Victory Points on GC....

[unmerged(703)]

I just finished a GC as Sweden. Highest difficulty, second highest aggressiv.... Using Swedish 1.07b...

Had a rough race with Spain. What made it in the end was that I left Spain alone in the South America (they took most of it before I had the chance to even be there), since I only can take 3 provinces per war.
Went for Japan and China.... Took some effort but the production and tax income is great ;-)

I was thinking of a AAR, but you just get absorbed by the game and miss all the juicy deatils for all history freaks ;-) Save file available for anyone who wants to see a Swedish Asia ;-)

VP result:
Sweden 7425
Spain 5842
Russia 1856
France 1700
Ottoman 1692
England 1605
Portugal 1495

My strategy was to be building rather than fighting. Now this still ended up in a lot of wars since I early allied up with Russia and kept the alliance with them through the game. During the whole game I never had a stability below 1. Only started war on Japan, China and Denmark. The rest was 'first blood' from others....

Result. China, Japan, Australia, most of SE Asia, India and a big chunk of Northern America Swedish. Most of Central Europe Swedish.

It was fun and even if the techs was all full around 1720, I needed until 1670 to pass Spain in points.
I was superior in Economy and warfare. Really sucked in exploration and diplomacy.....

Anyone else have any indications on points in the GC..... My England GC is ending too....

Next after Sweden is Russia....

------------------
bmolsson
*Just passing by*

 

[unmerged(698)]

This was on the hardest? Either you're really good or the AI is really stupid. I think they're still not smart enough, you shouldn't be able to conquer that much on the hardest difficulty, you think?

Anyway, GG!

 

[unmerged(620)]

i played GC as sweden several times now (old patch) and now i will start another one! nice to have someone to compete against. perhaps we should have a rankinglist or something similar?

 

[unmerged(703)]

I think it is important to say that I did have a difficult time the first 200 years..... I was constantly outnumbered and Russia saved me more than once to get a piece and my provinces remained in my ownership.

After I had taken Japan things started to turn and after China (using Japan as a base), the game was easy. India was the last and the toughest. Without China and Japan I would not have won the game....

Then of course, being superman incarnated makes things much easier ;-)

------------------
bmolsson
*Just passing by*

 

[unmerged(673)]

I agree with Dwarsen. If you were able to conquer Asia without problems playing with Sweden, there's something wrong with the A.I.

It should be possible, when a nation become too much strong , that the rest form an alliance anti-...
That's Historical.
If not, the XVI spanish empire or the XVIII french empire would have conquered the world just walking as you did .

 

[unmerged(703)]

So nobody believe that I actually is good ;-(

First of all, Spain could not be defeated. Russia was my ally (Swedens largest threat), which made my need for troops against Poland, Pskov, Ottoman etc to a minimum.

Taking Japan was easy, but China was not easy. Maybe they should have some tweak in their land tech, since an early attack would be a disaster.

Note that without a strong base in SouthEast Asia, this would not be possible. More than 50 % of my army was in Asia when I attacked and I was very hectic in making friends in Europe....
Spain was busy whipping the but of Spain and they all had allies all over the place.

So my strategy was seize the opportunity....

Now, what have all you other guy's had for point... Let me know if the AI sucks or I am just great......



------------------
bmolsson
*Just passing by*

 

[unmerged(436)]

bmolsson,
I'm interested to know if you conquered Japan and China in one single fell swoop or in multiple wars? I too find that on the hardest settings these (and the Indian provinces) are teh key to victory. The taxes you receive from the populations together with the huge recruitment base for military operations nearly always makes you the winner.
I think the problem is the ease with which a European power can build a city and then over 10 years built hundreds of thousands of troops from that single city. These can then invade and conquer Japan or China. I would like to see this toned down somewhat to make it harder to raise enough troops.
The difference in landtech also makes it easier but by 1700 this should be quite large. Maybe limiting conquest to 2 provinces at a time would (a) stop single annexation of the whole country. (b) encourage other European powers to take a piece for themselves when they see the main China and Japan armies reduced.
Paul.

 

[unmerged(703)]

Taking Japan in one swoop is a necessary. You will loose the CB if you go for peace and Japan will not attack you (or you could settle for 2 or 3 provinces).

Taking China without Japan as a base is very hard. You also have to wait until you get a high enough land military tech or you get your butt kicked by the Chinese.

Long wars against China or Japan is not possible without strong bases, since it takes for ever to ship troops from Europe and you loose 25% of them (at the lower sea techs).

