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.

There could be a way to fix it. Give the overseas French colonies to another faction like the game did with the 13 colonies and new Spain. This would make France focus on Europe more. (also, turn off the auto-give script as well)

I don`t think the "defense in the field" concept is functioning properly. If the French player leaves Paris to fight over their cities and resources a sneaky force may suddenly capture Paris and they`re outta here. I think there should be a command cap to brigadiers. Like a brigadier may not command an army larger than 10 units. In this way you`ll probabaly need a Grand Armee lead by a General to capture major cities and hopefuly there will be more skirmishes between smaller armies like it was intended and easier to defend the Capital.

I must say I do question the reasoning behind making both Spain and France one region nations and seperating the United Kingdom into three regions...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Superteale

I don`t think the "defense in the field" concept is functioning properly. If the French player leaves Paris to fight over their cities and resources a sneaky force may suddenly capture Paris and they`re outta here. I think there should be a command cap to brigadiers. Like a brigadier may not command an army larger than 10 units. In this way you`ll probabaly need a Grand Armee lead by a General to capture major cities and hopefuly there will be more skirmishes between smaller armies like it was intended and easier to defend the Capital.

---

I'd wager more that France and Spain are handicapped considerably in this regard relative to their northern Island dwelling peer...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nafod

I must say I do question the reasoning behind making both Spain and France one region nations and seperating the United Kingdom into three regions...

---

w00t for blue man group throwing uber damage lime-soaked heads! :2thumbsup:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nafod

I must say I do question the reasoning behind making both Spain and France one region nations and seperating the United Kingdom into three regions...

---

Initial starting province numbers are....not in the favour of the British. The French have extensive American assets, if they didn't play like puddings Britain would have a very serious problem keeping the Thirteen Colonies alive long enough to take on the inexplicably powerful natives and claim the Colonies itself. The problem isn't the starting French province, it's how the AI uses it. Ever noticed that the AI NEVER demolishes a town building to replace it with something more effective or even makes rational choices? Every single game I play, France has four Seminaries. It's difficult to justify even one with the army they keep in Paris and the lack of Protestant preachers, the computer would be a whole heck of a lot richer if it actually built an economy.

The Spanish also have lots of provinces, they start off with enough for an excellent trading empire right from the start and again unlike the British, a proper city in the Americas. They have huge expansion potential from their provinces as well, they can go splat Morocco and all the Barbary States, Portugal is begging to get munched the second Britain plays up, who should also lose the whole Carribbean to the much more capable Spanish colonies, and Italy is an all you can eat buffet!

Britain would suck if the computer played the game properly with the current province setup.

In this case I don`t count in the overseas provinces as France is destroyed if they loose their european provinces. ANd it happens too frequent that a minor like Savoy gives France a beating...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Superteale

In this case I don`t count in the overseas provinces as France is destroyed if they loose their european provinces. ANd it happens too frequent that a minor like Savoy gives France a beating...

---

They have two European provinces....one less than Britain, which isn't saying much because Ireland is hardly the land of money and joy. If the AI played properly those overseas colonies would be more instrumental, the money they provide in addition to a properly run France would make it rather more powerful in Europe, especially since it starts allied to Spain, which would be significantly more terrifying if Spain weren't a bunch of complete idiots as well.

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.

---

Honestly,

- as pointed out, Aragon was quite a powerful country throughout the Middle-Age. At some point in time, it was vastly more important and prestigious than both Castille and Portugal and was a very real threat to southern French holdings.
In MTW term, that faction was furthermore far from a minor. Aragon was one of the richest province in western Europe, and so was Valencia. Aragon was quite an easy faction to play, past the first few turns.
- MTW AI expansion was in all honestly, stupid as hell. Most games would end up with two AI factions + the player owning the whole map. Most of the time, said AI factions were Egypt, the Almohads, Britain, Aragon (unpredictable ?) or Byzantium. That was back then my main grief with the game: after 50 turns, only 4 or 5 factions would still be alive.
- if you think that Wurtemberg or Westphalia should outgun nations like GB or France, well, why do you even play a pseudo-historical game? You'd better replace France with Dark Elves, GB with Wood Elves, Wurtemberg with Undeads and Westphalia with Orcs, have the same starting condition and positions and enjoy your game.
EUIII is a what-if game, because, within realistic yet extraordinary conditions, a nation that is now forgotten can and may rise to power, while historical powerhouses sometimes struggle and collapse.
Having Westphalia - and for that matter all minor factions - more powerful than both France and GB is not a "what-if", it's the result of a screwed up AI, game balance and gameplay.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Meneldil

Honestly,

- if you think that Wurtemberg or Westphalia should outgun nations like GB or France, well, why do you even play a pseudo-historical game? You'd better replace France with Dark Elves, GB with Wood Elves, Wurtemberg with Undeads and Westphalia with Orcs, have the same starting condition and positions and enjoy your game.

