Quote Originally Posted by BeeSting View Post
Napoleon's conquest was in the 1800's and not 1700's... the game ends in 1799 and 1700's were a different time with different limitations.

The problem with CA games is that they are pseudo historical... if you want to feel somewhere remotely close to the challenges of the time, then play Europa Universalis where you would at least have to setup for yourself the "cause of war" before going into a war and achieve a point system for annexation of a province or nation before you can call any slab of land your own... TW games are child's play on the other hand.... it doesn't even consider the fact that the biggest enemy of any army is the nature and diseases it plagues them with; more men were lost to diseases than anything else. It's fun, however, battles are stunning... It's fun till you find out AI pattern and how stupid it is and discover all kinds of bugs which CA games are plagued with..... again though the graphics are amazing, it pushes technology, so you end up using a lot imaginations to find excuses to continue playing this game.
EU is a game that is for a different kind of player, personally I don't like it when I need to tranche through huge tutorials(I think II had like 6, by the time i was done with them I had forgotten the material in the first) that cover vast amounts of gameplay just to be able to enjoy a game. The depth and learning curve are intense, some people like that but it's not for me.

The weakness in CA's games has always been the AI going back to RTW, the AI seems improved this go around, we'll see in two days.

As for the Dutch, since there is literally zero details on how they conquered the French, who was aiding them, or how it happened there's no way for me to comment one way or another. I honestly find it hard to be either disappointed or impressed by a faction succeeding over another when I don't know the circumstances of it.