Replacements

[Wolfeh]

To me it seems far too easy to replace losses in divisions and such. It feels like there's no real consequences if I suffer heavy losses, because one turn later and they're most likely healed. I was under the impression that units were rarely at full strength, yet most units are full strength all the time.

[Naomi]

Thanks largely to your huge enough draft training size and your perfect supply system. More important, you had money to back them up.

I witnessed two Grand Armees thrusting into Swedian lands finally got cut down to a tiny fraction of themselves (and forced to bid farewell) by my intervening ships.

[Alaric_31]

it is difficult to maintain a really large army in the field, i had near two millions men movilized with france and must put some to forage if i want some money, supply in enemy territory is more costly, and i have around 40 provinces in my control, is my oppinion but i prefer very large armies, them give more strategic options in the global game.

with regards,

alaric.

[Naomi]

Luckily I saved myself the trouble by playing Britain, by which I managed just a nimble size of land units besides a long echelon of sea merchants supporting its treasury.