Paradox Office Multiplayer Campaign V

[FieldMedic]

British diplomacy has worked wonders for them this game. We'll see if it holds up going into the final stretch with them sitting pretty in second place.

 

[ForzaA]

So, it turns out that I want Britain dead.

Curious thing that, I had no idea I wanted Britain dead..

I am now very confused, and wondering if there's a mole somewhere who is withholding critical information from me.

 

[ragingrondo12]

So, it turns out that I want Britain dead.

Curious thing that, I had no idea I wanted Britain dead..

I am now very confused, and wondering if there's a mole somewhere who is withholding critical information from me.

 

[MCBC6]

Does anybody else really just want to see the Mughals ally Ming and annihilate the Bahmanis?

 

[Roflpotamus]

In the twitch, all I can hear is the music with some very faint muttering of voices in the background.

Anyone else experience this?

 

[funguide]

Mamluks need the 4000 point card and so do GB. Whoever gets it will be easily able to secure 2nd place. So yeah Mamluks, GB is now your greatest enemy. But a war will also mean that Fritaly may declare a war on burgundy and get back its victory card.....chaos will ensue. I think best possible outcome for GB is to have Mam luks be the guarantor against any refusal by ming and Russia to give the cards, and simply give Mam luks what they want.

 

[CassCD]

Britain has acquired its position as #2 entirely on the backs of his allies alone. Abandon him and Britain will hemorrhage. You've shown your worth as Britain's lapdog, Burgundy. Show that cowardly, weak fool what it truly means to work hard and sacrifice for victory! Send him back to the precious isles he clings to and hides upon!

 

[Groogy]

In the Year of Our Lord 1762

####################
## STATS FOR MP ###
####################
Current Score

1. Bahmanis 15165 (+9.96)
2. Great Britain 11432 (+6.52)
3. Mughals 10920 (+6.86)
4. Mamluks 9770 (+8.58)
5. Italy 8359 (+4.15)
6. Burgundy 7632 (+5.15)
7. France 6827 (+2.68)
8. Ming 6375 (+5.15)
9. Ottomans 6325 (+0.37)
10. Russia 5661 (+2.31)
11. Portugal 4812 (+2.17)
12. Denmark 4448 (+1.37)
13. Spain 3894 (+1.03)
14. Poland 677 (+0.00)
15. Bohemia 359 (+0.00)
16. Lancastria 62 (+0.00)
17. Gotland 26 (+0.00)
18. Spanish Apalnosee 25 (+0.00)
19. Pasai 22 (+0.00)
20. Maryland 14 (+0.00)

Development

1. Bahmanis 1952
2. Ming 1800
3. Portugal 1800
4. Mamluks 1711
5. Mughals 1599
6. Russia 1473
7. Italy 1461
8. Great Britain 1396
9. Ottomans 1065
10. Burgundy 1045
11. Spain 856
12. France 816
13. Bohemia 650
14. Poland 646
15. Denmark 614
16. Spanish Apalnosee 573
17. British Frink 494
18. New Francia 359
19. Queensland 322
20. Spanish Rewhannock 286

Income

1. Bahmanis 446.73
2. Mamluks 371.77
3. Great Britain 259.05
4. Mughals 235.02
5. Ming 229.97
6. Italy 223.84
7. Burgundy 176.00
8. France 155.54
9. Russia 137.64
10. Portugal 136.33
11. Denmark 132.36
12. Spain 103.10
13. Ottomans 101.82
14. Bohemia 82.02
15. Poland 57.84
16. Spanish Apalnosee 51.25
17. British Frink 37.25
18. Spanish Rewhannock 28.88
19. Queensland 28.57
20. New Francia 24.33

Max. Manpower

1. Russia 272K
2. Ming 252K
3. Italy 227K
4. Bahmanis 226K
5. Mughals 204K
6. Mamluks 197K
7. Burgundy 177K
8. Great Britain 136K
9. Ottomans 134K
10. Bohemia 133K
11. France 107K
12. Denmark 98,851
13. Spain 98,536
14. Poland 97,991
15. Spanish Apalnosee 78,937
16. Portugal 66,841
17. British Frink 55,943
18. Mamlukean Sattisa 48,096
19. Spanish Rewhannock 39,000
20. New Francia 38,597

Standing Army

1. Bahmanis 472K
2. Mamluks 389K
3. Italy 354K
4. Ming 353K
5. Mughals 338K
6. Russia 230K
7. Burgundy 201K
8. Great Britain 192K
9. Ottomans 163K
10. France 149K
11. Denmark 118K
12. Spain 113K
13. Poland 112K
14. Bohemia 108K
15. Spanish Apalnosee 66,000
16. British Frink 55,000
17. Queensland 34,000
18. Spanish Rewhannock 31,000
19. Portuguese Australia 29,000
20. Maryland 29,000

