• We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.

unmerged(13)

Banned
Jan 12, 2000
2.125
0
Visit site
1715-1747.

New EU timeline.

Refer to the previous pix, this way you'll know what provinces I'm talking about..


1727-1757. Alliance of Poland and Bavaria, leads to relative peace in central Europe. However Hungary still losses territory to the Turks between 1750-57, and Austria is constantly under fire by their cavalry regiments causing serious destruction and population loss there.


1715-16 The Bohemians get more aggressive. After annexing Thorn from Poland, they declare war on Brandenburg. The Germans do not have numerically high enough armies to deal effectively with the close to 50,000 men the Bohemians send onto Berlin. Despite this, the Germans decide to stay within their own gigantic fortificants. In June, 1715 the Bohemian army lays siege to Berlin, several bloody assaults later it is unable to penetrate Berlin's defensive decisively. The Poles were about to intervene in this war to recover Thorn, but a quickly signed cease-fire between the two sites in December of 1715 crushes those plans.

1712-1716, 1730-33. Colonial wars between Spain and France, in which French armies are victorious on several occasions, taking Spanish Rosario / Wichita in 1716, and surrounding provinces in 1733. The French position in Europe however remains extremely difficult, with the inability of the French to desively expel the Spanish and Dutch from their occupied provinces..


1716-1720, 1738-49, 1751-57. Swedish-Russian wars. Three successive wars that lead to the strong diminishing of Swedish power in Europe. The Swedes also lose their ally, the Cossacks, in 1748 to the Poles. The Russians declare war on an unprepared Sweden (still in the grip of civil war). The Russians are supported by the Dutch, Scots and the Venetians. Scot and Venetian fleets immediatley blockade Christiania & Alvsborg, whilst Dutch forces appear in the Baltic landing in Swedish Ingermanland (near Narva). Without Dutch support I doube the Russians could have done anything productive in this war, even despite a Swedish civil war. Kargapor (Onega, fomerly Russian province taken from ages ago, in their ownly previous war together....see details in other aars), is taken by Russian forces in July, 1717 after 3 months running battle in the province and countless Russian losses to smaller Swedish regiments.

Battle of Narva, Aug 29th 1717. 45,000 Russians attempt to cross into Ingermanland on their way onto Swedish Narva, and on the 29th they meet the lead elements of a 35,000 man Swedish army. The battle turns into a more equal conflict than you'd think, the Swedes being superior in organization and leadership, whilst the Russians having numerical superiority. In the end the Russians are however routed, both armies suffering high casualties. Ingermanland btw, is one of the provinces that is not technically controlled by the Swedes, at the moment because the capital of the province, Narva is actually held by rebel forces. This is the only major Swedish victory against Russian forces by themselves, soon the Dutch arrive..

December 2nd, 1717 a Dutch expeditionary force lands near Narva and defeats a small Swedish contingent sent out to blockade their advance. Whilst this is occuring a large Dutch army is in the process of laying siege to Copenhagen (which is also under a blockade). After weeks of siege the city capitulates in March, 1718. The Dutch have just grabbed themselves a very tasty bit of territory. A combined Dutch-Russian army lays siege to Visby, June 1718.

March 9th, 1719 the Swedes are forced to submit to Dutch peace terms in return for their ceasing operations in this war. The price is high, the Swedes relinquish Copenhagen (and all of Sjaelland) to the Dutch... the poor city, first occupied and annexed by the Swedes from the Danes, and now taken by the Dutch. What's the higher insult, it being controlled by the Dutch, or by the Swedes, anyone? Anyway, the Russians and the Swedes continue to wage war..until November of that year. The Swedes relinquish the vast territory of Onega (city of Kargapor), to the Russians. The defeat would have been even worse had the Russians captured traitorous Narva. From here on we see the Swedes gradually lose their great power status.


1738-39
In May, 1738, the Russians again invade, capturing the cities of Narva, Kexholm, Kalovala & Tavastehus by Feb, 1739. Swedes cede Tavastland and Kola to the Russians in Dec, 1739.

1751-57
Russians again declare war, sensing quick defeat, however this time the war is much more protracted. Russian object seems to be the capture of Narva (as in previous wars), however Narva never falls. Russian armies and detachements are swarming all over Finland, Russian fleets controlling the see of Finland. April 4th, 1753, the Russians must retreat from the walls of Narva with huge casualties, however the war continues in the n.w. Despite valiant Swedish efforts, they are simply overpowered numerically and are forced to huge concessions. In November, Savolaks and Osterbotten are handed over to the Russians, giving them control of around 70% of eastern Sweden by the treaty of 1757. These are added to the territories ceded in previous wars..


