-
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.
- Status
This is utterly silly, I really hope it can be modded to have only the 5 great powers.
I don't understand, that just add some stuff if you play a minor nations? If there is only 5 great powers, that change absolutely nothing to the game if you play a major
I am pretty sure we will be able too, but then I think the secound tier countries should be able to have goals aswell (not for winning alone ofc)
I am still laughing about Sweden winning this alone
but well Its better with more than few.. Still I had pref. the 5 major and 4-8 secoundaries
Well, While Sweden was defeated in war against Russia, they were pretty big and influential, to allow them the ability to try to relive their glorious days, that happened century ago. Actually winning, would probably be really tought, if not next to impossible.
Ottomans and Spain, again, while not the strongest dogs in the pack, surely could try finghting for uplifting their power and influence.
The way i see it, is basically similar to Victoria 2 score system, where you`r goal is not necesery to win it all, but to significantly improve your nation`s position among the other powers, and having country-specific goals, allows you just that.
The status, IMO more related to relative size, and ambilions, not by having at least a reasonable probability
to actually win.
Ottomans and Spain, again, while not the strongest dogs in the pack, surely could try finghting for uplifting their power and influence.
The way i see it, is basically similar to Victoria 2 score system, where you`r goal is not necesery to win it all, but to significantly improve your nation`s position among the other powers, and having country-specific goals, allows you just that.
The status, IMO more related to relative size, and ambilions, not by having at least a reasonable probability
to actually win.
Last edited:
I guess this would work better if the big 8 objectives was not always to become the major leading power, for example reforming and restoring the Ottoman and having a more local set of objectives without being necessary to overcome all the major powers could be considered a victory condition. Because certainly Spain, the Ottomans and Sweden played important roles in this era, but in such a short period of time at best they could restore some of their former glory and not single handedlycoming out as the top dog
But that's the problem, It would be ok with improving the nations position but they clearly state that to win you must become the dominant land and sea power.
But that's the problem, It would be ok with improving the nations position but they clearly state that to win you must become the dominant land and sea power.
But the thing is that there is only five great powers. Why add 3 more then? And if so, why not add in Portugal, Denmark and Naples as well? Makes no sense.
It makes plenty of sense. Sweden, Spain and the Ottoman were all Great Powers within a century before the game's timeframe.
For example, Sweden still has Finland. It's fall from status in European politics come in two waves: the Great Northern War when it loses Estonia, Livonia and Ingria; and the Finnish War, which historically happened 3 years into the beginning of the game, so it hasn't completely lost its status and still had a chance before it lost Finland. Spain, meanwhile, still has its huge colonial empire in the Americas. It's certainly much weaker since after the War of Spanish succession but, once again, the potential is still there since its last nail in its empire's coffin is not yet in by the beginning of the game. For the Ottomans... Well, I guess it's just to add some non-European flavour?
For example, Sweden still has Finland. It's fall from status in European politics come in two waves: the Great Northern War when it loses Estonia, Livonia and Ingria; and the Finnish War, which historically happened 3 years into the beginning of the game, so it hasn't completely lost its status and still had a chance before it lost Finland. Spain, meanwhile, still has its huge colonial empire in the Americas. It's certainly much weaker since after the War of Spanish succession but, once again, the potential is still there since its last nail in its empire's coffin is not yet in by the beginning of the game. For the Ottomans... Well, I guess it's just to add some non-European flavour?
France was not a military top dog before the revolution either. It surely was powerfull, but it got it`s ass kicked by Prussia in 7-years war, and was hardly contender to be capable of withstanding the joined assauld of Europe.
You need to understand that at that time, upgrading the military was much easier and took far less time than it takes today.
Yes, but do you have to win every game you play?
The warscore system just gives you a better ability to judje your position, and a reason for countries to fight, basically forcing a wars to happen.
As mentioned earlier in DD, there is very significant probability, that no nation will achieve total dominance by the end of the game.
It is the ultimate goal of any nation, but Napoleonic Period is more about an epic journey to get one, but ultimately unsuccesfull.
Last edited:
There is plenty of other nations that had "glory times" 1-2 centuries before that!! that just not justify making them "can win by themselves" cat
Finland is not worth much tbh, its a faulty argument
"sorry finnish people"There was no way Sweden could win irl alone!! it makes no sense making them a great power.
But thats not really the main problem I have, I would much rather have seen a goal for the secoundary nations aswell!! instead of just upping from 5 majors to 8 or do as V2 (make secondaries able to swap places if a major nation gets beated to death or if they become stronger than the 8th.. but well I see the arguement about this being too short for this.. still its rather stupid too add extra natons as majors just to fill a void (looks at Sweden) I feel that the reason they too in Sweden as a major was to either. A have a major in Scandinavia. B. favourisme (B is not something I see that often from Pdox so well I doubt thats why)
But lets see
the game is not out yet and stuff can chance, who knowns it might be fun to play a secoundary anyway etc.
