Results 1 to 30 of 38

Thread: England too easy?

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1
    Philosophically Inclined Member CountMRVHS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    481

    Default Re: England too easy?

    Still playing pre-patch, and certainly in my case England (and Scotland) are very easy. Too easy for my taste. I'm talking, VH/VH and snoozeville. I started a thread on this awhile ago, called "Peaceful British Isles".

    The problem for me is that, when I'm playing as Scotland, I want England to be aggressive and badass. I don't want England to send a 3-unit "army" to whack York, only to get driven back by the Rebels 3 times in a row. I want England to assert its authority, dammit, and try to put me in my rebellious kilt-wearing place! And I don't want to rush through and kick them off the island by turn 5 -- just not fun for me. But if you wait for the English to start heading north, you'll wait a looooong time.

    By the same token, when I'm playing as England, I want the Scots to cause trouble, give me something to worry about as I consolidate power on the island and the mainland. But all they ever seem to want is peace -- even if I offer them the most insulting diplomatic terms possible. If blockade Edinburgh for a turn just to declare war, they send a diplomat begging for a ceasefire. I'd *like* them to try to raid south, take York, try to take Nottingham -- at *least* take Inverness! ANd preferably do it without an army full of spear militia.

    While the Scots are idling around up north, the French are doing the same thing in the south -- failing to consolidate their power around them.

    I've noticed a disenheartening phenomenon with the campaign AI -- or I'm imagining things: it seems that all the excitng action happens several provinces *away* from wherever I am as the human faction. If I'm playing England, Scotland and France will be wimps. But if I'm playing France, Scotland takes Inverness and kicks the English out of York. Why couldn't they do that when *I'm* the English?!?!

    Anyway, this is just a silly rant but.... yeah. Rant.

    CountMRVHS

  2. #2

    Default Re: England too easy?

    The action is all around the med i have decided. Thats where this game is at.

  3. #3

    Default Re: England too easy?

    dunno bout anyone else, but I prefer a long game developing my empire rather than blitzing through.

    To make the English more fun and longer to play, lay down some simple rules for yourself.

    1) Change the turn settings to 0.5 & get BigMap Mod
    2) No attacking any faction unless they attack you first
    3) When they attack you, which they do frequently, counterattack and only end the war when you have at least one of their cities under your control - this can be done via diplomacy.
    4) Only take a city if it is joined to your empire - ie. only go to Ireland/ Tara if you control Edinburgh in normal or Dumfries in BigMap
    5) Attack neighbouring rebel cities ASAP
    6) Always occupy cities and Ransom prisoners.

    My English campaign, I'm at 1130 and have all of England, Wales and Ireland plus Dumfries. I have Caen, Rennes, Angers, Paris, Rhiems, Metz, Frankfurt, Bruges, Antwerp, Hohenstauffen, Hamburg, Arhus and Uppsala.

    All of this has been slowly accumulated over 100 turns and it has given me a chance to develop my characters and guilds how I want them.

  4. #4
    Member Member LordKhaine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    England
    Posts
    397

    Default Re: England too easy?

    To be fair I've found Milan and Egypt easier than England. Egypt has decent cavalry to rush in the early game, and a safe and rich position (until the mongols arrive at least). And Milan is easy simply because if you play your cards right you're very rich. And as we all know.. war needs three things...
    ~LordKhaine~

  5. #5

    Default Re: England too easy?

    Yeah, England has the best starting position by far. I owned all of central and western europe by turn 70 playing as them.

  6. #6
    Amateur Historian (In College) Member Artorius Maximus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Erring, Caledonia Name: Artorius Maximus Ethnicity: Italic-Illyrian
    Posts
    111

    Default Re: England too easy?

    My first campaign was a Venice one, but I tried England, and they seem to be much easier than Venice, also, if you are Excommunicated by the Pope as England, then it would not be as bad as Venice ( which is very close to the Pope, thus making him more dangerous ).


  7. #7
    Member Member LordKhaine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    England
    Posts
    397

    Default Re: England too easy?

    Quote Originally Posted by Lucius Julius
    My first campaign was a Venice one, but I tried England, and they seem to be much easier than Venice, also, if you are Excommunicated by the Pope as England, then it would not be as bad as Venice ( which is very close to the Pope, thus making him more dangerous ).
    I dunno about that. If you're right next to the Pope it's easier to deal with him (but harder to ignore him). Just sent over a stack of good troops or some decent assassins and you can cut off the head of the serpent. As England you no doubt have land in mainland europe somewhere which is very vunerable to attack by other catholics, so it's not as if England is in a position it can ignore the pope.
    ~LordKhaine~

  8. #8

    Default Re: England too easy?

    England was definitely one of the easier factions I faced while conquering Europe

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO