Machiavelli : Europe Arising

[BiB]

Originally posted by Slargos
Yes, but they're numbers in the game engine, mr I-will-defend-it-to-my-last-keyboard

A VOC nation in reality was doomed to fail, and rather quickly too, I would think. In the game it would actually be far stronger than a European power. For that reason alone it should not be done. It is in no way historically accurate or with precedent.

 

[kurtbrian]

Originally posted by Slargos
Yes, but they're numbers in the game engine, mr I-will-defend-it-to-my-last-keyboard

I wonder how many keyboards BiB has worn out over the years in here...

 

[unmerged(5834)]

Originally posted by Slargos
Of course, I was arguging from a RP point of view.

I know how the game engine works.

Especially the game engine is the reason why you should not be allowed to move your capital. In real life it happened to Hungary also that the capital moved to another city because Buda(pest) was occupied.
But the game engine bind some factors to your capital (MP for example) which are not present in RL.

So if you move your capital in EU2 it should be a desparate handling with a lot of disadvantages.

 

[Peter Ebbesen]

Originally posted by Mulliman
That should be considered a victory for the HRE and France beaten....

Strictly speaking, counting the two provinces diploannexed as parts of the spoils of war for Austria-Italia seems a bit farfetched.

That would be like stating the the French gains in the war of 1701 were Alsace, Cologne, Lorraine, Mainz, Pfalz, and Schwyz, while, in fact they annexed all these lands over a 15 year period from 1700 onwards.

Re manpower: I do not have the actual figures on current manpower pool totals, but it is true that France is behind in the building of CCs, and probably in pool size as well, since France is quality and Austria-Italia is quantity. France probably did not want to increase inflation like Austria-Italia did, by running full inflation for for some twenty-five years plus in order to afford conscription centres (and fund Prussia) like Austria-Italia has done. If the French ever decide they are willing to face a bit of inflation, they can easily fill the rest of their provinces with CCs. And even if they do not, quality is not to be scoffed at, as the encounters between the quality French armies and the quantity Austro-Italian armies have shown. Already good leaders when granted a fire/shock bonus become positively scary, and assaults on quality fortresses are harder as well.

 

[BiB]

Originally posted by Peter Ebbesen
Strictly speaking, counting the two provinces diploannexed as parts of the spoils of war for Austria-Italia seems a bit farfetched.

That would be like stating the the French gains in the war of 1701 were Alsace, Cologne, Lorraine, Mainz, Pfalz, and Schwyz, while, in fact they annexed all these lands over a 15 year period from 1700 onwards.

Re manpower: I do not have the actual figures on current manpower pool totals, but it is true that France is behind in the building of CCs, and probably in pool size as well, since France is quality and Austria-Italia is quantity. France probably did not want to increase inflation like Austria-Italia did, by running full inflation for for some twenty-five years plus in order to afford conscription centres (and fund Prussia) like Austria-Italia has done. If the French ever decide they are willing to face a bit of inflation, they can easily fill the rest of their provinces with CCs. And even if they do not, quality is not to be scoffed at, as the encounters between the quality French armies and the quantity Austro-Italian armies have shown. Already good leaders when granted a fire/shock bonus become positively scary, and assaults on quality fortresses are harder as well.

Well, if the French finish all their CCs, methinks u got a legitimate gripe there, but in the past war that hardly mattered

I ain't counting Baden really, but that still leaves 3 extra provinces (and good ones) which is excellent.

 

[Peter Ebbesen]

Originally posted by BiB
Well, if the French finish all their CCs, methinks u got a legitimate gripe there, but in the past war that hardly mattered

Well, it is not like I have had all the CCs that you see in 1769 all the time, BiB. Just like France, I have been building up - I was just willing to invest more of my sparse resources in it, which meant I maintained a small lead. Additionally, you seem to have an unwholesome focus on the manpower without considering the quality of the manpower, and, let me tell you this, ever since leaders began benefiting from dp fire/shock boni, quality has been a great force equalizer, as was seen in several major battles in the war.

 

[TheArchduke]

Location: Internet Cafe in Cadiz

So if anyone would be so nice as to make a little summary for me it would be nice to read in some days. Seems like Holland got off the hook and Poland stabbed Prussia-Austria once again, no?

Well it was to be expected really.

 

[unmerged(10146)]

Originally posted by Kalpeti
Move your capital to anywhere you want is not THAT historical IMHO.

Well, initially BiB was in favour for that solution. Perhaps mainly because my other one (involving Spain) was even wilder! Or/and perhaps he thought Peter would never accept it.
Nevertheless, BiB pointed out there was a historrical precedent tothat: Portugal at some point moved the capital to Brasil. And Portugal and Holland are probably the only nation I had in mind when I mentioned SMALL nations.

 

[unmerged(10146)]

Originally posted by Slargos
OTOH, if all dutch provinces were occupied/annexed, wouldn't it make sense for the dutch to move their base of operations to another area, until such a time that they can reclaim their capital?

