WE isn't bad and Croatia also has a full MP pool. Failure to capitalize on a few successes and ability to minimize a few losses has kept this war on the border. There is nothing more to it than that.
-
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.
- Status
As opposed to? I have:
A 6 Shock General.
A 5 Fire General.
A 9-9-8 King
80 Army tradition
A 20% Reinforcement Guy
A 10% Discipline Guy and Currently Highest Discipline in the World.
More mp than you (and its back up to max)
Defencive war, so -5 RR.
Some of the best possible terrain to fight a war in ever/anywhere (and I know how to use terrain)
More Moral than you.
Allies Smashing my rebels.
Hainan is my primary culture so it wont defect.
1v1 the war winneable it is not /Yoda. It is an irrational war. I know this, you know this.
Well thats not too fair, it was rational to attack when you did there's that, under most circumstances anyone else in my position wouldve been forced to fold em, I have absolutely no idea why my manpower suddenly went back to full and why I got such insanely lucky advisor, general and leader recruitments. I kept asking in the session "Why is my manpower going back to full?"
I would almost suspect edits but I wasn't the host! ^_^
But 6 years later with only 1 province net occupation and 17 we and 16 RR in all core croatian provinces and Religious Disorder event trigger and I really do honestly think the war has lost whatever advantage it may have conferred to you.
A 6 Shock General.
A 5 Fire General.
A 9-9-8 King
80 Army tradition
A 20% Reinforcement Guy
A 10% Discipline Guy and Currently Highest Discipline in the World.
More mp than you (and its back up to max)
Defencive war, so -5 RR.
Some of the best possible terrain to fight a war in ever/anywhere (and I know how to use terrain)
More Moral than you.
Allies Smashing my rebels.
Hainan is my primary culture so it wont defect.
1v1 the war winneable it is not /Yoda. It is an irrational war. I know this, you know this.
Well thats not too fair, it was rational to attack when you did there's that, under most circumstances anyone else in my position wouldve been forced to fold em, I have absolutely no idea why my manpower suddenly went back to full and why I got such insanely lucky advisor, general and leader recruitments. I kept asking in the session "Why is my manpower going back to full?"
I would almost suspect edits but I wasn't the host! ^_^
But 6 years later with only 1 province net occupation and 17 we and 16 RR in all core croatian provinces and Religious Disorder event trigger and I really do honestly think the war has lost whatever advantage it may have conferred to you.
So, Distant Overseas for everyone and their cat, and your land is poor and nobody wants it. You say: 'boo, poor land'; I say: 'security'
Also, you seem to be doing quite spiffily, having left quite a few Europeans behind!
..correction : nobody wants the poor land, as long as there is richer lands as easy to grab...
Even easier!
In addition to grain and low basetax, we also have lovely attrition-causing tropical diseases in Africa, which most of the rest of the world (with only Indonesia and parts of India excepted) lack.
Last edited:
Even easier!
That'll teach those imperialistic, non-african, somewhat-capitalistic trader-pigs!!
...hmmm..why DID the europeans go there in the first place? (In real life..)
to control the COT's? ..hmmm..there might be a reason to take some tiny bits of africa, after all...
BootOnFace : That'll be spice and ..hmm I'm quite sure rubber wasn't in africa, at that time.
And pepper is from India.. (http://www.kew.org/plant-cultures/plants/black_pepper_history.html) ..I meant why they went to Africa, of course...
Coffee on the other hand, should be Ethiopean..
Yes, well, coffee is the tradegood of various Ethiopian provinces in later starts, but the way the game is made, for a 1399 start there is no way to get coffee there. Or anywhere in Africa at all, actually, as its a disallowed tradegood for the entire continent.
