-
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.
King John said:
Why not? The problem/aims of England was (were) how to become more powerful or to avoid, well, complete destruction. It was not out of bounds that Nab could reach conclusion that he could achieve that with France. Since, actually, right now the alliance/friendship to France was a disaster for England and it was clear for some time that it was a disaster.
Actually, England should had followed suit at the time of Spanish betrayal. At that point it was clear that France do not had naval superiority and a weak England should be allied with the side with better navy.
But, well, we got now an England bent on revenge on Spain, and that can be be very, very annoying to such Spain.
arcorelli said:
Honestly, arco thats a little far fetched. The French alliance was completly beneficial for England until the betrayel of Spain :rofl: ; so you would propose when one ally jumps ship the other should as well? Not to mention that Cas was more eager to take on England then France (as in his stated aims).Your info seems a little awry.
edit: to put it more clearly; they were enemies even while France-Spain were allies.
Last edited:
K'shar said:
Regarding jumping ship at the same time: Not jumping ship meant for England that they could end with the weaker naval coalition. Now, a weak England can't do that.
Regarding Cas aims: Well, I really don't understand that Cas chosen the weaker target. You betray a stronger country that got a direct frontier with you and your capitol is a 2-3 provinces of your frontier. You should strike always the greater danger after all.
Casluerj said:
Well, some people would put it better than I:
Casluerj said:Temu, I do plan the "europelization" of the revolution, but not universalis.
We won late game. We practically rolled over everyone. Imho, had we actually played the Nappy period, I could have defeated you 1-on-1 despite your leader and my lack-of, however, you did dominate Central Europe most of the game. So guess you could call it almost a 3-way tie.
And now, a quote from EGA3, only cause it was amusing:
Nabukodonosor said:
:rofl:
arcorelli said:
Well, I don't want to be mean or anything, but Cas is sort of getting an habit of expanding essentially by targetting who's weaker than him, and avoiding longterm fights with someone who is his equal. Not that its a bad strategy or anything, but he spent most of this campaign avoiding fights with anyone that had a chance to dent his armor if he could.
Hehe, yes you got me reading that thread today.
From the days when Nab was a loyal Casluerite and a avid shark hunter
p.s. seems I am still observed in the same light.
From the days when Nab was a loyal Casluerite and a avid shark hunter
p.s. seems I am still observed in the same light.
Slightly reduced to emphasize some points:
In a way, its all a question of perspective, shall we say. He used to have a quote in his signature that said:
"My right is driven in, my center is giving way, the situation is excellent, I attack." —Marshal Ferdinand Foch
Fits his playstyle correctly. Always optimistic. If he isn't defeated, then he must be winning somehow.
You should put that back in your signature KJ
kwfinn said:
In a way, its all a question of perspective, shall we say. He used to have a quote in his signature that said:
"My right is driven in, my center is giving way, the situation is excellent, I attack." —Marshal Ferdinand Foch
Fits his playstyle correctly. Always optimistic. If he isn't defeated, then he must be winning somehow.
You should put that back in your signature KJ
Aye, I liked that sig too. I guess I haven't been able to find anything better..
Arco, you may be right about England. But there are always two factors to consider in diplomatic assessment- the country's situation, and the mindset of the player. Nabuko is very loyal, has always been in every game i've played with him, and K'shar helped him out a lot a few decades ago. So I don't think he would turn his back on K'shar even if the alternative was to lose a large chunk of his country(which has actually been proven already).
K'shar, in the wars between France and Austria, France almost always had the advantage, except in the WOR fight, and the current war. Thoug there were two other early wars in which Austria took the offensive. The 16th century and early 17th century wars saw two Austrian victories and I think two French victories(one of them while I was gone, iirc). Something wierd happened while I was gone anyway. And in the first Austrian victory, I could've easily taken 7-8+ provs off Brandenburg, as its army was entirely destroyed and many of his provs under control, with the rest quickly falling to my soldiers. So yes, you did only give up a few provs in total to me, but you could've lost that war a lot worse if I'd chosen to press my advantage. I'd planned to just fight another war in 5 years with another CRT, but of course I had to lock myself out of the house...
17th century saw some French-Ottoman alliances vs Austria, which, though Spain helped a bit in Hungary, still forced me to divert a lot of forces to fight the OE, and even resulted in a loss of land there. And then you had Turrene, who is peerless in Europe. With my high morale advantage I was able to hold the line somewhat, but Portugal ended up joining eventually, leading to Venice's demise, and by this time I had nowhere near your economic or military resources to play with(and Venice was also vassalized while I was gone. I'm still not so sure its total incorporation by France was really fair, though I guess Nitram is the one to blame for "willing it over"). In all these fights, you fought superbly well, making hardly any tactical errors and using overall good strategy. This France is mostly a diplomatic achievement, but without quite good military skills it would've still been set back in the first few major wars it fought.
My hat is off to you for escaping defeat in the early coalition wars of the 18th century. It was first of all quite a coup getting Prussia and NL to not join our coalition; if either one had, it could've given Sweden the supply it so badly needed to invade France, and then you would've had Karl XII on your hands. But militarily, almost getting to within stabhitting distance on Austria a few times was not a bad accomplishment, with Poland and Sweden both providing support. French invasions, even supported by Spain, just didn't have the necessary power to turn it into a victory at that time though.
