Strategic recommendations

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

Strategic recommendations

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Empires in Arms the Napoleonic Wars of 1805 - 1815 >> Strategic recommendations

Page: [1] 2 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

Strategic recommendations - 5/14/2005 6:12:14 PM

Marshall Ellis

Posts: 5630
Joined: 10/2/2001
From: Dallas
Status: offline

Hey guys:

I would like some input as to good advice for each major power. I've seen the tips in the manual but I want YOUR advice that is based upon experience. If your advice seems sound and creative then maybe we'll use it in our strategic-tips section of the manual...

Thank you

_____________________________

Thank you

Marshall Ellis
Outflank Strategy War Games

Post #: 1

RE: Strategic recommendations - 5/14/2005 8:18:56 PM

ardilla

Posts: 399
Joined: 2/25/2004
From: Castellon, Spain
Status: offline

I really think this is a great article and then at the end of the original boardgame rules book there are very very nice tips for each nation, but I guess not many people had read them...

http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=ah/article/ah20030801a

Regards

_____________________________

Santiago y cierra Espa�a!!!

(in reply to Marshall Ellis)

Post #: 2

RE: Strategic recommendations - 5/18/2005 3:11:40 AM

pzgndr

Posts: 3170
Joined: 3/18/2004
From: Maryland
Status: offline

That is a great article! Thanks for the link. So, where's the game already??

(in reply to Marshall Ellis)

Post #: 3

RE: Strategic recommendations - 5/21/2005 11:55:54 AM

crenfrow

Posts: 24
Joined: 3/8/2004
Status: offline

For france you must fight to win the game. If you sit back and arent aggressive you will never win enough pol. points to take the game.

For turkey a great advantage is massing you cavalry and then have a crushing cavalry pursuit if you can win a battle but I think that is covered in the book. Also you could stress the inportance of maintaining and controlling the Dardenelles and possibly as a source of income.

Hope that gives you something to start on.

(in reply to pzgndr)

Post #: 4

RE: Strategic recommendations - 5/21/2005 4:31:59 PM

jamo262

Posts: 82
Joined: 4/21/2003
From: Perth Australia
Status: offline

Strategic deployment of armies dependds on which coalition of Allies is present. The combination of possible coalitions is quite large but in general england and france will always be at war.
If a strong France declares on Prussia and Austria is neutral or worse an ally of France Prussia should leave small garrisons in the west and retreat to the Marsh area near Konigsberg and Combine with the Russian armies. Then the problems for Prussia /Russia are 2. How to protect Konigsberg and How to protect Russian supply depots. The first is the major problem. First assume that victory is not guarenteed but odds must be maximised. this means hitting the french with the best Army possible taking into consideration the following factors. Can cavalry superiority be attained-What is the optimum number of corp the army can contain before a leadership penalty applies (note if napoleon has 6 corps then leadership can drop to 3 and same penalty applies as with a 4 leader)-how much cavalry with its 4 moral can we squeeze in-and inclusion of the best corp from both Russia and Prussia into the army.
This army sets up in the marsh.
Another army with a guard corp(prussian) and any extra cavalry sets up in konigsberg.This army can be supported by the one in Konigsberg if attacked and the inclusion of a guard corp and any cavalry is because the initial moral will last for the whole battle. So now the French have 3 choices.
Attack an optimun army in the marsh
Attack Konigsberg and risk the battle being reinforced,
or doing something else, like going around to the south.
Depot maintanance and protection is very important but remember Napoleons maxim that control of an enemies supply lines consists not of making raids upon them but really mastering them. If the French go around to the south they are really getting a long way from home especially if Poland has not been created.
With the corps on Konigsberg these are other considerations-an english corp could be present-and a diversionary attack could be made on the marsh such that the main body could be prevented from joining. It seems stupid that a 1sp corp could provide this diversion and you should make any attacks of 5 to 1 or more automatic overruns to put an end to such foolishness.