---

Well put, Meneldil, well put!.. :2thumbsup:

I am trying France for the first time now, and it is not an easy campaign. I jumped out trying to create a trade empire because she is so strapped for cash. I was willing to betray my one ally to avoid war with England…but it didn’t work. My king died first and Austria declared a war of secession. England blockaded me and all trade went bye, bye. This also put me at war with everyone on my eastern borders.

Savoy didn’t have a large army so the troops I scraped together I sent into Stuttgart and took it for enough cash not to disband what few troops I had.

Then Savoy started raiding immediately. I managed to put a halt to it and managed to scrape together enough troops to take them out.

Everything is a matter of balance or the lack there of. I have played factions I though were economic basket cases and faired better than I have so far with France. It is troops or something else. It is economy or government infrastructure. It was a big effort to have the money to build troops in Guyana to take out the Dutch before they did the same to me. And I haven’t even gotten to the Pirates yet.

In past games I always wondered why the French never retook their port from the Pirates, well, now I know it is a lack of funds. Everything is underdeveloped. Research is slow. You dare not build improvements that cause dissatisfaction.

Every cent is needed for arming once you are at war. I have managed to put my self on my feet but it has been no easy matter. My fleet is mostly captured ships from the Dutch and English. I have not been able to tackle the Pirates but have managed to draw them away and break the British blockade for the moment.

One of the worst handicaps the French seem to have is that they don’t get light dragoons, and no dragoons at all in Europe. It makes it hard to keep order.

They need dragoons! I am almost positive they had them…and baring that they had mounted gendarmes. Something is needed to keep order.

They loose to the minors because they cannot afford troops. They can’t afford to develop government buildings and can not build a robust economy for fear of rebellion. Revolution is out of the questions as it takes too long and is economically expensive to engineer and repair afterwards.

Some of the factions are just not up to snuff. Major Powers should be able to hold their own against the other AI factions, don’t you think?

I think a bit more balancing is in order.

With the aptitude of the AI though, I guess we are lucky that most of the Major Powers don’t implode…

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fisherking

I am trying France for the first time now, and it is not an easy campaign. I jumped out trying to create a trade empire because she is so strapped for cash. I was willing to betray my one ally to avoid war with England…but it didn’t work. My king died first and Austria declared a war of secession. England blockaded me and all trade went bye, bye. This also put me at war with everyone on my eastern borders.

Savoy didn’t have a large army so the troops I scraped together I sent into Stuttgart and took it for enough cash not to disband what few troops I had.

Then Savoy started raiding immediately. I managed to put a halt to it and managed to scrape together enough troops to take them out.

Everything is a matter of balance or the lack there of. I have played factions I though were economic basket cases and faired better than I have so far with France. It is troops or something else. It is economy or government infrastructure. It was a big effort to have the money to build troops in Guyana to take out the Dutch before they did the same to me. And I haven’t even gotten to the Pirates yet.

In past games I always wondered why the French never retook their port from the Pirates, well, now I know it is a lack of funds. Everything is underdeveloped. Research is slow. You dare not build improvements that cause dissatisfaction.

Every cent is needed for arming once you are at war. I have managed to put my self on my feet but it has been no easy matter. My fleet is mostly captured ships from the Dutch and English. I have not been able to tackle the Pirates but have managed to draw them away and break the British blockade for the moment.

One of the worst handicaps the French seem to have is that they don’t get light dragoons, and no dragoons at all in Europe. It makes it hard to keep order.

They need dragoons! I am almost positive they had them…and baring that they had mounted gendarmes. Something is needed to keep order.

They loose to the minors because they cannot afford troops. They can’t afford to develop government buildings and can not build a robust economy for fear of rebellion. Revolution is out of the questions as it takes too long and is economically expensive to engineer and repair afterwards.

Some of the factions are just not up to snuff. Major Powers should be able to hold their own against the other AI factions, don’t you think?

I think a bit more balancing is in order.

