CleverDevils2 AAR

[gwheelock]

ORIGINAL: NeverMan

So, if it was nearly impossible to FORCE a player to surrender with "soft civil disorder" how was it easier with "hard civil disorder"? Threaten to occupy all capitals? Wouldn't that get you a surrender in both scenarios?

And yes, peace conditions were always a big deal when I played and the winner usually went softer the earlier you surrendered (unless the war just started and say France for instance wanted some PP out of it first).

It was easier to get the surrender because the THREAT of occupying the last couple
of capitols would usually be enough to get the surrender - you wouldn't actually have
to go and DO it.

Yep - picking the correct time time to "say uncle" is one of the more important
political actions in the game. (The other is when to DOW) - This is why the Austrians
were offered a CONDITIONAL (& a fairly easy one given the circumstances) in this
game.

[NeverMan]

ORIGINAL: gwheelock

ORIGINAL: NeverMan

So, if it was nearly impossible to FORCE a player to surrender with "soft civil disorder" how was it easier with "hard civil disorder"? Threaten to occupy all capitals? Wouldn't that get you a surrender in both scenarios?

And yes, peace conditions were always a big deal when I played and the winner usually went softer the earlier you surrendered (unless the war just started and say France for instance wanted some PP out of it first).

It was easier to get the surrender because the THREAT of occupying the last couple
of capitols would usually be enough to get the surrender - you wouldn't actually have
to go and DO it.

Yep - picking the correct time time to "say uncle" is one of the more important
political actions in the game. (The other is when to DOW) - This is why the Austrians
were offered a CONDITIONAL (& a fairly easy one given the circumstances) in this
game.

But you would have to be in the position to do it; otherwise the threat would be idle and wouldn't work. If you are in a position to occupy all capitals, it isn't going to take much effort to just go and do it, that was my point.

[gwheelock]

ORIGINAL: Jimmer

ORIGINAL: NeverMan
1. Well, maybe that is just how it appears to me. It could also just be newbie play, it's hard to tell.

Here's my problem: You can't be referring to Russia, Prussia, Austria, or Great Britian, because none of us can be remotely considered "on the winning side" or shooting for second place.

But, Turkey and Spain are just honoring their commitments to their ally (France). Unless you are trying to say that winning the game is more important than keeping your word.

Not to mention that the Turks have a good chance to WIN at this point - if they can keep
up the momentum against Russia; they may PASS France on the VP chart in a couple of
quarters (percentage-wise of course .... not in total vp).

[NeverMan]

ORIGINAL: gwheelock

ORIGINAL: Jimmer

ORIGINAL: NeverMan
1. Well, maybe that is just how it appears to me. It could also just be newbie play, it's hard to tell.

Here's my problem: You can't be referring to Russia, Prussia, Austria, or Great Britian, because none of us can be remotely considered "on the winning side" or shooting for second place.

But, Turkey and Spain are just honoring their commitments to their ally (France). Unless you are trying to say that winning the game is more important than keeping your word.

Not to mention that the Turks have a good chance to WIN at this point - if they can keep
up the momentum against Russia; they may PASS France on the VP chart in a couple of
quarters (percentage-wise of course .... not in total vp).

If I was Turkey, I honestly wouldn't count on this. He definitely kicked my butt in our only real battle thus far, dogging me with pursuit losses. I'm just not sure where he will get his PP from.

[Soapy Frog]

Since civil disorder only takes place in the economic phase, a player with half an ounce of sense always has a chance to surrender before being forced to civil disorder. In fact even using what you call "soft" civil disorder, you would never actually wait til the civil disorder step becuase then you get hit by the double whammy of added PP loss and economic loss on the economic turn.

[gwheelock]

ORIGINAL: Soapy Frog

Since civil disorder only takes place in the economic phase, a player with half an ounce of sense always has a chance to surrender before being forced to civil disorder. In fact even using what you call "soft" civil disorder, you would never actually wait til the civil disorder step becuase then you get hit by the double whammy of added PP loss and economic loss on the economic turn.