(in reply to Marshall Ellis)

Post #: 5

RE: Strategic recommendations - 5/21/2005 5:07:59 PM

jamo262

Posts: 82
Joined: 4/21/2003
From: Perth Australia
Status: offline

with a classic 1805 and a Prussia that cannot declare war the ausrrians should garison their fortresses and seek to st up with the Russian armies North/East of Vienna in the mountains. Create an "Optimum Army" and protect your supply lines (by their initial deployment as much as anything). Now note the following. If the French move into Hungry by more than 2 areas an insurection corp can be brought out splitting the French Army in Half and exposing it to defeat by the main Austro-Prussian Army. The French have the double move But if the second area they move into is next to the main one place an insurrection crp there as well and attempt to reinforce the battle.

Therre are 2 ways the French can attack Austria in 1805 Via Italy or Bavaria. Italy is good if Prussian is an unknown factor as the German States can act as a sheild against a northern invasion of France- they must attack via Hannover, still dangerous but easier to contain-leave davout or Massena here with a small/medium army.Withdraw before overwhelming forces and deploy such that Napoleon can hit the attacking army with the double move. Even though its winter and money is limited the French can advance quite quickly to Vienna and the foraging values are good and they can look at clearing/screaning the north Italian fortesses and securing Venice. An Austrian set up in the Tyrol is open to an early attack by the weight of the entire French army if it stays put. In the old rules an UMP could be made inactive be battle losses so you nearly always want to mingle corp to "spread the losses" so to speak.

If Austria /Prussia and maybe Russia are going for it in 1805 against France, France might play defensively or try take the offensive and knock off either Austria/Prussia by making them in actve and then concentrating on the other. My brother reckons Austria first then Prussia.The Allies must in this situation ensure that depots are laid down so that the Russian can quickly advance and make joint armies. Furthermore the mountain areas north of Prague should be denied the French as they make an excellent concentration point for the French; allowing them to strike at one enemy then another-they are central and mountainous.

If France and Spain are allied in 1805 I go the Trafalgar/Invasion option.

(in reply to Marshall Ellis)

Post #: 6

RE: Strategic recommendations - 5/22/2005 6:45:46 PM

NeverMan

Posts: 1722
Joined: 2/24/2004
Status: offline

Is this for the A.I. or simply for the manual?

The A.I. should have the ability to be "trained" by major power players. I know that's hard to do, so I won't expect a great A.I. ever, which is why I still think it's pointless to spend countless hours holding this game up for something that is never going to be any good.

(in reply to jamo262)

Post #: 7

RE: Strategic recommendations - 5/22/2005 10:11:14 PM

ktotwf

Posts: 182
Joined: 6/25/2004
Status: offline

This is another article about Strategy:

http://www.dlc.fi/~hurmavi/empires4.html

(in reply to NeverMan)

Post #: 8

RE: Strategic recommendations - 5/23/2005 12:27:07 PM

jamo262

Posts: 82
Joined: 4/21/2003
From: Perth Australia
Status: offline

quote:

it's pointless to spend countless hours holding this game up for something that is never going to be any good.

I agree, but would you go so far as to say dispence with the AI altogether for now?

I do.

_____________________________

(in reply to NeverMan)

Post #: 9

RE: Strategic recommendations - 5/23/2005 7:24:38 PM

NeverMan

Posts: 1722
Joined: 2/24/2004
Status: offline

Yes I would. The A.I. for this game is NEVER going to be any good, so why waste valuable man hours putting forth the effort to design and implement it?

I would MUCH rather see TCP/IP Play than an A.I., JMO.

(in reply to jamo262)

Post #: 10

RE: Strategic recommendations - 5/23/2005 7:49:22 PM

Pippin

Posts: 1233
Joined: 11/9/2002
Status: offline

quote:

My brother reckons Austria first then Prussia.

