Winter campaigning

[Alerias]

I've started playing a game as novorogrod which is a total blast, but my early experience with the future Russian Empire thought me the harsh realities of winter that I had been able to ignore successfully in western Europe. (But now I realize it must have cost me a few times without me noticing).

It was painfully obvious though, that in Russia, your armies must be in friendly territories, doing nothing, or the supply values drop dramatically. Its possible to "deal with it" by just keeping in midn winter WILL decimate your armies, when cities have to be sieged, but is there not a better way?

Or must we always remember that sieges that lasts reveral years in cold areas will decimate troops? Having just reached land 5, I suppose that will help, but through my three major campaigns to date; the conquest of scandinavia, of lithuania and of the golden horde, winter has always been my main foe.

 

[unmerged(3999)]

In my experience the best way to deal with winter is to let the enemy deal with it. Go on the offensive in the spring, take provinces by the fall (by going defensive for +1 siege, or assaulting everything), and then pull back into your own provinces. In the spring you can smash the remnants of the enemy armies trying to retake their provinces, and repeat.

Being the first country in the area to get to land 5 is a big advantage for this strategy.

 

[Alerias]

Assaults it is then.

Even in MP, I loathe quantity/defensive. I love my shock and morale too much, and quality leads to alot less attrition losses...

 

[Castellon]

Originally posted by Alerias
Assaults it is then.

Even in MP, I loathe quantity/defensive. I love my shock and morale too much, and quality leads to alot less attrition losses...

How does quality lead to less attrition?

 

[unmerged(9563)]

Well, in sheer numbers, It would reduce the attrition. (Because 50000 units would have steeper losses (Numerically, not proportionally) to 10000 units....
But other then that I dunno

 

[Castellon]

Originally posted by KwangTiger
Well, in sheer numbers, It would reduce the attrition. (Because 50000 units would have steeper losses (Numerically, not proportionally) to 10000 units....
But other then that I dunno

Well it is only important for sieging so just use the minimum, which would be the same number regardless of quality.

 

[unmerged(10591)]

Well Russian troops are pretty cheap so i see no problem with feeding them to the old storm during the winter to keep the sieges running... but honestly you must learn to use winter to your atvantage... declare war in fall so the enemy crosses the border and freezes to death by spring...and then Sally Forth... works like a charm for the Russians against those poor Lithuanians....

 

[Alerias]

Yeah I see your point. I might go back some towards Quant, my russian infantery costs 10 ducats now.

As for lower attrition, having larger armies do not raise the supply limits of provinces right? Well that leads to attrition problems for me, unless what you guys do is typically have same size armies fielded anyway and just recruit all the time during the war thus winning the "attrition" war?

The way I was seeing it you were massing 100,000 soldier armies to outmatch smaller but better ones. Shrugs.

Money is not a problem with some countries though. Everyone says France rocks as quantity, but against the AI, umph... Its 1530 in my French Game, GC, I have all the east coast of the US and Canada colonized, beat the Spanish and the portugeuse out of america, got the indians out of central america, conquered india using early provinces there, and in Europe, I have Iberia vassalized, letting them colonize somewhere else before I annex, conquered England, the HRE, parts of the Balkans, all of Italy, and all west africa. Well, my point; I have maxed quality, im mostly naval for colonists, more towards free than serf, yet I pay strictly no attention to costs while recruiting, just manpower, which is plenty large either way. Of course im just on Hard so I dont have to deal with real BB wars...

 

[Castellon]

Originally posted by Alerias
Yeah I see your point. I might go back some towards Quant, my russian infantery costs 10 ducats now.

As for lower attrition, having larger armies do not raise the supply limits of provinces right? Well that leads to attrition problems for me, unless what you guys do is typically have same size armies fielded anyway and just recruit all the time during the war thus winning the "attrition" war?

The way I was seeing it you were massing 100,000 soldier armies to outmatch smaller but better ones. Shrugs.

Money is not a problem with some countries though. Everyone says France rocks as quantity, but against the AI, umph... Its 1530 in my French Game, GC, I have all the east coast of the US and Canada colonized, beat the Spanish and the portugeuse out of america, got the indians out of central america, conquered india using early provinces there, and in Europe, I have Iberia vassalized, letting them colonize somewhere else before I annex, conquered England, the HRE, parts of the Balkans, all of Italy, and all west africa. Well, my point; I have maxed quality, im mostly naval for colonists, more towards free than serf, yet I pay strictly no attention to costs while recruiting, just manpower, which is plenty large either way. Of course im just on Hard so I dont have to deal with real BB wars...

Well France is one of the easiest nations to play, only a Newbie has a chance to screw up with them in SP.

 

[Alerias]

True, my point was that quantity may not be that great, given that for most great powers money is irrelevant after awhile.

I'm still trying to see how having great manpower reserves is that useful, and why the troops dont all die from attrition on the offensive... Quantity IMO is more of a defensive choice, but who plays to defend itself?

 

[unmerged(11008)]

When you get tech, bring 40 cannons in the spring to said province. Most of the Lithuanian and Polish Eastern territories will fall before winter sets in. If the city doesn't fall, retreat all troops except for a few thousand infantry (to keep sige progress...bummer if you had the city in yellow and have to start over again) and bring back the artillery come spring. With 2 40 arty armies, you can capture these territories rather quick.

Note: Make sure your cavalry armies sweep away enemy opposition first.

Good luck.

