The Historic Inevitabilty of Epic Failure

[Klarum]

I find that in all my large expansion games production far outweights trade around 1700 and until the end by 2:1. For this reason I have been very sucessful with investing in +production buildings and the Smithian NI instead of boosting trade.

This seems to be the case for big empires even when you own most of the COTs. Anyone else has this experience?

[Nephilia]

I notice that you hardly ever use (or even build for that matter) artillery, in any of your AARs. Could you explain why?

[Malurous]

Why go through all that trouble, when we could simply park all his doomstacks near the cores with Milan and another to make a run at Bohemia's capital?

Look at all his land, he can field a massive army if he wants. All he needs is to secure the borders, leave some guys to quell rebellions and hit Milan hard. Perhaps force them to release a country or two if he can afford it before peacing them out, see if he breaks them in the process. Then he can still go to Bohemia, fight them a little and take it from there. Sure, easier said than done, but it's not impossible, the hard part is certainly behind for him.

Because, depending on the situation, the trouble of fighting two limited wars (one to retain cores and the other to take them when there's opportunity) might be less than the trouble of fighting one "world war". It's also easier to do without hindering progress elsewhere.

I get the sense that his economy still has its limits, so going for a massive operation like that would mean stopping the Holy Wars for the duration of shipping the men to Europe, fighting the war and then shipping them back. I'm not sure if that's feasible as getting enough BB to last so long would cripple his cardinals as well as the Boundary Disputes. Alternatively, prioritize troops instead of infrastructure and the navy - doesn't sound smart in the long run.

Not to mention that, unless he can indeed put that massive army together for the conflict, sealing everything from invaders would be a pain with the long borders that would result from fighting against practically all of Europe, especially since Bohemia isn't going to just stand around while he's working on Milan. With his current (I think?) ADM 3 ruler that could lead to a WE disaster to some extent.

It all hinges on how willing Milan and the would-be alliance leader (Bohemia?) are to sign peace. If a quick "grab cores, occupy capitals, sign peace" war is possible, then sure, go ahead and take the land now. But if they're more stubborn then I'm not sure fighting such a major war now is the smart thing to do. Note, I'm not saying that it isn't possible to do, but it might be more efficient to delay until an opportunity comes.

Here's hoping such opportunity comes soon so there's no need to worry about cores expiring.

[The Arch Mede]

I notice that you hardly ever use (or even build for that matter) artillery, in any of your AARs. Could you explain why?

He prefers getting there fastest, to getting there with the mostest.

I reckon he would be able to deal with the heavy mob in Europe a lot more easily if every front included an artillery heavy army but its possible that playing on VH makes it pan out differently. I'd have lots of artillery in 1/3 to 1/2 of my armies on the Milan/Bohemia fronts and time marching to battles so that the artillery army was there a day earlier and the others came in on its flanks.

However, strategically its best not to fight them yet, and if you don't have the force to do it, then you don't get tempted to do the wrong thing and speed is much more important than firepower for trampling the Asiatics. The faster you march to the next province, the faster you storm it. I'm quite sure its possible to get better results in Europe than he does, but I never manage to match his speed going E because I get distracted by all those opportunities in Europe.

[Barsoom]

Malurous and the Arch Mede are right. There is no need to fight a European war right now. The cores won't start running out for quite some time. There is a chance of Bohemia and Milan getting into war against each other; that would be an opportunity PrawnStar would surely take. I think a war might come in handy as a distraction should Milan take QftNW early. So, patience.

As for the military odds. PrawnStar seems to think he will lose a war against Milan and Bohemia but I'm not so sure. (Neither is Chief Ragusa.) He's pulled off impossible victories before. His method of withdrawing while threatening forces the enemy to maintain large stacks, running up attrition and WE. Prawn's fast armies (without cannons) can usually outrun direct enemy attacks and can often quickly retake lost territory (before enemy garrisons grow too large). In the short run, PrawnStar loses some territory to occupation; in the long run, his enemies get exhausted. Note that this strategy only works as long as his armies are faster than his enemies', hence his reluctance to employ artillery. Anyway, why take the risk when there's time to wait for a better opportunity?

[Malurous]

Just a general observation - apart from immense patience and a solid knowledge of the game, one reason why PrawnStar is so successful in these insane challenges is that he's smart about his wars. On most occasions, he "wins first and then goes to war", so to speak. Of course, he can pull off those impressive victories against all odds (think Audacity) but I rarely see him choose to go for such a war just for the heck of it.

