Bloody hell - not only the first to get to land 14, but the first to get to infra 4 too. A lot of wars fought, that's why.....
-
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.
Might I remind all that AARs/summaries should go in the AAR thread for the ratings. At least, thats what FAL wanted. As far as I'm concerned you can just ignore it 
Forgot to mention that the Portuguese armed forces under Ozzeh XVI fought the French in England, killing a few thousands and liberated some provinces! Ozzeh XVI died a state hero.
Ozzeh said:Ah, a hero. This post will certainly influence my rating of you smn
:rofl:
You really are a sneaky one, Ozz!
Ampoliros said::rofl:
You really are a sneaky one, Ozz!
I respond well to compliments, and I see your last post as a compliment too
Your rating will be adjusted accordingly
Deeds of Brandenburg 1538 - 1565
-Vassalized Mecklemburg and annexed Holstein, blocking Denmark from Germany (later proved not to be a big deal).
-Attacked Denmark and took Bremen in a separate peace. Attacked her ally Prussia and vassalized and took Memel, making that important state alot more safe for Brandenburg.
-Attacked Poland while she was at war with Russia, securing Sweden from intervening. Later backfired as Russia peaced out for a province, leaving us with no gains and a WP.
-Made a NAP with Poland and milked the Oldenburg-Munster-Kleves for cash and converted them.
-Kept on investing in infra 4, so if the next player does that too, it will be reached within the next session.
-The next player can now decide whether or not to diploannex her vassals and will also have alot of free choice since ive left Brandenburg with a sizeable treasury.
-Vassalized Mecklemburg and annexed Holstein, blocking Denmark from Germany (later proved not to be a big deal).
-Attacked Denmark and took Bremen in a separate peace. Attacked her ally Prussia and vassalized and took Memel, making that important state alot more safe for Brandenburg.
-Attacked Poland while she was at war with Russia, securing Sweden from intervening. Later backfired as Russia peaced out for a province, leaving us with no gains and a WP.
-Made a NAP with Poland and milked the Oldenburg-Munster-Kleves for cash and converted them.
-Kept on investing in infra 4, so if the next player does that too, it will be reached within the next session.
-The next player can now decide whether or not to diploannex her vassals and will also have alot of free choice since ive left Brandenburg with a sizeable treasury.
I might have trouble joining in next sunday.
My flight is scheduled to arrive at 16:30 CET, and since I live close to the airport, it should be plenty enough to get home by 17CET IF the flight is on time.
So, unfortunately, I can't be sure if I'll be there in time. Also I can't give you an advance notice if I won't be
My flight is scheduled to arrive at 16:30 CET, and since I live close to the airport, it should be plenty enough to get home by 17CET IF the flight is on time.
So, unfortunately, I can't be sure if I'll be there in time. Also I can't give you an advance notice if I won't be
Ozzeh said:Might I remind all that AARs/summaries should go in the AAR thread for the ratings. At least, thats what FAL wanted. As far as I'm concerned you can just ignore it
Should I make one?
delosandes said:
Well we'd like it if you could explain to us exactly what you did, but if you dont want to its no real obligation.
Daniel & all,
Please use this thread for commenting the AARs. We want to keep that thread 'clean' so it will be easy to find ratings & stuff.
Please use this thread for commenting the AARs. We want to keep that thread 'clean' so it will be easy to find ratings & stuff.
smn said:
Yes, and if you feel you have to elaborate on a certain subject, just edit your post. Don't make a new one.
Ozzeh said:
Good job. I should of course have told what my intentions were, but you did exactly as I wanted
Now Denmark is dead, it's good to have Persia as a player nation.
Ok. Raspoutine, are you interested in continuing in this game? (as another nation of course)?
Moved here from AAR thread where it was originally posted.
--------------
Tonio made just about exactly that question he quotes above. However he does not quote my answer in extenso, which was rather long but needs to be said to make this clear.
Before reading it you can train your own thinking by trying to answering it imagining you were SPA.
Tonio: "...will Spain defend Venice, if Spain will be at war for example England and OE, and France dows me ?"
