Impressions of Faction balance.

From what I have seen so far Prussia seems the big winner with these changes. They can blitz their hearts out and not sweat money for troops. (Prussia still starts with 8000 while everyone else has been cut to 7000)

They need not build a thing but troops and military buildings. It must be the easiest of all the factions to play. I would say the game has now been tailored for this faction alone.

Sweden does okay. They can not expand early or afford to start any wars but if they can expand their trade they can hold their own and slowly expand.

France is about the same. Less money, and cash was their big worry before but they can still survive.

Great Brittan has lost a lot with the changes. It is not a powerhouse. It can barely hold on to what it has in the beginning and expansion is very slow. Troops are its biggest worry.

Austria looks like it has been redesigned to be Prussia whipping boy. It had more than enough problems before. It is iffy if it has the clout to hold out.

Spain is a total basket case. They have a smaller navy, less troops, and no real hope of getting any cash. The early game was hard for Spain in the first place. Now I am unsure it is viable.
Perhaps if the Dutch are still willing to trade Ceylon and Curacao for Flanders…

What has been done to the town improvement is a shame! Most factions will be unable to improve beyond the second level of anything. Improving plantations must be handled carefully and it always results in diminishing returns.

Many regions are net money losers and where tax exempting them in the past would result in some increase now you are lucky if they rise to 0. Several still are loosing money with tax exempt status.

Most of the minor powers have been nerffed so they are no longer a problem for major powers. Taking them is an easy way to increase your cash if you can afford troops in the first place. This is mostly another big win for Prussia.

I have not tried Russia yet but I have noted that the Crimea seems to always fall on turn two in every campaign.

Unrest is now a minor irritant in home regions which takes little or no garrison to hold in check. The unrest in conquered regions appears to be stronger now but perhaps it is only due to the fact that troops are harder to come by.

Techs and buildings no longer cause unrest. Just the school improvements do.

The AI diplomacy is now on a par with that of M2TW, which sucked, and behaved more sensibly before it was changed.

More aggressive does not mean better.

Of course it does prove advantageous for Prussia. With all the weak minors declaring war on them they don’t have to bother worrying about which targets to pick.

The game may have gotten very hard for some factions but if you cannot win with Prussia you had best leave the others alone anyway.

Turkey is a harder faction to play now I'm finding. Not that it was easy to begin with. Lots of land with little money to build up an economy. It took time to build up the current empire and now its harder since the AI is more aggressive and trade income changed so its not as easy to get coins rolling in. More factions attacking you now so you are even more on the defensive from the git go and the starting units weak on top of that.

Prussia's infantry destroys everybody on early. Hell, most of their neighbors have no form of bayonet. Once you have fire by rank, its over. I have to agree that the minor nations sent more troops to attack pre-patch. I start actually "playing" my Prussian campaign around 1750-1760. It's more fun that way.

France is definitely not so bad. So Spain sounds fun, I'll try that next. Not viable in early game eh? Sounds promising :yes:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fisherking

Great Brittan has lost a lot with the changes. It is not a powerhouse. It can barely hold on to what it has in the beginning and expansion is very slow. Troops are its biggest worry.

---

I can't say that's true for my post-patch British campaign. I am expanding, but at a slower pace than before. For some reason I'm behind in prestige rankings, but that should be rectified when I clean up NA, get the 13 colonies to join me, and also conquer India. That should take a while - I only have three regions in India, and I've gifted several NA regions to the 13 colonies. France just declared war on the colonies, when I had a full stack 2 turns away from Montreal and Quebec - too bad for the French. Both the Mughals and the Marathas are at war with me - even though I was trying to get an alliance with the latter.

My recommendation for any new GB campaign might sound counter-intuitive, but fire at least one of your nice 5-star starting ministers. Several are incorruptible, +2 (or 3?) to management, but -2 to nobility happiness. The army or navy one preferably. You should be able to improve the replacement rather quickly. The reason for doing this is that you have at least -5 modifiers to your nobility happiness, making holding your own regions, as well as any captured regions, difficult.

Once I fired a couple of them, researched carbines to get dragoons, and Victoria I replaced William III with a lot of positive modifiers, I was able to expand at a more normal pace for this game (one full stack in NA, one in India).

My second mistake was trying to hold on to Flanders (captured on turn 2) for about 8 turns. I should have gifted it to Westphalia earlier (to make it a protectorate), or to a NA nation! That delayed my India assault by 8 turns, which means I need to face a stronger Maratha faction now.

Edit: I am on turn 31 now. I didn't start firing said ministers until late in the tens of turns... I swapped Rupert for French Guyana (1800 gold + naval tech) on turn 1, which along with my holding Flanders caused Holland to DoW on me turn 8 or 9.

Second Edit: I've given almost all military techs to the 13 colonies, so they can defend themselves against the Native onslaught, and I've taken to giving them funds (1000 to 2000) every other turn for them to maintain their armies and still build up...

Edit 3: Difficulty is H/M if you're wondering.

So you've done a cursory analysis of the (very) early games of only six factions and you declare that Prussia "must be the easiest of all the factions to play"? How about playing every faction to at least the middle game with the same level of thought put into each before making such sweeping generalisations?

It's true, Prussian did get its line infantry boosted to 35 reloading skill and it does start out with more cash than most others. But it's entirely another thing to claim that CA tailored the game for Prussia. After all, what good are India, America and trading spots to Prussia if Prussia can hardly establish a meaningful presence there in the early/mid game?

Quote:

---

It [GB] can barely hold on to what it has in the beginning and expansion is very slow

---

The only British territory seriously threatened in the early game is Rupert's Land. If you're talking about the Thirteen Colonies, they are not technically British possessions gameplay-wise.

Quote:

---

Austria looks like it has been redesigned to be Prussia whipping boy

---

Part of the problem is that Grenzers are not available in campaign. This will be fixed in the next patch. However, Austria is still well-poised to take Ottoman territories, and Poland is as much a whipping boy for Prussia as Austria.

