Country/Scenario for a new Player

[Marshall Thomas]

Crown of Glory just arrived yesterday by post. It really seems like the game I've been dreaming of for a really long time. I'm already having a great time just reading the manual. My question is: what is the best nation to play as for purposes of learning CoG's rules and fundamentals? What is the best year to start in for these same purposes?

I'm so glad to have come across this game. I actually first heard of it about a month ago while visiting the Empires in Arms forum. Some posts were critical of CoG for being too complex and involved, particually it's economic system. CoG was also refered to as an "empire building"/military Napoleonic game, instead of simply a military Napoleonic game. Many responded to these post by writing that CoG sounds like the Napoleonic game that they've always wished for. It's funny that comments which were written with the intent of pointing out a "flaw" of CoG, were what actually made me realise that I needed to have this game right away. I wish I had known of it earlier, but that's alright because I'll have the benefit of the lastest patch and less of a wait until the release of the expansion. I've heard that Forge of Freedom is also a great game, but I've always loved Napoleonic history more than any other. I'm delighted that there's an expansion in the works. I'll definately buy it the first day it becomes available. Thanks again to all those responsible for creating this fanastic game.

[jkBluesman]

So, welcome on this forum. France in 1805 (standard scenario) is the strongest nation (military speaking). The economy is weak but in lower difficulty levels it will not cause you much problems.
France in 1796 is quite nice too. However you have to develop your provinces more than in 1805.

[Ironclad]

Napoleonic France can be a handful when starting out, and France is less dominant earlier on. Sweden or Russia are good countries to start with, unlike Austria they usually can take a more relaxed view of the main conflict and have better troop prospects than Turkey. Russia, especially, has a lot of growth potential in the 1792 or 1796 scenarios.

[ericbabe]

Thanks for the kind words.  We did learn that there is a relatively large group of folks who don't like the empire-builder aspect of the game, and we're hoping in the expansion to add some game options to allow people to play with a simpler economy, as well as addressing some of the other concerns some players had -- for instance, it's possible to develop some nations like Turkey and Spain into a-historically powerful nations, so we're considering ways to limit the development of provinces to prevent these types of situations.  Word-of-mouth is our most effective means of advertising, so please spread the word to other Napoleonics buffs out there.

[Marshall Thomas]

To me it sounds like CoG has the best of both worlds -empire building and military/diplomacy. I really like the empire building aspect for several reasons. For one thing, it's far more historically accurate. Regions and cities didn't remain constantly the same during these revolutionary twenty-three years. And regions having only two unchanging features (economic and manpower) is quite an over-simplification, to say the least. Of course, there's nothing wrong with players wishing to almost exclusively focus on the military aspects of the Napoleonic era -I'm simply saying that it's less realistic and creates a system where all of the non-military aspects of the era become so simplified and abstract that they can't really represent reality at all.

What's really great is that it's not neccesary to sacrifice one for the other. In other words, an "empire building" simulation/game may also have a better military system than a war game which doesn't feature empire building. This seems to be the case with CoG.

I also really like the idea of balancing a nation's various efforts. If the military situation is going well, but domestic issues aren't properly addressed -the problem could spiral out of control. So having to decide which national issues to address first adds a lot of realistic strategy. Napoleon, and many his counterparts, made many non-military decisions every day. It's good that this is well reflected in CoG. Plus, many of the non-military decisions effect the military aspect -and vice-versa.

"Empire building" and non-military aspects of play are especially important for the Napoleonic era, as it was a time of both war and peace. The great thing about CoG is that even though it's the "empire-building"/involved economic Napoleonic game, it still brings the player to a tactical map for detailed battles. So as I said earlier, a focus on one area of detail doesn't have to mean a sacrifice of detail elsewhere.

It's good that the expansion will allow players the chance to limit economic/domestic detail if they wish to. But I really hope that the expansion also has plenty of new details for players like myself, who enjoy all of the detailed aspects of a Napoleonic simulation -but with an "open-ended" chance to change history, without pre-determinism .

[hueglin]

I would NOT recommend Austria to start out, at least not in 1805. That's what I began with (out of interest) and got thrashed by France three times in a row. I did realize however, in the last attempt I played, that it was probably a big mistake to refuse an alliance with France mid way through the game (having already surrendered to them once). I had just retaken Venitia and refused an alliance with France when they promptly declared war on me and beat me again.

Of course, thinking about it, Austria did historically enter into an alliance with France and they were allies in 1812.

[Marshall Thomas]

Is the expansion going to improve the tactical land battles as well? So far, the only changes I've heard of deal with the strategic aspect of play. Just curious. Thanks in advance

[ericbabe]

There are some AI improvements we made in our Civil War game Forge of Freedom that I'd like to try to apply to detailed battles in COG.  We have a few other ideas -- such as adding special abilities to units (as we have in FOF), adding new generals' abilities, improving some of the interface or possibly the sound/graphics -- we not settled on anything definite, however.

[kucing]

First game: played as Sweden 1805, managed to steal some territories from France. France lost in the first war but won in the second one by big margin, which is enough for it to win the game.
Second game: played as Spain 1796, tried to grab some northern African provinces. Ottoman and their friends are not happy and I ended up being bashed by half of Europe.
Third game: played as Prussia 1805, France declared on me, captured my capital and I lost my occupied provinces.

I hope I have better luck on next games.

[jkBluesman]

If you win against France try not only to get territory from them but let them reduce their armys to half readiness or try to bann some leaders (like Napoleon) from the game. It makes it much harder for them to come back.