France: too weak in the game? (given the current province lineup)

Is it just me or is France really too weak given the current province lineup? I am not talking about the case when a player controls it but rather when the AI does.

In my last three games:

1) France always lost Alsace to Wuttenberg early in the game
2) Subsequently French main province got taken either by the Dutch or Savoy...
3) Given #1 & #2, France ceases to exist...

I feel, in the XVII century (especially while the Sun King is around) all neighbors (such as Savoy and the Dutch) should be trembling with fear from the French and covering behind their walls rather than successfully destroying France in the first decades.

I suspect, breaking up the huge blob that the current mainland France is into a few provinces would solve the problem.

Oddly enough, I never saw that happen. France is quite the force in all of my games, and stationed two armies within my borders (that are still there, mind you, even after I took away their military access privileges).

In my first campaign, I took France and Alasce-Lorraine. In my second game, France is still a world power and seem to be doing well. They have more than one army in France and a near full-stack in Alasce-Lorraine.

The faction that I find getting destroyed prematurely is Austria (by the 1720s, in both of my games, they were either destroyed or in their last province, which I think is Transylvania), usually by Poland-Lithuania and Prussia simultaneously, but mainly the by the former. I also saw the trend of Prussia booming to power early, and then losing to a behemoth Poland-Lithuania, who then impinge on my own borders.

I have seen France be strong and weak, but it depends on which faction I am. When I play as Prussia I usually draw all the attention from Europe factions which means France gets to be quite strong. When I play as GB or UP, I smash the french navy early on and they sputter out and are never a threat during the game. I dont like to play as France because their starting provinces dont interest me much. I agree that they should divide France into having at least one extra region.

I agree that France should have at least one more region. The French AI (along with the Spanish AI) is seriously handicapped with the amount of territory it has to build up, vs. the armies it needs to maintain in Europe. UP can eliminate France by 1703. Not a very realistic scenario!

My personal opinion is that the minor nations should be seriously cut. Their income is too large vs. their holdings, and they can field larger armies than major nations! France should not be out-gunned by Wurtemberg!

I have not seen a game where France was a dominant military power.

I think I saw them take Savoy once and maybe Wurttemberg once but never a great power.

It has been the most prestigious faction in a game or two and seems to have a lot of tech advancements.

I also see the other powers suffering from time to time but I do think that France could be stronger.

But all the major factions seem to have those troubles at times. With the possible exception of Russia, who seems to have an easy time with all but player factions.

France in my games almost inevitably gets locked into a stalemate with Savoy. Apparently the French AI is unwilling to capture cities in Europe, so they just kick Savoy out of their territory, then Savoy comes along with a fresh army and kicks the French forces back to Paris...then a fresh French force shows up and returns the favor...
And it just goes on and on and on...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JeromeBaker

I have seen France be strong and weak, but it depends on which faction I am. When I play as Prussia I usually draw all the attention from Europe factions which means France gets to be quite strong. When I play as GB or UP, I smash the french navy early on and they sputter out and are never a threat during the game. I dont like to play as France because their starting provinces dont interest me much. I agree that they should divide France into having at least one extra region.

---

Well, oddly enough, in my last three games (the ones I described in which the French were destroyed) I was playing Prussia and I did not touch the French (even not so much as to being at war with them) before they were wiped out.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by anweRU

I agree that France should have at least one more region. The French AI (along with the Spanish AI) is seriously handicapped with the amount of territory it has to build up, vs. the armies it needs to maintain in Europe. UP can eliminate France by 1703. Not a very realistic scenario!

My personal opinion is that the minor nations should be seriously cut. Their income is too large vs. their holdings, and they can field larger armies than major nations! France should not be out-gunned by Wurtemberg!

---

I suspect that's the key: the strategic map AI of the colonial empires does not prioritize holding European territory enough.