Quote:

---

The unrest in conquered regions appears to be stronger now but perhaps it is only due to the fact that troops are harder to come by.

---

No, gross resistance to foreign occupation has been increased and is independent of garrison strength. Obviously, the lesser availability of garrison troops will exacerbate its effects. I would say that this change has significantly slowed down blitzing in the very early game (due to the diversion of troops for garrison duties) and made it more expensive in the mid/late game (due to the need for [larger] accompanying garrison stacks).

Quote:

---

Techs and buildings no longer cause unrest. Just the school improvements do.

---

Truly a dumb mistake by CA and should be fixed soon.

Yep. Resistance used to be 8 points for regular regions, and 20 for national capitals. It is much worse now, 13 for normal and quite a bit more for capitals.

I'm for one happy about it - it does make blitzing much more difficult. I haven't tried Prussia at all, pre- or post-1.2, but I can't imagine it would be conducive to blitzing until dragoons come into play.

Without going into details, I think CA have done a very good job with this patch.

Many of the things you point out Fisherking, I disagree with so we will see what happens in the future patches with game balancing.

Bottom line...and from a macro point of view, did anyone notice the number of people in the E:TW section once the patch came out? :beam:

It declined substantially as it seemed most people decided to play, and stay playing, because of the changes made. That's a good sign that stability and difficulty have increased.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AussieGiant

Without going into details, I think CA have done a very good job with this patch.

Many of the things you point out Fisherking, I disagree with so we will see what happens in the future patches with game balancing.

Bottom line...and from a macro point of view, did anyone notice the number of people in the E:TW section once the patch came out? :beam:

It declined substantially as it seemed most people decided to play, and stay playing, because of the changes made. That's a good sign that stability and difficulty have increased.

---

The difficulty has not increased equally.

Now the factions not depending on trade dominate the AI factions and playing those is just too darned easy.

It was better when the minors just spammed armies. The more aggressive AI is just a joke.

They did a good job fixing bugs but the play is not more fun. The trading nations are tedious to play and the difficulties of playing Prussia, Poland, and Russia are no longer a challenge.

The reduction in unrest has made garrisons mostly unnecessary in home regions. The increase in unrest in conquered regions is a challenge.

Originally regional wealth was a bonus and a cushion you could fall back on. Now it is the key to building an army. Most higher buildings are too expensive to warrant building them. The changes in upkeep and trade have made the game difficult enough for the trading nations but not difficult at all for those not dependant on trade. Those higher costs don’t have much effect on them at all for the land based Powers. They have the money they need to raise and army and can acquire more by taking it from those who can’t afford the troops.

As Prussia I played a dozen turns. Conquered Poland the first turn then Saxony and some other region on the second. In six years I had made Poland a protectorate which also brought Coreland along. Other nations declaring war had no impact.

As Poland I took it a bit slower but still held everything I needed by 1720. Again DOWs had little or no impact. Killing off Prussia only took about 4 or 5 turns. Austria was nothing. Once a port was acquired I had little difficulty with money and the only thing I could trade was other goods.

Some factions have it every easy while others have it pretty hard. The trading nations can not afford to keep ships or troops which makes it difficult to gain ground. They need economic growth and cheap units. The land based powers befit from others not being able to build troops and are now steamrollers.

Spain is particularly bad off.

As I said, the more aggressive AI only has an impact on the trading nations. They lack the troops to put up a fight but a single ship is enough to bankrupt a trading country. For the land based powers belligerent little regions are nothing but plumbs for the picking.

As the game was before, it was a bit of a struggle for 25 to 40 years, depending on the faction, then it got easy. That was not so bad as things go. It gave you a sense of accomplishment.

Now for some factions it starts easy and gets better with every conquest…where does that leave you?

I can see your point Fisherking and I'm sure there will be changes.

But they may not be to everyone's liking.

As I said in another post.

With around 5 types of basic playing styles, 16 different combinations of difficulty and 12 Nations, this leaves CA and anyone who wishes to comment from an informed position, at least 960 feedback options.

You have clearly got a good deep knowledge of the game already, but I'd say no one is going to be able to speak to the CA AI guy's on even terms until you're at least half way though the 960 possible scenario’s.

It's like discussing something with Einstein.

He understands a lot about relativity, the other person also, but not as much. When talking to Einstein about relativity you need to be pretty informed for him to take your criticism or a particular argument seriously. Why? Because he can see your arguments, but because you don't understand the "whole" topic he can't explain to your satisfaction why things are the way they are.

Essentially there is "stuff" you don't know that you don't know. That "stuff" Einstein does know. That makes things frustrating.

So...

960 options...and I haven't even thought about the economic variables that need to be adjusted based on just 1 of the 960 selections...pricing alone needs an macro/micro economist just to analyse the various impacts, then there's repression, 3 different politcal systems, unit upkeep, trade etc etc.

This game is massive, really really massive and as a person managing a global application development and roll out for a relatively simple concept, it's pretty damn impressive to me.

And I know, I don't know a bunch of stuff about what they are doing in this game.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fisherking

From what I have seen so far Prussia seems the big winner with these changes. They can blitz their hearts out and not sweat money for troops. (Prussia still starts with 8000 while everyone else has been cut to 7000)

---

In terms of AI controlled Prussia: I see them beaten to pulp by Austria and Poland in my latest campaign. Courland also reemerged and are besieging Konigsberg now.[/QUOTE]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fisherking

They need not build a thing but troops and military buildings. It must be the easiest of all the factions to play.