Exactly! I still think it would be much more fun to do that. At least for me: I checked out and New Holland naval support limit would be not 220 as of Holland but 350!

 

[unmerged(10146)]

Originally posted by kurtbrian
well, it would shift the powerbalance somewhat...

You would all of have it a lot easier colonizing in Asia, I also belive you would get more manpower, but I'm not sure...

Colonising was over. Holland is not interested in more territory that she couldn't deffend. And I mentioned some limitations that could be agreed upon, like forbidding conquest of China or so. Although, I am not sure how much manpower those wrong culture wrong religion provinces would provide.
And even if masive conquests in Asia were allowed, how long do you think such a large New Holland (with for example Mughals and China incorporated) could wage a war? I am sure revolts there would be a HUGE problem.

But it would be an interesting experiment for sure.

 

[unmerged(10146)]

Originally posted by Slargos
It wouldn't be the dutch *people* though. It would just be the ruling caste. They've already got a lot of dutchmen living in indonesia...

Exactly! Dutch navy was in fact VOC fleet anyway for example. And VOC had moeny. So VOC=Holland. In a moment of crises capital move to Indonesia. What's so wrong here?
I mean for the future game. Or would anyone want to play (after we finnish this history) anothe one with VOC=Holland?

 

[unmerged(10146)]

Originally posted by kurtbrian
Yes, and I don't think the Dutch Government would remain in Holland if it was occupied by the eeevil germans.

But from there to surrendering their capital in a peace deal....

In fact Peter agreed Holland province to remain Dutch. Zeeland and Friesland were to go to Prussia and Geldre to Austria.

 

[unmerged(10146)]

Originally posted by BiB
Considering they can't ever lose their capital unless annexed and when ur capital when occupied doesn't interfere with government there's no need for that.

You try having a capital practically on the border and besieged a month after the war starts EVERY SINGLE TIME

 

[unmerged(10146)]

Originally posted by BiB
A VOC nation in reality was doomed to fail, and rather quickly too, I would think. In the game it would actually be far stronger than a European power. For that reason alone it should not be done. It is in no way historically accurate or with precedent.

As I feared! Spain would attack me before I could build more ships and much needed CCs

 

[unmerged(10146)]

Originally posted by Kalpeti
Especially the game engine is the reason why you should not be allowed to move your capital. In real life it happened to Hungary also that the capital moved to another city because Buda(pest) was occupied.
But the game engine bind some factors to your capital (MP for example) which are not present in RL.

So if you move your capital in EU2 it should be a desparate handling with a lot of disadvantages.

And what was NOT desparate in the Dutch situation before yesterday's session?

 

[unmerged(10146)]

Originally posted by TheArchduke
Location: Internet Cafe in Cadiz

So if anyone would be so nice as to make a little summary for me it would be nice to read in some days. Seems like Holland got off the hook and Poland stabbed Prussia-Austria once again, no?

Well it was to be expected really.

Be gone, backstabbing Prussian who invaded neutral Holland with all his hordes, completely doscarding the non-aggression agreement!

 

[BiB]

Originally posted by Peter Ebbesen
Well, it is not like I have had all the CCs that you see in 1769 all the time, BiB. Just like France, I have been building up - I was just willing to invest more of my sparse resources in it, which meant I maintained a small lead. Additionally, you seem to have an unwholesome focus on the manpower without considering the quality of the manpower, and, let me tell you this, ever since leaders began benefiting from dp fire/shock boni, quality has been a great force equalizer, as was seen in several major battles in the war.

Aha, u admit, u always had a lead (but it hasn't always been as smal as u try to make it out to be )! Also the fire bonus really gets a bit minimalised when u both have 4-4-5 leaders running around, really, I feel for the sucker nations with great leaders

 

[BiB]

Originally posted by Barnius
Well, initially BiB was in favour for that solution. Perhaps mainly because my other one (involving Spain) was even wilder! Or/and perhaps he thought Peter would never accept it.
Nevertheless, BiB pointed out there was a historrical precedent tothat: Portugal at some point moved the capital to Brasil. And Portugal and Holland are probably the only nation I had in mind when I mentioned SMALL nations.

Yes, during a war to continue operations and to move back from the moment it was possible (and Brazil is a lot closer to Portugal than Indonesia to Holland both in culture and distance). U just wanted to become a latin Asian nation, for which there totally is no precedent.

 

[BiB]

Originally posted by Barnius
Exactly! Dutch navy was in fact VOC fleet anyway for example. And VOC had moeny. So VOC=Holland. In a moment of crises capital move to Indonesia. What's so wrong here?
I mean for the future game. Or would anyone want to play (after we finnish this history) anothe one with VOC=Holland?

Because such organisations as the VOC eventually all had to admit to teh fact they needed their European nation to survive whiel in the game it would be the other way around.

 

[BiB]

Originally posted by Barnius
You try having a capital practically on the border and besieged a month after the war starts EVERY SINGLE TIME

Then expand or whatever. Having amsterdam as capital in Holland when u ARE the Dutch is just sommink u will have to live with.