But remember that land movement and land combat (including seige breakins)
happens AFTER the dp step. Under the "hard" rules & if you are CLOSE to being
occupied at the dp step you would have to consider whither the oppenent can
take the reamaining provences he needs in THAT TURN to finish you off & if you
think that he can you had better accept even a harsh unconditional instead of
playing it out.
of one of the econ months

[gwheelock]

ORIGINAL: NeverMan


But you would have to be in the position to do it; otherwise the threat would be idle and wouldn't work. If you are in a position to occupy all capitals, it isn't going to take much effort to just go and do it, that was my point.

Yah; but some capitols - eg Constantinople - are very hard to break into if they are
fully garrisoned & even then they may be able to fight off the besieger once or twice.
With the "soft" option; it tempts the player to take the shot & try to wait. He loses
nothing by trusting to the luck of the dice. Under the hard rules; if he loses the
die roll he would be out completely .... makes for a much less stubborn stand.

[gwheelock]

ORIGINAL: NeverMan

ORIGINAL: gwheelock

ORIGINAL: Jimmer



Here's my problem: You can't be referring to Russia, Prussia, Austria, or Great Britian, because none of us can be remotely considered "on the winning side" or shooting for second place.

But, Turkey and Spain are just honoring their commitments to their ally (France). Unless you are trying to say that winning the game is more important than keeping your word.

Not to mention that the Turks have a good chance to WIN at this point - if they can keep
up the momentum against Russia; they may PASS France on the VP chart in a couple of
quarters (percentage-wise of course .... not in total vp).

If I was Turkey, I honestly wouldn't count on this. He definitely kicked my butt in our only real battle thus far, dogging me with pursuit losses. I'm just not sure where he will get his PP from.

Well... possibly from you surrendering... he is in a position to sit on all of the capitols
in the southern 1/2 of Russia at the moment. At some point he will be causing you
enough pain to at least consider talking about a conditional

After that; he sets his e-m to +2 & holds the ps32 (10VP/qtr). Turkey getting
10VP/qtr beats France getting 15.

[NeverMan]

ORIGINAL: gwheelock

ORIGINAL: NeverMan

ORIGINAL: gwheelock




Not to mention that the Turks have a good chance to WIN at this point - if they can keep
up the momentum against Russia; they may PASS France on the VP chart in a couple of
quarters (percentage-wise of course .... not in total vp).

If I was Turkey, I honestly wouldn't count on this. He definitely kicked my butt in our only real battle thus far, dogging me with pursuit losses. I'm just not sure where he will get his PP from.

Well... possibly from you surrendering... he is in a position to sit on all of the capitols
in the southern 1/2 of Russia at the moment. At some point he will be causing you
enough pain to at least consider talking about a conditional

After that; he sets his e-m to +2 & holds the ps32 (10VP/qtr). Turkey getting
10VP/qtr beats France getting 15.

Guy, I can guarantee Turkey will not be getting a surrender out of Russia unless he forces me to surrender. I still have a substantial army left and good leaders.

[Jimmer]

ORIGINAL: NeverMan

Guy, I can guarantee Turkey will not be getting a surrender out of Russia unless he forces me to surrender. I still have a substantial army left and good leaders.

THIS is exactly the attitude that hard civil disorder makes more costly. Say you were to do as you say here playing the hard rules. Then, IF Turkey should conquer all your capitals, you will NEVER surrender, because you will out of the game.

There's a timing factor, of course, as gwheelock mentioned. Essentially, in an econ month, you would have to decide during diplo (i.e. BEFORE MOVEMENT) that Turkey cannot take out the rest of your capitals. If you gamble and win, you win. For one more quarter, at least. If you lose, you are out of the game.

In a game where I played Turkey, and exactly this scenario played itself out. But, because we were playing the hard rules, Russia surrendured unconditionally (and giving up nasty conditions). With soft rules, I would have had to fight out the turn, only then getting an unconditional, IF I managed to get all the capitals.

