Napoleonic France path probably worst of them all

[fallgelb22061940]

First off, I have to say that I absolutely love ahistorical playghtroughts. I am impressed with Spanish tree, and French one is not too far behind. New trees are also great, especially Turkish one. But there is one path that is just bad. That is Napoleonic France. I will point some stuff out
First of all, why would new Napoleon be same as millitary commander as his grandpa or whatever? There were multiple cases, like extremely good military commander and king and then his son is a disgrace, best example maybe would be Napoleon III.
Next thing is this: Napoleon was not royal blood. He was not someone from well known dynasty like Bourbons were, and nobody really wanted his return. For most of the monarchists, he was nobody, they wanted someone with blue blood. For other factions, they didn't want anybody to claim the throne.
After that we have the gameplay issue. Democratic socialist gives you quite a bit of factories, as well as bonuses for stability. Democratic nationalist, while it is less powerful, has some nice production bonuses, as well as the Laisess Faire which is really useful focus. Both democratic paths have way to make continental alliance, or, if you want, just to play historical or form alliance with Italy and UK to contain Germany. About communist branch, it is powerful, mostly the independent commie or stalinist commie, since you can gangbang Germany on both sides, or have some nice bonus. I will talk more about the independent communist branch later. Next we have fascist branches. You have west european alliance option, and you prevent 2nd front with Italy. Next we have collaborationist branch, which I personally dont like, but is not that bad, I just dont like idea of having France and Germany in same faction for that time period. And then come monarchist branches. You have Orleanist which is best for stability stuff. You also have Legitimists which annexes Spain for free. And then you have 2 worst branches: Independent communist and Napoleonic. Independent communist is kinda better, but they are similar. Both branches give you wargoals against Britain, which is literally suicide, since if you dont have Britain as ally, you are pretty much screwed. Then you get wargoal against Germany, which is useless since they attack you anyway. Then against Russia, which is pretty late game, since it takes time for you to get there. Both are just world conquest. It is just my thought, feel free to tell me if I overlooked something in this explanation.

 

[TalyonUngol]

I was going to argue against you for your title but since you are just talking about the lore or historical accuracy then i have nothing to say.

Gameplay wise. Napoleon is the strongest of France's paths. The manpower alone is pheneomonal.

 

[fallgelb22061940]

Well, I had no problem as France with manpower
I encourage immigration and set extensive conscription
I played multiple times as Napoleon France and always died of Germany, even when I conquered Britain

 

[TalyonUngol]

Well, I had no problem as France with manpower
I encourage immigration and set extensive conscription
I played multiple times as Napoleon France and always died of Germany, even when I conquered Britain

That's... just France. Lol. No other path is going to 'save' you from Germany unless you are good enough to stop them.

I don't remember my conscription law, but it probably is on extensive too. And I am 80% Positive t his is all 40W divisions. THIS is Napoleon France's power. Its the manpower ALONE that makes it worth it. The other ones are horrible you joking?


The other Non-aligned paths are awful. Secure the Crown of Spain? Okay so you get cores on the Spanish territories. Fine, whatever. That's all and dandy, but the Orleanist!? You get stability and PP gain,two buildings slots and wargoals... and you think NAPOLEON is the worst? You're out of your mind if you think .10 daily gain and stability gain is worth taking over 3% moer recruitable population, which is a free limited conscription on top of what you have, on top of a 25% increase to recruitable population factor.

Then combine that with the removal of the Full Employment? WOWZERS you get Manpower coming out the woodworks.


Now the facist side... I don't like these. I don't like the idea of making a faction and bringing people into it. Its more divisions that I will have on my borders clogging up supply, it's more people I have to worry about taking the territory I want... so I don't like them. The only one that appeals to me for the faction thing is going with the soviet union. THAT's something different.

But you're telling me that Napoleon is the worst is... just no.

 

[fallgelb22061940]

When I play France, I always go Democratic little Entente (except in multiplayer where I go Stresa front), I play communist Stalinist, I play Fascist Latin Entente or if in multiplayer, I play Alfonsist. I played at first Napoleon and then I understood it is weak and it is just a world conquest. In every way previously mentioned I killed Germany with little effort. But alone against Germany is a bit of an overkill

 

[TalyonUngol]

When I play France, I always go Democratic little Entente (except in multiplayer where I go Stresa front), I play communist Stalinist, I play Fascist Latin Entente or if in multiplayer, I play Alfonsist. I played at first Napoleon and then I understood it is weak and it is just a world conquest

How... is it weak if its a World Conquest? That would mean it's a super strong nation. I'm confused.

 

[fallgelb22061940]

It is weak, it only offers you wargoals and at the end some manpower. They could've at least given some traits to Napoleon, since he as the leader is weaker than Laval which you have earlier.

 

[TalyonUngol]

It is weak, it only offers you wargoals and at the end some manpower. They could've at least given some traits to Napoleon, since he as the leader is weaker than Laval which you have earlier.

Okay and trait's don't necessarily mean a nation is strong either. I rather have the manpower than the 20% base stability and weekly stability from the Orleanists. I rather have the manpower over just having cores on spain and thinking thats it. I mean, I guess over all spain has some decent manpower but still. 3% + 25% recruitable population is just... it's great.

And than you just get faction members like... Italy... the worst Major in the game... Just no.

But these are our opinions on the game. We both have very different playstyles.