With the aptitude of the AI though, I guess we are lucky that most of the Major Powers don’t implode…

---

hmm... you seem to have had much harder time with France than I did. what killed my French campaign was CTD when I clicked on my ports in the Carribean, not economic/military woes. The Dutch never attacked me in South America (by 1745), so I had just a militia unit guarding the port there.

The key to French cash flow success seems grabbing trade early (as with the other sea-nations in ETW); then again - grabbing trade spots is so easy (with France, Spain, England and even more so - the Dutch) that it feels like an exploit...

That, and, of course, keeping a unit of india-man (cheepest upkeep) in each trade port at least in France to keep England from destroying the ports.

I prefer to use Sakers to garrison ports myself because the enemy tends to sort of sink any ship I put in a port. Though maybe I merely misremember.

Each time I played with France, I get rid of my American holdings for Flanders and hard cash as soon as turn one so that I can focus on Europe and only on Europe. That is right, not even a trade spot. I scuttle all my ships except for one in each fleet; the admiral near Canada to bring the priest back to Europe, the admiral in the Channel in case I need to sneak invade the British Isles and the last ship in the Mediterranean Sea to send troops to Corsica to end Genoa.

The game feels a little fairer that way. :laugh4:

I will have to try these "new and improved" starting conditions on Hard and Very Hard, though... when the game interests me enough again.

A little more on topic, AI France is easier to end than Spain and Britain. Both of them have islands among their home territories so, as long as the AI refuses to use naval invasions, they will never be defeated by fellow AI nations. The only major nations which are (theorically) defeated as easily as France are Prussia and Maratha since they, too, have only two provinces in their home theatre, and even then I never saw them ended by the AI.

EDIT: Oh. Right. Dragoons. The complete lack of repression-happy units does not help.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Maladin

I prefer to use Sakers to garrison ports myself because the enemy tends to sort of sink any ship I put in a port. Though maybe I merely misremember.

EDIT: Oh. Right. Dragoons. The complete lack of repression-happy units does not help.

---

If you ship is sitting in the port, then AI fleet attacking the port will merely blockade it (not destroy; not attack your ship). The only way the game allows your ship to be kicked out is if an enemy land unit enters the port. I suppose that could be a threat after the upcoming patch sine AI sea invasions will become possible: but for now, a boat in the port protects it as well as a garrison.

I have yet to see anything that would be more difficult on VH (than on medium) strategic map settings in the vanilla game...

Thanks for the information.

From the differences I saw between Easy and Normal, I believe Hard and Very Hard will merely make the nations ask for more in diplomatic exchanges. Louisiana was willing to give me 9000 gold for my American provinces (except French Guyana, which went to Spain for Flanders) in Easy, "only" 8000 in Normal. But I should play again to make sure...

Never mind. All difficulties reject 9000 and accept 8000.

After playing as France, I'm pretty sure it's an AI problem. Though they suffer a bit in trade income since they only start out with 1 port in Europe, the region of France has ENORMOUS property tax revenue potential. There are SO many towns in that one region, it's a gold mine.

Also, starting with an alliance with Spain, a English AI currently unable to invade you, having access to Spices via French Guyana, and being able to build 5 units / turn from Paris and another 2 from Strasbourg...grants you a great power base to build on. The only competition you have in Europe (Spain) is your ally. Arrayed around you are several pidly 1-region nations that you can take appart piecemeal. Hell, you can knock out the Dutch in a few turns and get 3-4 very wealthy towns and a major port!

With all that going for France from the get-go, the problem seems clearly more the French AI than their starting position.

The biggest problem is not lack of funds or infrastructure of the major factions its simply a lack of aggressive AI towards the other AI factions. i know some people report massive factions and what not, but realistically in my and most other peoples experiences the AI is not aggressive towards other AI factions, go to war with them and they will attack you relentlessly, but ive watched Russia and Ottomans in 2 campaigns at war for the whole thing and not take any provinces from each other.

Ive watched russia with its massive empire a war with georgia and not touch it. Its the same with france not touching the single province targets in central europe. I feel the AI is just too passive towards itself.

in my current poland campaign with saxony as my protectorate, i pumped them up with provinces i stole from austria and the other minors, they now have like 15 provinces in central europe with heaps of full stacks roaming around. and yet when i call them in on wars they dont even move their troops, unless their borders are threatened which only happened in a war with bravia cos i was moving my troops through saxonies provinces.

Just my 2 cents :)

make the ai actually fight amongst itself i remember the good old days of fighting off against 20+ full stacks of alomahad's hehe

Cheers Knoddy