---

So, where's the problem with that? Factions play out differently. Prussia suits one who wants to go the military route outright. There are different factions for different gameplays. And no, Prussia is not the easiest: the easiest is still Britain. I played a campaign with them to 1785, raking in 50,000 in turn profits from mid-game on, building up treasury surplus to 500,000 at which point I abandoned the campaign since no war could bother me given the cash cushion. Top that with the fact that Britain as a Constitutional Monarchy does not get industrial unrest. 1) I can have absolutely no garrison in any of my provinces (unless in a contested territory); 2) I can build 3 modern universities in England alone with the bonus of Royal Observatory and still no meaningful unrest...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fisherking

I would say the game has now been tailored for this faction alone.

---

I could say that about Britain...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fisherking

Great Brittan has lost a lot with the changes. It is not a powerhouse. It can barely hold on to what it has in the beginning and expansion is very slow. Troops are its biggest worry.

---

I utterly disagree. As stated above, Britain still seems the easiest of the factions to play. + they do not need too many troops anyway. Whole of North America can be taken over by 2 stacks featuring about half professional colonial soldiers + half auxiliaries (cheap). No army needed in Europe since the AI still does not do Naval invasions.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fisherking

Austria looks like it has been redesigned to be Prussia whipping boy. It had more than enough problems before. It is iffy if it has the clout to hold out.

---

Austria is a very fun faction to play now.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fisherking

What has been done to the town improvement is a shame! Most factions will be unable to improve beyond the second level of anything. Improving plantations must be handled carefully and it always results in diminishing returns.

Many regions are net money losers and where tax exempting them in the past would result in some increase now you are lucky if they rise to 0. Several still are loosing money with tax exempt status.

---

Developing towns (and plantations) was the key to building up that huge British cash surplus I mentioned above. Maybe in short game, upgrading does not make sense. It sure still does in the long campaign.

Also, take the pirate islands. The tax income at the start on those is miniscule. However, trade income boost from the plantation output is huge.

As to those losing regions: I find it quite realistic. Not all regions were worth holding on to for economic reasons. However, strategically, those losing regions can be quite handy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fisherking

Most of the minor powers have been nerffed so they are no longer a problem for major powers. Taking them is an easy way to increase your cash if you can afford troops in the first place. This is mostly another big win for Prussia.

---

I agree.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fisherking

I have not tried Russia yet but I have noted that the Crimea seems to always fall on turn two in every campaign.

---

In my British campaign, Crimea took Kiev on their own. They still exist in 1785 despite Austrians having taken over most of the Ottoman territories (Crimea's allies). So, I guess, it plays out differently in different campaigns.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fisherking

Unrest is now a minor irritant in home regions which takes little or no garrison to hold in check. The unrest in conquered regions appears to be stronger now but perhaps it is only due to the fact that troops are harder to come by.

---

Unrest in conquered regions just takes longer to subside now. And I find, it's quite realistic.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fisherking

Techs and buildings no longer cause unrest. Just the school improvements do.

---

Techs and buildings actually still cause unrest. Only under constitutional monarchy they don't since that type of government does not have the lower class. I know, it's silly.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fisherking

The game may have gotten very hard for some factions but if you cannot win with Prussia you had best leave the others alone anyway.

---

I find Ottomans to be a very fun campaign to play now.

I certainly lean towards Slaists assessment of the last patch.

It's not meant to be easier, but harder. And essentially that has been what has happened.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Slaists

Techs and buildings actually still cause unrest. Only under constitutional monarchy they don't since that type of government does not have the lower class. I know, it's silly.

---

Actually, the enlightenment tech "clamor for reform" penalty has gone AWOL in this patch. It is still in the description, but not in the game!

I agree that trade factions will have it harder than before with this patch. GB at least is still relatively easy. I am currently on turn 32 or 33, and took 3 regions during the last turn and this turn (two in NA, one in India). I purposefully did not take a fourth one (Punjab), because I didn't way Persia to DoW on me... I guess I have been averaging 1 region/turn for the last 10 turns or so - though I number of those in NA were gifted to the 13 colonies to make them whole again... Can Prussia blitz with the same tempo on H/M (not having tried it...)?

Two full stacks, and two half stacks are sufficient to go on a rampage in two theaters, because the AI priorities are messed up. The AI recruits too many units and doesn't improve its economy - and it doesn't use them properly to add insult to its own injury. France has a larger navy than mine (one stack in NA alone has more ships than my total combat navy!), and has built decent garrisons in its colonial possessions. But that has broken its back - it can't even repair a damaged weaver's cottage in Flanders, it has been that way for at least 10 turns!

The Marathas looked like they might prove a challenge - but I can't find a single decent stack anywhere. It has garrisoned each and every single regional capital with 6 to 10 units, but its main army is AWOL. I think the Mughals wore them down. To be fair, the Mughals had a 16-17 unit stack which they were using first to recapture their regions from the Marathas - then trying to attack me (just destroyed it this morning).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by anweRU

Actually, the enlightenment tech "clamor for reform" penalty has gone AWOL in this patch. It is still in the description, but not in the game!

I agree that trade factions will have it harder than before with this patch. GB at least is still relatively easy. I am currently on turn 32 or 33, and took 3 regions during the last turn and this turn (two in NA, one in India). I purposefully did not take a fourth one (Punjab), because I didn't way Persia to DoW on me... I guess I have been averaging 1 region/turn for the last 10 turns or so - though I number of those in NA were gifted to the 13 colonies to make them whole again... Can Prussia blitz with the same tempo on H/M (not having tried it...)?

Two full stacks, and two half stacks are sufficient to go on a rampage in two theaters, because the AI priorities are messed up. The AI recruits too many units and doesn't improve its economy - and it doesn't use them properly to add insult to its own injury. France has a larger navy than mine (one stack in NA alone has more ships than my total combat navy!), and has built decent garrisons in its colonial possessions. But that has broken its back - it can't even repair a damaged weaver's cottage in Flanders, it has been that way for at least 10 turns!

