admiral drake said:
I may have to miss next week's session anyway to give a lecture, so perhaps it would be best to postpone a week and then Daniel can perm?
-
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.
I may have to miss next week's session anyway to give a lecture, so perhaps it would be best to postpone a week and then Daniel can perm?
Sander,
I subbed FRA these 13 years.
At first it went reasonable OK. With stab costs at 6265 and a monthly income a little more than 200 it was however walking a tight rope. After going one step towards serfdom and receiving a corruption event (and reaching +1 stab through normal non-investment) I got a political crisis and that was that. Down to -2 and only 8-9 merchants per year. Trading became very difficult, the problem was to maintain monos, not how to expand it.
I diplovassalised and diploannexed Cherokee, Creek, Navarra and Provence.
I got a blitz DOW by AUS when I was at stab +2 and he reached stab hit level before I could get my forces in action properly so I gave him what he asked for which was Hainault.
I promoted officials as much as I could spot. Colonised fully as well.
All of this meant that FRA expanded 9 cities during these 13 years, more than anyone else. But income was sadly almost the same at the end as at start (the increase I was able to create was mostly nullified by tax income loss from the lower stab and at the end worsening trade).
I converted as much as was possible. From start there were 8 with wrong religion and now there are 4 left. There were 5 succesful conversions but a province on New Foundland defected to France from SWE and Aenigma said we could keep it.
The main reason for the high stab cost is the BB value. I noticed revolt risk from nationality in North America. Apparently you have taken them in war. Offensive war perhaps?
Anyhow, one cannot have a nation with stab cost 30 times the monthly income. France is now down to 5323d and thus only around 24 months :wacko:
BB is now at 40. Had it been for example 20 your stab cost would have been 2867 which still is much too high compared to the income but possible to work with. If we add serfdom 10 to that they would have been 2100.
Looking at this one could ask why I DAed these nations. At least the DA of Provence caused some problems for AUS who were at war with SPA at the moment and marched through Provence to reach SPA proper and that they could not longer do. However now SWE DOWed and EIRE, POR and Poland joined them and then also HOL DOWed poor Spain and that ended the session prematurely as Alexius had had enough and quit midsession.
You are presently well prepared to take actions according to your choice.
Reasearch was put into trade. Whether this was a wise move is doubtful. I never reached trade 6. Perhaps you must focus on land now instead.
I subbed FRA these 13 years.
At first it went reasonable OK. With stab costs at 6265 and a monthly income a little more than 200 it was however walking a tight rope. After going one step towards serfdom and receiving a corruption event (and reaching +1 stab through normal non-investment) I got a political crisis and that was that. Down to -2 and only 8-9 merchants per year. Trading became very difficult, the problem was to maintain monos, not how to expand it.
I diplovassalised and diploannexed Cherokee, Creek, Navarra and Provence.
I got a blitz DOW by AUS when I was at stab +2 and he reached stab hit level before I could get my forces in action properly so I gave him what he asked for which was Hainault.
I promoted officials as much as I could spot. Colonised fully as well.
All of this meant that FRA expanded 9 cities during these 13 years, more than anyone else. But income was sadly almost the same at the end as at start (the increase I was able to create was mostly nullified by tax income loss from the lower stab and at the end worsening trade).
I converted as much as was possible. From start there were 8 with wrong religion and now there are 4 left. There were 5 succesful conversions but a province on New Foundland defected to France from SWE and Aenigma said we could keep it.
The main reason for the high stab cost is the BB value. I noticed revolt risk from nationality in North America. Apparently you have taken them in war. Offensive war perhaps?
Anyhow, one cannot have a nation with stab cost 30 times the monthly income. France is now down to 5323d and thus only around 24 months :wacko:
BB is now at 40. Had it been for example 20 your stab cost would have been 2867 which still is much too high compared to the income but possible to work with. If we add serfdom 10 to that they would have been 2100.
Looking at this one could ask why I DAed these nations. At least the DA of Provence caused some problems for AUS who were at war with SPA at the moment and marched through Provence to reach SPA proper and that they could not longer do. However now SWE DOWed and EIRE, POR and Poland joined them and then also HOL DOWed poor Spain and that ended the session prematurely as Alexius had had enough and quit midsession.
You are presently well prepared to take actions according to your choice.
Reasearch was put into trade. Whether this was a wise move is doubtful. I never reached trade 6. Perhaps you must focus on land now instead.
Last edited:
Daniel A said:
As someone who subbed England in this game quite some time ago (and FYI as you probably didn't follow this game that closely back then): Spain wasn't that innocent...back then (early 16th century) it could easily have beaten England on its own...it did however decide to participate in a gang (the worst I've been the victim of in my (still pretty short) time as player in EU2 MP
). It was the country that grabbed most and the one that used existing natives to destroy my (well, Bob's. I subbed) colonies to replace then with its own. Never before had the fact that someone was ganged made me grin...until I read Alexius' Spain was ganged
PS: Daniel...don't forget mighty Tobago
Interesting reading Mio. This certainly give a new perspective to what occurred. If you are a ganger yourself you well deserve to be ganged. I agree 100% about that. Indeed, I have organised such gangs several times and it has left nothing but a sweet taste in the mouth afterwards
It would be very interesting to hear Alexius' view on this. Perhaps ENG had taken part in a gang of SPA before you were ganged?
It would be very interesting to hear Alexius' view on this. Perhaps ENG had taken part in a gang of SPA before you were ganged?
