Petition for a new leader.

[Old Joe]

so its story of all losers against russia - snow, cold, outnumbers, swamps, etc etc, so you telling karl was so brilliant but loose this attack just because of enemy positions and not arrived cavalry suport? and what excuse this is? if the generals cant handle and calculate most simple and prefectly known battlefield doctrines of those times? maneuvering and shock attack, whos falt it was if not swedish commanders? these are very names using in europa universalis to show generals skills. But if karl was injured and didnt take responsibility on this swedish most historical failure (with what i'm tend to agree, he was exceptional commander) he must be dormant for beginning of this scenario, and not make uhistotical victory in 9 of 10 times against russians

try to take it impartially, you swedish national-radicals!

errr, and about russian leaders making their advantages of positions, i think menshikov's 434 is well enough showing this proportions

 

[Slargos]

Thanks Johan!

I was about to write a reply starting with exactly the same rethorical question.

Nuff said about Poltava, the darkest moment in Swedish history. Just hearing the name gives me a pain

Wow. I don't agree with you often, Daniel, but here I'm having trouble not agreeing.

 

[Slargos]

if the generals cant handle and calculate most simple and prefectly known battlefield doctrines of those times? maneuvering and shock attack, whos falt it was if not swedish commanders?

I think you vastly overestimate the C2I available at the time.

The swedish cavalry didn't show up on time and since the swedish army was dependant on the element of surprise, the attack was forced to go ahead regardless which prompted the defeat.

But if karl was injured and didnt take responsibility on this swedish most historical failure (with what i'm tend to agree, he was exceptional commander) he must be dormant for beginning of this scenario, and not make uhistotical victory in 9 of 10 times against russians

He wasn't around for one battle and this suffices to remove him from the leaderlist? And you're talking about impartiality?

 

[Old Joe]

I think you vastly overestimate the C2I available at the time.

The swedish cavalry didn't show up on time and since the swedish army was dependant on the element of surprise, the attack was forced to go ahead regardless which prompted the defeat.

pff, so whos invented this element of surprise? or its invented by itself? maybe so, still if armies depends on something in battle it must be good reason for this, so what is big reason to blind assaulting good enemy defences, not secure just arriving of more troops in time

He wasn't around for one battle and this suffices to remove him from the leaderlist? And you're talking about impartiality?

one battle - no sweden, hehehe, karl had to save it, he may be in list , but whos must be more concern about it, when i played sweden 1700 i was cripled to beat russia, with karl and all, but when i played russia these karl loosing in snows and i'm taking all baltic from sweden w/o problems

 

[unmerged(17563)]

Johan are you reading a history written by a swede???

My book David Massie's Peter the Great has a very different take on how Poltava went, so different in fact that I wonder if its even the same battle.

He has the swedes in a defensive position with thr Russians attack in 2 formations of infantry with a line of cavalry. He has Peter in the command post drawing up the plan with Menshikov and that other dude Apraxin??? Granted he mentions Karls injury and the fact that the swedes fought incredibly well. but Russia won and with terrible troops so imo the strategy must have been decent.

The Crimea campaign was the first time Russia went to war under Peter. It involved belting the Tatars a bit then sieging azov, peter had to teach the russians how to sue cannons from scratch and he personally fired many shots. The siege worked and the city was taken and Crimea ceded the entire azov region.

So yes he wasnt as good as Karl but to deny that he never commanded a field army or was a hopeless hack is plain stupid.

And Johan for game balance it is hard for Russia to beat a well played Sweden with Karl XII give them another mid range leader like Peter and bring the game closer to history. I revise the stats down to 3,4,4,1

P.S if you want my source material I can go dig it up...

 

[Slargos]

Johan are you reading a history written by a swede???

My book David Massie's Peter the Great has a very different take on how Poltava went, so different in fact that I wonder if its even the same battle.

He has the swedes in a defensive position with thr Russians attack in 2 formations of infantry with a line of cavalry.

I have never even heard of the notion that the swedes were in a defensive position at the day of the battle before your claim. I believe the general consensus is that the swedish army was forced to attack due to facing the threat of being surrounded by a larger army while low on supplies (swedish gunpowder was nearly depleted and what was left was of low quality, creating a situation where russian snipers could pick off swedish troops without fear of having the fire returned.)

I'd certainly like to hear this guy's take on it.

Here's what an ukranian site has to say about the battle, very briefly:

http://www.encyclopediaofukraine.com/pages/P/O/PoltavaBattleof.htm

Pretty much what you'd read from serious swedish historians aswell.

 

[unmerged(17563)]

I have never even heard of the notion that the swedes were in a defensive position at the day of the battle before your claim. I believe the general consensus is that the swedish army was forced to attack due to facing the threat of being surrounded by a larger army while low on supplies (swedish gunpowder was nearly depleted and what was left was of low quality, creating a situation where russian snipers could pick off swedish troops without fear of having the fire returned.)

I'd certainly like to hear this guy's take on it.

Here's what an ukranian site has to say about the battle, very briefly:

http://www.encyclopediaofukraine.com/pages/P/O/PoltavaBattleof.htm

Pretty much what you'd read from serious swedish historians aswell.

