RE: PBEM 109: Bad food and Bad attitudes - A British AAR (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [Napoleonics] >> Crown of Glory: Emperor's Edition >> After Action Reports



Message

Mus -> RE: PBEM 109: Bad food and Bad attitudes - A British AAR (8/17/2009 11:44:30 PM)

35.5 continued again.

[;)]

France has come back and stated that France is trying to get Russia and Turkey to go after Austria. He is going to be paying money to Prussia for the betrayal of Austria. I am going to try and get France and Russia to also go after Prussia. To abandon the attempt to buy off Prussia.

I am tryin to get a deal worked out with Spain for Malta and Portugal to go to Britain, but everybody I deal with seems to want the Sun, Moon and Stars from me. Don't know if a deal will be worked out or not.



Mus -> RE: PBEM 109: Bad food and Bad attitudes - A British AAR (8/18/2009 6:54:32 AM)

Turn 36. Jun 1795

Economy and Trade.

Pretty much very little new. My development continues at a good pace. Starting to slow a little because all my developments are mid to high level now and take longer to finish. I decided not to build anything this turn as far as military units. I am going to save up my labor. Probably will start my Horse Artillery unit next turn.

I lost my empire status this turn I THINK because Ironwarrior got Malta when the Papal States asked him for protection. My theory is that Malta is considered to be my "home territory" so I take a Empire point hit when it is occupied by somebody else.

I don't know if this is WAD, and the amount of points involved seems way out of whack, so I hope to be able to follow up with Eric or somebody else with WCS to see if my theory is correct.

Like I said earlier, this is the second game in which I have mysteriously lost 4 empire points when somebody took a province listed in my country's glory target list.

Diplomacy.

I moved some troops onto the Continent in preparation to fight Aprezto (Prussia) if need be, but it appears we might finally have an agreement.

I dont know if his early refusal to sign the deal was a result of not understanding the empire points involved or if the 150 money I tacked on to the deal helped sway him. He said it was a little bit of both, and that he felt like he couldn't ask me for money, that he thought it might offend me. In reality to me the deal was always decent for both sides, and a small amount of money to get a mutually beneficial long term territorial consolidation like this is a no brainer for a money rich power like Britain. But this was an exceedingly difficult deal to negotiate. Also, see my point below about players being a real PITA to negotiate with, he NEVER asked for what he thought would make the deal work, think about that, we were on the brink of war!

Basically the manual says a bunch of outdated things about the empire point value of certain things. It says a protectorate is worth 2 points or something, its actually 1 point for the protectorate plus 1 point for every province in the protectorate. It says a conquered province is worth 2 points, actually its only 2 points for the province of a major power, the province of a minor power is only worth 1.

So I offered same deal, Mecklenberg and 10 colonies for Brunswick, and will give him 150 money to sweeten the deal. He says that is acceptable. Hesse is now a moot point as he attacked and conquered it and thus receives the empire point.

My negotiations with Spain fell through. He was going to give me Malta and let me take Portugal as a protectorate. In exchange he had said he wanted an extended enforced peace and a royal marriage.

I had thought that a really good deal for both sides, figured by "extended" he meant 4-5 years since most people make agreements 1-2 years at a time in my experience thus far.

He meant 10 years.

[X(]

Obviously that is completely unacceptable. Of course, I don't have any intention of attacking Spain if I can get what he has that I want (Malta), or get guarantees for what I want that he might get (Corfu, Portugal) out of a deal without a fight.

However, 10 years would be insane. What if he starts acting in collusion with somebody several years from now in a way that hurts my interests? I would then be forced to break my alliance and look bad on the international stage and take a big glory hit.

At present, with him making so much more glory than everyone else by target province, I feel like that would be wrapping up the game, putting a nice bow on it and gifting the win to him.

I hope to be able to come to a more reasonable agreement, but he seemed pretty unmoving on the issue.

As a small gripe, it seems like most players in this game do not have a clue how to haggle about something or negotiate. They all come up with what they want, like sticker price at a big box retail store, and then come Hell or high water that is what they think I ought to pay.

The players I have found reasonable in negotations thus far: Maestro06 (Turkey in this game), Terje439 (France in this game, Austria in Another PBEM), lenin (Prussia in Another PBEM). All the rest it's like pulling teeth trying to come to an arrangement. I almost ended up at war with Prussia over a rearrangement of our territory.

