|
|
Post by Tolbethessar on Mar 25, 2020 16:43:04 GMT
Everyone... I formally declare the Pope to be exiled from Rome, and the Papal States as an independent power is no more. The Archbishopric of Salzburg will be a suitable residence of the said Pope. It's quite a beautiful retreat up in the Alpine country. In other words, you know about the Avignon Papacy, right? Well, I have the Tryolian Papacy happening in this timeline.  tagging the players: tpc , Santa Anna , syndicalist , Frederick the Great , Victor Katz , Wilhelm Ritter von Leeb , calgary , Chancellor Otto von Bismarck , Carlos III *laughs in Orthodox Christianity* *laughs at dumb rooskies for not realizing that we DO have the holy city of Orthodox Christianity* Constantinople of mine too |
|
|
|
Post by Dr. Hendrei Gromsinger on Mar 25, 2020 23:29:01 GMT
*laughs in Orthodox Christianity* *laughs at dumb rooskies for not realizing that we DO have the holy city of Orthodox Christianity* Constantinople of mine too Could've put the Pope there, if you wanted to start a nice civil war |
|
|
|
Post by Wilhelm Ritter von Leeb on Mar 26, 2020 11:32:03 GMT
It wouldn't have mattered anyway but I made a typo on my orders.
Obviously I didn't want to do the F Cop-Chr
|
|
|
|
Post by Santa Anna on Mar 28, 2020 2:35:13 GMT
*laughs in ascending Great Power status*
|
|
|
|
Post by Tolbethessar on Mar 30, 2020 16:23:57 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Santa Anna on Mar 31, 2020 4:47:49 GMT
I also confirm the draw
|
|
|
|
Post by Dr. Hendrei Gromsinger on Apr 1, 2020 1:22:44 GMT
If you will permit me, I'll exit the gilded cage of objective neutrality and judge your strategy and gameplay.
1763
Britain:
I think Britain's spring orders, especially F Gib H, speak to a lack of broader scheming and coordination. However, the fall shows a little more cooperation with allies.
Denmark:
The first year in Scandinavia is a bit of a crapshoot, so the failure to score builds is understandable. Under the circumstances, at least for the short haul, the anti-Swedish opening seemed workable.
France:
France's spring orders were, frankly, awful. I suspect the player was unfamiliar with A&E, and somehow missed the whole idea of armed neutrals. The naval opening against Britain had more potential, though the apparent lack of coordination between France and his neighbors (any of them) was less promising.
Austria:
Austria showed in this year his inclination to meddle across the board, and while he secured only modest gains in supply centers, he gained the much more valuable asset of discord between the many powers around him.
Turkey:
The spring NMR was what it was, and the fall orders were an attempt at a northern opening to redeem the lost position. I personally would've gone with a southern opening, but that's just me.
Poland:
Poland only has a shot at survival through intense diplomacy, either rallying an anti-Prussian pact, or persuading Prussia to ally. Neither of these happened (I'm told the Polish player didn't respond much to messages), and Poland's military moves were scattershot. The later elimination was in fact forged in Spring 1763.
Prussia:
At this juncture, Prussia's anti-Polish push was a sensible immediate strategy. Poland is always an easy target.
Russia:
Relatively classic opening here, further aided by the Turkish spring NMR.
Spain:
Again, relatively classic moves, targeting Portugal for a start. I do question the decision to take Portugal with the fleet, rather than the army, as having F And and F Brc would've been commanding against the Med in 1764.
Sweden:
The losing end of the crapshoot. Wasn't doomed yet, but needed some strong diplomacy to be saved.
1764
Britain:
The decision to take HeW with a fleet, rather than an army, was very myopic. An army in that province is a commanding unit, able to influence goings-on throughout Germany (the very heart of the board), and worth more than the possible loss of Han. I'd say this was a fateful misstep for Britain and the game at large.
Denmark:
Success in knocking out Sweden brought with it the new challenge of large Russia, right next to you. Poland's actions helped draw the heat, but perhaps if you had better meddled in Russia's relations, you could've actually injured him and benefited.
France:
Did you even try talking to anyone?
This was foolish gameplay, coupled with NMRs, and I can't sugarcoat it.
Austria:
The Habsburg's success in maintaining growth and incapacitating key neighbors (Turkey) set the tone for the rest of the game, as did the rise of Austria to lead the charts. I was quite surprised to see few to no signs of an anti-Austrian alliance.
Turkey:
I'll be frank, I don't know what happened in Crimea, but the Austrian stab to Con doomed the Sultan regardless.
Poland:
In 1763, you made your bed. In 1764, you were forced to sleep in it.
That said, the decision to retreat from Lit to Lvn instead of Mos or Kev was downright idiotic, forcing the Pole into disbanding a unit needlessly.
Prussia:
Taking out Poland, commendably swift execution.
The decision to use Mek as a build site, however, strikes me as rather short-sighted. It supported the next year's offensive, yes, but the site gives Prussia negligible added flexibility in building. Myopic though it was, the choice didn't end up coming back to bite you, since you never got big enough.
Russia:
I still don't know what happened in Crimea in fall 1764, but knocking out Sweden was a win.
Spain:
I'd consider relying entirely on Austrian support, having only one unit of Spain's own, for the gamble of hitting Mar, was a blunder. Morocco was a promising target.
Sweden:
Failed to leverage Britain, or another neighbor, into pressuring Denmark and/or Russia to ease the pressure. A matter of poor luck, perhaps.
Alas, poor Sweden.
1765
Britain:
The collapse in Germany, caused in part by the myopic neglect of the British Army, was partly mitigated in fall, but its effects were long-lasting. Britain could never again be a serious contender for the big win, not without Hanover or any armies in Germany.