Screenshots of war with Malaya, in which Catalunya and Japan, the owners of the prewar second and fourth-largest fleets in the world, hired third-largest Ethiopia as well to gang up on first-ranked fleet Malaya. Unfortunately there are no screenshots of the first battle of the war, in which the brilliant Ethiopian admiral Gîyôrgîs Dereje and his fleet of 97 warships decisively defeated a 177-strong Malayan armada and sunk fifty enemy ships with no losses. However, here are three late-war screenshots showing the aftermath; the Malayan fleet made one more breakout attempt which was contained by Catalunya (with the loss of another fifty-five Malayan ships), and subsequently was trapped in its harbors until a late-war invasion flushed them out:
The Ethiopian fleet duly engaged
and sunk
the Malayan remnants, which combined with Spanish and Mayan occupation of Malay South America, Ethiopian occupation of eastern Indonesia, and Japanese occupation of the Phillipines finally brought the stubborn Malayans to terms. Japan and Catalunya accepted an Ethiopian suggestion to offer more lenient terms than was originally planned, but when the Malayan player crashed shortly afterwards, uninvolved players howled at the prospect of another rehost*, and Malaya reacted... poorly... to being left braindead while having max WE. So that came to naught.
In the aftermath of the war Ethiopia has the most bigships in the world (by a hair) although Catalunya's navy holds a significant edge in total hulls as well as real power. Japan and England jockey for third place. Ethiopia also successfully westernized during the war, which was managed with negligible WE or revolts, and is now part of the Western tech group.**
*understandable, as we actually played for about 5 out of the first 45 minutes on Saturday
**I put my ADM 3 emperor in charge of the invasion and assaulted every fort, hoping either the defenders or the tropical Malayan jungle would kill him; the jungle eventually obliged. His heir is much more satisfactory.
I can just see the advisers to the emperor offering him a nice holiday in the warm deadly jungles....
That'll teach those imperialistic, non-african, somewhat-capitalistic trader-pigs!!
...hmmm..why DID the europeans go there in the first place? (In real life..)
You'll note that the malarial jungles and worthless deserts weren't annexed until very late, and then it was, by and large, to allow railroads to connect existing colonies. A railroad between South Africa and Egypt has obvious value by lowering transport costs for the exports of South Africa. Kenya and Rhodesia (now Zimbabwe) were both colonies of settlement: Good land free for taking by anyone willing to move; this is of course very badly modelled by EU3 with its state colonists. The names "Ivory Coast" and "Gold Coast" should in themselves be a bit of a hint; the Congo had rubber plantations and whatnot under Belgium - and again, you'll notice that the annexation was very late, well after the EU3 period. As for the Sahara, the French cared nothing for the desert as such but they found themselves with the classic problem of imperial states: Their coastal settlements in Algeria, Tunisia, and Morocco, which they did care about - let's note that grain and other agricultural products were a lot more important than EU3 tends to model them as; all these states had rapidly-growing and hungry populations - were exposed to raids by Bedouin tribes beyond the line of settlement. So they did as the Romans, Egyptians, Russians, and British had done before them: They moved forward in punitive expeditions and tried to establish a line of fortifications well beyond the settlements they were nominally protecting, to keep the tribes at a distance. Which is not to say that painting the middle of the Sahara in French blue was anything but boasting, but after all, who was going to complain?
Edit to add: About the importance of grain. Notice that Britain hasn't fed itself since Napoleon or so, and was on tight rations in both great wars of the twentieth century. Although non-peripheral Europe (that is, ignoring Finland, Ireland, and such outliers) had no actual famines during the latter half of the nineteenth century, a bad harvest would send the price of bread sky-high, and then the mobs of Paris and London would grumble. Statesmen of the time had to have the events of 1789, 1830, and 1848 fresh in their minds; when conservatives and reactionaries worried about mob rule and demagoguery, they were not imagining things. There existed a real danger that an angry mob of hungry proles would smash in their windows, rape their daughters, and make away with the silverware. (You remember how the Iron Duke got his nickname, right? Nothing to do with Napoleon!) The price of grain was a very real concern, and colonies that could supply food in exchange for manufactured products were not sought purely for the sake of a market for industrial goods - they wanted the food as well!
Observe, if you will, that the price of grain is sometimes mentioned as a factor in the current Arabian risings; and that the US Congress debates ethanol subsidies partly in terms of their effect on food prices. The more things change...
Last edited:
Damn that sure was a crushing defeat for the Chinese. Bavarian flag FTW.
I'ld like to point out that 80% of the troops in that battle were Punjabian and Mongolian troops which uh, aren't will suited for combat in Chinese hills and rice fields.
Terrain modifier -4, and Bavaria has the all-important level 18 of landtech so they do twice as much damage even with all else equal. We should have retreated well before we did.
What does the origin of the unit have to do with their combat performance again?
- Status