rebels..

[DrOnline]

I'm playing Russia, the year is 1800, I started in the campain where the strategy for russia goes.. attack on all borders..

I've got a big army stationed in Prussia. suddenly a rebellion happens. I defeat the army, but what do you know, they somehow slipped my 40'000 armed soldiers and manned the local fortress with 10'000 rebels. How on earth would that be possible? I don't believe I'm the only one not seeing how they would be able to do that..

Anyway. I lay siege, round up another 60'000 soldiers and attack.
but I lose.

when I have 64'001 inf, 10'254 cav, 117 guns, and they have 95 inf and 6 cannons left. My army falls into panic.

I can understand how an army would tire after assaulting a manned fortress, but I believe those 64k infantry could take shifts on the attacks when they were facing an enemy outnumbered by 640:1 heh.

Ok, enough whining about it. I love the game, but there are a few strange episodes, like this one.


ah. bonus question. How come the swedes have a lvl 5 fortress in.. Nyland (is that right? the one farthest southeast in Finland). Did they actually build this huge fortress in actual history? It's hell to break that one.

 

[unmerged(7580)]

Originally posted by DrOnline


I've got a big army stationed in Prussia. suddenly a rebellion happens. I defeat the army, but what do you know, they somehow slipped my 40'000 armed soldiers and manned the local fortress with 10'000 rebels. How on earth would that be possible? I don't believe I'm the only one not seeing how they would be able to do that..

The fortress garrison revolted, thus they hold it against you, don't know about the rest though...

 

[Orm]

Originally posted by DrOnline

ah. bonus question. How come the swedes have a lvl 5 fortress in.. Nyland (is that right? the one farthest southeast in Finland). Did they actually build this huge fortress in actual history? It's hell to break that one.

There is a fortress called Sveaborg ('Soumenlinna' in finish), that was built between 1748 and 1772. I think it was the largest swedish fortress of the time.

 

[unmerged(6657)]

Even though it was the largest Swedish fortress, was it large enough to be considered a level 5, i.e. was it large for a fortress, or just large for a Swedish fortress.

 

[Orm]

Originally posted by BRYCON316
Even though it was the largest Swedish fortress, was it large enough to be considered a level 5, i.e. was it large for a fortress, or just large for a Swedish fortress.

I don't have a scale for equating real life fortresses to EU fortresses, do you?
The fortress was large and strong, and would probably have been very difficult to take. And yet it was surrendered in 1809 without a proper fight, due to the commander's political beliefs. He has been considered one of the worst traitors in Swedish history, I don't remember his name unfortunately... not right now.

 

[Murmurandus]

Originally posted by beowulf


I don't have a scale for equating real life fortresses to EU fortresses, do you?
The fortress was large and strong, and would probably have been very difficult to take. And yet it was surrendered in 1809 without a proper fight, due to the commander's political beliefs. He has been considered one of the worst traitors in Swedish history, I don't remember his name unfortunately... not right now.

I think it was a commi

Nice avatar BTW

 

[unmerged(5503)]

Originally posted by beowulf


I don't have a scale for equating real life fortresses to EU fortresses, do you?
The fortress was large and strong, and would probably have been very difficult to take. And yet it was surrendered in 1809 without a proper fight, due to the commander's political beliefs. He has been considered one of the worst traitors in Swedish history, I don't remember his name unfortunately... not right now.

He was Vice Admiral C.O. Cronstedt (1756-1820

 

[Orm]

And another thing about fortresses:
It isn't necessarily the case that a EU fortress represents one specific fortress IRL. It can symbolise the generale state of all defense works in the province combined.

 

[unmerged(362)]

Originally posted by Adler


He was Vice Admiral C.O. Cronstedt (1756-1820

And if there is any divine god, he is rotting in hell.

 

[unmerged(5503)]

I can't ever understand, why he did that, no way.

 

[Orm]

It happened in 1809. Get over it!

 

[Murmurandus]

What's the thing about that Cronstedt guy? Why are you so upset about it?

 

[Styrbiorn]

He's a *beeeeeeeeep* TRAITOR!

 

[Styrbiorn]

And BTW, Sveaborg was the mightiest fortress of Northern Europe, situated on seven islands with an own docks and a shipyard. Defended by some 750 cannons. Impregnable. If you ever visit Helsingfors, I suggest you to visit it.

 

[Murmurandus]

Originally posted by Styrbiorn
He's a *beeeeeeeeep* TRAITOR!

Yeah, right, but he's not the only one (Petain, Quislin (sp?), ...)
What were his political believes and to who he surrendered?

 

[Styrbiorn]

He surrendered Sveaborg to a minor Russian contingent, thus virtually giving away Finland. I don't know about his political believes though, but he gained Russian pension after the war...

 

[Orm]

He surrendered to the Russians. Sweden lost Finland to Russia in that war, and he has been made a scape-goat. Finland would have been lost anyway... sooner or later.

 

[Orm]

Originally posted by Styrbiorn
I don't know about his political believes though, but he gained Russian pension after the war...

There was a lot of nationalist sentiment in Finland at the time. I think he was probably sympathetic to those ideas.

 

[Murmurandus]

Originally posted by Styrbiorn
He surrendered Sveaborg to a minor Russian contingent, thus virtually giving away Finland. I don't know about his political believes though, but he gained Russian pension after the war...

Ah, his political believes in money then. Well, it is an understandable reason, if the amount's big enough. (a Russian pension )
Anyway, all traitors should be executed

Thanks for the short history lesson, Styrbiorn & the others.

 

[Styrbiorn]

He surrendered to the Russians. Sweden lost Finland to Russia in that war, and he has been made a scape-goat.

Scape-goat? Hmmm. How familiar are you with the Finnish War actually?

Finland wouldn't have been Swedish far all time, no one believes that, but the treason had a large part in the outcome of this particular war, so calling him scape-goat is not very accurate (with scape-goat meaning "unjustfully blaimed" or similar).