Wars of Independence in Spain & England.

Spain and England fall under the crimson tide of civil war, within the space of a few months of each other in the year of 1723. Catalunya declares itself independent from the Spanish by the end of that year, and the Spainish are forced to sign peace-negotiations with them still dealing with the rebels and worried about possible French attack.

The situation in England turns much, much uglier. The civil war takes hold of the entire isle and after several exceedingly bloody battles the Royalists sign a peace-agreement with the 'English' on the 1st of Dec, 1723. England virtually partitions itself in two, the Royalists making Lancashire their capital. France immediately sends diplomats to the Royalists and an alliance is agreed upon. Seems the English won't be going on any expeditions to northern France for awhile..


1725 - A new civil war errupts in Sweden.. (actually the previous one still not completely quelled)

1727-8, 1735. The Austrians recover Presburg and Ostmarch (city of Krems) from Turkey. Despite this I'm still failing to see a strong alliance 'net' against the Turks... which will throw them out of central Europe indefinatly. The Turks are almost on a perilous steps in north africa and the middle east, many of her former allies uniting under the banner of a resurgent Morocco which controls large areas of north-western Africa. In 1735, another civil war in Turkey.


1742-45. Dutch-French war. The resurgent French declare war on the Dutch, in August, supported by the English Royalists. Things don't go well for the French alliance to begin with, Newcastle (the Marches), falls to the Dutch in July 1743. Royalist Plymouth is briefly held in March of 1745 as well. Royalist counterattacks recapture the fallen English territories within a few month. French armies have much better luck in northern France, capturing Dutch Auxerre and laying siege to Orleans. In July, 1745 the province of Nirvernais (city of Auxerre) is exchanged to the French for peace.


1745-48. Polish-Cossack war to restablish complete suzeranity over the region. The Swedes declare war on the Poles being unable to agree to the loss of their Cossack allies. On December, 14th, the capital of Ukraine (Czernow), capitulates to the Poles a long with the remaining 12,000 man garrison after successive assaults. The Swedes send what little forces they can spare into Polish Novgorod on 2 separate occasions (Oct, 1746, and Oct 1747). 29,000 Swedes attack a huge defensive army under Benyowski (with over 55,000 men) and are butchered within the space of a few hourse. They try again, the following year, in the same month (almost on the same day), with 15,000 men, and again they are defeated. The war is virtually over by 1747, however Poltava is the only Cossack city that resists and it takes till early 1748 for the Cossacks to agree to peace terms -> full annexation. The Ukraine is finally brought back into the fold, completely, after nearly 60 years as independent.


1751, Dec 5th. Bohemia becomes a Polish vassal.


English civil wars.

1747 - Feb-March & 1757-59 war, capitulation of London.


Two wars instigated by the English against the Royalists. The 2 month 'war' in 1747(Royals supported by France), leads to fall of Galway in Feb and Liverpool on March 3rd to the superior Royalist armies. A civil war breaks out in England, one party demanding peace with the Royalists before the country is completely submerged. At the end of March, the Royalists, who themselves weren't totally prepared for the war agree to peace in exchange for the secession of Connaught (city of Galway) to them.

Tensions however continue to simmer and lead to a longer conflict in 1757. The arrogant English defenses fall like a deck of cards. Liverpool falls in November of 1757, followed by Wexford and Cork in the west. Dublin is only saved by a foolhardy & brave attack by 8,000 Englishmen against nearly 20,000 Royalistis. The English army is butchered relieving Dublin, but succeeds in extending the siege indefinantly.

Royalists are now gathering strongly just north of London. In Sep, of 1759, Lincoln capitulates to the Royals. There is nothing stopping them now from moving on London and they reach the capital in early Novemeber, 1759. After nearly 3 weeks London capitulates. Peace demands are harsh, the secession of Munster (city of Cork) and Lincoln to the Royals in exchange for a hopefull final peace. This is agreed upon.

[This message has been edited by Sapura (edited 05-08-2000).]
 
It looks like in this timeline, Europe is not going to be so dominant in the world as it was in the real timeline. Half of Europe is in civil war and the other half is busy battering each other. I'm surprised there have not been independence bids in the New World so far.

BTW, how in the world did you manage to vassalize Bohemia, your long-time enemy?

Also, is it possible to continue the game past 1792? I know Europe changed a great deal at that point but it would be nice to deal with any loose ends.
 
I'm also interested to know how Bohemia turned from a bitter enemy into a vassal.