As for the military odds. PrawnStar seems to think he will lose a war against Milan and Bohemia but I'm not so sure. (Neither is Chief Ragusa.) He's pulled off impossible victories before. His method of withdrawing while threatening forces the enemy to maintain large stacks, running up attrition and WE. Prawn's fast armies (without cannons) can usually outrun direct enemy attacks and can often quickly retake lost territory (before enemy garrisons grow too large). In the short run, PrawnStar loses some territory to occupation; in the long run, his enemies get exhausted. Note that this strategy only works as long as his armies are faster than his enemies', hence his reluctance to employ artillery.

Setting aside the fact that I don't think such a war should be fought, I agree that I'd expect him to win it. At the same time, I wouldn't be shocked if it ended up being a tad ugly.

The reason is that in order for the method you describe to work properly, his country can't be messed up during the "PrawnStar loses some territory to occupation" stage. I fear that, with so many enemies and such a long border, too many provinces would be lost, leading to high WE. He'd most likely grind out a victory, but the war would be bad for his nation in the long run.

Oh and I agree with The Arch Mede that efficient warfare of this sort would require killstacks with artillery, whereas in Asia etc. it isn't necessary. EDIT: Oops, I suppose I should stop posting essays now.

[Barsoom]

EDIT: Oops, I suppose I should stop posting essays now.

That goes for both of us. I couldn't resist the temptation to intervene in the military discussion, even after arguing that this war should not be fought. So, my second point is moot in view of my own first point and I missed a great opportunity to keep my mouth shut. We agree on all the essentials.

[Aminti]

Sound plans. The only drawback I can see is leaving Khorasan to the Timmies, who will surely be forced to release / lose against rebels / suffer a succession crisis.

Aren't they surrounded by the English at the moment and sub-10 provinces? That would cut down on adverse events happening, though nothing is as unstable as a bunch of nomads that are so behind the times that it makes the original Gutenburg printing press seem futuristic in comparison. Still, I think that PrawnStar would rather see them gone now that their goal of eating Khorasan has been accomplished. It's just that there's the New World colonisation as well, and having countries go bonkers over there is rather more threatening. You can only spend colonists once - here's to hoping for a lot of random level 2 colony events.

Long-time lurker here - I really like how you take a country, push it to the limits and when the limits of what could be called sane are reached, you just plough on anyway. (The Golden Horde game comes to mind). Hopefully you won't fall short this time, even if your test game fell massively short.

[PrawnStar]

A reminder to all, it's time for the second round of the AARland Awards 2012.


Go vote, your forum needs you !

@Malurous, thought I'd try subtle...

[diegoami]

A reminder to all, it's time for the second round of the AARland Awards 2012.


Go vote, your forum needs you !

@Malurous, thought I'd try subtle...

Nice ... I'll try something like that myself

[hygge0302]

sub

[WeissRaben]

He prefers getting there fastest, to getting there with the mostest.

I reckon he would be able to deal with the heavy mob in Europe a lot more easily if every front included an artillery heavy army but its possible that playing on VH makes it pan out differently. I'd have lots of artillery in 1/3 to 1/2 of my armies on the Milan/Bohemia fronts and time marching to battles so that the artillery army was there a day earlier and the others came in on its flanks.

However, strategically its best not to fight them yet, and if you don't have the force to do it, then you don't get tempted to do the wrong thing and speed is much more important than firepower for trampling the Asiatics. The faster you march to the next province, the faster you storm it. I'm quite sure its possible to get better results in Europe than he does, but I never manage to match his speed going E because I get distracted by all those opportunities in Europe.

Is he stuck with 5.1 or does he use beta patches? Since May 28th patch, artillery moves at the same speed of cavalry and infantry.

[PdoxNewbie]

sub

A bit too late...

[PdoxNewbie]

sub

A bit too late...

Sorry... I thought this was another thread.

[PrawnStar]

FEEDBACK

homy_dog34 - I agree, Holy Wars will be the priority.

Barsoom - I intend to deal with the Khorasani issue very soon.

Chief Ragusa - I don't agree on swapping out Military Drill for Grand Navy (or Press Gangs) I need that extra morale for fighting in Europe (most countries are heavy in Military NIs - even the Pope has two and Bohemia is four from four) and for assaulting fortresses - I very rarely siege.

rustic - Cores due to start running out from about 1619 - it's a long time since I fought Milan. Absolutely right that it would be a shockingly bad move to lose those cores and have to pay a BB price for the provinces.

