Tuesday game - Defeat Before Dismemberment

[unmerged(18425)]

I only related the truth. AUS did not want to join unless PRU joined. SPA+POR did not want to join unless AUS joined. So PRU was the key and then all joined. This is a fact that you just have to accept. BTW Especially POR was very anxious not to join unless we would win.

Would this be true, I am flattered.

Had they stayed neutral the outcome was more in doubt. You did get a good beating in the bay of Venice before the Portuguese fleet arrived at the scene (some weeks into the battle), their crew had unfortunately been given a leave and was sun bathing at Corsica when the English army assaulted the city of Venice and forced the combined 18-1900 French-Venetian fleet to set sail and do battle with Admiral Nelson with some 1150 ships IIRC. But in the long run I guess you would outbuild me.

That's exactly my guess too. So, I continue to blame Portugal then

As I always claim: if you play ENG you must end up as the strongest nation (not least because her superior late phase leaders of course). Incidentally the same can be said of the OE and also possibly Russia although the naval aspect of Russia is normally a problem.

The tricky part is that England must, according to you, end up as the strongest nation in the end, but this also is often very *easy*, (if you measure it according your philosophy) because of her leader file in the end phase. One builds a fleet, sails with Nelson to the opponent and kills it. And then one should be the game winner according to you? I don't think so.

If you want to determine which country is the strongest one, purely by looking at the end game result, England *often* is considered the top dog, simply because of her admirals that just eradicated the fleet of an opponent. As happened in our game too. It thus doesn't say much, if you look to the fact that England has the largest fleet near the end of the campaign....

---------------

In EU2, it is extremely hard to make a good impression with England during the campaign, since this nation is so blessed with her leaders, events and strategical position. To make an impression with England, you should not simply be the strongest power near 1820 (that's easy), but dominate the game from Drake onwards. Win lots of wars, show that you are an able economiser by being the richest nation from Elizabeth onwards and so on.
Simply being the strongest power near 1820 is therefore *NOT* good enough for England to 'win' the game.

This is true for other countries too. I thus flatly refuse to look to the last session only as a measurement, since it always benefits countries with good leaders in the last session. I really hope to convince you to focus less at the end game session too.

Conclusion: To determine which nation 'won' the game, you need to look to the campaign as a whole.

 

[unmerged(18425)]

Venice + France had over 1950 ships. England alone had about 1300 i guess

Current stats shows 1800 for England.

Dear FAL, Napoleon and Davout never fought Blucher, Karl or Wellington :rofl:

Yeah, I hardly could predict all those random deaths

 

[unmerged(36826)]

Yeah, I hardly could predict all those random deaths

This game was obviously bugged for all those nice leaders to die randomly

 

[joriandrake]

all those (h)assassins were well paid

 

[Tonioz]

France and England, because of their historical leader files, were the obvious candidates to lead alliances against each other. Venice just had to pick a party which would be the most interesting.

And Prussia picked the side to be more interesting after we were sure Venice will be at french side.

As it was expected, Austrian soldiers were total waste.
Duke of Austria, i regret and apologize that i made harsh comments during the game, but please try to follow rules:
1. Use mix of infantry and cannons, not only pure infantry after LT51. 70K inf and 300 cannons is okay combination.
2. Do not border your small armies (even 100K pure infantry) big armies of superleader. As you saw Davout and Nappy could kill several your armies in one day.
3. And finally, retreat fast, very fast. You lost war to me, and was severly kicked by France, because you don`t retreat, and you get your leaders and forces annihilated.

Being Austrian ally was painful at this terms At other time Wonko was gentleman to invade only Austria and i concentrated to defence Austria. Blucher randomnly died in second battle vs France, then Sietsen 4-3-5 did that too, so i was left only with von Below 5-5-4.
Karl was killed by France in first own battle. That made impossible invasion to France versus maximum forts. Any hard success at this point will lead that Nappy would retake it easily.

So i played with attrition at austrian lands and massive stacking. Once i could almost kill Nappy, but he could escape. At second, crossing the river Nappy killed about 300K per 3-4 days and had to finish prussian army, which Wonko didn`t do. At third, i killed support 100-110K army of France. And i probably put Nappy in Tirol out of supply, so he should get attrition of 21 percents for month or two. So he came to my 250K by low infantry (around 40K) and mass cannons and was annihilated.

At this time we found that England made deep invasion in France intercepting Davout and killed him. Wonko should follow prussian tactic of avoiding battles and saving troops. It was more than possible to save Davout army and counter-attack England completely. Just no reason to try to win everything at first battle.

So, at the end Prussia solidly growed by 4 european provinces, together with several CCs built meaning raise of MP from 256 to 348.

Well, i didn`t promise anything certain last session as Venice and this session as Prussia to Wonko and Daniel, both of them wanted to grab me in own camp.

After easy defeat of Austria & Sweden, i realize it is hardly to find motivation to fight there, so i chose Wonko to fight (not in bang, i was sure that 900K troops of Venice help him), which was really entertaining and challenging. It seemed hopeless after Blucher was died and Austria quickly lost their army.

 

[unmerged(36826)]

woot for Tonio, good job.


So Blucher died in his second engagement?? I blame you for this FAL

 

[Tonioz]

Besides, had we played until 1819 I would have demanded that you disbanded your fleet or I would have sunk it. There was nothing you could to about it. That is real power .

That is real example of non-punishment because of certain factor of the end of the game. Which sometimes makes last sessions weird with one-sided wars.

 

[Ampoliros]

Yes....the deciding factor in the endgame was Prussia or to be more precise : Tonio.
With his awesome military skills & some luck he was able to turn the war in Austria. The pathetic Archduke received such a beating that he did not even dare to put troops on the front after the first year and only counterattacked when screened by Prussia.

