Granada AAR

[unmerged(262)]

I have hacked the files to play Granada. I made an 'Iberia' scenario, where the only countries were Navarra, Spain, Granada and Portugal. I was quite successful, because I ended first in victory points (well, read the AAR to see what really happened...), although that was my first campaign ever.
The settings were the normal ones.
You may read it, with a lot of screenshots, here: http://www.ctv.es/USERS/aleal/eu/Granada/Granada.htm

The scenarios files may be downloaded from here: http://www.ctv.es/USERS/aleal/EUscen.zip

Tell me your opinion

Regards,

Antonio Leal

 

[unmerged(23)]

I like the idea of the Iberian scenario.

Playing minors always give interesting AARs. It's also funny to see how ambition driven by a human player allow him to reach his higher goals

Do you play regular games beside your *exotic* scenarios ?

------------------
Pierre
Retired EU Beta Tester

 

[unmerged(286)]

Erm, that is very disturbing.

You built a huge empire, on your first try, on the normal settings, with a nation that would normally be eaten up by Spain.

Either you are very very good, or something is very very wrong

 

[unmerged(262)]

Originally posted by pierre:


Do you play regular games beside your *exotic* scenarios ?

Well, I tried Spain at first, but I did quite badly, because I was so excited with the game and the difficulties of playing in German when you're not German.
Then I tried Genoa. I conquered some North Africa minors, but I just stop after 20 or so years.
Then I played this scenario. I had made other scenarios, grouping the countries (German, Italian, muslim, asiatic). What I wanted was to play also with Aragon and Catalonia, defined in the game but not activated. I erased the provinces that Spain has and put to these two, but something goes wrong and I cannot play with them. I'll keep on trying.
I'm playing now with Thuringen, a German minor, as the only country activated. And after around 200 years since the start, I has not been involved in any war, but I have managed to annex, vassalize and inherit half Europe! Hehe, another AAR will come soon.

Best regards,

Antonio Leal

 

[unmerged(262)]

Originally posted by Andrea Doria:
Erm, that is very disturbing.

You built a huge empire, on your first try, on the normal settings, with a nation that would normally be eaten up by Spain.

Either you are very very good, or something is very very wrong

Perhaps a bug that should be fixed in a coming patch?

No, I don't thing I'm very good. I have tried before with Spain and failed miserably in conquering Granada, so I changed sides

And my victory points are not by building a great empire. Russia, Turkey, France, England, they have larger empires than mine. I managed to have good points following the missions and taking the easy ones like: keep Granada for 5 years and so on. So I amass a good deal of points. And also because I have good diplomacy with my neighbours. But I was the worst at trade, because I have still not grasp the mechanics of the game.
The worst of playing a minor like this is that you don't have any leader at all. I have a Conquistador event, I think, but nothing more. So I have to spent lots of money in armies. I always put more cavalry and cannons than infantry and took the fortresses by attrition, rather but storming. Only I used this when ending the game, pressed by the time.

What I really shocked me was that I could ask loan after loan in the beginning without clear penalties if I didn't pay back them. Perhaps it was I haven't a lot of provinces and the risk of rebellion was lesser when going into bankrupt.

 

[unmerged(23)]

I think that modifying the playable countries also has an influence in the game.
A playable country is, by definition, a country not vassalizable and not annexable (though it can be reduced to capital province).

That can lead to curious diplomatic consequences from time to time and so have an influence in the game and the balance of power in europe sometimes change because of this.

------------------
Pierre
Retired EU Beta Tester

 

[Devin]

Nice work, Laruku. Thanks for writing up that AAR and providing screenshots.

I still want to believe that such remarkable achievements are the exception rather than the rule. I certainly haven't had as much success in most of my games as a major power, much less as a two-province weakling. Perhaps it's because I religiously refuse to reload when things go wrong, or maybe there is some trick that I'm missing. For those of you who find this AAR a bit disturbing, I can assure you that in 75% of your games, you won't have as much success if you play without reloading.

 

[unmerged(349)]

Originally posted by pierre:
I think that modifying the playable countries also has an influence in the game.
A playable country is, by definition, a country not vassalizable and not annexable (though it can be reduced to capital province).

That can lead to curious diplomatic consequences from time to time and so have an influence in the game and the balance of power in europe sometimes change because of this.

