Land bridges becoming a joke?

[daedalus]

Why would England bother the French more now that they don't have the one thing anymore that enabled them to do that before? France just got a whole lot more dangerous to England. How will that force England to be more hostile to France (unless it has a death wish)?

Exactly my thoughts. Why in the world will a english player want to be in bad terms with france now? The french now can just jesus-walk to england.
There is a reason why the home islands have not being invaded in a long time, and that is that you need boats to cross! Have you ever seen an english player not building a strong navy?

Until now the scenario has been balanced in a way that englands low MP can be overcome by a navy stronger that her enemies. Now the only thing frnace needs is a navy half strong as that of england to pull out a successful invation, since france just go unlimited transport to cross the channel.
Just send your ships to invade northern england. If the english navy moves there just use the magically open teletransported to move your 1 million man accros the channel (notice that there is not limit on how many man can cross at the same time )

 

[daedalus]

If you are not disturbed for a month I imagine you could ferry quite a lot of men between Dover and Calais just using rowing boats and similar.

Problem 1 is that it does not take too much time to cross a strait as compared to move over provinces.
Problem 2 the english player cannot see the invasion force comming until they are done crossing, because of the fog of war.
Problem 3, english layer force to park a navy stronger that her enemies combined during the whole game!

Think about the scenario where france has allied netherlands, spain or portugal

 

[BiB]

Not to mention that the French invading army is now untouchable by the navy. If they have to be transported in with boats at least they can be sunk. Now at best the English can stop the French crossing with no casualties at all.

Invade England, 5 goes for a ducat

 

[Duuk]

If England puts 1 galley off Calais, they block the strait.

That leaves the rest of the English navy to sink enemy ships.

The straits don't magically convert armies into navies, they just allow for a small-boat crossing of non-contested areas.

In this new rule, England needs to be MUCH more wary of France, and needs to defend Calais a bit more, instead of selling it for 500 ducats and a colony in the bahamas.

Now, in the mind of the English player, he needs to think, "You know, I might want to keep Calais."

 

[Semi-Lobster]

I have to agree on the points daedlus and everyone else made, while it does make sense that Spain should be active in North Africa and the Irish land connection does make sense, the Kent-Calais bridge will not force England to be more hostile to the French at all and gives France too much power to send thousands of men across the channel. Although this does give an incentive for the English to actually keep Calais.

Where land connections are needed is with Corfu, those lousy Venetians are the eternal bane of my existance!!

 

[Duuk]

I do think Corfu and Rhodes need land connections though.

 

[BiB]

If England puts 1 galley off Calais, they block the strait.

That leaves the rest of the English navy to sink enemy ships.

The straits don't magically convert armies into navies, they just allow for a small-boat crossing of non-contested areas.

In this new rule, England needs to be MUCH more wary of France, and needs to defend Calais a bit more, instead of selling it for 500 ducats and a colony in the bahamas.

Now, in the mind of the English player, he needs to think, "You know, I might want to keep Calais."

No, you still don't want to keep Calais. It paints a huge target on your back for France who will want that province. If France has Calais the chance of friendly relations with France become a lot bigger.

Defensive wise it is also smarter to get rid of Calais. It is still easier to defend a straight than a direct land connection like exists to Calais. Calais is pretty much undefendable (which, together with the reasons stated above is why there are historical RP reasons only for an English player to hold on to it) and keeping it means that you start every war with France at a war score deficit.

 

[Duuk]

See, I tend to (in SP and some MP) base huge amounts of troops in Calais. Of course, I usually ally with Austria, too. That keeps France off balance a bit.

The large troops in Calais mean England can start with a positive warscore, too. Especially if Ile de France falls quick.

 

[daedalus]

Keep Calais and give France a free CB on you. You gain little for it.
And about keeping 1 ship, well it only means that france has to pull 2 ships, sink that, and force the UK player to gamble and move his navy to the strait (assuming the french player has a fleet big enough to defeat small british fleets). Now of course a smart french player will

a) sink the parked fleet. force english fleet to move.
b) have your fleet ship 100k troops to attempt to land on norther england. If the english player moves to cover, have your million men army ready to cross the channel.