[NeverMan]

ORIGINAL: Jimmer

ORIGINAL: NeverMan

Guy, I can guarantee Turkey will not be getting a surrender out of Russia unless he forces me to surrender. I still have a substantial army left and good leaders.

THIS is exactly the attitude that hard civil disorder makes more costly. Say you were to do as you say here playing the hard rules. Then, IF Turkey should conquer all your capitals, you will NEVER surrender, because you will out of the game.

There's a timing factor, of course, as gwheelock mentioned. Essentially, in an econ month, you would have to decide during diplo (i.e. BEFORE MOVEMENT) that Turkey cannot take out the rest of your capitals. If you gamble and win, you win. For one more quarter, at least. If you lose, you are out of the game.

In a game where I played Turkey, and exactly this scenario played itself out. But, because we were playing the hard rules, Russia surrendured unconditionally (and giving up nasty conditions). With soft rules, I would have had to fight out the turn, only then getting an unconditional, IF I managed to get all the capitals.

Are you being serious? If Turkey can occupy all of Russia's capitals then something is SERIOUSLY wrong, SERIOUSLY!!

It's not an attitude, I just don't see Turkey doing it considering I still have a large amount of my army left. You and guy keep talking like I have no army, lol and Turkey is some kind of powerhouse country. It's starting to confuse me.

[gwheelock]

ORIGINAL: NeverMan

ORIGINAL: Jimmer

ORIGINAL: NeverMan

Guy, I can guarantee Turkey will not be getting a surrender out of Russia unless he forces me to surrender. I still have a substantial army left and good leaders.

THIS is exactly the attitude that hard civil disorder makes more costly. Say you were to do as you say here playing the hard rules. Then, IF Turkey should conquer all your capitals, you will NEVER surrender, because you will out of the game.

There's a timing factor, of course, as gwheelock mentioned. Essentially, in an econ month, you would have to decide during diplo (i.e. BEFORE MOVEMENT) that Turkey cannot take out the rest of your capitals. If you gamble and win, you win. For one more quarter, at least. If you lose, you are out of the game.

In a game where I played Turkey, and exactly this scenario played itself out. But, because we were playing the hard rules, Russia surrendured unconditionally (and giving up nasty conditions). With soft rules, I would have had to fight out the turn, only then getting an unconditional, IF I managed to get all the capitals.

Are you being serious? If Turkey can occupy all of Russia's capitals then something is SERIOUSLY wrong, SERIOUSLY!!

It's not an attitude, I just don't see Turkey doing it considering I still have a large amount of my army left. You and guy keep talking like I have no army, lol and Turkey is some kind of powerhouse country. It's starting to confuse me.

Actually; the game that Jim referred to was a different one where Russia got his a** handed to him BADLY -
he had lost >2< battles similar to the one you just had & Turkey WAS in a position to at least TRY to occupy
all of the capitols - he DIDN'T have a "large amount of army" left.

I am not saying that Turkey is a powerhouse or that you are finished. But your army is not IN Russia right now & it IS going to
take you several months to haul it back home & then get it up to the front. During that time; Turkey can pretty well do whatever
he wants. If he moves fast; he should be able to occupy everything south of the line from Brest-Litovsk over to Astrakhan before
you can get ready (remember >I< know how much money I have been giving him & trust me it's enough to PAY for his supply
for this). & after you get your army home; you still have to BEAT him... The problem with fighting the Turks is that if you lose
JUST ONCE all of that cav he has will EAT your army (I speak from experience on this - remember my earlier posts about
playing Austria & getting stabbed in the back by Dave while trying to fight France.)

[NeverMan]

ORIGINAL: gwheelock

ORIGINAL: NeverMan

ORIGINAL: Jimmer



THIS is exactly the attitude that hard civil disorder makes more costly. Say you were to do as you say here playing the hard rules. Then, IF Turkey should conquer all your capitals, you will NEVER surrender, because you will out of the game.

There's a timing factor, of course, as gwheelock mentioned. Essentially, in an econ month, you would have to decide during diplo (i.e. BEFORE MOVEMENT) that Turkey cannot take out the rest of your capitals. If you gamble and win, you win. For one more quarter, at least. If you lose, you are out of the game.