As to the minor powers: I don't want them weaker. I'd like the major ones stronger...

heh. I fired up another VH Prussia campaign the other day. first 20 years highlights:

1. Wuttenberg destroyed France by 1715 and is attacking Spain now...
2. Westphalia destroyed the Dutch (1718) they're at war with Spain too...

Prussia (me) had nothing to do with it... :candle:

A different highlight: Polish declared war on Prussia (me). I defeated them in two battles and offered peace for 1000. The gem of the answer I received was: "no, no, no, we offer peace + 6000!..." I guess, Poland had an annoying budget surplus. :inquisitive:

France was still alive and kicking with its two European provinces instact when I finished my short Swedish campaign last night. It gave Wurtemburg a bloody nose early on, so W parked its bloodied stack on the bridge between Alsace and its capital, and kept it there for the next 30 years or so. The French built up several stacks, but never captured Flanders from the Dutch, despite having clear superiority (3 stacks at border + 1 in Paris + 2 Spanish stacks parked in Flanders vs. 2 Dutch stacks).

It did lose its Canadian provinces to the British, after first capturing Maine and Boston. Unfortunately for the French, I bought Jamaica from the Brits a few turns earlier, so there was a fun counter-march by the Brits. The same turn the French captured Boston, the British captured Quebec! Then returned and cleansed their former territories of any lingering French armies... (I had bought New Foundland around 1725 I suppose).

I never seen Britain, France, Spain, etc, fight in America. Only the Cherokee in taking provinces (the Spanish ones) and Pirates attacking everything sea wise.

In my current campaign as the Ottoman Empire I decided to invade North America as I am at war with Great Britain. The Brits had lots of stacks hanging around doing nothing even when they were at war with France. Arcadia was undefended but there was no sign of any British invasion. The French managed to hold the Carolinas for a couple of turns but all those very strong British stacks did nothing.

France is still doing strong in my Prussia campaign.
Poland however is not and are losing quite badly to Austria.
Spain is also doing well.

I've said much the same before . I would go as far as splitting it into four with one of the other three also being built like a nation capital {with the extra buildings , larger recruitment pool and wider selection of troops} . France was the premier European power for most of the 18th century , but doesn't present as such in the game .

I would also say that the free settlement garrisons need to be strengthened in all factions . Firelock Armed Citizens need to be twice the size , some units should be better quality too {especially in national capitals} and every settlement {including ports and farms} should have some small garrison of appropriate size and quality based on the province population , settlement type and degree of settlement development {Farms would get very few units -mabey only one Armed Citizen Unit for small popluations on simple farms- whereas a Steam Drydock in a booming province might have some professional military including artillery along with militia and a couple of Firelock Armed Citizens ... somesort of autocalc could be needed if an enemy fleet tried to enter a port plus a surrender option vs naval attack} .
This would only work well of course when the surrender option is actually fixed and would also need raiding to give a monetary reward too {consider it a combination of looted monies/art/etc and money saved by looting suppilies for the army} to compensate the A.I. when it does its' chain raids with small stacks {which would probably lose men in fighting} .

It's quite ironic that with all the stories there is a very wide number of results...

...maybe that's the way it's meant to be? :balloon2:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AussieGiant

...maybe that's the way it's meant to be? :balloon2:

---

I would be very disappointed if it the results were the same.
Having different results makes the game more fun.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TB666

I would be very disappointed if it the results were the same.
Having different results makes the game more fun.

---

I have no qualms about the game producing different results each time. I like that feature. But I'd prefer it to happen along the lines of one of the historical major powers (France, Spain, Prussia, Austria, Ottomans, Russians, even Poland) 'ruling' the theater rather than the small city-states taking over Europe.

Don't get me wrong: I am fine with the small city states presenting a challenge for the player. However, I feel, they should not present a consistent challenge to such major AI factions such as France. After all, ihistorically it was French power-balance design: to keep Germany fragmented so that the individual Prince-states would present no threat to France.

