Quote Originally Posted by Michiel de Ruyter View Post
Assuming these are the options, and starting at 1700:

Sweden: Again in many ways a spent state. It would be hard to get anywhere (at least if Russia, Denmark and the Dutch Republic are modelled anything close to reality). Even more so due to the stranglehold the Dutch had over the Swedish economy (especially the metal industry).
.
Oh come on! Sweden was a great power at the time the game starts. Actually, the game starts 1700, the same year as The Great Northern War starts. Sweden had, at the time, one of the best military forces in Europe. Commanded by the military genius Charles XII Sweden won several major victories and defeated Denmark in the first year of the war in such a way that it could not participate in war until several years later. The same year Russia was temporarily defeated when 8,600 Swedish troops defeated 37,000 russian troops in the battle of Narva, one of Swedens greatest military victories ever. The coalition against Sweden was in this time of the war, and actually during most of the war, ready to grant Sweden a very good offering of peace. Had it not been for Charles XII stubborn view of the war, convinced that everyone that declared war on him should surrender without terms - Sweden would have emerged only slightly hurt by the war. It wasnt until the battle of Poltava as the luck ran out for Sweden, and thats 9 years after the war started. If nothing else, it will be a great and entertaining challenge for the player to start the game with a faction currently in a state of war against 5 other countries at the same time.

Its ridiculous not including Sweden in the list.

A country that by its own manages to fight a 21 year long war against: Russia, Denmark–Norway, Prussia, Hanover, Poland-Lithuania and the Electorate of Saxony is ANYTHING but spent. It was spent _after_ the war, but since the war didnt end until 21 year after Empire: Total War starts, you might want to reconsider that statement.