Military.

My units attacking Berg got stuck in there when Matto conquered Bavaria. I had to violate his neutrality in order to move out. I sent him a note about it, telling him to turn off his aggression towards me so we don't end up at war. I also sent a note to my Turkish allies to be ready in case he wants to fight.

Hopefully he doesn't. I don't think Austria wants to fight me, he is about to go to war with France from everything I am hearing back channel. But maybe he doesn't know that yet.

PS. Sorry for all the edits. I typed this up after a long day and was really tired. Lots of typos and incomplete thoughts. Needed to flesh it out a little.



ericbabe -> RE: PBEM 109: Bad food and Bad attitudes - A British AAR (8/18/2009 7:54:02 PM)

Having the highest level of culture is worth 4 points.  (Second highest, is worth two.)  Did other nations happen to develop any culture?



Mus -> RE: PBEM 109: Bad food and Bad attitudes - A British AAR (8/18/2009 9:55:01 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: ericbabe

Having the highest level of culture is worth 4 points.  (Second highest, is worth two.)  Did other nations happen to develop any culture?


Britain has always been really low in the culture standings, both before and after the 4 empire point hit. Think I am in 4th or 5th place? Edit: Correction I have been in 6th or 7th place through the entire game.

In the other game I got hit with this, I was playing Austria and I was and remained 1st place in culture before and after the hit.

Doesn't seem to be related to culture at all. Both hits coincided with other powers getting control of provinces on my glory target list, but not provinces that would seem to correctly be considered "Homeland provinces" as listed in the empire point section of the manual.

Also the amount of the hit doesn't correspond to the manual.

I really wanna get to the bottom of this. Any files you need or anything I can test on my own please let me know.



Mus -> RE: PBEM 109: Bad food and Bad attitudes - A British AAR (8/19/2009 6:06:38 AM)

Turn 37. Jul 1795

I am able to move out of Berg without ending up at war with Austria, so most of my forces are in Hanover or Holstein, with my 1st Corps in Reserve back in England.

Start production of my Horse Artillery in York. This will be my last military unit for the next half a year or so. From now on all my labor and textiles are going to be going into developments as I have 2 or 3 finishing next month and several more after that due over a 3-6 month span.

I decided to abandon the idea of building all banks this next round. Banks will be built in provinces with a Bank level of 4 and below, unless they have a Roads level of 3 or less in which case I will do Roads. Courts are my highest priority in Anglia. Provinces that dont fit those criteria but have low level Barracks and Culture will start to build those up to reasonable levels, roughly evenly split between Barracks and Culture. Barracks helps me get more land doctrine upgrades, Culture helps me boost national morale and glory, and I have a number of provinces with very low culture. In addition to development being a priority I will build another Super-Diplomat once my Courts level in Anglia has made more progress.

Play with my sliders a bit, but don't feel I accomplished much in doing so.

I always feel compelled to experiment for a few minutes each turn to make sure I am squeezing maximum efficiency out of production.

[:D]

I wind up rejecting an Austrian offer to give me Berg for an enforced peace of 2 years. That isn't enough for one thing, for another I told France I wouldn't make a deal with Austria for the duration of our 2 year enforced peace which isn't up till next year sometime.

Spain rejects my earlier offer to buy Malta, no surprise there, our negotiations really fell flat with the 10 year enforced peace curveball thrown in the works.

For the last few turns I have said Europe seemed poised on the brink of war. Things have calmed down a bit, but the underlying tensions remain high, and I would be surprised if this game went more than a year without major wars going on.

There was a ton of diplomatic activity going into this turn and last, and things quiet down a bit this turn.



Mus -> RE: PBEM 109: Bad food and Bad attitudes - A British AAR (8/20/2009 12:46:28 AM)

Turn 38. Aug 1795

My Heavy Artillery has failed an initiative check to attach itself to a Corps in this last turn. I had not realized that Heavy Artillery units have an initiative of 20, half that of normal artillery and a third of horse artillery.

This is concerning as I believe a container moves at the initiative of its slowest unit. This would slow down an entire Corps to initiative 20.