The Marathas looked like they might prove a challenge - but I can't find a single decent stack anywhere. It has garrisoned each and every single regional capital with 6 to 10 units, but its main army is AWOL. I think the Mughals wore them down. To be fair, the Mughals had a 16-17 unit stack which they were using first to recapture their regions from the Marathas - then trying to attack me (just destroyed it this morning).

---

Playing as Ottomans I seem to have plenty of 'clamour for reform'. I think, playing as British your initial ligne-up of ministers + the king give huge boost to canceling out the clamor. Several of them have the conservative trait.

It might be bugged though. I've read somewhere that constitutional monarchy is the only one that effectively cancels out clamor for reform (not the republic...). It might be, they messed up the entries and constitutional monarchy got what a republic was supposed to get (no clamor for reform).

Come to think of it: it would make sense.

- CM by design would get no industrial unrest but would have clamor for reform
- Republic by design would get no clamour for reform but would have industrial unrest
- AM would get both types of unrest, but the highest repression and the ability to tailor the cabinet to their liking at any point

The way it stands now Constitutional Monarchy does not get industrial unrest and, probably, does not get clamor for reform either. Seems like a bug.

The clamor for reform has not been there nor has it been listed on the techs for the factions I have played. Maybe some of the high level building have it but I have not been in a position to build them.

In the last few days I have tried out Prussia, Poland, Russia, Sweden, Spain, GB, Austria and a brief look at France. I won’t say it is taken out but I have not seen it.

The AI is still a blundering boob it just declares war now without being able to back up its claims. Major Powers are not much better than the Minors, they just have more land.

The AI does not seem as willing to swap regions as it was. I don’t know if that is all together good or bad.

Russia seems to play much like it did before the changes, and I guess that is good. But still the minors are not the powers they were so they don’t put up the furious fight they did.

I am not trying to be an expert on the topic.

These are impressions and not too in depth. I have kept the play brief deliberately.

From what I have seen the new trade system is just fine.

The building costs are much too high for some factions, as are the recruitment and upkeep costs.

For other factions they are about right or even a little low. (troop costs)

The challenge of keeping a government type from start to finish is gone from what I see, and I miss the challenge.

Many of the regions have also had their value cut. Some of these need to be looked at.

I am unclear on the tax penalties. I noticed them big time with GB but hardly at all with most of the others.

Spain seems the big looser and it was a struggle before. It can not stand up to the Pirates or even the minor powers. It needed to avoid war before, and that was difficult owing to its weakness. Not… well the AI is more aggressive and Spain has on troops. It seem to me it needs help.

I will still try to get to some others if I have time.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fisherking

The clamor for reform has not been there nor has it been listed on the techs for the factions I have played. Maybe some of the high level building have it but I have not been in a position to build them.

---

Keep in mind, clamor for reform affects only regions with schools.

The -1 clamor for reform penalty is still listed in the descriptions of the 2nd and higher level enlightenment technologies. That is as it was pre-patch.

What is missing post-patch for GB is the actual clamor for reform when you research the techs. I used to get it as advertised in my pre-1.2 games. The fact that it is displayed in the description, but not present in the game suggest a snafu in the patch (or something due to my ministers as Slaists wrote above - I'll check it tonight).

The only clamor I get at the moment is the one due to the presence of the school itself...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by anweRU

Keep in mind, clamor for reform affects only regions with schools.

The -1 clamor for reform penalty is still listed in the descriptions of the 2nd and higher level enlightenment technologies. That is as it was pre-patch.

What is missing post-patch for GB is the actual clamor for reform when you research the techs. I used to get it as advertised in my pre-1.2 games. The fact that it is displayed in the description, but not present in the game suggest a snafu in the patch (or something due to my ministers as Slaists wrote above - I'll check it tonight).

The only clamor I get at the moment is the one due to the presence of the school itself...

---

Yes, I agree. I double checked my British campaign: and I actually had clamor for reform but only in cities with universities. None whatsoever in any other province despite the enlightenment techs promising such clamor.

As to Britain: I had two modern universities in England and the clamor for reform was still minimal. Something seems broken with constitutional monarchy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by anweRU

Keep in mind, clamor for reform affects only regions with schools.

The -1 clamor for reform penalty is still listed in the descriptions of the 2nd and higher level enlightenment technologies. That is as it was pre-patch.

What is missing post-patch for GB is the actual clamor for reform when you research the techs. I used to get it as advertised in my pre-1.2 games. The fact that it is displayed in the description, but not present in the game suggest a snafu in the patch (or something due to my ministers as Slaists wrote above - I'll check it tonight).

The only clamor I get at the moment is the one due to the presence of the school itself...

---

Indeed you are right!

I would have sworn that it was also missing from the tech card.

The clamor doesn’t seem to be as bad and it is also missing from building. At least all that I have built.

So the best research farms are located in big provinces with equal parts booze and schools. That's cool :).

@Fisherking

As prepatch I focused primarily on the Ottomans, Russia, and Prussia, I wouldn't know how much they nerfed the tradeing.

However I did start a French GC H/N the day before patch and was chugging along almost unstoppable. I had 4/5 Sugar trade spots, 9/10 Ivory tradespots, and 2/5 Spice tradespots.

I restarted post patch and was only able to capture 3/5 sugar tradespots, 3/10 Ivory tradespots, and 3/5 Spice tradespots employing the same strategy (so the AI is better at grabbing them). Granted in neither case did I employ a "balls to the wall" East Indiamen produced everywhere strategy, nor did I use existing naval units to "hold" tradespots. I merely built 3 every other turn and sent them out. I did noticed very quickly the decline in trade and think it serves the nations I played pre-patch as trade is so little of what they do. My French campaign post-patch is continueing just fine with 22k income around 1750.

Prussia in particular was a monster pre-patch and will continue to be one post patch.