War Fleet

1. Bahmanis 115/0
2. Great Britain 97/14
3. Mamluks 103/0
4. Burgundy 52/0
5. Portugal 51/0
6. Russia 45/0
7. Mughals 34/0
8. Denmark 18/13
9. Spain 28/0
10. Ming 18/2
11. France 20/0
12. Spanish Apalnosee 11/0
13. Gotland 0/9
14. Italy 0/4
15. Syria 0/3
16. New Francia 3/0
17. Tidore 2/0
18. Antarctic Francia 1/0
19. Masquois 1/0
20. Queensland 0/0

Trade Fleet

1. Italy 130
2. Great Britain 104
3. Ottomans 100
4. Denmark 59
5. France 50
6. Mamluks 49
7. Bahmanis 45
8. Spanish Apalnosee 45
9. Portugal 41
10. Mughals 34
11. Queensland 31
12. Portuguese Australia 26
13. Spain 25
14. Lancastria 24
15. Ming 21
16. Antarctic Francia 20
17. British Frink 19
18. Burgundy 17
19. New Francia 15
20. Spanish Rewhannock 14

Technologies

1. Italy 84
2. Great Britain 84
3. France 84
4. Mamluks 84
5. Mughals 83
6. Antarctic Francia 83
7. Bohemia 83
8. Portuguese Sarpig 82
9. Nugget Francia 82
10. Bahmanis 82
11. Portugal 82
12. Queensland 82
13. Spain 82
14. Ming 82
15. Burgundy 82
16. Spanish Rewhannock 82
17. Maryland 82
18. Little Francia 82
19. Spanish Sattisa 82
20. Spanish Apalnosee 81

 

[aqvamare]

Unless you have found a trick to get the drydock to NOT replace the dock, you only get the +4 from the drydock.

My mistake, still it helps to push naval force limit really high

It'll take some masterful diplomacy to get into range of all of those without tipping anyone off.

Holding the light fleets in there trade nodes needs only full maritim, after this you need only trade range and your fleet can operate without limit. If you fear that they can kill your lightships, add 10 heavies into the fleet, for killing they still need to DOW, simply dig out of the naval battle, and bring your fleet home to UK. After you have your doomstack active, start blockading there ports. Do not forget, a full island england controls always the wargoal.
They have the choice to DOW with claim on england, or to DOW on england with trade war.

Either you get everyone to go against you at the same time (and believe me, France + Spain+ Italy (or whoever) + Ottomans can muster a fair fleet if you're going to bully them like that - they don't need to beat your heavies, they just need to make sure you can't keep your lights trading profitably.
Or they could reroute trade / collect elsewhere / Embargo to limit the value of these trade nodes.. Good luck paying for your fleet then.

They can muster a fair fleet, but this the goal you want to reach in your strategy. A Heavy fleet is expensive, and cost you the army edgde against the other land army powerblock who counters Spain+France+Italy+Ottman. And of course I'm not telling you do it without secret backing, there is 1 more reason why England is nasty this way.

I'm not saying it's impossible to pull off - but I am saying it'll take some careful work to do so, and not get smacked down halfway through.

Of course it has to be done step by step. but if you prepare it slowly in 1600+ you should be able to hold your own with blockading all ports against your allaince at 1730+.

I will now write, why nobody wants to be in a naval war with england at 1730+, when england picks the right Ideas.

Ideas:
Exploration (+25% NFL and colo)
Expansion (both for the colo empire, you have no landempire to care, so you strike in oversea, and cheap DOW for islands in asia)
Maritim (+50% and +33% NFL)
Innovative (-0.1 war ex/month for lategame)
Mil idea of choice
Trade ( extra trader, if you cannot control african/indian coast at this time, islands in this area should still be under your control)
6/8 ideas picked, 5 as must have, 3 mil ideas to pick how you like (naval+quality for better navies is nice)

NOw, how late game war look like:

The numbers are from a excel sheet, so i think you can reproduce them for yourself in 2min.

A trade war who goes for 9 years produce this number of war ex, for UK and his picked enemy:

UK total war ex : 12,25
UK total war ex : 6,66 (parlament, DotF, Innovative)

Enemy total war ex : 23,15
Enemy total war ex : 15,12 (DotF, Innovative)

So as England, you start wars not to gain land, you start wars to gain the trade power war goal, or to cripple the enemy. After you won your first war, were you got trade power from france/spain etc...you will run a loop of naval build up.
You simply start to build fleets when there income is weaken, and when they cancel it after truce timer, you restart the war.