And remember what was the first thing united Germany did in the XIXth century... They marched (successfully) to Paris, no hesitation, no questions asked...

+, this thing should not be hard to fix. France just needs to be broken up into several European provinces.

Same for Spain. That needs to be broken up a bit more as well.

As long as there are different results then who is to say things should be dominated by any one faction on a consitent basis.

I would recommend they keep things as they are.

I have no problem with small factions having a shot. Westphalia, Saxony, Hannover etc should all get a chance.
I remember Aragon once conquered half of Europe in M1TW.
So yes France should have their teeth kicked out by a smaller nation if that's how it turned out.
This is afterall not a historical game but a what-if type of game. Powerhouse in one game and a weak pathetic nation getting pushed around by minors in another.
That's how Total war should be like and so far that's how it is in ETW.
Now if only we can get the UK to join the fray we will see some really interesting and hopefully hilarious results.

Why didn't France just invade and wipe out all those pidly little German states to the east. When you play as France, that seems the obvious move, right? So why did major nations like France, Spain, and GB basically maintain their Euro borders and focus primarily on expanding their overseas holdings? My guess is it has less to do with standing armries, more to do with the ability to quickly raise troops, and most especially the power of culture to make such invasions prohibitively expensive (the cost of garrisoning entire nations that will constantly be in rebellion for year after year). Except for France I guess, since they seem to roll over for whoever invades them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TB666

I have no problem with small factions having a shot. Westphalia, Saxony, Hannover etc should all get a chance.
I remember Aragon once conquered half of Europe in M1TW.
So yes France should have their teeth kicked out by a smaller nation if that's how it turned out.
This is afterall not a historical game but a what-if type of game. Powerhouse in one game and a weak pathetic nation getting pushed around by minors in another.
That's how Total war should be like and so far that's how it is in ETW.
Now if only we can get the UK to join the fray we will see some really interesting and hopefully hilarious results.

---

Well, EU3 is a what-if-type of a game too. But the power balance is much more realistic there (France is known as the 'big, blue blob' there).

I have no problem with small factions having their chance (especially if they team up: that was exactly what historic France was afraid of), it just feels wrong if the small nations out-gun a major nation on one-on-one basis almost outright.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Servius1234

Why didn't France just invade and wipe out all those pidly little German states to the east. When you play as France, that seems the obvious move, right? So why did major nations like France, Spain, and GB basically maintain their Euro borders and focus primarily on expanding their overseas holdings? My guess is it has less to do with standing armries, more to do with the ability to quickly raise troops, and most especially the power of culture to make such invasions prohibitively expensive (the cost of garrisoning entire nations that will constantly be in rebellion for year after year). Except for France I guess, since they seem to roll over for whoever invades them.

---

By the XVIII century most royal families in Europe were blood relatives (including the princes of German states). Direct conquest/landgrab was not that common in Europe in the era and was carried out mostly by 'political outcasts' (such as Napoleon) who decided to go against the 'rules of the club'. Land control transferred frequently through dynasty inheritance though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Slaists

Well, EU3 is a what-if-type of a game too. But the power balance is much more realistic there (France is known as the 'big, blue blob' there).

---

And I for one don't like that. The more random it is the better.
The less you can predict who is gonna be the major player the better.
Having France as a powerhouse in every game would just make the game predictable.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Slaists

it just feels wrong if the small nations out-gun a major nation on one-on-one basis almost outright.

---

This is Total war so it's not wrong in any way or form.
The smaller the nation, the more memorable it is.
I hardly remember any games from M1TW but I do remember the one where Aragon conquered half of Europe and I had to fight them of single-handed.
I remember that particular game because it was fun and unpredictable.
In RTW CA failed with this since you always saw the same factions getting powerful.
CA made this better in M2TW but still certain factions never stood a chance.
In ETW they seem to have gotten it right again.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TB666

And I for one don't like that. The more random it is the better.
The less you can predict who is gonna be the major player the better.
Having France as a powerhouse in every game would just make the game predictable.