I was thinking about this. I want to play a GC as Venice, but I haven't been able to decide which major power to strip of its major power status (i.e., who do I replace with Venice?). Do you, Pierre, have any suggestions about which is the best to leave out? Any of the other 'old timers'?

I think, since I am playing Venice, then Turkey and Austria should not be removed. But neither should Spain be removed... which means France shouldn't be. And removing England seems crazy, which leaves only Russia or Portugal, either of which would cause strange results. Right now, though, I am leaning towards removing Portugal with the hopes of making Venice the 'Portugal of the Mediterranean!'

Which leads me to another question. If i am playing a GC as Austria, and I hack the GC file to play a game as Venice, can I play both at the same time, or will Venice suddenly become a 'playable power' in my Austrian GC???




------------------
'Therefore take heed how you impawn our person,
How you awake our sleeping sword of war.
We charge you in the name of God, take heed;
For never two such kingdoms did contend
Without much fall of blood...'
Henry V (a la Shakespeare)

 

[Johan]

It is too easy to survive as granada as you can't be annexed at a player nation.

/Johan

 

[unmerged(262)]

Originally posted by Johan:
It is too easy to survive as granada as you can't be annexed at a player nation.

/Johan

Yes, that's the reason why Spain must agree with my peace terms, although they'd invade and take control of my country. I can wait 100 years for peace, but they not.

And yes, I reloaded from time to time, because I did'nt know the mechanics of the game and some things I did wrong (splitting an army, sending a ship without infantry and so on). But most of the game was played forward. And believe me, this is not a great achievement.
Many countries were more ahead than me in territory and army. Most of North America was English, Central Europe was Austrian, France had an impresssive army, Russian took a lot of provinces. Only Poland was reduced in a few provinces and Turkey was going weaker at last.

My only clever achievement was to grab some Spanish provinces when they were out and always accomplished the easy missions I was commanded. That allowed me the victory points that made the difference, because I was rather bad in trade, discoveries and other subjects.

 

[Hartmann]

I always erase all powers I do not want to play in a given game. As Johan confirmed once, this has no consequences except the major powers beeing fully annexable (I like that, hehe ) plus some minor consequences regarding events. It may seem strange, but I have made the experience, that playing a minor country with only a few provinces, but well established and well led (e.g. Bavaria), is in fact the easiest way to get into the game.

Hartmann

 

[unmerged(23)]

About playing minors

My opinion is that you can’t do worse than a minor playing by the AI.

Making minors playable change the game. Sometimes slightly, sometimes heavily. It depends of the minors made playable.

A playable country is immune to annexion and vassalization.

Using Laruku AAR, the Iberian scenario creates a situation you’ll probably never find in a regular game, whatever the difficulty level you choose.

As Granada, Laruku faced Spanish attacks at the beginning of the game.

What are the possible consequences for him ?
Nothing

He can NOT loose.
Being immune to annexion, he can’t be kicked out of the game. So Spain is obliged to agree a peace and let him live.
The only consequence of being on the loosing side as Granada are financial consequences. But sooner or later, Granada will be back again to fight Spaniards.

It means a playable Granada hinder Spain development because it’s an ennemy that Spain will NEVER be able to get rid of.

So playable Granada has only to wait to a Spanish mistake, for a war where Spain will send troops elsewhere and then strike.

But it’s not only linked to the fact a human is playing the country.

In his AAR, Laruku invaded Navarre, which is playable.
He wasn’t be able to annex them.

Navarre was crushed but couldn’t be eliminated from the game, being playable.

So, the Spanish AI then had two countries totally immune to annexion and vassalization.

From my own experience, I never saw Granada surviving the initial shock with Spanish troops and Navarre is always either vassalized or annexed, sooner or later, by a major country.

Making Navarre and Granda playable create a situation the Spanish AI can’t manage. A Spanish player will always take care of garrisoning his borders with Granada and Navarre but the AI will have more difficulties.
It can also be linked to the game engine.

Basically, Spain has only one playable neighbor, Portugal.

Granada is destined to disappear in the first year of every GC.
Because Granada CAN’T stand in front of Spain... unless when playable.

A playable Navarre also mean the *minor* will be a pain in the Spanish and French a**** until the end of the GC.

The game is not designed to have such minor countries immune to annexion.


When you play a minor country, you are playing a biaised game. The smaller the country, the less you have to face consequences.