Furthermore, shouldn't civil wars resolve themselves in a relatively short amount of time? A 36 year-long conflict which still hasn't been resolved strikes me as rather ridiculous. Both sides should be fighting for total victory, not making peace agreements with each other. Also, do you have any information on how this civil war played out in English colonies?
 
Sapura,
Congratulations on keeping Sweden in check, allying with Bavaria, pummeling the Cossacks and subjugating the Bohemians. What a coup, it looks like you only need to hold on for a little while longer to have some pretty nice victory conditions met by the end of the campaign...

I'm also very interested in the English Revolt... They didn't seem to be involved in any wars or anything, this appears to come right out of the blue. Do you you what sparked the revolt, and I'm also interested to know how it played out in the New World colonies.
 
I must say I actually like the lengthy battles for independence. I like a system that makes you responsible for taking care of the home front. I am suprised we didn't see the formation of Finland or Norway considering the constant convulsions occuring over that length of time. In Sweden's case, maybe that was merely everyone being upset at the fact that they can't buy the game yet.
 
Regarding Bohemia:

Do remember that this took nearly 20 years, with diplomacy on and off. Lots of cash.. Why is it so unreasonable that one monarch may despise a particular country, whilst his son (for example), would want closer relations? Besides which, the Turks are still a menace in central Europe.. this gives Bohemia even more protection agains them. Illogical? I don't think so.


Also, yes it is possible to play the game past 1792 .. just make an alteration to some gamefiles, but still it'd be pretty silly. No more tech enhancements, or miltary for that matter..

Dark,

Also if you read the aar properly you would have seen Sweden was involved in several civil wars. It's not that ridiculous to be unable to regain distant provinces from controlling enemies / rebels, even if it takes longer than whatever amount of years. This may not have been the case in w. Europe, but it was the case almost everywhere else, and it would be so in Sweden ..take a look at its size ..its gigantic..

Jim,

I don't know what caused all these independence wars. It probably started with a minor revolt which escalated into something major: the fall of London and the independence of the Royalists .. which led to these events. It would lead to something even more disastrous later on too..


Dragon,

<rofl> I'm capping that comment, most amusing :)


Sapura
 
I see the logic behind the Bohemia vassal.

Here's a burning question. Is it possible for the rebels to annex the capital of a major if they broke away from that major? From your accounts of the English civil war, it looks like the royalists are actually the stronger of two Englands, yet they may be totally unable to reunify the country since London will never surrender.

I am guessing that the answer is no. Put that on the list of features to add in EU2. If a revolt happens on the home country of a major, the resulting state can demand and get the capital of the mother country (as appropriate). However, they may wish to make an exception in that colonial revolts cannot do so (the US annexing London just sounds silly).
 
Guess that leads to the question or two.

Can a revolt that starts in a colony carry over to the home country?

I would assume it can because people at home might be pissed about the colonist not being put to the sword or being allowed to gain independence.

Now when the Colony revolts can it take provinces in the home land as part of it's settlement?

Is there usually a settlement process when Colonial Provinces rebel like there is when Home Provinces revolt?
 
Originally posted by Sapura on 08-06-2000 06:53 PM

Jim,

I don't know what caused all these independence wars. It probably started with a minor revolt which escalated into something major: the fall of London and the independence of the Royalists .. which led to these events. It would lead to something even more disastrous later on too..

Sapura,
I like the suspense of that final line... I want wait to find out what British disasters are just around the corner. It's hard to imagine that things could get much worse for them than already occured in this game.
 
In the final chapter of the Timeline Saga the Dutch Jugernaught declares war on England sails the fleet up the Thames and rather than just burning London as they did historically the decide to invade. Following up the sucess in London the Dutch decide nothing les than complete capitulation on the part of the English is acceptable. The proceed to over run the countryside and England in the end capitulates, England becomes Dutch Territory and the English colonies all declare independence or loyalty to the Dutch crown.

Just the way Marc had envisioned it = )
 
Originally posted by Sapura on 08-06-2000 06:53 PM

Also if you read the aar properly you would have seen Sweden was involved in several civil wars. It's not that ridiculous to be unable to regain distant provinces from controlling enemies / rebels, even if it takes longer than whatever amount of years. This may not have been the case in w. Europe, but it was the case almost everywhere else, and it would be so in Sweden ..take a look at its size ..its gigantic..
Sapura

I was talking about England, not Sweden. I suppose I should have made that clearer...
There certainly isn't a distance problem in England! ;)

[This message has been edited by Dark Knight (edited 07-08-2000).]