For some reason Sweden had an easier way through the Japanese and Chinese defense than the English (?)..... I guess Swedes are something extra ;-)



------------------
bmolsson
*Just passing by*

 

[unmerged(703)]

Come on guy's... There must be some more who have played the game.... Let me see what points you have come up to......
Do I suck or not.....


------------------
bmolsson
*Just passing by*

 

[unmerged(452)]

Originally posted by bmolsson:
(snip)
Taking Japan was easy, but China was not easy. Maybe they should have some tweak in their land tech, since an early attack would be a disaster.

I had a similar experience playing England. Japan was WAY too easy to conquer. What's even worse, the Japanese provinces do not experience any revolts, since as pagans they are considered indifferent to foreign occupation.

Note that without a strong base in SouthEast Asia, this would not be possible. More than 50 % of my army was in Asia when I attacked and I was very hectic in making friends in Europe....
Spain was busy whipping the but of Spain and they all had allies all over the place.

I transported troops (around 80k) from England, using ports in South Africa and SE-Asia as staging points (raising invasion forces in SE-Asia is just too tedious). With this army it was a piece of cake to conquer all of Japan in one swoop.

All Japanese provinces allow recruitment of between 12k and 15k each. So I built two armies of around 80k there to take out China. China had in previous encounters (as allies of the French) fielded a 120k army at tech level equal to mine (maximum), so I felt that I need serious forces to take out China. I was quite surprised when my eventual invasion met next to no resistence. China had dissolved its army! Plain stupid AI stuff, since China has oodles of cash and could easily maintain a 100k army. When I had attacked however, they were not able to raise armies big enough to stop me...

Anyway, my point has been and still is that Paradox made a bad mistake to have those two countries be such powerless minors. They (Paradox) made this even worse by taking everything off text files into code, rendering it impossible to change. I have made this point before: this should really be changed so that optionally China and Japan can develop. I find it hard to accept that in a game trying to be as historical as possible, the tech leader of the period (China) is rendered so powerless. After all, China had opted to stay within their borders. And this decision was a narrow one. It would be more in line with the game in general if China could become a powerhouse as much as the Knights of St.John, or Holland.

Yes, I know the game is called Europa Universalis. and it is supposed to be about Europe conquering the world. However, as 'what-ifs' go, the China-being-expansionist-what-if is more realistic than many if not most other ones touched upon by different AARs.

I hope very much, that Paradox makes the parameters for countries like China, Japan, Iroquis, etc editable as soon as possible.

Now, what have all you other guy's had for point... Let me know if the AI sucks or I am just great......

In my current game as England (in 1779) I am first in VP with about 12000. Spain - surprisingly - comes 4th with some 2000. Probably because I took out the Aztecs which seemed to throw Spain off track seriously. The Incas are still in the game with most of their territories....

/zwingli

[This message has been edited by zwingli (edited 15-02-2001).]

[This message has been edited by zwingli (edited 15-02-2001).]

 

[unmerged(703)]

Originally posted by zwingli:
In my current game as England (in 1779) I am first in VP with about 12000.

That is FAR away from me..... To reach that in my Sweden game I would need at least 50 more years.... Got about 2000 points the last 50 years.....

Maybe I should try China earlier.... Or make a go for South America as well.....

Swedens largest problem was the lack of settlers...... And I don't ship Swedes around the world (most of us are seasick by nature ;-)....



------------------
bmolsson
*Just passing by*

 

[unmerged(452)]

Originally posted by bmolsson:

Swedens largest problem was the lack of settlers...... And I don't ship Swedes around the world (most of us are seasick by nature ;-)....

You are right. With England those settlers from colonial dynanism make a huge difference, particularly after Johan has tweaked the growth formula for colonies. It used to be that is was sufficient to plop down a single settler in - say - North America, leave it alone for 50 years, and come back to fully grown city. No longer. You really need seven settlers at least to grow a city from nothing.

The game mentioned as England was my first with a colonial powerhouse (after games with PLC, Turkey, France). I spent most of the 18th century just trying to keep my settler account below 6 (did not want to waste any: old habits die hard

With the other countries I used to wait for my lone settler to arrive...

So I do not think scores are really comparable across different countries.

What is interesting about my Englandgame is that by 1784, Spain has actually disappeared from the top eight total VP score! England is first with now 14'000 points (this would be 2000 points in six years: that's what you get as the bad boy on the block), then France, Russia, Sweden, Holland, Turkey, and Nubia follow each with around 2000 points. So far, Spain has always been second behind whatever country I played...

/zwingli