 

[fallgelb22061940]

I like not having to worry about Alpine front and Africa. In both independent communist and Napoleon branches, you are alone against all 3 major factions. You first kill Allies, then kill Axis and then kill Komintern. Ok, manpower is good but France has no industry on start to sustain larger army, it has less military factories than some minor nations. Also, I avoid making empty divisions just to have them as meatshields, only people without guns, since I sometimes feel bad about it. Italy is not a bad ally if you are France, sure better than Britain.

 

[Vlad123]

Okay and trait's don't necessarily mean a nation is strong either. I rather have the manpower than the 20% base stability and weekly stability from the Orleanists. I rather have the manpower over just having cores on spain and thinking thats it. I mean, I guess over all spain has some decent manpower but still. 3% + 25% recruitable population is just... it's great.

And than you just get faction members like... Italy... the worst Major in the game... Just no.

But these are our opinions on the game. We both have very different playstyles.

Italy wors major of the game? Seriusly? Only in my game the 70/80% kick off british?

 

[Mackus]

Napoleonic France is meme path. Nothing more, nothing less.

 

[TalyonUngol]

Italy wors major of the game? Seriusly? Only in my game the 70/80% kick off british?

I've not seen THAT in a very long time.

It's very rare I see a competent Italy but I also play with the unhistorical focuses checked so they dont have big bad Germany all the time either.

 

[Matoro_TBS]

Napoleon's path is probably the strongest one. You get early war goals on Belgium and Netherlands BEFORE Sudetenland. You can just annex both countries and puppet Dutch East Indies when the world tension is so low they can't even join an alliance. Timed correctly, you have weeks after capitulation of Benelux and the Sudeten crisis - now, stand with the Czechs and you will get Germany in two-front war in 1938 with vastly stronger France and longer frontline. Captured Belgian and Dutch infantry equipment is usually easily counted in tens of thousands, and combined to Napoleon's final manpower bonus you can rapidly multiply the size of your army.

So yeah, the point of the war goals here is to strike first, when the Germans are still weak.

If you don't annex Benelux and just wait for Germany to come, yeah, then Napoleon is probably the worst path... but that's your own fault really.

 

[TalyonUngol]

Napoleon's path is probably the strongest one. You get early war goals on Belgium and Netherlands BEFORE Sudetenland. You can just annex both countries and puppet Dutch East Indies when the world tension is so low they can't even join an alliance. Timed correctly, you have weeks after capitulation of Benelux and the Sudeten crisis - now, stand with the Czechs and you will get Germany in two-front war in 1938 with vastly stronger France and longer frontline. Captured Belgian and Dutch infantry equipment is usually easily counted in tens of thousands, and combined to Napoleon's final manpower bonus you can rapidly multiply the size of your army.

So yeah, the point of the war goals here is to strike first, when the Germans are still weak.

If you don't annex Benelux and just wait for Germany to come, yeah, then Napoleon is probably the worst path... but that's your own fault really.

And if you manage to get across the sea into the UK as well? Delicious resources from the colonies and mainland!

 

[Tsavong]

Another option is to do what is suggested in the wiki :

Take belgium and netherlands, then wait for Germany to declare on poland and drag Great Britain into the war. Then declare war on GB yourself and join axis.

 

[fallgelb22061940]

Another option is to do what is suggested in the wiki :

Take belgium and netherlands, then wait for Germany to declare on poland and drag Great Britain into the war. Then declare war on GB yourself and join axis.

I like this idea, you know, I think it is best idea ever

 

[Secret Master]

I played multiple times as Napoleon France and always died of Germany, even when I conquered Britain

If I can defeat Germany with historical focuses and occupying nothing but the parts of Italy and Germany I occupy as I beat the Axis, there's no reason you should lose to Germany if you occupy Britain's industrial base. The sheer number of extra factories should make it an easy win.

If you manage to put a collaboration government on Britain before capitulating them, sheesh, I can only imagine how many tanks and planes you can throw at the Germans.

 

[Pellaken]

The one thing that drives me nuts in that path is the splitting of the german states. I'm planning a mod to fix it. (and already have half done)

 

[TalyonUngol]

The one thing that drives me nuts in that path is the splitting of the german states. I'm planning a mod to fix it. (and already have half done)

Yea... I won't ever be doing that focus again if i play Napoleon. Screw the faction building.

 

[DystopianAlphaOmega]

First of all, why would new Napoleon be same as millitary commander as his grandpa or whatever?

He doesn't become a military commander though. And leaders using their last name/achievements of ancestors to gain political power is very much heard of in both democracies and non-democracies (see Napoleon III for example).

There were multiple cases, like extremely good military commander and king and then his son is a disgrace, best example maybe would be Napoleon III.

Napoleon III was Napoleon I's nephew. Napoleon II was his son. Nonetheless, the bloodline of a Napoleon does give him some political prominence/legitimacy and dreams of Imperial conquest to live up to his ancestors (though it's admittedly rather exaggerated in all the wargoals you get. It would be more likely for a restored Napoleonic dynasty to behave like Napoleon III, more opportunistically and still trying to stay in Britain's good graces, which means no messing with the Low Countries). As for support, it wouldn't have been unheard of for some to prefer restoring a Napoleon over the even more transient House of Orleans or the off-branch Bourbons that agreed to forsake the French throne. Realistically, a Napoleonic dynasty should have the option to choose between the more Orleans-style enlightened autocratic liberalism and a more absolutist approach, much like in Kaiserreich, but I digress.

As others have said, having to deal with Germany is a general France issue, regardless of ideology. While some ideologies give you allies, Napoleonic France lets quickly secure the industry and defencive positions of the Low Countries. Well that and the manpower, which doesn't hurt.