I may end up disbanding the Heavy Artillery already built (as much as this hurts, 120 labor and 300 iron down the drain [:@], I just thank God I didn't build both planned units before I noticed this), and switching my artillery build plans to Horse Artillery instead. Although Horse artillery only gets a +1 counterassault bonus (vs the Heavy Artillery at +2 assault), they are still better than standard Artillery when it comes to quick/instant combat, and this would would make it so my infantry corps move at a speed of 50, at the pace of the slowest units, the infantry.

I have not found that Horse Artillery are less effective in the formula for sieges in my other games, but I will make enquiries of Hard Sarge and other experienced beta testers to make sure they are still effective before I go ahead with this idea.

I am also going to experiment with my Heavy Artillery, attaching it to things, marching it around the country, reattaching, etc. to see just how often initiative checks are failed at 20 initiative. I CAN NOT afford to have a slow force as Great Britain. I have to be fast. There will be situations where I need units to make a quick march and an attach check to get into ships and sail to safety. 20 initiative may not cut it.

If I get back word that Horse Artillery ARE less effective in siege combat I will build 1 more regular Artillery, giving me 2 total in 2 infantry Corps that will have 40 initiative, and I will use these Corps for my siege operations. Horse Artillery will also still be built and put in some Corps for their effectiveness in battle.

So in other words my artillery arm will be broken down in this way:

1. If I find out Horse Artillery is just as effective at sieges as regular Artillery, I will build 3 more Horse Artillery (for a total of 4 Horse Artillery), eventually scrapping my Heavy Art and regular Art.

2. If I find out Horse Artillery are less effective in sieges, I will build 1 more Horse Artillery and 1 more regular Artillery (for a total of 2 Horse Artillery and 2 regular Artillery), eventually scrapping my Heavy Art.

3. If I am not able to find a good answer, I will test for it myself, leaving my 1 regular Artillery in the field as a test unit and building 2 more Horse Artillery (for a total of 3 Horse Artillery), eventually scrapping my Heavy Art.

My deal with Prussia went through this turn. This deal is good for both of us. War is thus averted, and we smaller armied players can start worrying about real threats to peace and stability like France and Austria.

[:'(]

The Brunswick militia was moved to my capital which I thought odd, I think the troops should have disbanded once total control of the Protectorate was transferred to Prussia. I didn't want or need them so I disbanded them myself.

Mecklenberg is in an uproar, in unrest for 9 months after having been given to me by Prussia.

Kinda funny, as I have a very low tax rate, a high standard of living with lots of sumptious goods consumption, and extend liberally respect the rights of my subjects.

They will learn to love me with time. Maybe they are just concerned that English (from what I hear) is a PITA to learn to speak as a second language.

[:D]

I suffered a critical shortage of Labor resource this turn, so wasn't able to continue all the developments I wanted. I placed priority on a new Courts for Anglia, and took labor out of development in provinces without a development in progress and put it into making extra food. This allowed me to reduce food production in provinces capable of making lots of Labor resource and pumping that up for awhile.

If I go the pure Horse Artillery route I will need more horses as well. I will talk to Ottomans and Prussia.

I think since our deal fell through Spain has decided to strategically cut production in the provinces we have trade deals in, as many of my deals with Spain have been falling through.

One of these days me and Ironwarrior will play a game and not end up being enemies. For now it looks like we are headed for trouble.

[;)]





Mus -> RE: PBEM 109: Bad food and Bad attitudes - A British AAR (8/20/2009 3:07:08 AM)

Turn 38.5

In negotiations with Spain again.

Of course he wants a really long agreement with me, or doesn't want me to have Portugal. Neither one really works for me. 10 years is simply unreasonable. It is half the remaining time in the game. I am fine with 4-5 years and renewing our agreement a year before it ends, I send him a long message explaining my logic.

We will see what happens.

I may post the email I sent him here eventually. It was too long to fit in a PM, LOL. I am home sick and bored as hell.

[:D]



brianlala -> RE: PBEM 109: Bad food and Bad attitudes - A British AAR (8/20/2009 9:08:48 AM)

Good stuff Mus. A couple of questions:

1. How is Austria going to avoid getting steamrolled by someone? It seems like Austria (with or without Prussia) is in a pretty perilous position once wars start breaking out.