(I wonder how many little boats will be needed to move 1 million men accross the channel )

 

[BiB]

See, I tend to (in SP and some MP) base huge amounts of troops in Calais. Of course, I usually ally with Austria, too. That keeps France off balance a bit.

The large troops in Calais mean England can start with a positive warscore, too. Especially if Ile de France falls quick.

Unless you're playing the ai or a bavoon that's never going to happen

 

[Cleanthes]

Those straits are there for TWO major reasons..

1) To promote English/French rivalry. They are almost always on decent terms in MP games and England always stays out of European war. Now they will be forced to be anti-french, and not just sit on their island and cash in money from colonies.

2) To make Spanish players do what Spain did in history. Grab parts of Northern Africa, and OPPOSE the Ottoman expansion in the Mediterranean.

I appreciate the game play value of adding these straits. England absolutely should be required to always protect the narrow seas if there's any chance of invasion. The English Channel narrows had, even in 1419, a great deal of infrastructure of a nautical nature. Ferries had run for thousands of years. So, it seems to me that the English Channel crossing point should be the WIDEST one in the game. Even with the Aegean crossings, I think the Dover Strait is, indeed, the widest crossing as of this latest beta.

I also believe that very narrow water should be much more easily crossed - there are always ferry boats to be commandeered. Loading and unloading on naval ships was NOT required. Both Napoleon and the Duke of Parma, when planning the two biggest threatened invasions of England, contemplated using invasion barges screened by the fleet, not carried by the fleet.

For consistency, though, may I point out:

Dover Strait, now crossable, is 33 kilometers at its narrowest and is swimmable only by a world-class modern swimmer.

If there is a crossing here, perhaps there should be crossings at the following points (all measurements at narrowest point):

Indonesian Island straits:

Malacca Strait, Jehor to Jambi province in the game (Malayan peninsula to Sumatra).
Width of strait = 15.6 kilometers and swimmable to fit athletes.

Bali Strait, Surabaja to Bali in the game.
Width of strait = 3.7 kilometers and swimmable by me, probably.

Sape Strait, Flores to Bali in the game
Width of strait = 14.8 kilometers

Ombai Strait, Flores to Timor in the game.
Width of strait = 29.6 kilometers

Manipa Strait, Buru to Ceram in the game.
Width of strait = 22.2 kilometers

Philippine Island straits:

Surigao Strait, Samar to Mindanao in the game
Width of strait = 27.8 kilometers

San Bernardino Strait, Mindoro to Samar in the game (Luzon Island to Samar Island)
Width of strait = 3 kilometers


Elsewhere in the Pacific:

Tsugaru Strait, Ezochi to Tohoku in the game (Honchu to Hokaido in Japan)
Width of strait = 18.5 kilometers

Hainan Strait, Hainan to Guangdong in the game
Width of strait = 24.1 kilometers

Cook Strait, Timaru to Taranaki in the game (North to South Island, NZ)
Width of strait = 22.2 kilometers

Dampier Strait, Wewak to Raboul in the game (New Guinea to New Britain)
Width of strait = 24.1 kilometers

Isla San Estaban Strait, Empalma to Ensenada in the game (Sonora to Baja via the islands forming the Sea of Cortez)
Width of strait = 12 kilometers


Atlantic Straits:
Strait of Belle Isle, Gander to Belle Isle in the game (Newfoundland to mainland Canada)
Width of strait = 16.7 kilometers

Strait of Canso, Nova Scotia to Isle Royale in the game (The Canso causeway, nowadays)
Width of strait = 1.5 kilometers

Dominica Pass, Dominica to Guadaloupe in the game, I guess, although in reality, Dominca is in between Guadaloupe and Martinique so it would be ever so much better if provinces 148 and 149 switched names. In any case, these islands have the least separation in the Lesser Antilles:
Width of strait = 29.6 kilometers

Aruba Pass, Curacao to Tocuvo in the game (Curacao to the mainland)
Width of strait = 27.8 kilometers