This is Total war so it's not wrong in any way or form.
The smaller the nation, the more memorable it is.
I hardly remember any games from M1TW but I do remember the one where Aragon conquered half of Europe and I had to fight them of single-handed.
I remember that particular game because it was fun and unpredictable.
In RTW CA failed with this since you always saw the same factions getting powerful.
CA made this better in M2TW but still certain factions never stood a chance.
In ETW they seem to have gotten it right again.

---

Off topic, but Aragon actually is a bad example of a 'minor faction' getting far. Aragon was a medieval powerhouse on par with Castille of the time. At some point historical holdings of Aragon included Catalan lands, Sicily and Southern Italy. I agree, who knows where they MIGHT have gone from there in a what-if-scenario.

I still feel that countries like France (and Ottomans for that matter) are dealt with wrongly in ETW. Countries like Savoy and Wuttenberg having standing armies on par with France's while they still are ONE-TINY-PROVINCE factions just feels wrong (for me).

Ottomans start with numerous provinces; so do Russians; so do Austrians; even English have 3 (AI safe, mind you) mainland provinces. Why did they make the French to equal to German minors?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Slaists

Off topic, but Aragon actually is a bad example of a 'minor faction' getting far. Aragon was a medieval powerhouse on par with Castille of the time. At some point historical holdings of Aragon included Catalan lands, Sicily and Southern Italy. I agree, who knows where they MIGHT have gone from there in a what-if-scenario.

---

Except in most other games they get completely run over usually in the first few turns.
And haven't faced the ottomans yet so can' speak for them but from what I have read is that they do seem to be weak, seem to be wasting their money on religious buildings instead of on the army.
However the other factions are random.
Some say Austria is too weak and in my Sweden campaign they are indeed weak but in my Prussia campaign they are strong.
We can't count England until they fix the naval invasions.
Overall I don't think we can count on any of the colonial powers until this is fixed and that includeds France.
Maybe with the bug fixed they will do better for you.
As I said, in my Prussia campaign France is doing well as is Spain.

I feel like France should start off 2-3 times as many forces as the little German states start out with.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Slaists

Why did they make the French to equal to German minors?

---

Because it is an English company and the English just hate the "Frogs". ;-)

But on a more serious note, I do agree that France is too weak in the game. Too many oversee provinces, too weak concerning mainland France.

One example: In the beginning of the 18th century France had an army of around 200.000 men, while Bavaria (one of the participants in the War of the Spanish Succession) had around 20.000 - 25.000 men. Wurttemberg could certainly put less men in the field then Bavaria. So yes, seeing Wurttemberg taking over France singlehandedly seems rather odd.

France isn't too weak, its just not properly played by the AI because its stretched too thin. From its main European province, France can pump out 4 units of line infantry a turn starting on turn 1. Put a competent AI behind that and it'd be walking over everyone.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DisruptorX

France isn't too weak, its just not properly played by the AI because its stretched too thin. From its main European province, France can pump out 4 units of line infantry a turn starting on turn 1. Put a competent AI behind that and it'd be walking over everyone.

---

That's the point of the main post. I referred to "AI controlled France".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Slaists

That's the point of the main post. I referred to "AI controlled France".

---

True, but most of the posts in this thread seem to suggest that there's something inherently weak with France's position in Europe.

If France ignores the colonies and focus on Europe, Frances colonies will all fall (as in history), but France will be the main power of Europe. All that is required is the AI to choose whether to expand in the colonies or Europe. Currently, it rarely does more than sit on its hands.

France was pretty quiet for most of my Ottoman Campaign, but then all of a sudden they cam out swinging. Down went the Dutch, down went Austria, the Poles, the Prussians. It was as though someone flipped a switch.

All I had to do was contain them on my borders, and send money to the countries they were overrunning. But yeah, when France feels like going on a tear, it ain't pretty.