I believe given the choice, most French players want to target Austria first, as she appears to have a weaker army (and other problems to watch out for). The problem with this, is by your time she is finished off (if not quick), Prussia becomes loaded up with Cav factors, and then France has another issue on her hands. I've seen Prussia fully loaded basicaly crush France single handedly, and not all was due to just lucky die rolls & chit picks. I will never under-estimate the power of fully loaded Prussian corps. If you spy Britain handing her extra $$$ early, be VERY cautious.

Why so many people bid so low for Prussia, has me puzzled.

_____________________________

Nelson stood on deck and observed as the last of the Spanish fleets sank below the waves�

(in reply to NeverMan)

Post #: 11

RE: Strategic recommendations - 5/23/2005 10:14:32 PM

pfnognoff

Posts: 631
Joined: 5/6/2003
From: Zagreb, Croatia
Status: offline

They bid low for Prussia just because some people know that France is much better off going after Prussia first while Brunswick/Hochenloche are in charge, and because Prussia has a small home nation that if France insists can be reduced to almost nothing in two wars. I'm not saying it is good play on part of France to kick Prussia out I just say it is possible.

(in reply to Pippin)

Post #: 12

RE: Strategic recommendations - 5/23/2005 11:01:55 PM

NeverMan

Posts: 1722
Joined: 2/24/2004
Status: offline

Yes, I generally attempt to remove Prussia from the coalition first, then move on to Austria, which isn't too hard once Prussia is gone. If spain is part of the coalition it can wait, unless I am in desperate need of PPs.

(in reply to pfnognoff)

Post #: 13

RE: Strategic recommendations - 5/27/2005 9:23:24 AM

pooroldflick

Posts: 12
Joined: 3/8/2004
Status: offline

My two favorite countries to play is Prussia and Great Britain (been playing against crenfrow for years)...

With Great Britain, the key is to use your wealth to your advantage. The more you can do through diplomacy, the better. Also, control the seas with your fleets. Early on in the game if you find yourself at war with a country, destroy their navy. Build up your army and aim to conquer the minor countries that have decent land forces, such as Naples and Sweden.

Prussia has become my favorite country to manage. I've found that if you invest in garisons in all of your cities, Prussia looks much bigger than it is. It's key to gain control of some of the countries in the Rhine, but don't get sucked into an early war with France. Allow Austria to fall before that happens. It's also advantageous to work with Great Britain early in the game even if it's unofficial.

(in reply to Marshall Ellis)

Post #: 14

RE: Strategic recommendations - 5/27/2005 10:48:04 PM

NeverMan

Posts: 1722
Joined: 2/24/2004
Status: offline

I am not sure how Prussian can defeat France without Austria, but OK, whatever. Also, in the beginning, I have seen a Prussia/Au/GB coalition against France start the game at war with France, because in the beginning Au/Pr have a good advantage. I know that combined they can out produce Fr with GB monetary support and I am not keen on this strategy, but I have seen it work and work well.

If you beat France with Prussia and did it without Au, did you have GB and Ru helping you? How did that work?

(in reply to pooroldflick)

Post #: 15

RE: Strategic recommendations - 5/28/2005 5:08:05 AM

Titi

Posts: 153
Joined: 9/15/2001
From: Montr�al
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: NeverMan

Also, in the beginning, I have seen a Prussia/Au/GB coalition against France start the game at war with France, because in the beginning Au/Pr have a good advantage. I know that combined they can out produce Fr with GB monetary support and I am not keen on this strategy, but I have seen it work and work well.

I disagree with this one for having already tried this. It was more Russian support than GB, but basically it was the same result. During the first three months of 1805, it's mainly winter when forage is harmful, depot maintenance cost a lot, armies are not combined and in place, money is low and gift aren't allowed before the first economic phase. So the result is a free access and CONQUEST for the french to the german and even italian minors and leaving him the initiative...that's he may use than diplomatically.