Ricardo Rolo - Khorasan is on the 'to do' list and yes I'm aware Holy Wars can end long after 1650 as long as the CB ios used to start the war before 1650. Cheesiness test here - I'll only DOW countries which would be natural targets without the intervention of the deadline.

Malurous - I've given some thought to just resetting the clock on my Milanese cores but if I'm going to fight them I'd like to profit from the war.

uat2d - Indeed easier said than done. I'm outnumbered, the economy isn't that strong and cores from Milan remain a second priority after Holy War - whatever is done will have to be done with the resources available in theatre.

dragonizer - Agree with all three points there.

Can you not engineer a war with Bohemia, beat them, and then the day before peace, declare on Milan?

Quoted because quite obviously a staggered two war solution is the simplest answer. I have cores on both...

Klarum - I started DW thinking Production buildings are where it's at but look at the Trade 6 building - that +1% trade efficiency is global in effect - build a couple of hundred and the effect is incredible.

Nephilia - Artillery is slow and early game not very effective. I like to get to the battlefield first - incredibly useful when chasing defeated foes to get ahead and get defensive bonuses when trying for stackwipes.

Malurous - Lots of good points. Most simply I don't have the troops to fight Milan and Bohemia together while a war exhaustion spike is very likely. Pulling troops from all over for a war in Europe risks rebel problems, dogpiling and worse yet - slowing down Holy Warring.

The Arch Mede - It's a fair point about using artillery in Europe - I'm looking at adding cannon to at couple of those stacks and I'll probably need loads in the late game when my assault every province approach runs into countries covered with high level forts. Speed feels more use out East, army for army I have a big lead.The push East just needs a bit of self-discipline - I suspect that by 1650 I'll have demostrated that maxing out Holy War brings incredible gains.

Barsoom - Bohemia v Milan would be a great oportunity and I'll take it if it happens. Milanese QftNW will be a real pain - it's probably my single biggest risk now. A war against both countries is very likely to be painful, horrible war exhaustion, rebels and dogpiling - it's not a good solution even if it's winnable.

Malurous - Exactly, Milan/Bohemia is not a 'smart' war, there's a lot that could go wrong in what is not my highest priority area.

Barsoom & Malurous - Nothing wrong with the big posts talking about the pros and cons of different approaches. Gameplay AARs are about how to play the game so this sort of discussion is a big part of what this is all about. I'm sure that people following the AAR and thinking about they would tackle each step get a lot from your posts. I know that the comments often set me thinking about how I'm doing what I do.

Aminti - Nice to see you take the plunge into posting - I spent a year between starting reading and joining and then a while long before I had much to say You make a very good point about priortising colonists - I want to use just enough against the Timmies to stop Khorasan returning and spend the rest securing the Atlantic.

hygge0302 - Hi, welcome aboard

WeissRaben - 5.1 I started in February and played my test game last autumn (got distracted and spent three months playing the Vicky 2 mod Divergences).

[PrawnStar]

CHAPTER THIRTY FIVE

March 1600 brings a boundary dispute on Wu. Taking it will give me a BB free province but then I’ll need to cause either Ming Macau or Brunei’s Hainan to defect to make Wu back into a two province country.



Little else happens until October when the Golden Horde reappears at the borders. This opens up the opportunity to remove a little anomaly.



There’s a complex history here. Remember a while back I moaned about getting cores on nomad provinces? Solikamsk was one of them and now it’s eventually revolted free as an OPM Muscovy and been vasselised by the Horde. Still this is an opportunity so… Muscovy is annexed in November.

The year ends with two boundary disputes in late December, got to love that Diplo 9 ruler! For once coring on a nomad province is welcome since this is Khorasani rebel country.



A core on a Hindustani province is good news as well.



The Horde is quickly peaced and things stay quiet until midsummer when the Timurids reappear. I could use the colonists elsewhere but I’m going to seize the remaining non-Uzbek provinces for the prevention of unsightly OPMs. By August 1602 the Timurids are all but occupied and the current wave of target provinces have colonists under way. I’m aiming to take all four non-Uzbek provinces in this war finally ending the Khorasani menace.



BB is now 8.01 / 24.00 and falling at 2.50 a year (9 Cardinals!) so war is again on the agenda.