I support you in the effort to make all nations (e.g. Spain) viable with a multitude of strategies, but ask that we stop short of trying to "balance" all the starting positions as this seems a bit goofy in a single player strategy game.

As England was unable to be invaded pre-patch, and I'd wager highly unlikely to be so post patch; I take most comments about the uber achievements players have made with this nation with a grain of salt.

In particular I feel the Colonial "missions" in North America are a bit goofy to begin with. And France and Spain seemed to have drawn the short straw on this.

Also I didn't notice that the AI doesn't trade territories anymore until you mentioned it, but my French game has not seen a single offer.

Cheers,

Naf

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nafod

As England was unable to be invaded pre-patch, and I'd wager highly unlikely to be so post patch; I take most comments about the uber achievements players have made with this nation with a grain of salt.

---

No need to take it with a grain of salt. Save games can be provided... However, you have a good point. If the AI actually conducted invasions, then I would need to build up my units in Britain. I currently have only several dragoons and a single general in the British islands.

Holland shouldn't have a big problem. It needs to hold only two European regions. Others would be hard pressed.

Which is why I asked "Can Prussia blitz with the same tempo on H/M?" I doubt it. GB is still a very easy faction. Fisherking has the opposite idea, as is obvious from his posts.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nafod

Also I didn't notice that the AI doesn't trade territories anymore until you mentioned it, but my French game has not seen a single offer.

---

It still does, just with nowhere near the frequency; possibly as a consequence of the different monetary values floating around, it may not reach positive outcomes as often. In particular you can still offer ridiculous sums for territory, as well as demand it for peace.

re: Britain, still by far the easiest; Holland is also pretty damn easy simply because you incur no "territorial expansion" as you don't need (nor want) to expand in Europe at all (and the New Spain "exploit" lets you claim your one European goal early on without France intervening.).

Spain isn't too bad if you take a long view, but if you play it straight and don't spend a few turns sacking the King, etc, it's probably the weakest European power. The Ottomans are probably the only faction I'd rate "hard" in that you have an uphill climb no matter how you do it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by anweRU

No need to take it with a grain of salt. Save games can be provided... However, you have a good point. If the AI actually conducted invasions, then I would need to build up my units in Britain. I currently have only several dragoons and a single general in the British islands.

Holland shouldn't have a big problem. It needs to hold only two European regions. Others would be hard pressed.

Which is why I asked "Can Prussia blitz with the same tempo on H/M?" I doubt it. GB is still a very easy faction. Fisherking has the opposite idea, as is obvious from his posts.

---

@anweRU


2 things:

I only consern myself with the world domination or prestige campaigns. I find the short/long goals a bit gamey. I don;t mean to dis those that play these, only I do not, thus my comments do not apply in these cases.

Additionally you mentioned your father was a US Sub Skipper. Could you ask, assuming you do not know, why the stretch of US Interstate 70 from Columbia Missouri to Kansas City Missouri is dubbed the "US Submarine Veterans Memorial Highway?" This has puzzled me for five years.

My father was a Turkish submarine skipper. You probably have/ had a big group of submarine veterans in the area.

My GB campaigns have been prestige campaigns - which invariably become world domination campaigns. I need to eliminate my competition after all. In my pre-patch GB H game, I had 55 regions on turn 71 and a prestige rank of 2451 (883 being the second ranked nation). I switched to a Dutch H, then to a Swedish VH campaign. Current game has 19 regions on turn 31, with a prestige rank of342 vs 223 of Poland, the second. Early on Prussia and the Marathas had higher prestige ranking than I...

Pre-patch Swedish VH short campaign had 37 regions held at turn 101, when the game ended. That was my most peaceful campaign. And the one I enjoyed the most incidentally. The pre-patch Dutch campaign had 43 regions (including most of India, NA, and the Baltic) on turn 70. I abandoned it due to a CTD issue.

Post-patch I haven't had an opportunity to play anything other than the GB campaign, and look at how the patch affected my VH French campaign which was two days old when the patch hit.

Most of the time I can only play about an hour a day, either before going to work or after coming home. Need to spend time with a minor distraction known as family (the four legged children are more demanding than my girlfriend)... Hence my ignorance of what Prussia can accomplish.

I have played roughly between 20 and 40 turns post patch of all the major factions except the Dutch.

I will get to them but have not had the time. To me they were the easiest faction I had played pre-patch.

Post patch the number one hands down easiest is Prussia, fallowed second by Poland. The third easiest are the Marathas Confederacy who have an easy time in India so long as European troops don’t show up.

These are as you see only early game impressions. As you get into the mid game it should get a bit easier, I would think.

The hardest faction is Spain, fallowed by the Ottoman Empire. With Spain I found I had little hope of even surviving. With no other faction did I feel so hopeless or helpless. With the Turks I was able to take two regions while trying to build up the weak economy. I didn’t get the economy running in any grand way but it gave me enough for cheap troops.

The way I played it Austria seemed very weak also with everyone going to war with you it makes it a very close call between them and the Turks, they may be a bit harder actually.

The rest fall into a middle ground where they are not in danger of being eliminated but the road to victory could prove long and hard.

I know that some of you think England is easy but just try to meet your victory conditions in under 10 years. Prussia, Poland, and the Marathas should all be able to accomplish their required regions in that amount of time and Prussia can get all the regions they need for the Prestige game in that amount of time. Prussia also had the fastest research in all fields of any of the factions. It needs some work to make it a bit more of a challenge.

This is not the Prussia of history, that much is for sure. They are in no danger of being rescued when the Tsar decides they should live and they need not worry about a great French army subjugating them. It is much more like an unstoppable Third Reich sort of military machine rolling across Europe.

Fisherking, I am playing as Sweden now in my first post patch game which you mentioned was close to Prussia as being easiest of the factions. I am making it decently fine and having lots of fun with the challenge. What happens if you play the other factions on an easier setting, like M/M. Are they still hard to get going then? I was going to start an Austria campaign next and I usually play VH/H, but might start M/H or something like that. I guess another way to phrase the question is, how much easier is the economy to build on M/M than VH/H? This might be on another thread, so sorry if that is the case.