2. Who is going to take down Spain? If you sign even a 5 year peace deal with them, doesn't it make Spain's life extremely easy? Spain could just pick the most inopportune time (for France) and attack it once a war with Austria inevitably starts.

3. What about Russia? They seem to be getting a free pass in this game.



Mus -> RE: PBEM 109: Bad food and Bad attitudes - A British AAR (8/20/2009 11:39:13 AM)

Hey Brian, that is my name as well BTW.

1. Austria IS in a very dangerous position. I have good reason to believe there will be a war between France and Austria within the next 2 years. I also happen to know that France is trying to get Turkey and Russia to attack as well, and Prussia to sit out at the very least.

My opinion is that the Austrian player will immediately surrender if attacked by 2 or 3 powers at once, suffering minimal damage in the ensuing negotiations because of extremely low casualties, and gaining a large number of land experience in the resulting military reforms. These quick surrenders in hopeless situations are an ISSUE for game balance purposes in my opinion, as well as many other players.

It doesn't quite make sense that if you surrender right off the bat your opponent doesn't get to demand much from you in the treaty, no matter how overpowered you would be if hostilities continued.

Anyways, if Austria quickly surrenders, the war will be delayed for another 18 months and Austria will emerge about the same strength or stronger. During that time both sides will seek to add more allies and seduce defectors to shift the balance of power as well as gobble up any remaining unaligned minors. By the time things kick off again, I hope to have a little power bloc of my own, and support the WEAKER side, once it becomes clear who that is.

2. Spain has a kind of weird position as well. The early Glory lead will evaporate after one lost war, and the Glory is mostly coming from protectorates (which are fragile, easy to lose through invasion or insurrection) in Italy. As you may have read I am in negotiations with Spain, and actually hope to be able to form a long term partnership.

Failing that I will be taking down Spain more than likely, but my preferred outcome would be at least an enforced peace, royal marriage and territorial division to my satisfaction. Best case scenario would be some kind of working alliance.

BTW I forgot to mention me and Ironwarrior (Spain) had a possible breakthrough on negotiations. I think we will be able to do business long term.

[;)]

Whoever emerges victorious from the big battles between Austria and France and their allies over the next 2-4 years will be the biggest threat to Spanish security. This is because both France and Austria have conflicting Glory targets in Italy. I can acrue LOTS of Glory in wars to help defend Spanish interests.

In the event of an absolute monster emerging on the Continent that it appears can't be beaten immediately, I will be forced to withdraw from the Continent and start looking to add partners to my Coalition.

The keys for British longterm success from what I have experienced thus far (Having played Britain in "Another PBEM" for 82 turns now):

A. Focus on developing your economy early. I am doing a much better job in this game based on my experience from the other game. I have also been blessed with a 3 year peace at the start of this game during which I poured resources into developments like crazy. That will really pay dividends in the long run.
B. Focus on Quality over Quantity. Doing a much better job of that in this game. In the other game I used lots of levy troops and fought with them until they were up to snuff, because they were free. I learned in the long run that paying for better units is the smarter choice when playing a country with a low mobilization limit. Most of my singleplayer experience was with France so I kinda learned this the hard way in PBEM. In this game I am focusing on producing high morale specialized units and maximizing the amount of textiles, horses, iron, etc. on hand so I can build the best units to fill every mobilization point. Lancers, Light Infantry, Horse Artillery, eventually Rifle Infantry, etc.
C. Get good long term allies you can trust. Britain, Prussia and Sweden have had a great working alliance in "Another PBEM" and I would like to have a similar coalition in this game. Have won several wars in that game because my opponent did not "value" my allies when assessing me as a threat or vice versa.
D. Fight lots of wars, and always win. The British do not have well designed Glory targets. I think many of them are "Legacy" targets from back when you weren't required to have adjacent territory to require somebody to Cede Province in a Surrender treaty to you. Places like Brittany, Normandy and Egypt for example are all worth 3-4 points a turn, but exceedingly difficult to get. So you have to stay very active in wars once the game really kicks off, and always win. Easier said than done right?

[:D]

3. Russia I think is going to make their play with France in the fight with Austria. After that I don't know what he plans to do. Russia is fairly secure, being huge with low forage values, and not high in the Glory rankings, so not a target of anyone right now.