(in reply to NeverMan)

Post #: 16

RE: Strategic recommendations - 5/28/2005 7:20:01 AM

NeverMan

Posts: 1722
Joined: 2/24/2004
Status: offline

When a MP declares war an a Minor, the person at war (either auto or with a great advan., can't remember) gets control of the minor. All you have to do then is keep him out for a month and it's yours (Au or Pr). Why would you start the game at war with France then declare war on Minors? It's to your advantage NOT to do this. France will HAVE to just to keep up with production prices.

(in reply to Titi)

Post #: 17

RE: Strategic recommendations - 5/28/2005 7:32:54 AM

pooroldflick

Posts: 12
Joined: 3/8/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: NeverMan

I am not sure how Prussian can defeat France without Austria, but OK, whatever. Also, in the beginning, I have seen a Prussia/Au/GB coalition against France start the game at war with France, because in the beginning Au/Pr have a good advantage. I know that combined they can out produce Fr with GB monetary support and I am not keen on this strategy, but I have seen it work and work well.

If you beat France with Prussia and did it without Au, did you have GB and Ru helping you? How did that work?

We didn't complete the game, but it sure made me a believer in Prussia. Typically at the beginning there is a land grab for the Rhine (if you're playing with the original rules). I've found that if you're not careful you can loose out if you're pulled into a war with France too quickly. A strong alliance with Austria will either ensure this with the land grabbing or prevent it. It's a must that you talk things out clearly with Austria on which countries you'll go for and what will be done if you're bullied by France.

Go to the extremes to prevent a war with France before 1806 so Prussia can build up garison in major cities and storing up the manpower. When a war with France ensues, work out a deal with Great Britain to loan the finances to dig into the manpower reserve and boost the army quickly and defences.

(in reply to NeverMan)

Post #: 18

RE: Strategic recommendations - 6/1/2005 4:42:42 AM

Titi

Posts: 153
Joined: 9/15/2001
From: Montr�al
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: NeverMan

When a MP declares war an a Minor, the person at war (either auto or with a great advan., can't remember) gets control of the minor. All you have to do then is keep him out for a month and it's yours (Au or Pr). Why would you start the game at war with France then declare war on Minors? It's to your advantage NOT to do this. France will HAVE to just to keep up with production prices.

Sorry, i probably wasn't clear.

I will restart. An alliance of prussia and austria doesn't have the ability to combine and move in strength before april and the first economic phase for a lack of fund. So it give a three months and even more time for the french to freely declare war and conquer the minors he wants or even grabs the prussian and austrian controlled ones. The french player take the initiative and can select if he want to come in sight of Berlin or Vienna.

(in reply to NeverMan)

Post #: 19

RE: Strategic recommendations - 6/2/2005 3:09:35 AM

NeverMan

Posts: 1722
Joined: 2/24/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Titi

Sorry, i probably wasn't clear.

I will restart. An alliance of prussia and austria doesn't have the ability to combine and move in strength before april and the first economic phase for a lack of fund. So it give a three months and even more time for the french to freely declare war and conquer the minors he wants or even grabs the prussian and austrian controlled ones. The french player take the initiative and can select if he want to come in sight of Berlin or Vienna.

I disagree, You can begin manuevering <sp> and mixing corps right away. We can debate this strategy back and forth till we are both blue in the face, but hopefully we will be able to take it a step further and implement it in an CEiA game with each other one day. :)

(in reply to Titi)

Post #: 20

RE: Strategic recommendations - 6/4/2005 3:46:01 AM

Titi

Posts: 153
Joined: 9/15/2001
From: Montr�al
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: NeverMan
I disagree, You can begin manuevering <sp> and mixing corps right away. We can debate this strategy back and forth till we are both blue in the face, but hopefully we will be able to take it a step further and implement it in an CEiA game with each other one day. :)

I disagree also, with prussian and austian budget at the start of 1805, you can but losing 10 or twenty factors by foraging is giving a beautiful smile

to the french and

for the german coalition, even more if it's before engaging the Grand Arm�e.

Now i accept the offer for the match... who play the french then?