I admire you tenacity Fisherking, but now JeromeBaker has asked his question you now have the dilemma of play all of them again at varying difficulties...

:sweatdrop:

Its easy to rush as Prussia in the early game, but I think your economy growth is not so fast compared to some other factions after it passes into the mid-game, so if you didn't zerg in the beginning it's a little bit harder later on (provided Austria, Poland-Lithuania, and Russia didn't beat each other to death first).

As for tech, I limit myself to 3 schools with Prussia and I found that pace to be slow enough so that I'll finish the tech tree perhaps in the late 1780's or early 1790's.

And I think Marathas is easier than Prussia IMHO :2thumbsup:

Fisherking I agree Spain is hopeless. I couldn't bring myself to play 5 turns....

Spain isn't hopeless it is fun if you play a long campaign, especially the world domination one. Sell Flanders to the UP in exchange for Curacao, sell Lombardy to Rome for an alliance and a lot of problems are gone. My biggest problem became France! My loyal ally declared war on me twice and faced the consequence in losing the France region and her possessions in the Caribbean. With Spain money is very tight in the beginning, I could only support one stack and a fleet of four ships in the beginning and had to gamble during the first French war. Now I am earning almost 40,000 per turn and can support four stacks. I am at war with the US which has captured almost all of Cherokee, Louisiana and the Thirteen Colonies.

If you try to hold on everything in the beginning, Spain is very difficult. Concentrate on developing your empire and it can be fun.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JeromeBaker

Fisherking, I am playing as Sweden now in my first post patch game which you mentioned was close to Prussia as being easiest of the factions. I am making it decently fine and having lots of fun with the challenge. What happens if you play the other factions on an easier setting, like M/M. Are they still hard to get going then? I was going to start an Austria campaign next and I usually play VH/H, but might start M/H or something like that. I guess another way to phrase the question is, how much easier is the economy to build on M/M than VH/H? This might be on another thread, so sorry if that is the case.

---

As the game is currently set, you will find that the difficulty levels show up only on the battle map.

If there are any differences on the campaign map I haven’t noticed them.

The campaign difficulty only seems to effect the generalship on the battle map and the battle difficulties give bonuses to the enemy troops. I wouldn’t even swear that the generalship is much better…but the bonuses are real enough.

Diplomatically and economically I find no differences. The easy AI is just as belligerent and stupid as it is on very hard. The regions are just as poor and trade values and building costs are the same. At least at the start of the campaign troop upkeep is all the same.

Each campaign is randomized a bit, most noticeable in ministers but I suspect it gives factions slightly different personalities.

If anyone else sees any, then please point them out.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fisherking

As the game is currently set, you will find that the difficulty levels show up only on the battle map.

If there are any differences on the campaign map I haven’t noticed them.

The campaign difficulty only seems to effect the generalship on the battle map and the battle difficulties give bonuses to the enemy troops. I wouldn’t even swear that the generalship is much better…but the bonuses are real enough.

Diplomatically and economically I find no differences. The easy AI is just as belligerent and stupid as it is on very hard. The regions are just as poor and trade values and building costs are the same. At least at the start of the campaign troop upkeep is all the same.

Each campaign is randomized a bit, most noticeable in ministers but I suspect it gives factions slightly different personalities.

If anyone else sees any, then please point them out.

---

For instance France N/N. Went from total peace to being at war with the Innuit, Huron, Iroqouis, Savoy, Wurtemburg, Westphalia, Austria and the UP.

The next turn The Pueblo and Cherokee went to war with Louisiana.

The turn after that GB joined the fray.

Ended up ok though. Only nations in North America are myself, Spain, and the Plains Indians. Game gets kinda boring once you completely dominate a theatre..... All European nations that went to war with me ate dirt save Austria.

It seems the AI executes war better now, but it can't afford the resources to do so. Pre-patch it had masses of stacks that fumbled around aimlessly.

Better generalship at higher campaign difficulties?

Just what I've been waiting to hear! :D

I had a look at the last of the playable factions post patch. The UP.

It has been made easier! But as a trading nations the changes are almost warranted.

It now starts with 8 merchantmen. Two flutes (350 upkeep now) and five Indiamen in the spice islands and one fluyte in the North Sea. The navy is still the strongest in the game at start and ready to rake in the profits. Except the profits are never really there…

I managed to totally dominate trade, having all five spots in the East Indies, four off Brazil, four off the Ivory Coast, and three off Madagascar. I even had two extra trade ships on ivory, my two sugar plantations, and a tea plantation. I had small fleets guarding the trade lanes and had the pirate ports blockaded.

Trade revenue was just above 9000.

I never exceeded 3600 on my best turns, and the worst turn was 0. Most of the time it was at 2200 no matter what.

My unit builds for the entire game were 5 Indiamen, 4 sloops, 3 line infantry and 1 dragoon. All other ships were prizes. I never lost a single naval battle, and there were many! There was almost one per turn and sometimes as many as three. I only auto resolved two of them, due mostly to fatigue.

I took the regions of Rhineland on turn 1, and Flanders on abut turn 4 or 5 when Spain attacked.

Given the choice of the AI pre patch and post patch, I would say put it back! I am sick to death of friendly and very friendly nations declaring war. Actually the one good thing is that allies often abandon their alliances now when it makes little or no sense to go to war but the willingness to go to war over nothing is still stupid.

the game does conspire to keep trade interrupted, and it does a darn good job of it too.

I tore down improvements to build two schools, as every region is fully developed at the start now.

I did not find the faction at all difficult to manage, but I did find it very tedious and tiresome. How it will ever have the income to manage its goals I have no way of knowing. 1711 was all I could stand.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fisherking

I had a look at the last of the playable factions post patch. The UP.