Prussia finaly also turning on France with Tonio leading it decided the endgame. I am confident I would have defeated even Dr. Bob with Prussia or rather : I would have cooperated with Dr. Bob against Austria......as was the agreed plan before session.

I find it tragic and ironic that of all nations it would be Prussia which sealed France´s fate. Prussia, the one nation we always supported with money and men, the one nation we saved from doom & mediocracy. Then again : In this campaign nothing was sacred. You can call me ruthless but at least I am honest in my ruthlessness. I for one find what happened yesterday kind of low - I would never betray a nation in the endgame which was already vastly outnumbered AFTER her sole ally had peaced out. I wouldn´t do this for reasons of both fun and honour.

As for Portugal´s motivations I want to reveal them here the way Moredhel told them to me yesterday and will leave them to you to judge.
Moredhel told me that he betrayed me because he wanted to "teach me a lesson" because I had attacked his Russia in "Dire Striaits II" over 1 year (reallife) ago. I find this below contempt, honestly, for several reasons :

1. Daniel A. (Austria) then attacked Moredhel´s Russia together with me (Sweden). As it seems Moredhel didn´t remember this part of the operation.
2. Attacking a country because you have some kind of grudge with it´s player, over one year old and totaly not relevant in the present campaign is just mean and low, imho.
3. Doing so is obviously not in Portugal´s best interests - after all : What benefit did Portugal get from repeatedly betraying us versus the nosedive Moredhel´s reputation has taken and will continue to take?

Seriously, I for one am disgusted to the max with you, Moredhel. I do not believe that I will EVER play in another campaign with you, for, imho, you have crossed a line here.
And to think that I was the one who offered you the Perm-Portugal-Position in the first place just makes me sick...

 

[unmerged(36826)]

Relax Amp


I was wondering which side Tonio would take, I didn't know which I was going to take going into the last session it was fun to keep switching alliances and getting lots of people to fund me

 

[Tonioz]

well, i didn`t have exact plans too, so i masked for everyone "at first i want to kick Austria and return provinces".
If France would be banged by whole world including Venice, i would join on their side. I was intended a bit to join vs Nappy, but in rather fair situation, which i informed Daniel in private chat. So i got my fun for these two sessions.

Well, Wonko, as you see diplomacy can never rule whole the game. People, who you played by diplomacy, at the end came to you, remembering you betrayed them. Maybe you didn`t betray all them, but they got the image like you did. So perhaps active diplomatic position to have things secure hits you as boomerang.
Ironically even i came to you, though i did only for local reason of searching fighting fun.

 

[labalag]

As far as we know centralisation has nothing to do with the chance to get a CW (or am I forgetting something ). Apparently just an unlucky random CW. Extremely nasty to get one this late in the game and quite undeserved as you had no BB points and serfdom 10 and inoo4 so stab costs should not be that high - or did you own a lot of muslim shit provinces?

Well I was under the impression that low centralisation raised your chances for a CW... The onyl Shiite provinces I had were the ones conquered from the OE and some in the colonies I hadn't bothered to convert.

BTW I love your sig! Especially the new line
"I played the Ottoman Empire in Conflicts and Converts: Winter Revenge and all I got were some dead Erzherzogs."

I had not seen that one before

Thanks, actually that line has beent there since C&C ended...

 

[unmerged(18425)]

Centralization DOES affect your odds at a civil war, the lower the centralization the higher the odds (but you must be at stab 0 or lower of course).

 

[unmerged(6147)]

Yeah, I hardly could predict all those random deaths

After the game I was told that Archduke Karl died in his first battle. Random death or did his army get annihilitated?

 

[unmerged(6147)]

1. Daniel A. (Austria) then attacked Moredhel´s Russia together with me (Sweden). As it seems Moredhel didn´t remember this part of the operation.

Interesting. I did not remember it was Moredhel who played Russia.

I went to Tonioz excellent stats site and could see that Moredhel's last session was the one ending in 1622. And that same session was incidentally my first. As I remember you and me Wonko did not strike Russia directly but at later sessions. So I think I was not part of that attack. However I may remember wrongly.

 

[unmerged(6147)]

Relax Amp


I was wondering which side Tonio would take, I didn't know which I was going to take going into the last session it was fun to keep switching alliances and getting lots of people to fund me

Bob, you know I counted on your support. Do you mean to say you took my continuous assistance without in your heart dedicating yourself to me... I am quite shocked.

 

[unmerged(36826)]

Bob, you know I counted on your support. Do you mean to say you took my continuous assistance without in your heart dedicating yourself to me... I am quite shocked.

There, there Daniel

You'll survive it I am sure

 

[unmerged(6147)]

There, there Daniel

You'll survive it I am sure

Bob this has to do with our relations in upcoming campaigns. I have been looking forward to play with and against you. If this new info is correct then you have received the last ducat from me. I recommend you to only play nations richer than those I play (a difficult feat to achieve nota bene ), i.e. those that do not need financial or other support.

 

[unmerged(36826)]

Bob this has to do with our relations in upcoming campaigns. I have been looking forward to play with and against you. If this new info is correct then you have received the last ducat from me. I recommend you to only play nations richer than those I play (a difficult feat to achieve nota bene ), i.e. those that do not need financial or other support.

Hmm...so both you and amp believe in holding grudges beyond the game you are playing.

I do not understand that myself but people play in different ways, so in conclusion: "meh".

 

[unmerged(18425)]

I wonder who Daniel 100% trusts then

I don't carry grudges over to another game.*









*Except against those who have defeated me of course

 

[unmerged(36826)]

So FAL hates everyone