In a game where I played Turkey, and exactly this scenario played itself out. But, because we were playing the hard rules, Russia surrendured unconditionally (and giving up nasty conditions). With soft rules, I would have had to fight out the turn, only then getting an unconditional, IF I managed to get all the capitals.

Are you being serious? If Turkey can occupy all of Russia's capitals then something is SERIOUSLY wrong, SERIOUSLY!!

It's not an attitude, I just don't see Turkey doing it considering I still have a large amount of my army left. You and guy keep talking like I have no army, lol and Turkey is some kind of powerhouse country. It's starting to confuse me.

Actually; the game that Jim referred to was a different one where Russia got his a** handed to him BADLY -
he had lost >2< battles similar to the one you just had & Turkey WAS in a position to at least TRY to occupy
all of the capitols - he DIDN'T have a "large amount of army" left.

I am not saying that Turkey is a powerhouse or that you are finished. But your army is not IN Russia right now & it IS going to
take you several months to haul it back home & then get it up to the front. During that time; Turkey can pretty well do whatever
he wants. If he moves fast; he should be able to occupy everything south of the line from Brest-Litovsk over to Astrakhan before
you can get ready (remember >I< know how much money I have been giving him & trust me it's enough to PAY for his supply
for this). & after you get your army home; you still have to BEAT him... The problem with fighting the Turks is that if you lose
JUST ONCE all of that cav he has will EAT your army (I speak from experience on this - remember my earlier posts about
playing Austria & getting stabbed in the back by Dave while trying to fight France.)

Well, I guess we will have to let all this play out.

[AGT4533]

Playing Austria, i consider myself an experienced player albeit a bit rusty; been 10 years since I've played. I'll concede the last battle was imprudent however the outcome isn't disasterous. Austria ends the war with its guard and cav intact, +$100 in its treasury, and loss of just one province.

The war had to end. Continuing delaying tactics wouldn't change the status quo, namely French concentration against Austria while ignoring Russia. In the four months of the war the Russian Northern Army is further East from where it started the war in April. From my perspective that was disheartening. Secondly, July was the last turn Austria would have the initiative when France re-established the threat of a double turn by choosing to move last.

Before suing for peace I thought it my duty to take down as many Franch factors as possible. Home Nation battle casualties in the course of the war: France 44i, 21m,2g and Austria 82i, 10m, 2c (excluding Insurrection Corps casualties since they resurrect annually). Casualties were even up until the last month. Don't know if France would have accepted a conditional peace if Austria hadn't been pummeled the last month.

Couple lessons learned: even if it is only a single British corp, it is needed in the Austrian stack. It wouldn't have been too difficult to arrange in an Austrian port. Secondly, I think I sacrificed too many political points by using single corp stacks to interdict French movement and supply. Need to have been more judicious when doing that because politically Austria has been a basketcase the last two quarters.

Now the war with France is over, Austria can turn its attention to the Russian/Turkey conflict - neither of whom are allied to Austria - and figure out how to begin collecting some political points.

[Jimmer]

ORIGINAL: NeverMan
Are you being serious? If Turkey can occupy all of Russia's capitals then something is SERIOUSLY wrong, SERIOUSLY!!

It's not an attitude, I just don't see Turkey doing it considering I still have a large amount of my army left. You and guy keep talking like I have no army, lol and Turkey is some kind of powerhouse country. It's starting to confuse me.

Oh, no, I'm not referring to you specifically or this game. I'm pointing out how and why the hard civil disorder rules change play. That's all.

In your current position, I agree with you. But, your statement implied never, so it seemed like a good example to use. If you were to play, say, another year, and Turkey kept hammering you and not losing (which is close to what happened with me that time), eventually you would have to surrender.

If playing the soft rules, you can wait until he actually takes all of your capitals. You can also hope to get help from your allies, say, in St. Petersburg. But, if we were playing the hard rules, then you would have to consider capitulating earlier when Turkey got close, just to keep from being put out of the game.