Strait of Magellan, Magallanes to Tierra del Fuego in the game
Width of strait = 2.5 kilometers

Mediterranean Straits:

Corfu Channel, Corphu to Albania in the game
Width of strait = 5.6 kilometers

Strait of Bonifacio, Corsica to Sardinia
Width of strait = 11.1 kilometers

Rhodes Channel, Rhodes to Antalya in the game
Width of strait = 16 kilometers

Kithera Strait, Crete to Morea in the game (Crete to Kythira Island, separated from the mainland by the narrow -5km- Porthmos strait)
Width of strait = 7.4 kilometers

Indian Ocean Straits:

Bab el Mandeb, Aden to Issas in the game (southern Arabia to Africa)
Width of strait = 16.7 kilometers

Palk Strait, Colombo province to Madurai in the game (Sri Lanka to India).
Width of strait = 5.5 kilometers and easily swimmable by anyone in good condition.

Zanzibar Channel, Zanzibar to Tanga in the game
Width of strait = 31.5 kilometers

Gulf of Bahrain, Bahrein to Damman (nowadays the King Fahd causeway)
Width of strait = 9.6 kilometers

Okay then, this is as complete as I could make it - this is every strait narrower than the Dover Strait that matters in game terms. I've probably overlooked an obvious place though, so please I'd like to see corrections to this list. I mostly used "The Times Atlas of the Oceans" for the width of these straits. That source gives widths in nautical miles, which I converted to kilometers (1.852 km = 1 nautical mile = 1 minute of latitude = 1 minute of longitude at the equator} Because of this conversion, the last digit of each width is accurate only to about 1/2 a kilometer. Other sources included "World Reference Atlas", Dorling Kindersley 2003, "Webster's Geographical Dictionary" G&C Merriam 1949, and "Indian Ocean Atlas" Central Intelligence Agency, 1976.

I would especially like to see crossing allowed at all straits under 10 km wide. Honestly, I think every one of these crossings, except maybe the Dominica Pass, should be included.

 

[daedalus]

So if I understand correctly, the reason to put the strait there is to encourage conflict between france and england.
But IMHO there is not real reason in game to england and france to have a rivalry like the one IRL. England has little to gain from lands in europe. France can not just simple compete as a trading nation with the likes of netherlands, spain, england, sweden, etc. The only reason for in game rivalry is an artificial one, role playing or game rules. In pure game terms, france and england had much more to gain as allies than enemies.
England's major enemies are netherlands, portugal and spain. France are spain, austria and BB prussia. However, you will never,and should never see france allied to england. But if I was a england trading enemy, I will invest tons of money in a navy and financing france to destroy england. And how could england stop a trading enemy that plays like this?

It only takes one province for france to destroy england. After she has capture the other side of the coast, is suddenly game over for england As france can move troops accross the channel on peace time.
Sadly, the opposite is not true, as england has little chance in a land war against france, even if she owns calais.

 

[unmerged(5822)]

More straits are needed in the Mediterranean. Especially for Rhodes and Corfu, but also for Crete and Corsica-Sardinia.

 

[Semi-Lobster]

Great list Cleanthes! I agree, some of those straits really should be in, especially the Asian ones although the Bab el Mandeb for gameplay purposes might not be a good idea. I think the Ethiopian AI really needs to be more expansionist. I think crossing the English Channel also has to consider the seaonal condition, the Channel can be pretty rough during certain times of the year

 

[Veilwalker]

England now gains manpower and add'l taxes (land connection to capitol) so why isn't it in their interest to expand on the continent at the expense of France? They can beat france it is just a matter of application of force at the most opportune time. Spain would be more than happy to divy up France with England.

It will still take a serious effort for France to knock out England and what English player is going to give peace while France is occupying a portion of the home isles?

As people have said this is mostly a MP balance issue and as such simply playing hands off games will not give you a true indication of the effect of these changes.

What is the penalty for assaulting across a strait? I am guessing it is pretty severe; it should be greater than a river crossing. The logistics of crossing a river are simple compared to the crossing of a strait no matter how narrow or placid it may be.