Lol.There is plenty of other nations that had "glory times" 1-2 centuries before that!! that just not justify making them "can win by themselves" cat
Finland is not worth much tbh, its a faulty argument
There was no way Sweden could win irl alone!! it makes no sense making them a great power.
But thats not really the main problem I have, I would much rather have seen a goal for the secoundary nations aswell!! instead of just upping from 5 majors to 8 or do as V2 (make secondaries able to swap places if a major nation gets beated to death or if they become stronger than the 8th.. but well I see the arguement about this being too short for this.. still its rather stupid too add extra natons as majors just to fill a void (looks at Sweden) I feel that the reason they too in Sweden as a major was to either. A have a major in Scandinavia. B. favourisme (B is not something I see that often from Pdox so well I doubt thats why)
But lets see
Why not to make 1 major, France. GB getting enought army to get land dominance is wildly implausible, same goes for Russia and Navy.
Austria&Prussia are basically side kicks anyway, no way on earth Prussia, Austria, or Sweden could pull of something similar to 7-years war, that Prussia did 30 years before the start of the game, or France, a decade before the start of the game :rofl:
Now, did I mention, that they need to pull of both naval and land dominance to "Win"?
I know that the main power of napoleonic era are five, but watching the thing from a larga point of view, in europe exist other important countries during the timeframe, that can't be ignored, and that have the potential to play a major role (Ottomans and Spain even weakened, have the right to be in this category). About Sweden Versus Denmark, Denmark is cool but I think that Sweden give flavour, becouse is more recognized by non-scandinavian people as the northern-baltic power, since the thirty year war, so for many is know like a country cool to play in a game like this.
Whether one likes it or not, Spain still had all of Latin America plus the Philippines under its belt in 1805. The Ottomans
had a great amount of territory in 1805. That made both of these countries World Powers at the time of the game. Gee, if I
remember correctly a lot of the ships wasted by the French in the battle of Trafalgar were Spanish ships.
had a great amount of territory in 1805. That made both of these countries World Powers at the time of the game. Gee, if I
remember correctly a lot of the ships wasted by the French in the battle of Trafalgar were Spanish ships.
Ottoman and Spain indeed had potential!! they were no tiny minors! but Sweden however was far behind them! I don't agree with your flavour argument and if they made all majors in coming games on popularity and reknown it would be a weird set up strong countries..
As I wrote in the other thread, I've much rather seen 5 big majors! and then a huge tier of secoundaries (that with the right gameplay also could get a minor "win" by progression etc. solo) but with set goals as a minor and possibility to join one of the big ones.
That would certainly add to the game more than this..
Its also not the same to join one of the major 8's in this game as in HOI IE. because in HOI you join a faction! in this you join a country! (again making it sound silly when you look at)
Portugal or Denmark-Norway joining IE Sweden!!! why would they! they are almost as strong as Sweden (notice almost)
But who knows it might be fun playing a minor and it might be super fun all in all being a major
we can't know for certain untill we have tried the game or seens more DD.. I guess if its to ones total dislike that the minors have no chance to progress etc, one could always mod it in..
I do like the Victory conditions for the major 8!! I like how there is different goals in terms of cities to hold etc. Can't wait to hear more about the game.
Ottoman and Spain indeed had potential!! they were no tiny minors! but Sweden however was far behind them! I don't agree with your flavour argument and if they made all majors in coming games on popularity and reknown it would be a weird set up strong countries..
As I wrote in the other thread, I've much rather seen 5 big majors! and then a huge tier of secoundaries (that with the right gameplay also could get a minor "win" by progression etc. solo) but with set goals as a minor and possibility to join one of the big ones.
That would certainly add to the game more than this..
Its also not the same to join one of the major 8's in this game as in HOI IE. because in HOI you join a faction! in this you join a country! (again making it sound silly when you look at)
Portugal or Denmark-Norway joining IE Sweden!!! why would they! they are almost as strong as Sweden (notice almost)
But who knows it might be fun playing a minor and it might be super fun all in all being a major
chance to progress etc, one could always mod it in..
I do like the Victory conditions for the major 8!! I like how there is different goals in terms of cities to hold etc. Can't wait to hear more about the game.
I understood your points. However we need to know better the mechanics of this game to judge to judge the "join country" victory.
Indeed thats why I said we have to wait for more information. Its good too see you understand my points.
I still would be disappointed if you had to become a satellite state to join in victory
but you are right lets wait for more information.
Thus setting the theme for the majority of AARs to come: "AndorrAAR: Victory as a microstate"
- Status