(in reply to NeverMan)

Post #: 21

RE: Strategic recommendations - 6/4/2005 7:32:16 PM

NeverMan

Posts: 1722
Joined: 2/24/2004
Status: offline

Who to play the French??

Good Question........... perhaps Pippen would indulge us!

(in reply to Titi)

Post #: 22

RE: Strategic recommendations - 6/6/2005 3:48:36 AM

Pippin

Posts: 1233
Joined: 11/9/2002
Status: offline

We shall see...

_____________________________

Nelson stood on deck and observed as the last of the Spanish fleets sank below the waves�

(in reply to NeverMan)

Post #: 23

RE: Strategic recommendations - 6/6/2005 11:24:40 AM

Forward_March

Posts: 201
Joined: 6/26/2003
Status: offline

I'd be happy to be the French. Perhaps I can engage Spain and Russia in a dismemberment-of-England-alliance while the Central European powers struggle to come up with enough bread to move their armies. Imagine the concept...the northern Spanish provinces of Ireland, Scotland, and Wales.

(in reply to Pippin)

Post #: 24

RE: Strategic recommendations - 6/6/2005 11:43:00 AM

jamo262

Posts: 82
Joined: 4/21/2003
From: Perth Australia
Status: offline

What sort of victory conditions ae you using Marshall; the ones from the original game or the national aspiration rules? I think depending on the answer the strategic advice will differ. Also do you need the advice for programming the AI or just for the rule book?

_____________________________

(in reply to Marshall Ellis)

Post #: 25

RE: Strategic recommendations - 6/6/2005 1:10:39 PM

ardilla

Posts: 399
Joined: 2/25/2004
From: Castellon, Spain
Status: offline

The basic boardgame victory conditions.

The aspirations rules will be an upgrade for the future, if i recall it right.

_____________________________

Santiago y cierra Espa�a!!!

(in reply to jamo262)

Post #: 26

RE: Strategic recommendations - 6/6/2005 7:23:36 PM

NeverMan

Posts: 1722
Joined: 2/24/2004
Status: offline

If GB isn't supporting a Pr-Au anti-French alliance financially, then the GB is an idiot. With GB money, Au and Pr should have no problem "moving their army".

It's interesting to see how some people play EiA like Diplomacy while others lean more toward keeping alliances strong and lasting and making sure that balance is kept in the game, which I believe to be GBs job because it helps her out the most.

(in reply to ardilla)

Post #: 27

RE: Strategic recommendations - 6/6/2005 9:05:29 PM

Barbu

Posts: 46
Joined: 10/14/2004
From: Montreal, Canada
Status: offline

He's not necessarily an idiot. Spanish and russian interests tend to clash more with the brits than the french would, as they are usually absorbed in continental warfare. While it doesn't make for an healthy and interesting game for the 5 others, I've seen France and England engaged in a secret or not-so-secret alliance that ended up with basically all of Europe split between the two of them.

(in reply to NeverMan)

Post #: 28

RE: Strategic recommendations - 6/7/2005 12:27:55 AM

NeverMan

Posts: 1722
Joined: 2/24/2004
Status: offline

EDIT (silly me): I have always played GB and France start the game at war together and the certain unconditional obligations (like take Nappy) to have peace between them. This stipulation more or less makes them at war the whole game.

Personally, I would not want to take part in an EiA game where these rules were not at play. Then again, that's just me.

< Message edited by NeverMan -- 6/7/2005 12:29:35 AM >

(in reply to Barbu)

Post #: 29

RE: Strategic recommendations - 6/7/2005 9:34:44 AM

Barbu

Posts: 46
Joined: 10/14/2004
From: Montreal, Canada
Status: offline

I do as well, but not everyone does.

I have also seen a game in which GB and France managed to trick the rest of the world and beat it into submission, despite the mandatory war. It's always something to watch for. I feel that without this rule, it's not in the interests of either country to pursue the historical rivality that existed between the two.

(in reply to NeverMan)

Post #: 30