Any game I play, I always get these two events fairly early on, telling me to pick between one or the other. The thing is, there is no text underneath the options describing exactly what each option does. So far I've always picked Clauswitzian Theory and Superior Crew, but what are the benefits to picking the others? Heck, what are the benefits to picking Clausewitzian Theory and Superior Crew? I must admit I'm completely clueless on this issue.
-
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.
Clauswitzian/Superior Crew increases organization, Jomonian/Naval Hero increase Moral
Yep, so early on when morale is low extra morale is good. Later when you have buckets of morale from techs extra organisation is good. Depends on your game stratergy I guess (ie are you going to be aggressive/attacked by an aggressive nation early on? then morale may be good. Otherwise organisation is prob better).
Later on in the game organisation becomes more important, whereas early on it is elan. So really... it depends when you wish to do most of your warmongering, to what you decide.
Personally I always choose Clausewitzian and Superior Crew, whatever nation I play as.
Personally I always choose Clausewitzian and Superior Crew, whatever nation I play as.
yeah, I used to pick jominian and naval hero but noticed that my troops were getting trounced in later games due to lack of organization.
As stated above, it depends on when you plan to do most of your fighting. I also read a while ago that morale is much less important than org when it comes to naval battle, so I always choose Superior Crew.
Though the impact of these inventions shouldn't be underestimated. Choosing Jominian and borrowing money for ~12 Hussars you could crush (almost) any nation in the first years of the game. Good tactic with Sweden against Russia or a south slavic minor against OT, Russia and Austria (though this requires a lot of luck, exeptional manouvering and going bankrupt).
Though the impact of these inventions shouldn't be underestimated. Choosing Jominian and borrowing money for ~12 Hussars you could crush (almost) any nation in the first years of the game. Good tactic with Sweden against Russia or a south slavic minor against OT, Russia and Austria (though this requires a lot of luck, exeptional manouvering and going bankrupt).
i usually end up picking the jominian theory and the superior crew, as land forces need the morale, even later in the game, because i find the AI always picks jominian theory as well. if you dont, they will have 20 points more morale than you do, and that is good for the computer if you get into a big battle that goes on and on.
however, it is not necessary. if you play smart, go slow, and make sure big battles are fought on your choosing ground, it really doesnt matter in the end whether you choose one or the other.
however, it is not necessary. if you play smart, go slow, and make sure big battles are fought on your choosing ground, it really doesnt matter in the end whether you choose one or the other.
I'm not sure, but I'm going to speculate that morale is useless as long as it stays above the break/retreat threshold. Everything above that is just breathing room before you have to withdraw. Of course the enemy's shock value(s) determine how quickly your morale is depleted. Organization is basically how efficiently & effectively the fighting force operates in combat. So, basically shock damages morale. And ORG (effectively / indirectly) damages strength... since it enables the unit's attack & defense values to be fully enhanced, or utilized - in battle.
By the 4th tier of army tech, the typical Jominian INF unit has morale near, or even in excess of 100. I guess that's just totally unecessary. If you're fighting a battle where it's necessary to shave off ~90 morale points, then I would go ahead and suggest that an alternative attack plan should be formed.
By the 4th tier of army tech, the typical Jominian INF unit has morale near, or even in excess of 100. I guess that's just totally unecessary. If you're fighting a battle where it's necessary to shave off ~90 morale points, then I would go ahead and suggest that an alternative attack plan should be formed.
I always ends up taking Superior Crew. Unless I'm playing the UK I won't have much use of my navy until late game, and if I'm playing the UK, no one can rival my navy until late game. Jomonian/Clauswitzian is a much harder decision...
Yeah definitely. As we have all said before... it depends on the nation and when most conquering will be done. The first choice for each of those inventions would favour early conquest, with the second choice favouring conquest later on.
I remember playing as Paraguay once (VIP:R 0.2) and the War of the Triple Alliance began. Brazil had obviously chosen Jominian Attitude, and well I had chosen Clausewitzian Theory. I just couldn't match up to them at that point in-game! They had a larger army and more morale to keep fighting for longer. I had to just form a defensive line against them whilst quickly conquering Argentina and Uruguay and then forcing Brazil into a white peace after that.
The moral of the story... it is a question of time as to what should influence your decision with these events.
Of course, a bit of 'cheating' helps. Knowing what events and wars will come up will affect which you go for. Really I guess we should all be role-playing instead of playing to win (though I guess few really do this, including myself) and so should either go for historical, or go for option that fits style we play (rather than on events!).
An interesting use of Jominian Attitude is a blitz unification as Italy. Because Italy has a lot of nice RGOs and a lot of national culture POPs, it can easily pay back the debt it would entail by "rush-buying" a bunch of Hussar-ed Cavalry and steamrolling the peninsula.
Outside of the "early war vs. late war" argument, I sometimes use Jominian Attitude if I am playing a nation that will primarily be at war with uncivilized nations, where you are going to be constantly attacking rather than taking and holding territory.
On the other hand, European wars, especially later in the game, generally hinge on the fast dig-in that high Org of Clauswitzian Theory offers.
Outside of the "early war vs. late war" argument, I sometimes use Jominian Attitude if I am playing a nation that will primarily be at war with uncivilized nations, where you are going to be constantly attacking rather than taking and holding territory.
On the other hand, European wars, especially later in the game, generally hinge on the fast dig-in that high Org of Clauswitzian Theory offers.
this strikes me as kind of funny, since superior crew leads to Colbertt, who was leading british naval theoretic. makes sense, of course, but funny non the less