Feel free to ask any other questions that pop up.



brianlala -> RE: PBEM 109: Bad food and Bad attitudes - A British AAR (8/20/2009 11:13:10 PM)

Great response Mus/Mush Brian.

1. It sounds like Spain is a natural ally for you aside from their glory points lead. I'll be interested to hear what sort of "breakthrough" you've had in your negotiations with Spain because it seems like once you cement a deal with them that you will then be able to concentrate all your efforts on the coming war with/against France/Preussien/Austria and whomever else. Without Spain in an enforced peace deal then you'll always have to worry about them wreaking havoc with your Mediterranean interests.

When you throw in the fact that you'll get Portugal and Malta if you ink a deal with them, it seems to me that it's a no-brainer to team up with them. Why don't you and Spain offer to split the difference and sign a 7 or 8 year deal? If I (still admittedly a beginner) was Britain, I'd also want that alliance to be as long as possible and would prefer the 10 year deal to the 5 year deal.

There is still France and the Ottoman Empire to cause Spain headaches if they get to too much of a lead. Surely France won't stand and let Spain continue to grow the way it has? After France and the Ottoman Empire have their way with Austria then it just seems natural for both of them to target Spain. I don't see where Britain could come in and team up against Spain as things stand no matter what you do (then again, I have been mostly playing as Prussia in my single-player games and have ignored Spain).

2. If I was Austria in this game then I would be making as hard a play for Russia as an ally as is possible. Austria seems to be in the position that if they are not ueber aggressive with their diplomacy then they are bound to be swallowed up by all the super powers (France, Ottomans, Russia) on their borders. If I was Austria then I would be trying to push the Russians into a deal against the Ottomans. Am I wrong in seeing this as Austria's only hope as the game stands right now?

It sounds like once a real war breaks out then all these ambiguities will be solved and who is really leading the game will become fairly apparent.

The surrender event does seem to be a little too forgiving.




Mus -> RE: PBEM 109: Bad food and Bad attitudes - A British AAR (8/21/2009 12:13:37 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: brianlala

Why don't you and Spain offer to split the difference and sign a 7 or 8 year deal? If I (still admittedly a beginner) was Britain, I'd also want that alliance to be as long as possible and would prefer the 10 year deal to the 5 year deal.


I don't actually want an enforced peace, what I truly want is a working alliance.

All an enforced peace with Spain accomplishes for me is prevents me from attacking and sinking his fleet. A working alliance (by working I mean one in which we communicate, help each other out, etc.) greatly increases my ability to project power into the Med and increases my chance of long term success.

You have to understand that it is difficult for Britain to view Spain's fleet as anything but a floating 200 Glory target. If I attack I almost certainly win decisively, gain 200 Glory and retain the strength in numbers and quality to face off with the French Navy in defense of the British Isles.

Therefore I need more than territory and an enforced peace to make a deal truly worth it in the longterm. I need the working alliance.

That is why I only want to go for the 5 year enforced peace. If the working alliance portion falls through I don't want to be locked in to peace with Spain for the entire game.

If I establish a working alliance I will be forgoing any future attacks on Spain unless the unlikely event of him betraying me took place. The working alliance is worth giving up the Glory for taking out the Spanish Fleet.

I can always smack around the Russian fleet if I need some quick Glory and National Morale down the road.

[:D]

PS The breakthrough is him dropping the 10 year enforced peace idea (I think he realized it was unreasonable and not going to happen) and showing some enthusiasm towards the idea of a REAL (working) longterm alliance.

BTW I use the term "working" alliance to distinguish it from the phoney alliances that sometimes occur in the game between players. These phoney alliances are sometimes nothing more than stronger enforced peace treaties.

I will address Austria later if I have time. I am playing Austria in a couple other (younger) games, so I have some insight, but not this deep into the game. I actually get to use Austria as an example of what NOT to do if he gets hammered here, about 2 years ahead of where I am in one of my other PBEMs.

[:D]



Harvey Birdman -> RE: PBEM 109: Bad food and Bad attitudes - A British AAR (8/21/2009 12:50:21 AM)

quote:

35.5 continued.