The war after that was where I was vassalized. You guys got me right before Von Duan spawned. But I still had a 444 leader and some other good ones so I still had a leader advantage, but you did dwarf my MP pool pretty badly. And IIRC, I fought this one alone, at least toward the end.
Though that's really what most of my wars prior to the 18th century felt like- Austria always had to absorb most of France's offensive power while other even weaker nations like Venice played minor roles like seiging provs.
I can hardly take any credit away from you by showing that France generally had a great advantage over Austria anyway. It just goes to show how well you handled your economy and diplomacy too.
Arco, you may be right about England. But there are always two factors to consider in diplomatic assessment- the country's situation, and the mindset of the player. Nabuko is very loyal, has always been in every game i've played with him, and K'shar helped him out a lot a few decades ago. So I don't think he would turn his back on K'shar even if the alternative was to lose a large chunk of his country(which has actually been proven already
). K'shar, in the wars between France and Austria, France almost always had the advantage, except in the WOR fight, and the current war. Thoug there were two other early wars in which Austria took the offensive. The 16th century and early 17th century wars saw two Austrian victories and I think two French victories(one of them while I was gone, iirc). Something wierd happened while I was gone anyway. And in the first Austrian victory, I could've easily taken 7-8+ provs off Brandenburg, as its army was entirely destroyed and many of his provs under control, with the rest quickly falling to my soldiers. So yes, you did only give up a few provs in total to me, but you could've lost that war a lot worse if I'd chosen to press my advantage. I'd planned to just fight another war in 5 years with another CRT, but of course I had to lock myself out of the house...
17th century saw some French-Ottoman alliances vs Austria, which, though Spain helped a bit in Hungary, still forced me to divert a lot of forces to fight the OE, and even resulted in a loss of land there. And then you had Turrene, who is peerless in Europe. With my high morale advantage I was able to hold the line somewhat, but Portugal ended up joining eventually, leading to Venice's demise, and by this time I had nowhere near your economic or military resources to play with(and Venice was also vassalized while I was gone. I'm still not so sure its total incorporation by France was really fair, though I guess Nitram is the one to blame for "willing it over"). In all these fights, you fought superbly well, making hardly any tactical errors and using overall good strategy. This France is mostly a diplomatic achievement, but without quite good military skills it would've still been set back in the first few major wars it fought.
My hat is off to you for escaping defeat in the early coalition wars of the 18th century. It was first of all quite a coup getting Prussia and NL to not join our coalition; if either one had, it could've given Sweden the supply it so badly needed to invade France, and then you would've had Karl XII on your hands. But militarily, almost getting to within stabhitting distance on Austria a few times was not a bad accomplishment, with Poland and Sweden both providing support. French invasions, even supported by Spain, just didn't have the necessary power to turn it into a victory at that time though.
The war after that was where I was vassalized. You guys got me right before Von Duan spawned
. But I still had a 444 leader and some other good ones so I still had a leader advantage, but you did dwarf my MP pool pretty badly. And IIRC, I fought this one alone, at least toward the end. Though that's really what most of my wars prior to the 18th century felt like- Austria always had to absorb most of France's offensive power while other even weaker nations like Venice played minor roles like seiging provs.
I can hardly take any credit away from you by showing that France generally had a great advantage over Austria anyway. It just goes to show how well you handled your economy and diplomacy too
.
We were both too generous at times, thats for sure.
edit:
Three actually, and Engel attacked me I was trying to hold off beating you till you got back
edit:
Three actually, and Engel attacked me
I was trying to hold off beating you till you got back
Last edited:
Well, I don't know. When you're the #1 power, it almost makes more sense to be easy on the vanquished so you can milk more victories from them later on
EDIT: That's fine, I'm not going to count Engel's blunders though.
EDIT: That's fine, I'm not going to count Engel's blunders though
.
Off topic now:
Any of you chums be interested in trying an EGA crew HOI2 match? I played a few HOI MPs back in the day (2-3 games). Wouldn't mind to give it another go with a reliable group.
Great part is ... 5 players is doable and 6 is perfect, so not so many bodies to worry about.
I know Cas would and KJ so thats already half of what we would need
Any of you chums be interested in trying an EGA crew HOI2 match? I played a few HOI MPs back in the day (2-3 games). Wouldn't mind to give it another go with a reliable group.
Great part is ... 5 players is doable and 6 is perfect, so not so many bodies to worry about.
I know Cas would and KJ so thats already half of what we would need
I swear to Christ it was Venice's fault.King John said:Well, I don't know. When you're the #1 power, it almost makes more sense to be easy on the vanquished so you can milk more victories from them later on
EDIT: That's fine, I'm not going to count Engel's blunders though
Van Engel said:I swear to Christ it was Venice's fault.
Hehe. You were just too eagar to pick a fight
. A man after my own heart, but that just compounded Austria's problems :rofl:
I want to laugh but I am constant reminded of my own Spain in my own game. I am the new Elio.