PBEM 2 Player Force Control?

[Marcus_Antonius]

Game looks great.

One question: it seems that in a 2 player grand campaign the Allied player can only control the forces of one nation. That means the French will be fighting AI coalitions mostly?

This seems like a real weakness if it is the case. Shouldn't the Allied player control all the forces of an active coalition against France?

[YohanTM]

That would be a big concern for me as I plan to play PBEM

[Aurelian]

ORIGINAL: a_gonatas

Shouldn't the Allied player control all the forces of an active coalition against France?

No they shouldn't.

[Marcus_Antonius]

Kind of kills the two player campaign thing then...

[Ironclad]

Someone asked if they could play a couple of countries. Official answer was yes, so I presume more could be played. You do it like playing a pbem game - each separately entered.

[loki100]

ORIGINAL: a_gonatas

Kind of kills the two player campaign thing then...

not really. These were coalitions and up to 1813 the anti-French coalition fell apart quite often - sometimes due to defeat but also to do with shifting goals.

you can also tell your coalition partner where to concentrate and focus and the concept of expeditionary forces helps. But there was a good reason why Napoleon felt that fighting as part of an alliance was a handicap

[gwgardner]

A player can play more than one country. Save your turn for one country, exit out to the main menu, reload the saved game, choosing another country to play. Do that until you've played all the countries you want to, then hit 'end turn.' The AI will play the countries you don't play.

[HMSWarspite]

Not got WoN, but giving the British player all countries on the coalition side to play just destroys the history of the game... it becomes 'everyone pick on France' game, which is very boring for them. Britain did not have an absolute empire like control, she cajoled and bribed and coerced and then went quiet when it all fell apart, rinsed and repeated, for many years - until 1812 in fact. Not having control of allies seems much more realistic. This isn't 1941!

[waltero]

ORIGINAL: HMSWarspite

Not got WoN, but giving the British player all countries on the coalition side to play just destroys
the history of the game... it becomes 'everyone pick on France' game, which is very boring for them.
Britain did not have an absolute empire like control, she cajoled and bribed and coerced and then went
quiet when it all fell apart, rinsed and repeated, for many years - until 1812 in fact. Not having control
of allies seems much more realistic. This isn't 1941!

I do not have WoN. From my understanding you do not have to give the British player all the countries?
I have played many games of the Napoleonic Era. It always seems to be Everybody against France...Napoleon can handle it[;)]

The 1st Coalition (1792-1797): Austria, Prussia, Great Britain, Spain, Piedmont.
The 2nd Coalition (1798-1801): Russia, Britain, Austria, Ottoman Empire, Portugal, Naples, Vatican.
The 3rd Coalition (1805): Austria, Great Britain, Russia, Sweden.
The 4th Coalition (1806-1807): Prussia, Saxony, Russia.
The 5th Coalition (1809): Great Britain and Austria.
The 6th Coalition (1812-1814): Great Britain and Russia, joined by Prussia, Sweden, Austria, German States.
The 7th Coalition (1815): Great Britain, Russia, Prussia, Sweden, Austria, German States.

Before a final victory against Napoleon, five of seven coalitions saw defeat at the hands of France.


Not necessarily everybody against France, rather Napoleon against all...Hardly boring[:)]

[gw15]

AH War and Peace board game is 2 player but handled the coalition issue with diplomacy rules and modifiers to die rolls on activating countries, etc. Worked fairly well.

[Aurelian]

ORIGINAL: waltero

ORIGINAL: HMSWarspite

Not got WoN, but giving the British player all countries on the coalition side to play just destroys
the history of the game... it becomes 'everyone pick on France' game, which is very boring for them.
Britain did not have an absolute empire like control, she cajoled and bribed and coerced and then went
quiet when it all fell apart, rinsed and repeated, for many years - until 1812 in fact. Not having control
of allies seems much more realistic. This isn't 1941!

I do not have WoN. From my understanding you do not have to give the British player all the countries?
I have played many games of the Napoleonic Era. It always seems to be Everybody against France...Napoleon can handle it[;)]

The 1st Coalition (1792-1797): Austria, Prussia, Great Britain, Spain, Piedmont.
The 2nd Coalition (1798-1801): Russia, Britain, Austria, Ottoman Empire, Portugal, Naples, Vatican.
The 3rd Coalition (1805): Austria, Great Britain, Russia, Sweden.
The 4th Coalition (1806-1807): Prussia, Saxony, Russia.
The 5th Coalition (1809): Great Britain and Austria.
The 6th Coalition (1812-1814): Great Britain and Russia, joined by Prussia, Sweden, Austria, German States.
The 7th Coalition (1815): Great Britain, Russia, Prussia, Sweden, Austria, German States.

Before a final victory against Napoleon, five of seven coalitions saw defeat at the hands of France.


Not necessarily everybody against France, rather Napoleon against all...Hardly boring[:)]

Five of the seven fell apart because each member had their own goals, diplomacy, etc.

Hard to get Austrian forces to join the invasion of Russia if it's controlled by the UK.

Even harder to get Austria to surrender if the UK player doesn't sign any treaty.