If they do not peace out for trade power, you simply ruin there country over the war ex. As england you should have no problems to run +2 dip focus and +3 dip advisor, so your starting advantage in lower war ex gain becomes crazy strong over time.

And that is the reason why you should dogde land territory which can be reached over land access, if you are not sure that russia never give countries like france+ottman land access.

Ingame you run a heavy ducats - income, but there is this trader income event, do not know which event it is excatly....but you get this event which gives you the coice for income or more trade efficeny. Which proccs in late game extremly often, and gives you with trade power control like 3000 ducats every 3 years or so. I runned as england with this strategy -100 ducats/month and still could build the buildings I wanted.

The reasone why I like this strategy is simply, japan and england are only countires in your game, who can go no land army mil focus ingame. And england thx to english channel is the strongest land for this tactic.

Normally MP rule is simply, pick mil ideas or you die...england on the other side....has the option to go different.

P.S. of course this is no tactic for victory points, but the winner of a game can be scoreboard....
or the nation who DOWed at 1770+ all othere nation in the world just for fun and wins this war until 1821...and get hate from all the otheres player.

 

[aqvamare]

Edit:

I forgot to tell, the reason why I discuss this strat with your in your MP games is simply, your game is early enough that your england can do a half test of the strategy in your game to see the outcome, even when he hasn't the right ideas.

In your next addon you change the naval build up speed again, through your sailor manpower mana. So countries who can focus on naval can my named strategy even longer and without fear that enemies will counter it with a fast ship building programm.

If the goal of sailors is to reduce the ship building capacity overall in this game, which is only a guess.

 

[Oahkoah]

Does that Russian income even count as income? It's more like whatever loose ducats Groogy is finding down the sofa cushions.

 

[funshine]

Edit:
P.S. of course this is no tactic for victory points, but the winner of a game can be scoreboard....
or the nation who DOWed at 1770+ all othere nation in the world just for fun and wins this war until 1821...and get hate from all the otheres player.

And there lies the problem the play for victory points and score it decides the winner off the campaign so score cards will be on the main land off Europe or we could see on china afaik , and gb cant just sit on the island .

 

[aqvamare]

If you play for victory scoreboard as britain in MP, than you ally burgundy human, castile human, split france between all of you three. And DOW france in the first year to start the dismantel chaining of france.

And you deside or not deside to do the war as big war together or threee seperate wars, after you have seen france alliance, if he gets Austria, you do it as 3. If he gets AI countries, than you DOW all together in 3 wars so that france has to do 3 100% warscore peaces.

After your first ganbang, france should be minor, truce timer and finish off france.

One direct road to finish of france, winning against france as non naval britain, you do it in the first 20years, or you have failed.

But for me this is unfunny, MP should always have a goal to reach lategame, and britain in lategme can be so rewarding, compare to the othere mil idea, mil idea countries.

And if you do not want to dismantel france as britain, you go direct to dansk/sweden to dismantel them.

You always have to use your start advvantage in naval and army to kick 1 of the power whores in army out of the game as england.

Dansk is the easiest target, because you can take his core lands 100% save.

 

[vfmikey]

Could we see a trade mapmode?

I especially wonder how/wheter does the trade flow from the Philippines east to the New World

 

[Frogbait]

Pressing questions after this MP session:

Will Groogy ever finish in the top 8?
Will Groogy ever contribute more than 4% to a war?
Will Groogy ever be able to have the biggest name?

I think the answer to all of this is no. If only he wasn't a Dane and could speak an intelligible language!

Jokes and bad memes aside, this has been a lot of fun to watch. Thanks for putting this on

 

[LittleFido]

Pressing questions after this MP session:

Will Groogy ever finish in the top 8?
Will Groogy ever contribute more than 4% to a war?
Will Groogy ever be able to have the biggest name?

I think the answer to all of this is no. If only he wasn't a Dane and could speak an intelligible language!

Jokes and bad memes aside, this has been a lot of fun to watch. Thanks for putting this on

By the power of Roland, there is a chance

 

[Viperswhip]

Well, there's not much time left, and the last session was not...well, it was still fun to watch, but not as exciting as the previous ep., what I want to see is an all out from 4-x to just try to mess things up in the last 50 years, not much to lose really.

 

[Serpent]

I can't understand how everyone, (especially the Mughals, Mamluks and GB) just handed the Bahmanis the first place when the Bahmani player has done so little to deserve his victory. There should really be a grand coalition against them next session to at least challenge their supremacy.