England can probably just stick a small-medium sized army on their side of the strait, a couple of boat in the waters and that should take care of that. I am presuming that if a naval battle is going on in the seazone that a crossing of the strait cannot occur. All you should have to do to disupt the crossing is to send one suicide boat into the straits just before the crossing is completed and that should throw the whole thing out of sync and it will need to get started again.

 

[BiB]

England now gains manpower and add'l taxes (land connection to capitol) so why isn't it in their interest to expand on the continent at the expense of France? They can beat france it is just a matter of application of force at the most opportune time. Spain would be more than happy to divy up France with England.

It will still take a serious effort for France to knock out England and what English player is going to give peace while France is occupying a portion of the home isles?

As people have said this is mostly a MP balance issue and as such simply playing hands off games will not give you a true indication of the effect of these changes.

What is the penalty for assaulting across a strait? I am guessing it is pretty severe; it should be greater than a river crossing. The logistics of crossing a river are simple compared to the crossing of a strait no matter how narrow or placid it may be.

England can probably just stick a small-medium sized army on their side of the strait, a couple of boat in the waters and that should take care of that. I am presuming that if a naval battle is going on in the seazone that a crossing of the strait cannot occur. All you should have to do to disupt the crossing is to send one suicide boat into the straits just before the crossing is completed and that should throw the whole thing out of sync and it will need to get started again.

England already gained taxes and manpower from the continent (assuming England is fully naval and which sane England isn't), nothing has changed in this respect. Unless you own and can keep half of France (not very likely), a foothold on teh continent is a liability.

And English player that has France controlling some of the home islands is in deep shit usually, aka not in a position to refuse much peace offerings.

I am a very experienced MP player and I am speaking from that angle (the drawbacks are clear enough anyway in SP) and I tend to be rather accurate in my assessments throughout the years I have spent on this game. You don't necessarily have to test something 300 times to know it is wrong.

England shouldn't have to worry about any Chunnel avant la lettre. There are no beenfits for England, it will not increase English rivalry with France as it seems intended for on top of the ahistoricty of it.

 

[daedalus]

England can probably just stick a small-medium sized army on their side of the strait, a couple of boat in the waters and that should take care of that

You probably have never had a 500k french army lead by nappy coming your way, have you
ITHO, england will only gain MP if she is able to take provinces in europe. But who is she going to take provinces from? France?... LOL... before this patch england could build a big navy and land a big army wherever she wanted, but no one does that in MP, why? because that bg army is the only army you can raise with your punny MP
I hardly see how this strait thing presents any help for england.

 

[King of Men]

Problem 2 the english player cannot see the invasion force comming until they are done crossing, because of the fog of war.
Problem 3, english layer force to park a navy stronger that her enemies combined during the whole game!

Think about the scenario where france has allied netherlands, spain or portugal.

Quite so, think about that scenario. Just how much of a chance would England have stood, historically? That's why England was always the premier balance-of-power player in Europe : To prevent any such alliance from coming to pass. That's why Trafalgar was such a decisive battle, because it prevented the Spanish navy from linking up with the French, and thereby creating a force capable of defeating the Home Fleet.

And yes, England does need a Navy stronger than her enemies', or the ability to keep her foes from combining in the Channel. That is to say, England will need allies. England will need to get involved in Europe; not necessarily grabbing provinces, but adjusting alliances, subsidising Prussia to keep France in check, keeping the Dutch either down or up, as circumstances warrant - in short, playing historically, as opposed to the hands-off colonial style.

The Two-Power standard was there for a good reason; but before England had the economic might to maintain such a fleet, there was diplomacy.

 

[unmerged(3158)]

Those straits are there for TWO major reasons..

1) To promote English/French rivalry. They are almost always on decent terms in MP games and England always stays out of European war. Now they will be forced to be anti-french, and not just sit on their island and cash in money from colonies.

2) To make Spanish players do what Spain did in history. Grab parts of Northern Africa, and OPPOSE the Ottoman expansion in the Mediterranean.

