Two decades without a leader?

[unmerged(4868)]

Playing Austria..... I experience almost two decades with a single leader. All of them died (due to natural causes)

And then suddenly (in the early 17th century) I have SEVEN leaders???

This really boggles the mind.

In those two decades I really really was desperate for one single leader. Without a leader, it's near impossible to win a campaign against some enemy (France or Turkey) who has very good leaders.

And now suddenly I have SEVEN, count them, seven leaders!! I have so many many leaders I don't know what the heck to do with them.

And you wanna hear the sad part? I have all my 7 wonderful superb Austrian leaders during a time when I am lying low in absolute peace (I just diplomatically annexed Bavaria and conquered Croatia and Illyria from Turks).... so I have no choice but to sit in total peace and quiet to avoid a BB war.

So now I have 7 fantastic leaders, many of them have seige values, and they just sit around doing guard duty.

it makes me wanna cry.....

 

[PatMaster]

You have my deepest symphaties

 

[Vulture]

Well, I guess it's just historical... Austria probably had some great leaders in that time frame... Just like it is wise to avoid big wars with Sweden till the Karls make their appearance

 

[Agelastus]

It happens to all of us-the only countries that seem to avoid this leader dearth, and then plenty, are France and Poland-Lithuania(?), I believe. Since the leaders you get are genuine historical figures, this actually gives you an interesting tidbit about the history of those two countries in the EU period!

 

[unmerged(3627)]

It also means next time you play Austria, you'll know exactly when to plan your major Turkish offensive

 

[BiB]

Poland inderdeed has a very nice set of generals to keep everything ticking over though the French have some early dry spells (which they more than make up for later )

 

[dralizaar]

poland does have nice field generals..but almost no seige generals if you notice ...historically i dont think but one general comes to midn for them that was great at seige work/defence..and that was the general for poland who aided the autrians inside vienna during the ottaman seige..he planned and organzied the defences that held off the ottomans till the chirstian armies <polish hussars, austrians and germans> came to break the seige...but i cannot for the life of me remember his name...gotta do more research...but id like to make sure he gets added and his seige value in...prob a 2 rating for siege at least..nothing outrageous he was goiod but not great great...

also question...Gustav himself was decent at seige but wasnt it really his artillerman general who was the seige master? he who planned their own field breastworks and organized the destruction of enemy field works and forts? as well as commanding the guns that broke up enemy armies as well as walls...wouldnt his seige value be higher then gustav? since gustav himself depended so heavily on his advice and procedding with seiges

 

[BiB]

I found the siege ratings so far quite satisfactory for Poland. Quite a few have a 1 for siege and there's more times with such a general in play than not (early on) though there's no siege "expert" and copared to otehr nations esp the ones with a default siege rating it isn't that much but u can go a long way with 1 in siege early on

Oh and I just love all those cavalery armies Never played PLC before but it is one of the more interesting majors!

 

[Agelastus]

Originally posted by dralizaar
also question...Gustav himself was decent at seige but wasnt it really his artillerman general who was the seige master? he who planned their own field breastworks and organized the destruction of enemy field works and forts? as well as commanding the guns that broke up enemy armies as well as walls...wouldnt his seige value be higher then gustav? since gustav himself depended so heavily on his advice and procedding with seiges

I assume you are speaking of Lennart Torstensson? His siege rating is 2-Gustav only has a siege rating of 1 in the game (I just checked the file!)

 

[dralizaar]

ah yes thats hjim...ok cool i thought they made gustav into a 666 monster hehe so was wondering how they fit in his excellent generals under him who were specialists...


as for poland im not complaining i like their generals and rate...for most part poaldn historically didnt do well in seige work..this is work hurt them most against TO and Prussia who both had excellent defensive works set up..and why poland did so well agaisnt Russia, golde horde, Hungary etc...in the field Poland excelled thats what her generals did best and her cavalry made it a breeze...while playing them i guess i never noticed the guys i got with the 1's as my tech is usually superb and i just asusmed myt ratings came from that rather then leaders... the one general at Viennna i inquired about because i really would like his name and to be sure he is indeed represented in the game properly. The one Polish general who i defintely think needs a bit of stat change might be Polaski the Polish general who foguth in the Polish revolts agaisnt the partitioners in the mid to late 1700's? he won every battle but poloitcal screw ups cost the rebels their chance and he fled to america where he served with distinction...becoming the father of american cavalry...never losing a fight against the british general sent against him, pionerring for america at least, the tactics of hit and run, supply train raiding, long distance strikes into the enemy rear, ambushing enemy columns on the roads etc...he was given many awards by washington and was feared by british officers...but if you look at his stats under Poland's leader files..he sucks