Had a few more PM conversations with France and Sweden, confirming some of my suspicions about Prussia. I also have additional messages out to France, Spain, Turkey and Sweden.

Several of the major powers in Europe are on the brink of war. Most particularly France and Austria, and possible allies of France against Austria as well.

What's crazy about Prussia supposedly standing by and dishonoring it's mutual defense agreement with Austria (particularly in such a public way this early in the game) is that Prussia's friendship and word would become useless. Who would trust a country that wouldn't abide by a mutual defense pact, particularly one in which the pact was formed as a condition of Austria ceding massive tracts of Polish territory to Prussia? This would show to the entire world that you can't buy Prussian friendship even by giving away half of Poland!

I think Prussia must be getting terrible advice from somewhere. Either that or his pride was so injured by our earlier war of words via email (at his instigation I might add) that he is blindly pursuing suicidal policies just to get back at me.

Either way I benefit.


Blame me. He didn't like what British/turkish diplomats had done to him. He feared he was going to get into a war with britain/turkey so he asked for advice on his thread.

I told him eventually the glory leaders were going to get ganged up on. I told him the glory cost for breaking an alliance was much less than the glory cost for losing a war.

He's having money problems ie depot costs and I told him, it's not a good idea to piss off the money powers: france and britain.

What was the point of british/turkish diplomats harassing him. The unintended consequence is that he regrets allying with austria.

I checked my posts on the prussia thread. I forgot to tell him he should give back the 4 polish provinces.



Judge his behavior from this point forward.






Mus -> RE: PBEM 109: Bad food and Bad attitudes - A British AAR (8/21/2009 2:23:30 AM)

Ah, I see.

Well actually the diplomatic undermining was done because he was being intransigent on the diplomatic front, not the other way around, I wonder if he received some advice from somebody earlier than that.

Regardless, I made the deal with Prussia and don't want a war with him, so it's all water under the bridge now.



Mus -> RE: PBEM 109: Bad food and Bad attitudes - A British AAR (8/21/2009 9:39:48 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: brianlala

2. If I was Austria in this game then I would be making as hard a play for Russia as an ally as is possible. Austria seems to be in the position that if they are not ueber aggressive with their diplomacy then they are bound to be swallowed up by all the super powers (France, Ottomans, Russia) on their borders. If I was Austria then I would be trying to push the Russians into a deal against the Ottomans. Am I wrong in seeing this as Austria's only hope as the game stands right now?


Austria's position is super exposed. It is a hard country to play. It is capable of growing fairly powerful, so people get threatened by it, and it also is surrounded by countries that Austria has conflicting glory targets with.

I honestly don't know what Austria can do to get out of the situations it is in. I think Prussia is going to bail, and I think Russia and Turkey are both attacking when France does.

A quick surrender to minimize the damage would be my course of action.



Mus -> RE: PBEM 109: Bad food and Bad attitudes - A British AAR (8/23/2009 12:41:51 AM)

Turn 39 and 40. Sep & Oct 1795

Nothing much going on, but a quick pace to the game, so 2 turns in one entry.

[:'(]

I conduct some tests with my heavy artillery moving them and detaching/reattaching to see how many initiative checks they fail. If they continue to fail routine things like joining a Corps the way they did a couple turns back again I will scrap them and go to Horse Artillery.

I heard back from Russian Guard, a beta tester for COGEE, and he said he believes Horse Artillery, like all Artillery, has standard Siege value of 1 point per 1500. I already explained my logic in thinking about the switch to horse artillery but will repeat it again: They have high strategic initiative and have a +1 counterassault with no drawback now that I think I know they have the same siege value as all artillery.

We shall see.

I got a deal going with Spain. As soon as I can arrange it I am moving troops down towards Portugal in preparation to receive it as a protectorate. Spain is going to declare on it, it is going to run into my arms, and then we are going to cease fire and declare some treaties.

Don't know if thats gamey, or just Machiavellian.

[:D]

I had had to hold off on starting new developments because of a critical labor shortage. That is now over and I started a road programme in several provinces that had level 3 roads to bump them up a bit. I will be proceeding with the development plan stated above: Any province with roads 3 or below will build roads. Any province that makes good money, but has banks below 4 will build banks. Any province that has achieved these other benchmarks but has a low level of culture or barracks will focus on those for increasing my morale/glory/land experience. Courts will continue to be the focus in Anglia for my super diplomat construction plan.