Daniel A said:Interesting reading Mio. This certainly give a new perspective to what occurred. If you are a ganger yourself you well deserve to be ganged. I agree 100% about that. Indeed, I have organised such gangs several times and it has left nothing but a sweet taste in the mouth afterwards
It would be very interesting to hear Alexius' view on this. Perhaps ENG had taken part in a gang of SPA before you were ganged?
england didn't dow spain before alexius ganges him i think and definatly not a gangbang
I had not attacked Spain in the one session before he ganged my england.
Interesting that Holland and Sweden were in that gang as well.
Interesting that Holland and Sweden were in that gang as well.
Dr Bob said:I had not attacked Spain in the one session before he ganged my england.
Interesting that Holland and Sweden were in that gang as well.
sweden dowed before the other 2 did and whitepeaced moment i got your maps iirc
spain was the 1 asking for a joined attack on england
and third you helped bb against me the week before so was kinda pissed
i only agreed to attack you cause of that help vs me before
Daniel A said:
Well the problem is that France was rather neglected if i may say so by the previous players. So a deal was arranged so that France could take English NA, since it was almost annexed by Holland. But this really raised my bb a lot, but it had too be done quickly as Spain was closing in on them. After that we arranged a deal for Canada and many of us thought little BB will be coming from there since it is in human hands. But much bb came from it and my bb border dropped as well and too make things worse 2 civil wars broke out. So the government collapsed, which after seemed the best thing to happen. It lowered my bb to under the border. After that the only goal was too rebuild the whole of France untill it is in a good position again.
And who could do this better then you Daniel
. Thank you for subbing me, ill continue where you left France again.BTW wasn't I in war with Spain at the beginning?
Yes Sander, FRA was at war. I got WP suggestions from both AUS and SPA and I asked the whole game if you would have accepted these proposals and I was told you would. Think it was Drake who said so.
Anyhow, when I then could get a better understanding of the French position I must say I was quite happy about it.
Whoever started that war?
How many BB points did the NorthAmerican adventure cost you?
Anyhow, when I then could get a better understanding of the French position I must say I was quite happy about it.
Whoever started that war?
How many BB points did the NorthAmerican adventure cost you?
admiral drake said:
Sweden was indeed the least greedy one. By far. And I had been warned by Bob for NL and Sweden, as he expected they would try something. Spain joining in (or being the one who actually planned it) was the completely unexpected part
Daniel A said:
most of the bb came from the english part of Na iirc wich was ai at the time of france attacking them
admiral drake said:
Oooh, taking that many of this kind of provinces for 2 BB a province.... This is horrendous.
The one doing it should really apply for a one day lecture by professor Daniel on the topic "stability - trade - prosperity - the key to success".
And if someone does not understand the connection between stability and BB points... Well then I recommend other lectures, however as they are more basic they are not given by myself but by my junior colleagues such as.... hehe... now you no doubt thought I would give you the names of my lesser colleagues, but that would be against the forum rules
BTW, how can NL have taken all of ENG and still have so low BB? Was that not as well an offensive war versus the AI?
When I study the expansion of BB I can see this
Code:
Number of BB points in end saves
YEAR FRANCE NL
1634 1 0
1654 0 4 (7 English provinces taken)
1676 56 15 (16 English provinces and many in Aisa taken)
1687 43 10It certainly looks like FRA made a turboannexation. Gaining 56 BB in one round is quite impressing. Is all that FRA owns in NA now former English possessions?
And yes, the dutch performance, taking all of this while keeping a low BB is quite an accomplishment although a bit mysterious at a casual glance.
Daniel A said:Oooh, taking that many of this kind of provinces for 2 BB a province.... This is horrendous.
The one doing it should really apply for a one day lecture by professor Daniel on the topic "stability - trade - prosperity - the key to success".
And if someone does not understand the connection between stability and BB points... Well then I recommend other lectures, however as they are more basic they are not given by myself but by my junior colleagues such as.... hehe... now you no doubt thought I would give you the names of my lesser colleagues, but that would be against the forum rules
BTW, how can NL have taken all of ENG and still have so low BB? Was that not as well an offensive war versus the AI?
When I study the expansion of BB I can see this
Code:Number of BB points in end saves YEAR FRANCE NL 1634 1 0 1654 0 4 (7 English provinces taken) 1676 56 15 (16 English provinces and many in Aisa taken) 1687 43 10
It certainly looks like FRA made a turboannexation. Gaining 56 BB in one round is quite impressing. Is all that FRA owns in NA now former English possessions?
And yes, the dutch performance, taking all of this while keeping a low BB is quite an accomplishment although a bit mysterious at a casual glance.
dutch let others take colonys then diploannexed what was left of england
also lost provs to china iirc to dump some bb
Can't play this Saturday most likely. Is a slim chance I'll be free, but I'm not relying on it. Should have enough time to find a sub.
fraese said:
k since daniel cantake spain perm next week
fraese seems to be missing ?
and rinak can't make it
and i won't play tomorow (my birthday today-dads birthday tomorow)
i think we should postpone the session for a week
and see then
i think i will resign from this game, sorry guys but i'm running low on time lately and i have to choose what i will continiu and what not,
if needed ill generate leaders for next session and ghost something next few sessions but i won't host and won't play active anymore.
gl guys...
if needed ill generate leaders for next session and ghost something next few sessions but i won't host and won't play active anymore.
gl guys...
admiral drake said:
Well it was in the air for some time, thank you for all the things you have done for this game Drake.
I think we need to discuss with all the players how to go on now.
Sander_NL said:
Well, even if Daniel plays Spain we're now missing Sweden. Seems rather pointless to me. Better to take a break and then play EGA 6.
Last edited:
Is this a dead game or does the corpse move? In case it does my offer still stands.
Perhaps we should go for a Tsunami this weekend?
Perhaps we should go for a Tsunami this weekend?