Daniel:"I always try to defend my friends and fight my enemies. But not for any price. If you lose less by giving up a province than I would by entering a war it is plain stupid to ask for assistance. The thing is that you cannot analyse these things in absolute terms as you just did. It is always a question of the circumstances. The answer to your question is: if the situation were as you describe I see little reason to join you: if I am alonee vs ENG and OE in war what help could I give you? What kind of a stupid question was that Tonio? Or did you mean financial assistance? If I hvae money I wil of course support my friends with that when they ar ein big trouble. I always do.And since I am such a peaceful trader I usually have a lot of money.I am basically very trustworthy and you should know that Tonio.If we do this together, you, me, AUS and hopefully ENG I will be loyal to you. And if you paint a more specified example of a situation, more than a general one, as before, I will give you an honest response.BTW, I might make the same question to you: if you were SPA and in war with OE and ENG - and thus all your armies probably occupied - what help would you then give me as Venice in that situation? Answer that and I will answer you.
Tonio:"well, FAL promised support and so on, but when Austria+Spain got war vs OE, they left me alone vs France. You confirm that under different events you won`t give me protection too. I don`t think it is wise to risk again on same conditions"
Tonio were unable to understand that whether SPA would help or not depended on the circumstances.
Instead he writes "Then Cheech offered French support anyway, and judjing him as reliable good defender had much higher rate than Daniel"
Well, Imagine FRA was in war with SPA and AUS for example, and had say 150k men fighting them, 75 each. Then OE attacks you, do you believe FRA would help you then? Do you believe he would just move away one of his army? Do you not understand that it is all a question of the precise circumstances? :wacko: You never specified any and thus you could not get a definite answer. Had I been a liar, lika many other, I would no doubt have promised you everything just to get you into the war. But that is not my style and you failed to diagnose it.
-------
And yes: deep down this all has to do what happened in BF3 when he was AUS and I were SPA and he expected full Spanish support after his own conditions rather on both parties conditions.
--------------
Tonioz said:
Tonio made just about exactly that question he quotes above. However he does not quote my answer in extenso, which was rather long but needs to be said to make this clear.
Before reading it you can train your own thinking by trying to answering it imagining you were SPA.
Tonio: "...will Spain defend Venice, if Spain will be at war for example England and OE, and France dows me ?"
Daniel:"I always try to defend my friends and fight my enemies. But not for any price. If you lose less by giving up a province than I would by entering a war it is plain stupid to ask for assistance. The thing is that you cannot analyse these things in absolute terms as you just did. It is always a question of the circumstances. The answer to your question is: if the situation were as you describe I see little reason to join you: if I am alonee vs ENG and OE in war what help could I give you? What kind of a stupid question was that Tonio? Or did you mean financial assistance? If I hvae money I wil of course support my friends with that when they ar ein big trouble. I always do.And since I am such a peaceful trader I usually have a lot of money.I am basically very trustworthy and you should know that Tonio.If we do this together, you, me, AUS and hopefully ENG I will be loyal to you. And if you paint a more specified example of a situation, more than a general one, as before, I will give you an honest response.BTW, I might make the same question to you: if you were SPA and in war with OE and ENG - and thus all your armies probably occupied - what help would you then give me as Venice in that situation? Answer that and I will answer you.
Tonio:"well, FAL promised support and so on, but when Austria+Spain got war vs OE, they left me alone vs France. You confirm that under different events you won`t give me protection too. I don`t think it is wise to risk again on same conditions"
Tonio were unable to understand that whether SPA would help or not depended on the circumstances.
Instead he writes "Then Cheech offered French support anyway, and judjing him as reliable good defender had much higher rate than Daniel"
Well, Imagine FRA was in war with SPA and AUS for example, and had say 150k men fighting them, 75 each. Then OE attacks you, do you believe FRA would help you then? Do you believe he would just move away one of his army? Do you not understand that it is all a question of the precise circumstances? :wacko: You never specified any and thus you could not get a definite answer. Had I been a liar, lika many other, I would no doubt have promised you everything just to get you into the war. But that is not my style and you failed to diagnose it.
-------
And yes: deep down this all has to do what happened in BF3 when he was AUS and I were SPA and he expected full Spanish support after his own conditions rather on both parties conditions.
dan you need to rate even though you were sub please...
tonio - its really annoying when you commment on tactics during war in public. Saying things like france should be assaulting more when i have all cav armies puts me off because i want to shout I DONT HAVE INFANTRY TONIO!
please dont do it or ill have to stop giving you rms and i know you like to watch
also bear in mind that its easy to be an armchair general but when your fighting on 3 front errors happen.
tonio - its really annoying when you commment on tactics during war in public. Saying things like france should be assaulting more when i have all cav armies puts me off because i want to shout I DONT HAVE INFANTRY TONIO!
please dont do it or ill have to stop giving you rms and i know you like to watch
also bear in mind that its easy to be an armchair general but when your fighting on 3 front errors happen.
