World Conquest anyone?

[Prussian to the Iron]

im sure some people have, the people who have played non-stop since they got the game. its not really a difficulty thing as much as it is a time constraint thing. i, for example, have only had the game for 5 days. but, playing as russia for only a few hours a day, i eliminated 3 factions already and am halfway through conquering the ottomans. this may seem like a lot, but i still havent even expanded into europe, india or america yet. the farthest west i ahve been is south of the polish border. so i estimate by the time i conquer the world, i will have had the gam for 4 months.

i can bse this off experience. in R:TW, it took me about 6 months to finish my first world domination campaign(i fought every battle personally). in M2, it took about 4. this is about 3 times the size of m2, but it is also much harder with micromanagement and politics. thus i estimate anywhere from 4-7 months i will dominate the world.

of course, at that point i may already have lost interest in that campaign, as often happens when you dominate everyone.

[Relic]

im sure some people have, the people who have played non-stop since they got the game. its not really a difficulty thing as much as it is a time constraint thing. i, for example, have only had the game for 5 days. but, playing as russia for only a few hours a day, i eliminated 3 factions already and am halfway through conquering the ottomans. this may seem like a lot, but i still havent even expanded into europe, india or america yet. the farthest west i ahve been is south of the polish border. so i estimate by the time i conquer the world, i will have had the gam for 4 months.

i can bse this off experience. in R:TW, it took me about 6 months to finish my first world domination campaign(i fought every battle personally). in M2, it took about 4. this is about 3 times the size of m2, but it is also much harder with micromanagement and politics. thus i estimate anywhere from 4-7 months i will dominate the world.

of course, at that point i may already have lost interest in that campaign, as often happens when you dominate everyone.

Out of curiosity, what difficulty were you on?

[Dogfish]

I could of in a few campaigns but it gets boring for me near the end where victory is assured, so I usually stop playing. It's too easy right now.

[Prussian to the Iron]

Out of curiosity, what difficulty were you on?

for which games?

I could of in a few campaigns but it gets boring for me near the end where victory is assured, so I usually stop playing. It's too easy right now.

thats the way TW has always been (or at least the games i have had) once you are so close, you just lose interest. it always happens. however, having many regions in your victory conditions helps to make it interesting.

[jsberry]

I hate it that such conquest is so easy. It is so completely contrary to the "limited" nature of warfare before Napoleon.

Frederick II was "the Great" and he only won one province from Austria in two major wars. I am playing Prussia and by 1720 own most of Austria and Poland. My only tough adversary? Courland. Freaking Courland.

And, this is my very first time to play the game, and I'm not using any gimmick strategies like selling access. AND I'm auto-calcing all battles to avoid a sure CTD in the transition to the battle map.

This could be such a wonderful game if they'd just make it more realistic.

[Prussian to the Iron]

in my experience i only get a CTD after every other battle i fight on the batlemap, up until the new patch. if you want to actually fight the battles, save at the scroll asking if you want to fight or auto-calc, then go back and load it, then fight it. rinse and repeat for every battle. but after the new patch i havent had a single CTD.

[DisruptorX]

I usually try to roleplay my conquest a bit. Usually by the point that I've completed my goals, there's nothing stopping me from continuing to the ends of the earth, but it doesn't really feel right to do so.

Its nothing like say MTW 2, where I had trouble expanding past Africa as Spain because the Mongols had multiple full stacks waiting for any armies I shipped all the way across the world, or when I barely won as the Russians because transporting modern armies all the way to the front lines took years. Its easy in ETW so I limit myself.

[MikeV]

This could be such a wonderful game if they'd just make it more realistic.

I'd like to see that, as well. But, such a thing might not be "fun."

Here are just some of the changes needed:

• A realistic logistics system, including attrition, lines of supply, stockpiles, and foraging (with much higher foraging requirements for cavalry -- one reason armies had relatively few such units) -- no 20-unit stacks of dragoons rampaging through the Persian deserts;
• Much higher support costs, keeping army and navy sizes small;
• Recruitment, training, and support based on each unit's "home" regional population, and even the old S:TW (or, more generally, AoR) idea of certain regions specializing in certain unit types;
• Much longer training and reinforcement times (one reason there were so few all-out engagements during this time period);
• Weather effects -- there were almost no Winter campaigns during this time period, for good reason, and plenty of ships were lost at sea in storms;
• Iron, gunpowder, and other strategic resources, in sufficient quantity, to recruit/support each unit type;
• other stuff I forgot to mention ...

Some of this can be covered in an E:TR mod, but much of it would require changing the code itself.

[Prussian to the Iron]

i disagree with you completely. that would make it boring and waaay too much micromanaging.

and there is an AoR for some regions. play as united provinces and check cylon. rather than line infantry, it is V.O.C. infantry.