I hate to agree with Johan in this respect, but he is right. England normally tends to stay out of war's and just hypetech, unless you have a relatively competent player who will involve himself in continental affair's. Normally though, England only usually involves themselves when the Spanish Succession war happen's, and this is because they at this point have a superb leader in the Duke of Marlborough.

To be honest, a competent France can keep England semi-friendly and keep England docile while France can in turn, turn their attention on Spain and Austria. This straight now force's England to take an active part in continental politic's and more importantly force's them to choose a side instead of remaining out of reach and out of mind. Which historically they were a very influencial factor in continental politic's with the advent of the defeat of the Spanish Armada.

As for the straight in Gibralter and Tangier's. I approve of this. For the most part before MP game moderator's started offering Culture's to lure nation's into land's they wouldn't normally go into. Spain for the most part would stay out of North Africa. Why take any of those land's and increase your stab cost's and reduce your tech speed? For the most part most Spanish player's would refrain from going into North Africa. And I would have to admit, I would be one of these player's. There just wasn't any clear profit from doing so, with the one exception of preventing the OE from going into West Africa and gaining more MP from it.

Now there is a clear tangable reason for going into North Africa. More MP, which has always been the achille's heel of Spain. Spain that should be able to match France 1 for 1, yet because of their MP situation, is sorely lacking in that regard. Spain during the 1500's to the 1600's was the dominant continental power in Europe. Had huge far flung possesion's around the world and controlled sizable territories in Europe. Yet Spain could never match France for MP which is a significant weakness in some respect's.

And finally, Spain in North Africa provide's a desperately needed bulwark for Austria in helping them fend off the Ottoman aggression. Openning up a new front for the OE is something that will help balance out the uneven situation with the OE having relatively few enemies to contend with, unless a dedicated coaltion goes out and fight's them.

I don't know if these changes is the right solution, but it may be a step in the right direction.

Lastly I am hoping that BB will indeed have a far less effect on civil war's, since in my opinion, this was the worst thing that was added into the last patch. Alot of editting had to be done to fix nation's that were over the limit. Instant civil war's and multiple civil war's in under a month was a very extreme measure.

I would also like to see the free subject slider adjustment's to stab rolled back to their previous level's. I remember in my England game, I had under 9k stab, the last patch change, brought my stab up to 17k. Nearly doubled my stab, and I wasn't the worst off nation in our game. Spain and Port both had over 20k stab costs.

I'm not a huge fan of these patch's. more emphatically, most of the time, I would not want to see any further patch's be rolled out. These patch's cater's to intrest group's that resemble the lobby group's in the United State's. One has to wonder why certain patch's even come out if its to balance a game system or to satisfy a pet peeve.

But knowing that Johan is dedicated enough to keep releasing new patch's. which is highly commendable. I would like to see some restraint on caving into change's that would radically change the way we play our game.

Duma

 

[doktarr]

I too find this one is a bit too much. Gibraltar's and Ulster's are good, and very useful,

I disagree. Gibraltar encourages Spain to essentially take Portugal's empire, and colonize down the west African coast for the manpower. STRONGLY encourages it, in fact. I can't see a serious Spain player NOT doing this.

As far as Ulster goes, don't we already give England a foothold? The problem with Ireland is not that it's too hard to conquer, it's that everybody and their brother (Iberians, Denmark, Burgundy, et cetera) seems to grab a piece. We should be strengthening Ireland's defenses, not weakening them.

but I'm afrait this one would lead AI France to invade too easily AI England.

That, and France should have to actually load up an army in ships and risk those troops in transit if it wants to pull off an invasion. I don't see this helping gameplay, except perhaps by helping England a little in the HYW.

IMHO, other straits are much more needed, e.g. :
- Rhodes, to help AI OE to invade the Knights

I'm not sure this makes more sense than the others. The Ottomans never attacked Rhodes using simple barges, did they? It's a fair distance.

- Corfu, as the distance with mainland is very small, and Venice tend to build great armies there without using them

I think gameplay is on your side here.

- Hainan, for the same reason, and China has a hard time to put down rebels there

Although it's a bit far to be realistic, it would help China, I agree.