 

[unmerged(9994)]

It costs more to buy 28000 low quality troops than 10000 high quality ones. They are also better able to win battles in the long run. The single low quality troop is as good for the price as the single high quality one, and the greater number of troops available makes the possible army better with quantity. The 28000 man army is better overall, and as good a value for the cost, as the 10000 man army. So quantity is still better even if price is not an important factor. (I hope my point got across in all this gibberish)

I don't think quantity is particularly a defensive strategy either. Having smaller forces and smaller available forces makes offensive wars harder and less palatable. The main problem you face in a WC after the first couple bb wars is lack of troops to take provinces at the rate you want to.

 

[Tormodius]

It's actually very realistic. Winter is THE foe...
Report from the 1700 century war between Norway and Sweden:

"In the mountains near Härjedalen, soldiers were found dead in large numbers. Some were sitting in birth positure. Some still with bread in their mouths. It was a terrifying sight. "
- Obvisously, they did not have a starvation problem...

In RL winter warfare today we are taught to always keep dry and mobile, and stick toghether like penguins when pinned. Dig into the snow in time before a storm. Waterproof tents and tiny (low smoking) ovens are also very helpful.
I also realized that hot chocolate, crackers & coffee is the key to troop morale and to final victory.
And finally: Don't eat the yellow snow!


So, my words to the Field Marshalls:
- When it's really cold and wet,
you'd stay home and oil yer muskette! ;-)

 

[unmerged(7374)]

Originally posted by Alerias
winter has always been my main foe.

As a Russian, it should be your best friend.

 

[unmerged(10911)]

Don't you just get fed up reading how good people are in terms of capturing huge slices of the map?

Its so easy to boast on a message board about how good you are, when there is no way to prove it! Also, not everyone has the time to play the game for hours every single day, thereby learning the game inside out. Whilst it can be important as part of a thread to talk about how you are doing, sometimes it is just such blatant boasting.

The same applies in this post which is meant to be about the effects of winter.

As has been mentioned, playing as France is relatively easy due to the number of resources, although in a past game I played, France were totally annihilated. It is literally possible, within the different continents, for any nation to emerge dominant.

An unfortunate thing that seems to be mildly prevalent amongst some people on here is snobbishness against new/newer players. Remember, everyone starts off as a new player, and not everyone has time to learn a game inside out! I do try to myself, if its one I get involved in that is.

Anyway, its an enjoyable game to play, and is interesting for the above mentioned fact, that a large nation such as France is not guaranteed to be successful. Also, that it is not necessarily down to the human player to influence this as the AI can cause many variations.

 

[unmerged(8576)]

Uhh.. we discuss the game.. it´s what the forum is for. And who is snobbish against newbies? Don´t take everything so seriously, mate.



Welcome, BTW!

 

[Owen]

Originally posted by DoctorPlague
It's actually very realistic. Winter is THE foe...

For a similar view, just listen to the Tchaikovsky's 1812 Overture. The revolutionary French didn't solve the problem, and the Nazis certainly didn't.

Two lessons this tells you for playing Russia, or in fact Lithuania, Poland or Sweden. 1. Fight on your territory, but let attrition do its job first. 2. Rack up war score in game by concentrating on field armies, only besieging provinces you intend to take in peace.

 

[Castellon]

Originally posted by Bavarian King
Don't you just get fed up reading how good people are in terms of capturing huge slices of the map?

Based on what you say below, I think it is clear you are referring to my post above, about France. So I will take this opportunity to respond.

Its so easy to boast on a message board about how good you are, when there is no way to prove it! Also, not everyone has the time to play the game for hours every single day, thereby learning the game inside out. Whilst it can be important as part of a thread to talk about how you are doing, sometimes it is just such blatant boasting.

But there are ways to prove what kind of player you are.
Read some AARs People tell you right from the start what cheats if any they will be using, then you can see every move they make (depending on writing style). Also there is multi player games and multi player AARs. There is also posting of screen shots (this at least proves your editing skills ). Most telling is what the person says and how they say it. Once you are familiar with the game it becomes easier to tell who knows what they are talking about and who does not. Make your own mental list of who to trust.

The same applies in this post which is meant to be about the effects of winter.

As has been mentioned, playing as France is relatively easy due to the number of resources, although in a past game I played, France were totally annihilated. It is literally possible, within the different continents, for any nation to emerge dominant.

I think you will find that the concessus of the board is that France is the easiest nation to play. An experienced player will not have a problem with France. No matter what the AI does or does not do.

An unfortunate thing that seems to be mildly prevalent amongst some people on here is snobbishness against new/newer players. Remember, everyone starts off as a new player, and not everyone has time to learn a game inside out! I do try to myself, if its one I get involved in that is.

If anything I think this board is very welcoming of new members.
Welcome to the board and congrats on your first post!
SEE!
And just because you are a new member does not mean you are a new player, and visa versa.
NEWBIE is a term of endearment . It is not intended to be snobbish, as you rightly point out we were all newbies at one point. Also pay attention to any smilies in the post they are there for a reason and without them some posts may be misinterpreted.

Anyway, its an enjoyable game to play, and is interesting for the above mentioned fact, that a large nation such as France is not guaranteed to be successful. Also, that it is not necessarily down to the human player to influence this as the AI can cause many variations.

Well we can agree it is an enjoyable game but not with the rest of your statement. I would be very shocked to see Prof. E. lose a game where he played SP France, Especially 1492 Scenario. You see I did not even mention myself, so you cannot accuse me of boasting.

 

[Krasnaya Strela]

Originally posted by Alerias
winter has always been my main foe.

Knave,
Icicles at dawn.

 

[Thanak]

Originally posted by Castellon
I think you will find that the concessus of the board is that France is the easiest nation to play.

I think that England is even easier. You start with English and French culture, Henry and Bedford. Beating the french is pretty much a nobrainer in the 1419 scenario.