Alternatively I'd like to see a new great war with a new set of alliances. The British and Bahmanis, because of the Chinese failure to secure Korea and Japan in time, are natural allies against China. China and Mughals and natural allies against Bahmanis. Mughals and British are natural enemies because of score. Fritalians and Britgundolish and obvious enemies because of history and geography. Russia is tied to Poland and will likely side with them to regain their cores, and the Danish and Iberians are likely to tag along behind Britain as they have done the entire game (although Denmark could benefit from regaining Norway and taking the rest of Lubeck from the Burgundians and the Spanish and Portugese should really fight it out over the Sevilla node). The Ottomans still need someone to support them against Polish claims and will stay allied to Fritaly. Bohemia could side with anyone depending on what they want to gain, let's assume they trust their current allies more than their enemies.

So, we'd have Bahmani, Britain, Burgundy, Spain, Portugal, Russia, Poland and Denmark against Mamluks, Italy, France, Mughals, Ming, Ottomans and Bohemia. That seems a quite fair and even contest and would make the last decades of the game a lot more interesting than simply waiting for the Bahmanis to win.

The Ottomans could be a liability in keeping the anti-Bahmani coalition from forming, since they seem to be a target for everyone around them. Italy might be better off dividing them with Poland, Russia, Mamluks and Mughals to secure the friendship of those powers and gain a piece for themselves. Russia is already friendly with the Ming and with the border adjusted in their favour in the west they would likely look to eject the British from Siberia and could well benefit from an alliance with Italy to do it.

In other words, Britain and Bahmanis need to die.

 

[Viperswhip]

I can't understand how everyone, (especially the Mughals, Mamluks and GB) just handed the Bahmanis the first place when the Bahmani player has done so little to deserve his victory. There should really be a grand coalition against them next session to at least challenge their supremacy.

Alternatively I'd like to see a new great war with a new set of alliances. The British and Bahmanis, because of the Chinese failure to secure Korea and Japan in time, are natural allies against China. China and Mughals and natural allies against Bahmanis. Mughals and British are natural enemies because of score. Fritalians and Britgundolish and obvious enemies because of history and geography. Russia is tied to Poland and will likely side with them to regain their cores, and the Danish and Iberians are likely to tag along behind Britain as they have done the entire game (although Denmark could benefit from regaining Norway and taking the rest of Lubeck from the Burgundians and the Spanish and Portugese should really fight it out over the Sevilla node). The Ottomans still need someone to support them against Polish claims and will stay allied to Fritaly. Bohemia could side with anyone depending on what they want to gain, let's assume they trust their current allies more than their enemies.

So, we'd have Bahmani, Britain, Burgundy, Spain, Portugal, Russia, Poland and Denmark against Mamluks, Italy, France, Mughals, Ming, Ottomans and Bohemia. That seems a quite fair and even contest and would make the last decades of the game a lot more interesting than simply waiting for the Bahmanis to win.

The Ottomans could be a liability in keeping the anti-Bahmani coalition from forming, since they seem to be a target for everyone around them. Italy might be better off dividing them with Poland, Russia, Mamluks and Mughals to secure the friendship of those powers and gain a piece for themselves. Russia is already friendly with the Ming and with the border adjusted in their favour in the west they would likely look to eject the British from Siberia and could well benefit from an alliance with Italy to do it.

In other words, Britain and Bahmanis need to die.

I understand what you are saying here, but umm, you are forgetting there is more than 3 people playing. Bahmanis never did anything to create waves, which means there was no animosity, which means not everyone, ie Russia, Bohemia, or anyone who was not in the top 4 at the time, would get on board, and if France sent the 100k men down there to actually make a difference, they would come back to a fully sieged country.

That's the reality of a large multiplayer game, if you go to fight in a distant land, you will suffer. Even England can't really do it, Bahamanis has too many ships, if there is a significant naval battle, or there ever was one since Bahamanis was in first, England's fleet would be damaged to the point that France and Italy's fleets (once they were significant), would be able to land troops on the now vacant England.

In single player the AI is not great at figuring out that nobody is home, players don't really have that problem.

 

[MCBC6]

I understand what you are saying here, but umm, you are forgetting there is more than 3 people playing. Bahmanis never did anything to create waves, which means there was no animosity, which means not everyone, ie Russia, Bohemia, or anyone who was not in the top 4 at the time, would get on board, and if France sent the 100k men down there to actually make a difference, they would come back to a fully sieged country.

That's the reality of a large multiplayer game, if you go to fight in a distant land, you will suffer. Even England can't really do it, Bahamanis has too many ships, if there is a significant naval battle, or there ever was one since Bahamanis was in first, England's fleet would be damaged to the point that France and Italy's fleets (once they were significant), would be able to land troops on the now vacant England.

In single player the AI is not great at figuring out that nobody is home, players don't really have that problem.

This is understandable, but the problem is that Johan(Mughals) is basically giving the game away to Yonaz(Bahmanis). And nobody is trying to stop it.