My first Lancer comes out of Anglia barracks this turn with a 5.6 morale at 8k strength. Should probably be around 5.4 when it is at full strenght. I order it to join my 1st Corps in SW England.

Not a bunch of diplomatic activity these last couple turns. Things quieted down a bit, except for a brief exitement about Spain attacking Venetia to get things set up for our deal. Turkey was briefly alarmed by this.



brianlala -> RE: PBEM 109: Bad food and Bad attitudes - A British AAR (8/23/2009 10:39:56 AM)

Hey Mus/Brian

A couple of questions about Spain now that I've thought about things for a bit (and you've clarified other things like smacking Russia's navy around for glory points if you need to).

1. If you do get a true alliance (not enforced peace) with Spain then won't that virtually guarantee that you and Spain will be at war with France at some point? With Austria going down (in terms of glory points) and nobody else to challenge Spain then France is going to have to turn its head towards Spain once Austria is weakened. N'est pas?

2. When France turns its head towards Spain and sparks a war (either knowingly or unknowingly) with you as well then won't Preussen use that opportunity to kick you out of Northern Europe? How will you counteract this from happening?

3. I'm not experienced at all with glory points for naval engagements (as I usually play land-based Preussen) but I'm guessing you will get a pretty good dollop of points for beating France's navy into pieces during this war. Will the glory points from naval activities be enough to make up for the loss of your northern Europe land?


Brian



Mus -> RE: PBEM 109: Bad food and Bad attitudes - A British AAR (8/23/2009 11:53:46 AM)

1. I don't know that France could come after a British/Spanish alliance in the way you envision. Currently everyone is building up their forces. I am doing a good job keeping up for the moment. That will change once I hit my mobilization limit which is very low at 30, but gaining Portugal as a protectorate (part of the deal with Spain) will give me about 60,000 more "free" (protectorate troop's do not count toward your mob limit) troops. That ought to raise my total up to around 240,000 and I should have about 260,000-270,000 men by next Spring or Summer. Around 300,000 at the end of next year, where I will probably top out. I also have the highest quality force in Europe, both in terms of morale and in terms of having high performance special units, with the ability to retain the morale and "specialization" edge indefinetely. Spain has one of the largest armies in Europe right now because of his control of nearly the entire Italian peninsula. Together we can almost pick our wars, and talk people we don't want to fight down.

2. Prussia currently has about 150,000 men total. Bear in mind when I discuss these figures I am not talking about militia garrison forces, just maneuver formations. Of this the bulk is Infantry. I believe he has 3 jager infantry, 2 cavalry divisions and 2 artillery divisions. I do not think he will make a play for me at the first opportunity. I plan to pressure him for continued enforced peaces and coexistence in N Europe. Failing that I myself have around 140,000 men in the area, with 6 cavalry divisions and 1 artillery division. With that kind of cavalry superiority I believe I could win a decisive battle and then march on Brandenburg. I also have Swedish allies who could help me out in a pinch. He has a small but high quality army. I will try to strengthen my ties with Sweden shortly by offering him additional land in Denmark. Sweden can also place very high for a rather small power by joining me in my wars and always winning.

3. The Glory gained from destroying the French navy in a hypothetical war would more than make up for losing all my land in N Europe (the victor in a naval battle gains Glory equal to the number of ships engaged IIRC, will get back to you from my battle logs from sinking the Dutch navy with details), but I don't believe that losing all my land would necessarily be the outcome of a war with France. I also don't really think war with France in the immediate future is inevitable. It will be some time before France and Austria duke it out. I currently have just slightly fewer troops than France does and it will be a number of years before France can enlarge his Army to the point where he greatly outmasses me concentrated at one point. For example, I sent a spy to see what kind of army France was assembling for his campaign against Austria. I have attached a screenshot of the Army. Then when you factor in my hoped for alliance with Spain the number of fronts in this theoretical war increases substantially. And the numbers start looking worse for him as well. Another point going for me in avoiding war or putting it off for a long time with France is the fact that I will destroy or drive into port his merchants and also blockade his ports. This will cause his income to plummet. He knows this, and therefore I think IF/ONCE France defeats Austria on the Continent he will actually turn his attention to other continental powers (such as Prussia, another factor that can mitigate the threats discussed in 2) he has not yet defeated, plus increasing his control over any remaining independent minors. He will also want to make sure he is ready to face a recovered Austria in 18 months time.