Play the Knights and attack Turkey whenever you can, don’t even take care of a strategy. Why would you ? You can’t loose anything. You only have one province which is not annexable.
Play Granada or Navarre and have fun with the Spaniards.

You don’t have to face the same consequences as an AI played minor country.

Imagine Cologne, played by the AI, declaring war to Spain early in the GC (I’ve seen that from time to time). Guess the fate of the germans ?

Now imagine YOU are playing Cologne. Declare war to Spain. What will you loose if you are crushed ?


Comparing games where you play minors by *hacking* and regular games is like comparing oranges and apples for me.

I agree, it’s fun to play minors and try to create an empire. Consider such games as alternate history where some minors are not destined to be minors and major powers are not able to subdue minors because of their dynamism.

------------------
Pierre
Retired EU Beta Tester

 

[unmerged(23)]

Originally posted by von Curow:
[BDo you, Pierre, have any suggestions about which is the best to leave out? Any of the other 'old timers'?

[...]

Which leads me to another question. If i am playing a GC as Austria, and I hack the GC file to play a game as Venice, can I play both at the same time, or will Venice suddenly become a 'playable power' in my Austrian GC???
[/B]

First question : Russia ? Even as a minor, I think that won't lead to unlikely consequences. Other countries can have interests to stop/help you.
Just an opinion.

Second question : no idea.

I only edited the files once. I always play regular games.

------------------
Pierre
Retired EU Beta Tester

 

[unmerged(345)]

Thanx a lot Pierre, that reassures me pretty much over the AI's value and the depth of the game. Muslims wining over the Incas sounds too much to AoEII.

Granada conquering Bilbao?. Noooo waaaay!!
/Alzate

 

[unmerged(234)]

Originally posted by von Curow:
I was thinking about this. I want to play a GC as Venice, but I haven't been able to decide which major power to strip of its major power status (i.e., who do I replace with Venice?). Do you, Pierre, have any suggestions about which is the best to leave out? Any of the other 'old timers'?

I think, since I am playing Venice, then Turkey and Austria should not be removed. But neither should Spain be removed... which means France shouldn't be. And removing England seems crazy, which leaves only Russia or Portugal, either of which would cause strange results. Right now, though, I am leaning towards removing Portugal with the hopes of making Venice the 'Portugal of the Mediterranean!'

You forgot that Poland also is a major/player country in the GC

[This message has been edited by Janbalk (edited 02-11-2000).]

 

[unmerged(262)]

Mostly, I agree with you Pierre. But if I exchange a major for a minor, I'll have less resources than playing France, for instance.

Of course, it's just for fun. It's a game. Every game we play is alternate history, by definition. I went a little further.

 

[unmerged(23)]

yes, it's alternate history even if you play regular games.

I just wanted to underline the game system is not designed to have non annexable minors like that

It can lead to curious things.

Only

------------------
Pierre
Retired EU Beta Tester

 

[Doomdark]

Well, personally I like to play in a historically plausible fashion. I get a kick out of role-playing so to speak. So, if I were to play a tiny minor and my provinces were all occupied, I would concede the game and resign.

The AI-controlled major nations can't do this however, so I suggest not having any tiny playable AI nations in your scenarios. I always disable all other majors in my campaigns since I feel it is more accurate.

Btw, Portugal might be an exception to this rule, since it will otherwise disappear in the first 50 years.

/Doomie

 

[unmerged(252)]

Could someone explain to me why there are any countries in the game that are immune to annexation? I don't think an artifical restriction like that should exist. Take that AAR where the player conquered the world as France. (Now, I am bringing this up for a totally different reason than our last discussion, so let's not dredge that up again.) He had conquered Spain, except the capital. Portugal, except the capital. England, except the capital. That seemed really cheesy to me. It served no purpose. Those countries were basically knocked out of the game anyway, just one province countries sitting there to rot. It takes away from the realism too. I mean, a major country should be hard as hell to annex just because of its inherent power, but if you do manage to do it, what's the rationale behind having this one useless province sitting there, kinda making the game cheesy?

 

[unmerged(13)]

Vurbil,


as default the major playable nations (Spain, Poland, England etc) cannot be fully annexed in the game. That is, all their provinces can be taken but their capital remains. Yes I dislike this as well, so how about a roundabout? Simply delete them from the main grand campaign file and you'll be able to take and annex the capital in the end if you want too.


Sap.