I have read books by Americans and Englishmen, I will check them again later and post here then

 

[unmerged(1047)]

I believe the 'other' campaign there had to do with the construction of some ships in the Rostov area, used to conduct an amphibious (or partially so) invasion resulting in a gain of a small amount of territory either in the Crimea or just eat of it... I'm recounting from memory having taken a Russian history course in college about six years ago.

I don't recall the account of Poltava, but if Peter commanded an army at any time he should be included. Regardless of what his stats are (I'll leave that to others to come up with), monarch-level leaders are quite useful in sieges, in taking control away from allies....

 

[Slargos]

I don't recall the account of Poltava, but if Peter commanded an army at any time he should be included. Regardless of what his stats are (I'll leave that to others to come up with), monarch-level leaders are quite useful in sieges, in taking control away from allies....

He didn't so much command as he was present during the fighting where in previous actions like Narva he left well before it.

As far as I'm concerned, Peter should not be a leader.

 

[Slargos]

I have read books by Americans and Englishmen, I will check them again later and post here then

Ah. Books on european history by americans...

...

:rofl:

 

[unmerged(17563)]

Ah. Books on european history by americans...

...

:rofl:

yah about as good as using a swedish history book to get an impartial view on the great northern war... :rofl:

 

[unmerged(21937)]

Well, one could say in EU2 terms that Great Northern War was a gangbang. Den-Pol-Rus vs Swe. So in such situation, just losing Baltics and Ingermanland means that Sweden fought back very well. The war had been going on over a decade when the decisive loss came. If Russia could have been able to stomp Sweden alone, wouldn't Sweden had lost badly and swiftly? Giving 4/5/5 leader to Russia would mean that Russia can stomp Sweden on it's own and therefore likely lead to ahistorical results.

 

[unmerged(25612)]

I think we are all missing the real option here:

Make Peter a leader of the army AND navy. No better, make two of him in both classes, just to be sure that he is properly represented in meddling with everyone and everything.

All hail Peter!







Lady Europa: Have you played AGC-EEP? Download the mod and see if Peter is in that, if he is not, then I suggest you raise the discussion there. AGC-EEP has more than double the amount of leaders in vanilla, and if Peter is not there, then there is no way he will be in Vanilla. If Peter is or has been already accepted to the mod, then you have some chance of having your way in this debate.

(I really don`t know much about the Great Nordic War, so I will not take a stance or two in the debate, but I will say this, as it was my first impulse upon seeing the name of the war: "Hakkaa päälle!!!" )

 

[Hive]

I have never even heard of the notion that the swedes were in a defensive position at the day of the battle before your claim. I believe the general consensus is that the swedish army was forced to attack due to facing the threat of being surrounded by a larger army while low on supplies (swedish gunpowder was nearly depleted and what was left was of low quality, creating a situation where russian snipers could pick off swedish troops without fear of having the fire returned.)

Right, Slargos. Snipers. Snipers with those crappy 17th century guns. That's rich.

Couldn't the Swedes just have taken them out of with mortar support, then? :rofl:

 

[Slargos]

yah about as good as using a swedish history book to get an impartial view on the great northern war... :rofl:

You'll note that I supplied you with a Ukrainian source. Don't let facts stand in your way of asserting yourself, however.

 

[Slargos]

Right, Slargos. Snipers. Snipers with those crappy 17th century guns. That's rich.

Couldn't the Swedes just have taken them out of with mortar support, then? :rofl:

 

[unmerged(10894)]

Russia has a 434, a 3331, and a 3341 leader around the time of the great northern war. For balance and realism's sack they do not really need anything better. Those are their best leaders to date if you don't count Vorotinski.

 

[unmerged(14689)]

Don't know if he should be a leader, but the siege of Azov went very poorly untill Peter made it to the scene and personally ordered the cannons to be placed differently after which the city quickly fell.

And about the Swedish loss at Poltava: they attacked heavily defended redoutes they could have easily left behind. Their bad. No, let's say the Russians are numerically superior... Had nothing to do with it. The Swedes bled themselves dry in useless attacks and then were slaughtered by Russian artillery. It was a stupid, though bravely executed, attack all around. The Swedish version of the "charge of the Light Brigade", if you wish.

And all this stuff from Swedes moaning about possible ahistorically strong Russian leaders is, of course, simply laughable. If there's one country in the game that has ahistorically strong uberleaders....

 

[unmerged(14689)]

You'll note that I supplied you with a Ukrainian source. Don't let facts stand in your way of asserting yourself, however.

A Ukrainian source about the Great Northern War? That same war in which Ukrainian Cossack traitors sided with Charles XII? Yes, very plausible. I think I'd even prefer the Swedish version... :wacko:

 

[Slargos]

A Ukrainian source about the Great Northern War? That same war in which Ukrainian Cossack traitors sided with Charles XII? Yes, very plausible. I think I'd even prefer the Swedish version... :wacko:

I was hoping no one would pick up on that. :rofl:

Regardless, any retelling of the events of that battle I've read has pretty much the same storyline.

While the swedish army was in a defensive position *around the city it was sieging* the actual battle started out as a swedish attempt to break through the russian lines before the russian reinforcements arrived. Do you disagree?