The position against Spain confuses me too. What did you think you'd gain?
Denmark:
The sudden decision to run back home in Fall was foolish. F Bal is like a knife to Prussia's back, a way to force him to do your bidding. It's not something one should discard so wantonly. That, and you had a good opportunity to shank Russia and stop that giant from rising.
Overall, the beginning of the end.
France:
The Spring was promising, a bold move that could position France as kingmaker, with an army in HeW. And then, in fall, a desperate (futile) rush to save the homeland that ended in failure, and in forsaking that crucial A HeW. You could've done so much more with it.
Austria:
I think your focus on Mar, and even on keeping Sav, was less valuable than gaining Tus and the ability to put out more fleets to defend Italy. However, the strike against Prussia, and engineering Russia's devastation of Turkey, were powerful moves.
Turkey:
Your position was a little hopeless. I can't speak for the specifics of the diplomacy, but I understand how the circumstances worked out to end you.
Poland:
You tried to prevail in Spring, but then in fall you just went NMR. If your position is hopeless, as it was, resigning is understandable, but the NMR makes me feel justified in talking so harshly of you. It's the coward's way to resign.
Prussia:
I know I've devalued the word 'myopic', but I have no better words for Prussia in the year 1765. Yes, hobbling Britain and gaining Han was nice, but you neglected the threat of the ascending Austria, coming at your exposed underbelly.
Russia:
A combination of strong moves and others' ineptitude permitted Russia to maintain and even gain strength against a trying map. This is commendable.
Spain:
Fashionably late, Spain pursued the mediterranean strategy, all the while handling a bizarre relation with England that benefited no one.
1766
Britain:
While it was too late, Britain finally sobered up, made up with Spain, and got an army on the continent. Without this change of heart, Austria would've had a runaway victory.
Denmark:
Denmark's earlier choking, in terms of strategy, really backfired in 1766, as the Dane was left ill-positioned to defend his gain (singular). I commend the perseverance in this hopeless position, but I cannot acquit Denmark of digging this grave.
Austria:
While the Habsburg failed to take it all this year, I still commend the bold gameplay that could have set up for a 1767 solo. In fact, I was expecting that.
Prussia:
Not sure what's up with the Danish offensive, but the results of this phase speak for themselves. Perhaps an earlier move west by the eastern armies could have salvaged the position, and supported a counteroffensive against Austria.
Russia:
Russia failed to deploy a crucial set of orders.
A Cri-Wla
A Pod S Cri-Wla
A Smy-Con
This set, deployed in Fall 1766 and followed by a build of F Cri, could've rolled back Austria that much faster, positioning Russia for possibly soloing himself later.
Spain:
I understand the initiative to go for Austria, but I think Spain was too weak. Finishing off North Africa was two units, two turns, and that's that. A mistake, in my opinion, not to do it.
1767
Britain:
A commendable effort, but rife with tactical blunders, like returning a fleet to HeW again. A middling set of moves, but an improvement for Britain.
Denmark:
At this point, Denmark was screwed. No doubt about it.
Austria:
You overreached. HeW was defensible, but you chose to go for Ber and get neither. The solo was that close!
Prussia:
The pure defensive strategy, and the decision to keep using it indefinitely, strikes me as a blunder. The only way to regain momentum was to move an army into GPo, and you could've, except you didn't. Yes, that ran the risk of a Russian stab, but then, the future shows that this risk materialized anyway.
Russia:
The increasing strength in Central Europe was impressive, but also a little sad, considering a successful breach of the Black Sea line (entering Wla) in Fall 1766 would've made the blitz rather stronger. Still, a sign of strength and growth.
Spain:
The failure to seize the North African builds is redeemed by the aggressive naval deployments against Austrian Italy. Those two fleets stopped an Austrian solo.
1768
Britain:
Here, you made really subpar moves, missing out the delicious potential of convoying A Edi-Sca directly, but it wasn't significant.
The offensive against Austria was strong.
Denmark:
The death throes of a power are never fun. At least you stuck it out.
Austria:
In my opinion, you choked. Sending A Ven northwards was wasteful, as losing Bur in the fall would've been insignificant if you'd walked away with 15 SCs. Also, the fall choice of taking TwS with the Ionian fleet means that, if the draw hadn't happened, you would've been incapable of stopping the Spanish Armada. Also, no clue what happened in HeW.
Prussia:
No clue what happened in HeW.
Moreover, your leaving A War and Kon idle, gave Russia as much temptation to take them out (as doing so wouldn't hurt the coalition's strength) as vacating the SCs to attack would have, perhaps more temptation. Lamentable.
Russia:
You finally shone here, between the moves that made Austria sweat down south, and the elimination of Prussia's eastern half. If not for the draw, you were positioned at least as well as Austria to solo.
Spain:
Despite the spring NMR, good job stopping Austria! Without those fleets, he would've solo'd.
I hope the frankness of my opinions doesn't offend anyone.
|
|
|
|
Post by Santa Anna on Apr 1, 2020 7:31:42 GMT
Moral of the story I learned: Don't depend too much on the game's strongest player for support, because you'll spend the rest of the game trying to get rid of them later.
Also, don't let the Turks fool you into letting them take Cri
Also, don't miss the one opportunity you have to send the game in your favor.
|
|
|
|
Post by Frederick the Great on Apr 1, 2020 11:55:36 GMT
Moral of the story I learnt: take a corner power next time on this map.
The game was good though no doubt but the end for me had become pretty boring with Austria not dying quickly and Britain and Russia pissed at me for not doing anything at all.
|
|