Just have to comment on this. This is an agreeing post, not one that tries to shove the blamecheech in rating thread said:
.Denmark was the main problem of my policy this session and yes, i think i failed slightly concerning her. Due to her actions last session, i saw her as doomed as Sweden could likely have dismembered her without German aid, even if we sided with Denmark. I sought to profit as much as possible from this, weighting the resulting Swedish dominance with a dismemberment of Poland, making Russia more viable if Sweden invaded in the future. This would also have included Jylland as demands, but i peaced Denmark to attack Poland instead. However, the thrash of Poland backfired and they are about as strong as they were from the outset of the session. So thus, Brandenburg will have to rely on either (1) Austria, who will most certainly be preoccupied in any other direction when GIIA comes knocking, (2) a second dismemberment of Poland coupled with a Russia that has fixed itself when the Swedish period of dominance comes in or (3) Poland surviving and making common cause with Brandenburg, as Scandinavia will most probably have designs on Danzig. The last option is the least profitable one, but most likely if Russia doesnt get its act together.
Nice AAR Daniel. Some comments:
Perhaps the smartest thing to do. I got the same offer from FRA, but tried to get peace for Artois only, before I left the country (and it's diplomacy) to you.
France of course profited maximally from that dow.
WP with the OE is certainly not bad, especially for Austria. And Spain now has a solid grip on North Africa, something I missed in FN.
I am not sure if this is worth the money in this time. Spain can afford colonies without fortresses till 1570, since no one will be able to take them before that. That money could be used for improving the economy instead.
Sure, there is the problem with rebels taking the province, but you can take it easily back then too after the rebels left.
Some comments here:
Is it wise to trust Portugal full? I have seen a couple of games in which Portugal betrayed Spain. With the player switching this risk increases.
How can you be sure that Portugal will give the mines back?
Quite smart to avoid my bankruptcy rule with minimal effort. I need to alter that rule to avoid this in the future
Yep, looks like Tonio made a bad movement, mostly judged because of which players played which country and not because of geopolitical reasons.
On the other hand, it's normal Venetian practice to switch allies.
Yep, with Denmark being annexed (and perhaps other nations in the future as well) Holland will be a nice player nation.
From pure economical reasons it's better to not annex that much. However, owning all that territory is an excellent opportunity for Spain to avoid England (or in this case France) from expanding too much in NA.
Besides, the original intention was to sell some of the indian territories to a puppet, like Venice or Sweden. Someone which will not be a danger in the colonies like England would be. That way Spain decreases stab and gets some ducats from it and a happy puppet.
Big OOPS. But weird, since I am fairly sure that I did check the tolerance slider when I noticed the RR in North-Africa.
Daniel A said:
Perhaps the smartest thing to do. I got the same offer from FRA, but tried to get peace for Artois only, before I left the country (and it's diplomacy) to you.
France of course profited maximally from that dow.
WP with the OE is certainly not bad, especially for Austria. And Spain now has a solid grip on North Africa, something I missed in FN.
I am not sure if this is worth the money in this time. Spain can afford colonies without fortresses till 1570, since no one will be able to take them before that. That money could be used for improving the economy instead.
Sure, there is the problem with rebels taking the province, but you can take it easily back then too after the rebels left.
Some comments here:
Is it wise to trust Portugal full? I have seen a couple of games in which Portugal betrayed Spain. With the player switching this risk increases.
How can you be sure that Portugal will give the mines back?
Quite smart to avoid my bankruptcy rule with minimal effort. I need to alter that rule to avoid this in the future
Yep, looks like Tonio made a bad movement, mostly judged because of which players played which country and not because of geopolitical reasons.
On the other hand, it's normal Venetian practice to switch allies.
Yep, with Denmark being annexed (and perhaps other nations in the future as well) Holland will be a nice player nation.
From pure economical reasons it's better to not annex that much. However, owning all that territory is an excellent opportunity for Spain to avoid England (or in this case France) from expanding too much in NA.
Besides, the original intention was to sell some of the indian territories to a puppet, like Venice or Sweden. Someone which will not be a danger in the colonies like England would be. That way Spain decreases stab and gets some ducats from it and a happy puppet.
Big OOPS. But weird, since I am fairly sure that I did check the tolerance slider when I noticed the RR in North-Africa.