[image]local://upfiles/18762/3AE574482FBD4EBCBA0A40C13E4A91D5.jpg[/image]



Mus -> RE: PBEM 109: Bad food and Bad attitudes - A British AAR (8/25/2009 9:17:03 AM)

Turn 41. Nov 1795

As I said, I sent my Heavy Artillery on some random movements. The result is they only made the check to do one of their movements. This combined with the earlier failure to make the check to join a Corps, two turns in a row, makes me decide to scrap it.

Having found out that the concensus from 2 beta testers is that Horse Artillery should have regular siege value as all other artillery (1 point for 1500) means this is the way to go. I will begin building Horse Artillery as soon as I have the spare labor. I will keep my 1 regular artillery already fielded for now, possibly replacing it later should I have extra resources and the desire to do so.

I order the Heavy Artillery scrapped, returning my mobilization point it was taking up. This lesson on the drawbacks of Heavy Artillery cost me over 300 iron and 120 labor. The money I could care less about, but the labor in particular really hurts.

I also order another Light Infantry to be built in Anglia. I had wanted to hold off on building any more military units for a spell, in order to build up my Labor and reduce my inflation, but my textile production and importation is so high that I was again over 100 textiles. At that point you start consuming textiles for morale boosting purposes, which I did not want to do. Furthermore I am not ready to build another diplomat yet, my Courts are still being developed in Anglia and I want maximum bang for my super-diplomat buck.

Failed to make 1 critical move on my initiative checks, leaving my forces out of position to receive Portugal as a protectorate. I send word to Spain (Ironwarrior) that I will not be ready for another 1-2 Turns.

The delay is irritating, but necessary.

Nothing else substantial to report. All my developments are chugging along, several will be finished in a couple months. My growth compared to other powers continues to look good.

Still no loud noises on the Continent. The world is at peace.

[:D]



Mus -> RE: PBEM 109: Bad food and Bad attitudes - A British AAR (8/26/2009 10:52:53 PM)

Turn 42. Dec 1795

Get my troops headed toward Portugal again and get the word to Spain to go ahead and DOW Portugal. Will see how this works. Nothing much else going down.



Mus -> RE: PBEM 109: Bad food and Bad attitudes - A British AAR (8/28/2009 4:31:24 AM)

Turn 43 & 44. Jan and Feb 1796

Spain DOWs Portugal. I get called as a protectorate. Me and Spain end up at war, with a verbal agreement to call a cease fire next turn and then set up our full agreement.

This has a certain amount of risk to it, Spain could always try to backstab me here, but I doubt he would. If he does I can move troops swiftly into position and do some quick port raids on his main fleet base.

My preferred outcome is the ceasefire and a working alliance for the rest of the game.

Other than this these turns were just house keeping.

I did send a message to Prussia requesting that they send me some kind of royal marriage/enforced peace deal and in return I would start subsidizing them every turn. I am concerned that a counterweight to France or Austria may become necessary on the Continent and need to start boosting up Prussia so he isn't too weak compared to his neighbors.

Obviously to do that I have to make sure he is going to stay at peace with me.

[;)]



Mus -> RE: PBEM 109: Bad food and Bad attitudes - A British AAR (8/30/2009 11:19:19 AM)

Turn 44.5

It is becoming pretty clear through PM and forum discussions with other players that this game isn't running the all generals mod, which is what we were supposed to be playing.

That is a major bummer for me as I have very little interest in playing another 23 year 1792 game, particularly as Britain. The ENTIRE point of PBEM 109 for me was to play a marathon game with all the generals showing up at their appointed time.

I think I am going to tender my resignation and ask the group to find a replacement for me. I will play until they have me replaced so as to not leave them hanging, but I think it's a little absurd that proper care wasn't take in the setup or installation of the mod by certain players.

[:-]

Thus endeth my AAR?

Maybe the new guy will post in here.

[:D]



Page: <<   < prev  1 2 3 [4]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.9375