So, the general effect of hard rules is to have harsher surrenders overall.

[Jimmer]

ORIGINAL: NeverMan
Well, I guess we will have to let all this play out.

I agree. All my example was intended to do was show what we were talking about earlier (in another thread, I think).

[gwheelock]

I just noticed that we have not been updating this AAR promptly.
Here is the rundown since the last items.

After the battle detailed in posts 232-234; Austria negotiated a
CONDITIONAL surrender with France & Spain. France gets 24 months
& Bohemia; Spain gets money & Royal marrage & will also get Venice
(lost by Austria due to being in Fiasco zone). This negotiation occured
at the end of July 1806 BETWEEN the Austrian & French (moving last)
turns. Because of this; France moves Nappy's main army to Thuringia
in preparation to fight the Russians (on his July turn).

During his July turn; A British controlled Swedish corp lands in Amsterdam
& retreats the French controlled Holland corp. Due to a program bug
(auto-foraging a corp with >0< movement is counted as "using movement"
and thus preventing a seige attempt) Britian is unable to seige the Amsterdam
city garrison. Britian also has had a corp in Stettin & conquors French controlled
Pommeramia.

Because of the program bug France offers to allow the British corp to leave
Holland and walk home via the channel crossing.

France makes a mistake in the August 1806 reinforcement phase &
forgets to change his move orders from LAST to FIRST (intending to
attack the Russian Danish corp in Mecklenberg).

Britain appearently changes his mind about the deal to leave Amsterdam &
lands another British corp in Amsterdam and a 1-factor blocking corp in
Breda. Britain makes a successful breakin to Amsterdam & wins the seige;
but a program bug does not cause the Fleet to evac. Britain also moves
the corp in Stettin to Berlin via Wittenberg while leaving 1 I in Stettin; 1I on
a depot in Stettin and dropping 1 I into unoccupied Wittenberg.

Russia moves his army to "Area 150" (Pommeramia area west of Danzig)

France splits Nappy's army.

Napoleon; the Guard corp with 18G 3C & the Saxon corp with 2 Saxons
attack & beseige Wittenberg. Breakin is successful. Casulties are 1 British
I; no French losses.

French 4th corp (14, 1M, 3C) attack 1 Danish I in Mecklenberg. Breakin is successful
Casulties are 1 Danish I; no French losses.

French 2nd corp with Murat (18I, 1M, 3C) attack British Depot garrison in Stettin.
Casulties are 1 British I; no French losses. Breakin is prevented due to use
of movement for forage.

French 5th corp (13I 1M, 3C), Holland corp (3I 1C) with Massena attack the
British blocking corp in Breda. Casulties are 1 British I; no French losses.

French 11th corp (11I, 1C), Artillery corp (11A) with Devout do an
end-run around the British blocking corp & are joined by the 1st corp (25I 3C)
and the 3rd corp (20I 3C) from Nappy's army attack the Swedish/British combination
in Amsterdam. Breakin is successful. Casulties are 8 Swedish I, 2 Swedish C,
6 British I (corp was not full); 3 French I. British were eliminated during the 2nd
round of combat.

Sept 1806 Spain DOWs Venice; Britian gets control.

[Jimmer]

Just one comment: GB never actually agreed to that deal. I listened to the offer, but never commited.
&nbsp;
Also, IF the game does what it says it should in the rules (which I doubt), the fleet in Amsterdam will still have to evacuate before his naval phase. We're both guessing that it will just happily sit there. 19 British boys wasted because of yet another bug. Why don't the FRENCH ever see bugs that kill HIS troops?

[Soapy Frog]

Wow a conditional for Austria that is uncommon generous! And I see Russia is next on the menu... it's like a three course meal where you saved some extra room for dessert!

[NeverMan]

ORIGINAL: Soapy Frog

Wow a conditional for Austria that is uncommon generous! And I see Russia is next on the menu... it's like a three course meal where you saved some extra room for dessert!

LOL. I guess you see something I don't. We'll see.