It has been made easier! But as a trading nations the changes are almost warranted.

It now starts with 8 merchantmen. Two flutes (350 upkeep now) and five Indiamen in the spice islands and one fluyte in the North Sea. The navy is still the strongest in the game at start and ready to rake in the profits. Except the profits are never really there…

I managed to totally dominate trade, having all five spots in the East Indies, four off Brazil, four off the Ivory Coast, and three off Madagascar. I even had two extra trade ships on ivory, my two sugar plantations, and a tea plantation. I had small fleets guarding the trade lanes and had the pirate ports blockaded.

Trade revenue was just above 9000.

I never exceeded 3600 on my best turns, and the worst turn was 0. Most of the time it was at 2200 no matter what.

My unit builds for the entire game were 5 Indiamen, 4 sloops, 3 line infantry and 1 dragoon. All other ships were prizes. I never lost a single naval battle, and there were many! There was almost one per turn and sometimes as many as three. I only auto resolved two of them, due mostly to fatigue.

I took the regions of Rhineland on turn 1, and Flanders on abut turn 4 or 5 when Spain attacked.

Given the choice of the AI pre patch and post patch, I would say put it back! I am sick to death of friendly and very friendly nations declaring war. Actually the one good thing is that allies often abandon their alliances now when it makes little or no sense to go to war but the willingness to go to war over nothing is still stupid.

the game does conspire to keep trade interrupted, and it does a darn good job of it too.

I tore down improvements to build two schools, as every region is fully developed at the start now.

I did not find the faction at all difficult to manage, but I did find it very tedious and tiresome. How it will ever have the income to manage its goals I have no way of knowing. 1711 was all I could stand.

---

The key for uninterrupted trade (and a filthy rich, boring game) is to get rid of the pirates early on. It's not that ahistoric either. The Caribbean pirate problem was solved only once the territories that were friendly to them got under control of major powers.

I'm playing a VH Ottoman campaign and, in 1745, the pirates are ruining my trade so, the Sultan's fleet is heading to the core of the problem: the Caribbean.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Slaists

The key for uninterrupted trade (and a filthy rich, boring game) is to get rid of the pirates early on. It's not that ahistoric either. The Caribbean pirate problem was solved only once the territories that were friendly to them got under control of major powers.

I'm playing a VH Ottoman campaign and, in 1745, the pirates are ruining my trade so, the Sultan's fleet is heading to the core of the problem: the Caribbean.

---

It was not the pirates! Some pirating by belligerents of course but I had the fleets to deal with it…

There were just other things going on. No one will agree to trade. The money for the provinces held were not good enough to make up the difference.

You can see I was not spending a lot on upkeep. Also trade partners blockaded, so money down the drain.

I find the game more tedious and less enjoyable in its current state. At least with the Trade Nations, and I don’t find much challenge in the blitzing factions…They were historically poor but here it is the reverse!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fisherking

It was not the pirates! Some pirating by belligerents of course but I had the fleets to deal with it…

There were just other things going on. No one will agree to trade. The money for the provinces held were not good enough to make up the difference.

You can see I was not spending a lot on upkeep. Also trade partners blockaded, so money down the drain.

I find the game more tedious and less enjoyable in its current state. At least with the Trade Nations, and I don’t find much challenge in the blitzing factions…They were historically poor but here it is the reverse!

---

No one willing to trade? Hmm... that's weird. Post patch I have played H with GB and now VH with Ottomans. So far, playing with Ottomans everyone who has a port (or land connection) has been quite eager to trade with me. True, in some cases I had to pay to jump start the trade but in one case, Austria asked for trade and paid themselves after I had signed a ceasefire with them.

Sure, successful trade now involves guarding the trade routes of my partners too. For example, I saw my trade take a plunge in one turn. Sure enough: it was Savoy blockading the closest French port and pesky Persians blockading Marathas. A DOW and swift fleet action solved that problem. It was fun too, LOL.

In 1745 my profit (after paying for fleets and armies) runs anywhere between 15,000 and $5,000 dukats per turn depending on which of my trade partners get blockaded or what the pirates are doing. So far, the biggest pain in the neck have been pirates for they seem to have captured MOST of western european scouting fleets and are featuring huge armadas sitting on trade routes near Madagaskar and Indonesia. According to estimates (from the trade screen) they're eating away about 7,000 dukats in potential profits from me. That's more than enough to field another full stack army...

Another thing I noticed: if you have a trade partner that has been blockaded for a long time and there is no hope of rescuing it it's more profitable to cancel the trade agreement. It seems, the goods get redistributed amongst the active trade partners after the cancellation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Slaists

Another thing I noticed: if you have a trade partner that has been blockaded for a long time and there is no hope of rescuing it it's more profitable to cancel the trade agreement. It seems, the goods get redistributed amongst the active trade partners after the cancellation.

---

That is correct. Canceling a blockaded traded route will significantly boost your income if your partner is large (typically Sweden, Austria, Ottomans, Russia in my games).

I suppose my complaint would be the exact opposite of Fisherking's. I know France has a full stack of 5th & 6th rates, brigs and sloops in North American waters. It chased my small fleet (4 ships) carrying my full-stack invasion force (destined to rescue Virginia from the Iriquois). Yet it didn't kill it off. To my fortune, instead of following my fleet when I retreated, it vanished back into the expanses of NW Atlantic. I know it is still there - even though I was blockading France's northern trade port with another puny force in the European theater.

Only the pirates & the Prussians tried to raid my route so far. The pirates are conquered & gone, and I now have 5 IM thanks to Prussia (unfortunately the sixth sank during the battle...).

I went back and tried Spain again. It is workable but it does take a large effort. Most of my starting money went to make alliances and overland trade agreements.