[This message has been edited by Dark Knight (edited 07-08-2000).]
 
Dragon,
Nostradomas would be proud of your ability to see into the future! :) Howevever, now that the Poles have conquored the Cossacks and vassalized the Bohemians - perhaps we'll see a Polish expeditionary force besieging Stonehenge soon! Or maybe the Turks will quit beating their heads against the wall decide instead to scale up the white cliffs of Dover!
 
Dragon,

The Dutch have lost much of their power, in the last 20-40 years. I wouldn't be too surprised if the French recover their provinces which are still under Spanish / Dutch control. It will need determination though..

Dark,

Yes, but where did I say that there were '36' yrs of civil war? It was a gradual decline though..


Jim,

Dragon ventured very close to what actually happens in the next and final timeline :) It's basically an extended conflict that leads to absolutely nothing gained by either side(s). At least so far, I'm only up to 1770. Twenty more years and the campaign is over (sheds a tear).

Btw, I got a 'C' for Economics in Year 11, was never going to be a Banker ;)


Sapura

[This message has been edited by Sapura (edited 07-08-2000).]
 
Dark, yes, but where did I say that there were '36' yrs of civil war? It was a gradual decline though..

You said in the AAR that the civil war in England began in 1723, and when the AAR ends in 1759, the civil war is still going on, hence 36 years. Of course, the two sides were fighting only part of the time, but then both the length of the conflict and the lack of actual fighting seem very unrealistic for a civil war.
 
Originally posted by Dark Knight on 08-07-2000 02:39 PM
You said in the AAR that the civil war in England began in 1723, and when the AAR ends in 1759, the civil war is still going on, hence 36 years. Of course, the two sides were fighting only part of the time, but then both the length of the conflict and the lack of actual fighting seem very unrealistic for a civil war.

Well, I personally consider the hundred-years war to be a civil war.

/Johan
 
Dark,

It's not unrealistic at all. Extended periods of instability occured in many countries.

Russian time of troubles, in reality the external wars finished in 1617, however the period of internal unrest started in 1600 and finished around 1620. That's 20 years.

Polish deluge.. 1648-1667.

Just two examples ...


Sapura
 
Ah great and lengthy upheavals. Let's touch on a couple of modern ones.

How about Afghanistan? 1979 - Current.
This bad boy has long legs and no telling when it will end. The religious and political factors make this a very ugly war that has bled the populous pretty badly.

Maybe Vietnam? From the revolt againist French occupation, to the forming of nations to the unrest in the south and U.S. intervention and final capitulation in 74 (?) You are looking at a good 20+ years of unrest.

Somolia - Though reasonably new to the scene this has the potential to last forever or until a major power back one of the warlords and he sweeps the country clean.

The Sudan - The Southern Sudan has been a festering sore for quite awhile, this may actually see an end.

Probably the best example is Angola. They have had unrest/civil war waging within thier borders since independence in 75'. That is 25 years of unrest. In 94' there was peace but Jonas Savimbi broke the peace when he did not get elected. Cabinda has been in revolt for several years as well.

These are modern examples and warfare is different now than it was in the middle ages but I think the definition of unrest/revolt applies to the above since they are all armed conflicts.

I didn't mention Ulster, Kashmir or East LA since armies aren't haven't actually been in the field for the duration of those conflicts.
 
Sapura -
I agree, Dragon was right on with his predictions about Dutch conquests in the British Isles. I was really shocked to see how close my predictions a Turk invasion was as well, in that the Persians occupied Plymouth...

How the heck did that happen?

Also, don't worry about the banker thing, heaven knows there's an oversupply of us anyways. I just hope I'm able to translate my job training into an improved ability to gain monopolies in COT's.
 
Sapura -

I agree, Dragon was right on with his predictions about Dutch conquests in the British Isles. I was really shocked to see how close my predictions a Turk invasion was as well, in that the Persians occupied Plymouth...

How the heck did that happen?

The Persians were allies of the Dutch.

Obviously its a tad silly thinking about a Persian invasion of England, so I decided to call these Persian armies as allied 'detachements' of the Dutch :D

Besides which their 'armies' weren't at all numerous or significant. Sometimes you have to stretch the 'truth' a bit, in order to maintain a plausable game world, since no game is 100% realistic.

Sapura
 
Sapura,
It's still darkly humorous, ;) Persians in Plymouth... instead of Fish & Chips, they'd be eating Curried Herring perhaps, yum.

Do I remember a 'detachment' as being defined as less than 1000 troops? Is this what the Persians shipped over? If so did these troops make a difference in any fights or did they simply occupy territory?