looks to be a very interesting read.  I understand the concept of geopolitics, but, a focus on the subject is interesting to me.

[Silent Disapproval Robot]

I took a course in university called World Political Geography.  It could have and should have been a fascinating course but the professor was a hippy-dippy Marxist straight out of central casting.  Birkenstocks, greasy hair, goatee and glasses.  The cover of the course syllabus had the lyrics to Imagine and Goya's painting of Saturn eating his sun.  Should have known to transfer then and there but I didn't.  Anyway, the mid-term exam was to write an essay based on this statement by Napoleon "The policies of all powers are inherent in their geography..." and another by some other national leader (can't remember who but I think it might have been Hussein) who said something along the lines of "geography is the enemy of our state".

I thought I made a pretty compelling argument in agreement with Napoleon that national goals and policies were heavily influenced by a nation's geography.  I got a D and a dressing down about my blinkered world view that was corrupted by an overtly militaristic, colonialist mindset and obviously I'd learned nothing.   I hop he sees this book and it causes an aneurysm (which would probably just mean he'd up his medicinal weed prescription).

[Steelgrave]

I realize that it is not at all the same, but, one of the principles followed in the games we play IS geography!.  Whether it's a map of our Earth or a purely fictional one, the topography and geography of said map determines the flow of populations, resources and conflict, just as in the real world.  Not sure how many people look at it that way when they are in the midst of playing, but, stepping back, you'll see exactly that.

Having said that, and reading the review, it looks to be a very interesting read.  I understand the concept of geopolitics, but, a focus on the subject is interesting to me.

I remember taking American History my sophomore year in high school and asking the teacher how the British had allowed their army to become trapped on a peninsula at the Battle of Yorktown. He was genuinely befuddled, not knowing that Yorktown was on a peninsula or what had led the Brits there. He seemed surprised that one of his students would take an interest, but I had been playing Avalon Hill's "1776" and the Revolutionary War was very fresh on my mind. I know that wargaming taught me more about geography than geography class ever did. It's astonishing how illiterate Americans are about world geography. I have to wonder if that's because there is no practical application given to the textbook learning of the subject? Where Belgium and Poland are located geographically has affected their history, as it has for America, Britain and many other nations throughout history.

In fact....it's really impossible to separate history from geography. Unfortunately, many young people don't understand the need to learn either, much less both   :P

I'm gonna get that book. Looks like a good read.

[bob48]

^+1. Interesting because it was due to playing wargames that got me very interested in geography.

[MetalDog]

Mine was the exact opposite.  I adored history and looking at maps.  War was always the most interesting part of history for this young boy.  Then I found RISK and Tactics II and a couple of other games and it's been on since then.

[Airborne Rifles]

My dad recommended this book to me. Haven't picked it up yet. I'm a geography a graduate student right now and I can confirm that SDR's experience seems pretty typical of a large corner of academic geography. They would say the book is too deterministic.

The map, and how you adapt to it, is certainly the most interesting part of any wargame for me, be it Civ or SPMBT or FPC: RS or (to a lesser extent) Command .

[Silent Disapproval Robot]

My dad recommended this book to me. Haven't picked it up yet. I'm a geography a graduate student right now and I can confirm that SDR's experience seems pretty typical of a large corner of academic geography. They would say the book is too deterministic.

The map, and how you adapt to it, is certainly the most interesting part of any wargame for me, be it Civ or SPMBT or FPC: RS or (to a lesser extent) Command .

What area are you focusing on?  I got my degree in geography as well.  I focused on urban planning with an emphasis on disaster preparedness/relief/mitigation.  I later went back to school and went into geomorphology.  Then I went back again and now do water treatment.  I enjoyed geomorphology the most but full-time work was hard to come by so I usually ended up as the grunt on a survey crew for the summers and laid off for the winters.  The theory behind disaster planning was fascinating. The reality of working in that field sucks in that any plan will quickly be made entirely useless by a bunch of myopic idiots from government, industry, and the populace who will force themselves onto the oversight board and butcher your work.  Water treatment is kind of dull but it pays a lot better than the other two. 

[BanzaiCat]

I know that wargaming taught me more about geography than geography class ever did. It's astonishing how illiterate Americans are about world geography.

This.

This is pretty much what taught me awareness of world geography. And copious amounts of military history reading.

[Airborne Rifles]

My niche is history of cartography, military cartography specifically. I'm looking at some WWI battle maps for my thesis. Interesting, one of my arguments is that the military mapping systems I'm studying would be pretty effective in designing organizations to provide mapping systems for disaster relief operations!

I'm not on the physical geography side so much, but I will be teaching introductory physical geography at my next job.

[Mr. Bigglesworth]

I'm curious about map scales for wargames. Given vehicle movement over terrain is a big part of a wargame, what square/hex size would give a good blend of terrain values without over burdening the calculation system?

For example, a defensive cliff over a river is held by infantry. A motorized brigade wants to neutralize the position. They can circle around, ford nearby, bypass then cut off for later, etc.

The detail of the defense and offence values of the terrain need to be about what size? I have the feeling most games are highly stylized to speed up the game pace.

[Greybriar]

Interesting subject matter for a book. I think I will read it next.

Thanks for the heads-up, besilarius.  O0

[Martok]

I realize that it is not at all the same, but, one of the principles followed in the games we play IS geography!.  Whether it's a map of our Earth or a purely fictional one, the topography and geography of said map determines the flow of populations, resources and conflict, just as in the real world.  Not sure how many people look at it that way when they are in the midst of playing, but, stepping back, you'll see exactly that.

Yeah, I realized that fairly early on in my gaming hobby as well.  Whether it's Civ-type games, Total War games, Paradox titles, or what-have-you, geography has an absolutely critical role in how things play out.   

Heck, geography often plays a major role in space 4x titles too:  Tight clusters of star systems, large expanses of empty space, heavy dust clouds/nebulae affecting ship movement, etc. all have a significant impact in where/how players expand. 

Mine was the exact opposite.  I adored history and looking at maps.  War was always the most interesting part of history for this young boy.  Then I found RISK and Tactics II and a couple of other games and it's been on since then.

My experience was pretty much the same as yours, MD.  I loved maps first (even when I was a small boy), then found I had a love of history, and in senior high school I discovered the twin joys of Risk and BattleTech.  I never looked back after that.  O0 

[bayonetbrant]

I'm curious about map scales for wargames. Given vehicle movement over terrain is a big part of a wargame, what square/hex size would give a good blend of terrain values without over burdening the calculation system?

Map scale / unit scale are hand-in-hand in the design.  If your hexes are 5km or bigger (modern warfare) then everything but the artillery are same-hex combat.  If your hexes are 1-2km, then you're dealing with ranged vehicle combat.  You have to figure that our first before you start worry about how to aggregate the terrain in a hex.

[Mr. Bigglesworth]

Thx BB.

Martok,
I think you intuitively understood the system impact of the environment as a kid, without studying systems analysis. Most people on this board probably gravitated to wargaming for the same type of thing, even if it was not specifically geography