Once I got my one galleon onto a trade spot I have some almost breathing room. If the upkeep and recruitment were still the same I might have a better chance but as it is I lost Florida to the Cherokee. Mostly due to lack of money for troops. They had over a full stack when they came and I couldn’t beat that with what little I had.

I have avoided most major entanglements thus far but it is only 1703. At war with Genoa and a lot of Indian Tribes.

I managed to capture a galleon from the pirates but I don’t have the fleet to block their ports.

It is a bit odd that I am actually making more off two trade spots and the Spanish plantations than I did with all the trade I had as the Dutch. I have gotten around 3400 the last couple of turns until my port was blocked. Then I only got 904. But I have no fleet or army to speak of and have to take out Genoa if I can rise the money. I had to spend what I had in reserve to build the fleet to free the port.

This is a double post but it is to offer a view of all the factions as I perceived them in 10 to 20 years of play. I didn’t include or look at the US so perhaps someone can give us an opinion.


Overview:

The game plays differently. Most factions are more difficult but some have become a cake walk.

All costs are higher and revenue is as always your life’s blood.

While quick expansion is desirable for economic reasons only 4 factions can manage it in my view. The rest are limited to a slow approach, though the quicker you can manage the better.

GB; More difficult and somewhat challenging at times. Taking on the Pirates may be your best option for early growth. Capturing their trade ships may help in trade.

France; generally the same but less revenue and result in more of a challenge, though the minors offer little challenge to your existence now.

Austria; I found it to be among the most difficult. It lacks money and has poor quality troops. All nations see you as weak, and you are. Make any trade agreements and alliances you can and try to build up until the first attack comes. You will likely make it through but it will be long and slow.

Russia; Plays much the same as before but building improvements do less. Sweden is too strong so look south first for expansion. They are weaker.

Sweden; Your position may be improved, for your enemies have fewer troops. However, you will not be making any early conquests either. Trade and development are your only options.

UP; The strongest position of any of the trading nations. You have more trade fleets than ever. Grab all the trade spots you can and expand trade as quickly as possible. All your regions are fully developed from the start. Grabbing Rhineland on turn one will give you a second school. If you want others you need to destroy towns and rebuild. Don’t declare war on Spain! Wait! It is likely France will not join its ally, which is to your advantage. Flanders should not prove hard. Just keep a few troops in Amsterdam. Spain may waist its troops on an assault and leave the door open.

Spain; Perhaps the most vulnerable position at start and economically strained. Replace ministers. Tax exempt all regions but Spain to stimulate growth. Make alliances and trade agreements with everyone possible including Portugal and trade with Morocco. Spend the money on diplomacy and it will pay dividends later. You can’t afford troops so you will need to rely on friendship for the moment. If you can build troops Florida is your best bet. If you are luck you can take Georgia, if not you are no worse off with out those regions. Ports need expanded to get the benefit of your American regions. Trade spots are also needed. You just need money.

Prussia; At start you are the golden boy! Blitz! Then Blitz! Then keep going. Your research is quicker than anyone else’s and you start with bayonets, the best troops and a strong army. Use it. Poland turn one. Saxony and West Prussia turn two. If someone else declares war you can likely ignore it. They haven’t the armies to do much. Poland first and then Austria at your leisure. You are made to win and win quick. Russia is happy to make peace when you choose.

Poland; Strike Prussia first. You may be a bit slower in the build up but you can do it. Prussia is only two regions and wealthy ones for you. No one else is strong enough to stop you then.

Ottoman Empire; Large and weak. Develop but first clean house with the ministers. That will help greatly. Stimulate growth by exempting all you can. Trade with anyone and watch Russia and Georgia. Most others are too weak to be a threat. You need time and money.

The Marathas Confederacy; Expand! You can take two regions on the first turn. Soon you will have other opportunities. Farms, trade, and troops! From there the world. Grow!


General; Allies are much more fickle and willing to abandon you. If you don’t call on them it is just fine. They are of much less use now anyway, as all are militarily weaker. Be prepared to fight all your own battles.

Trade is more important but its economical value is reduced. Trade agreement help but friendly status of powers does not guarantee peace.

I have not looked past the early game in these assessments. The AI in general holds surprises. When you make gains expect setbacks.

It's good to see you have found a stategy for Spain FK. FK, is your new designation for me by the way. Is that ok? It's a holdover from the massive PBM in the throne room.

I'd say that all AI balancing work by CA is going to require a re-think on strategy in general. Change is not bad, and it's a challenge to now get Spain up and running. Which is a good thing.

Keep in mind I'm now in 1776 with Prussia on H/M and I'm one province away from getting my land requirements in a Prestige campaign. I have to declare war on France because it's the Alcaise (sp?) that I need.

I've done anything but blitz to survive. I managed to get Austria and Poland into a truce by around 1750. It was hard but a combination of smashing their armies and stationing a good sized deterrent stack has kept Austria at peace plus trading!! Poland and I have been at war for the last 55 years, but they don't dare come across and bother me now that I've spent the last 20 years dealing with Denmark, Westphalia, and those other two single province states. I've now slapped UP because they did the old: "Ah you're my neighbour so I'm going to declare war on you, even though we have been friends and trading for 50 years."

BUT, I can see their point. I do have 12 or 13 provinces and represent the 900lb gorilla in Europe. So it would be appropriate for everyone to gang up on me.

Again I've only played out this one campaign but it has been difficult, plausible in the diplomacy area and a lot of fun. Westphalia just threw two stacks at me to save their home land. It was a cracker of a fight.

My stack:

2 x 12lb howizters, 2 x 24lb Howitzers, 3 x Cav regiments, 2 x Grenadiers, and the rest Line Inf, plus my general.

They went banana's, and if they hadn't drip fed the second stack into the battle I would have been in deep pork flu I can tell you.

I felt like I was in a Sharpe film!! It was great!!