So…



Yes, I’ve built some artillery, to strengthen the large stack based in Paris as that’s one of my main strike units in the West. By the start of November I’ve +14 war score without fighting any significant battles so…



War with Milan - if nothing else I’ll reset the timer on my cores expiring!

Looks nasty doesn’t it?

Next step , peace with Bohemia.



It gets messy with reasonably widespread rebellions and the reappearance of Kazakh - which I‘d forgotten about. At the end of the month the Timurid Khan dies so I get a TSC to deal with, predominantly affecting the provinces I’m trying to settle then as December starts…



If they think they’re simply walking in….


I’m now at war with:

• Milan, Naxos, Avignon, Burgundy, Hamburg, the Palatinate, Switzerland, Aquileia, Genoa, Savoy, Murom and Trier
• Aragon, Lorraine, Baden and Sicily
• Timurids
• Khazkh

Of course none of these wars will gain any BB so I’ll be doing something about that shortly as well. The plan is to try and force the Aragonese and Kazakhs to make peace along with Milan’s allies. The Swiss hand over 463 ducats at the start of the year and then I get another boundary dispute, on Bohemia!



Barcelona is stormed as February 1603 starts to bring an end to the war with Aragon. Forcing Burgundy to make peace is the next goal in the West. My Eastern armies are advancing uncontested on Milan’s Balkan holdings and fighting hard around Novgorod. Orkney has been captured. Burgundy is bribed from the war a month later as the Milanese stack in Russia is destroyed. It’s not all going well though, that’s a 28 regiment stack running for the hills.



Kazakh is peaced out soon after. Trier and the Palatinate are white peaced in June. Despite +22 war score Milan is still not interested in peace.

By the start of August BB is 5.55 / 24.00 falling at 2.40 a year. Further war is needed… War with Ming.



Mixed fortunes in France - I’m heavily outnumbered here and slowly losing ground.



Avignon and Hamburg peace out in September, only Milan and vassals are left. War score is +30 but they have the upper hand in the key French theatre.

Mid November - diplomacy never sleeps



Milan has started offering white peace although they still won’t hand over even 25 ducats. Mid March brings a core against Burgundy (at last!) and I’ve stab hit Milan down to -2.



Late April Milan is rejecting a 25 ducat peace when I have +56 war score! I’ve won a lot of battles and seized Milan’s Balkan and Russian possessions but they’re not hurting for war capacity, still have over 100,000 soldiers and have captured several French provinces. Some weeks after I get yet another boundary dispute this time on nomad Kazakh Zheteru.

As May 1604 ends Milan has had enough, all four cores are reclaimed.



BB is 3.70 / 24.00 falling at 2.50 a year and war exhaustion has crept up to 5.66. The war with Ming continues at +56 war score.

So there was the answer, breaking the Milan/Bohemia behemoth into two separate wars and peacing out anyone I could who I didn’t need to be fighting. Even then Milan lost the war but was far from beat. They’ll be back and I need more troops in the West.

[Chief Ragusa]

True at your low naval techs going over maintenance limit is cheap. Look at Diogani's Venice AAR for the costs associated with higher tech navies neede for the full tariffs for an Empire the size you'll be running over the maintenance limit. It's something to consider later.

First wars are generally the hardest. You took on pretty much everyone and only lost one of your armies in Russia. You've got your cores and more on Burgundy and Bohemia and the key is indeed splitting the enemies up. A CB for intervention is a year and it generally takes that time to get Bohemia to agree peace.Some overlap of wars is important to stop Bohemia re-entering the fight.

[PrawnStar]

Have I just ninja'd your ninja?

[loki100]

ach to anyone else this would be time to go screaming off to the corner of the room

I’m now at war with:

Milan, Naxos, Avignon, Burgundy, Hamburg, the Palatinate, Switzerland, Aquileia, Genoa, Savoy, Murom and Trier
Aragon, Lorraine, Baden and Sicily
Timurids
Khazkh

not to casually announce:

So there was the answer,

[Memento Mori]

Aragonese conquest of Gonder?! I can just picture it, the valiant king of Aragorn gathers his puny few regiment army and attacks Valencia, giving some random Spanish kiddo enuogh distraction of English armies, so he can take a jewellery article and venture toward London, in order to hinge it between the mechanical parts of Big Ben, thus freezing the clock, and the British Empire with it...

... looking at the map, getting to the canal would not be impossible, given the amount of Milanese armies, but from there... one does not simply walk into London!