Let's be honest - Prussia survived the 7-Years War ONLY because Elizabeth of Russia died at a critical moment (with the Russians out of Berlin and the Prussian armies devastated) and her successor was kind of a Prussia fanboy.
Concerns about lategame warfare balance
- Thread starter unmerged(652342)
- Start date
-
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.
Let's be honest - Prussia survived the 7-Years War ONLY because Elizabeth of Russia died at a critical moment (with the Russians out of Berlin and the Prussian armies devastated) and her successor was kind of a Prussia fanboy.
That war had equal forces and ended in a draw, how is that an example of a Russian outnumbered win?- guy implied that Prussian never lost a battle to anyone.
- russo-swedesh war of 1788-90 for example.And even when Russia had higher numbers they were not that high like some want to imply.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russo-Swedish_War_(1788–90)
It is by the way known as the Theatre War in Swedish, as the king simply declared war on Russia to distract public discontent with his autocratic regime. Neither side took the war seriously as can be seen by it ending in a draw and just 30k participating on either side.
Tbh I think both Poland and Hungary should start as western tech, but Poland should get eastern tech when it absorbs Lithuania through the event/union and then have to westernize manually. The Russian states should all start as eastern but Russia will westernize at around late 17th century due to the DHE.
That said, I think one malus is enough for lower tech groups, it's enough that the tech is slower, adding worse units on top of that is weird, worse technology is already represented by slow tech, no need to make the units worse.
The racial silliness and defensive posts is unwarranted though.
That said, I think one malus is enough for lower tech groups, it's enough that the tech is slower, adding worse units on top of that is weird, worse technology is already represented by slow tech, no need to make the units worse.
The racial silliness and defensive posts is unwarranted though.
I know that, doesn't mean Prussia would have died there on the spot.
unless they changed something russia is not weak , it is VERY simple to westernize and you have insane amounts of manpower and unless i misread something russia has always had a problem keeping up with modern tech isn't that why they lost the war with japan?
PRUSSIA would have. Not the nation led by Frederick, but I honestly can see the Austrians getting Silesia back and ripping the title of King of Prussia away from Brandenburg. Maybe recreating a separated Duchy of Prussia.
So, the only way Prussia would have been fallible would be if it was completely destroyed? Good news, then, everyone! Russia was similarly never beaten by anyone, ever, in any way!
in EU 3 i was wiping the floor with any nation that i fought , all i wanted to do was join the HRE but noooooo im to big im the wrong religion ! so i constantly invaded and took HRE territory
Well Czar Catherina the Lewd should perhaps have left the poor horse alone then so we would be able to tell what would have happened...
- they "won"? In the long run they still lost. And in EU timeframe Prussia was not a massive winner.
- maybe some hospital manager somewhere indeed will not be pleased, id dont know. But i 100% sure that you with your "smart" remark and observation of eastern europeans definitely pleased dr.Goebbels.
- so you saying that eastern europeans are 1.5 worser than western europeans? Is that somekind of genetic trait of eastern european people? But who am i to ask, after all in comparison with Ottos and Arabs we not that bad, you given them much worser rates... The only thing i wonder is how the hell eastern europeans managed to beat western europeans when they did not had a numerical advantage... Divine intervention maybe?
hmy:
They did win the war, does it matter how they won the war? The OP claimed that Prussia failed, I simply stated that they did not since they never was conquered and in this I am actually 100% correct. So what is the fuss, people need to stop act so butthurt and nitpick at irrelevant details.
Does it really matter if the Russians were defeated on the battlefield or that they pulled back because their Czar was crushed to death whilst copulating with a horse? Not really.
Really? Considering their starting size I'd say they were massive winners, perhaps even THE winners of the era.
Ok Russian hospital manager sad, Goebbels happy, glad we could agree.
When did that happend? The enemy beaten at the Siege of Vienna were Ottomans you know.- so you saying that eastern europeans are 1.5 worser than western europeans? Is that somekind of genetic trait of eastern european people? But who am i to ask, after all in comparison with Ottos and Arabs we not that bad, you given them much worser rates... The only thing i wonder is how the hell eastern europeans managed to beat western europeans when they did not had a numerical advantage... Divine intervention maybe?
Defensive nation ideas. 1% guaranteed attrition/month + scorched earth + harsh winter attrition. Who wanna invade that? Ever?
Alright, I was wrong about Sweden, I was pretty sure Sweden outnumbered Russia at a pretty significant battle but I couldn't find it, I did however find this old thread dispelling the myth that Russia was always the outnumbering force. http://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/showthread.php?681517-Russia/page2
page three also has good info on it.
btw, not Russian, and certainly not trolling, I feel you are biased especially with that comment based on the Modern Russian army.
Biased against Russian army? I am pretty sure that the modern Russian army is a much more terrifying foe than the old one.
Most of these are against other Eastern Tech foes, but yes Russia did fight valiantly against Napoleon the Demon from Corsica at the very end of the timeframe.
Adowa happened many decades after the end of the EU time period and military technology had advanced a lot by then, so it's actually quite a bad example to use.
Sort of. Italians had machineguns by then. The gap had enlarged, and not by a small amount. And yet...
- nein nein nein nein nein! Prussia never fails!
- you asked example when sweeds outnumbered russians, i give it to you
They had ~500 man more.- 1.to westernize you need to have big tech gap with west. 2.eastern europe consists not only from Russia alone. 3. "modern" tech had nothing to do with Japanese-Russian war fail.
Yep African and New World forces simply did not stand a chance even if 10 times more, that is not bias, just history. Or look at the Opium Wars, massive China got gimped by a British expeditionary force.
Like I said earlier in the thread, they absolutely mauled the Prussians in the Seven Years' War. Doesn't seem to register with your narrative, though.