Matrix Games Forums

Austrian turn posted while ago.

Like I said, I am happy to keep playing.

You know. Even the original design team knows that insurrections are over-powered in this release.

Why I agree with the WCS design team:

The Spanish House of Bourbon and Austrian Habsburgs had traded off ruling the Kingdom of Naples for 200 or more years by 1790 (changing hands by treaty). In this game, it can be stripped in 2-3 months. Don't you think some French diplomat would have done this a little earlier if it had been this easy?

The Austrian Habsburgs and Spanish Habsburgs traded off ruling Milan and Tuscany for around 200 years before 1790 (changing hands by treaty). The total number of insurrections I was able to count in that time? ZERO. Don't you think someone would have stripped them of these lands a littler earlier if this would have been possible? There were at least 4-6 European wide conflicts in this time which would have provided the context for it.

The House of Hanover ruled Britain and Hanover for almost 80 years by this point. A diplomat in CoG:EE can take it away in 2-3 months. Don't you think the French would have done this a little sooner if it had been this easy?

The Spanish Habsburgs or Austrian Habsburgs ruled the Spanish and Austrian Netherlands (Flanders and Luxembourg) for 200 years before COGEE began (changing hands by treaty). The total number of "insurrections" I count in that long period of history of that highly disputed land? ONE. Don't you think that someone would have done this a little more often if it had been that easy? In that time three phases of the Thirty Years War came and went. The War of Devolution was fought. The War of the French Reunions was fought. The Dutch War was fought. The War of the Spanish Succession was fought. The War of the Polish Succession was fought. The War of the Austrian Succession was fought. The Seven Years War was fought. And the War of the Bavarian Succession was fought. I am guessing that in the 200 years prior to the start of COGEE (1792) that a state of war existed for the rulers of these lands for almost 60-70 years. But, again, in that time, through all of those wars, there was only ONE (1!!!) insurrection which lead to a loss of power which I was able to track down.

The same story goes for Parma.

These are just some examples I was able to throw out. I think you have to have read 20+ books over the general history of the 1700s to know this stuff, so I don't blame anyone for thinking they are not over-powered.

Yet each of them are an example of a COG:EE protectorate, which after up to 200 years of rulership, can be stripped in 2-3 months. In fact, in the survey of history which I just presented, with between ALL of the protectorates I looked at, I was able to track exactly ONE event which could be labelled as an "insurrection" in "Belgium" (insurrection=rebellion/coup which resulted in the loss of control--control which was reestablished within one year, it didn't even change hands and the Austrians just walked back in peacefully).

The fact of the matter is that the design team itself thinks the insurrection is overpowered and has taken immediate steps to correct it, adding a mechanism to make it impossible if a player holding such a region wants to make it impossible. I suppose it is possible to disagree with the design team. But I don't know how it is possible to disagree with the numbers I just presented.

Yes. They are over-powered. In fact, the nations discussed above traded hands only by treaty at the end of wars and by conquest. If the above examples do not convince you, then nothing ever will--except perhaps for an exhaustive reading of 24+ books on the history of the 1700s which I can give you a list for. In my opinion, for the time frame of the game, the loss of protectorates through the drop in national morale which accompanies being conquered is more than enough to represent historical realities.

Now, why don't we all go around in a circle and strip each nation of all of their protectorates which they have held for 100-200 years of war and peace? And when we are done with that, we can then strip all of the conquered nationalities as well.

For me, the talk of and use of such an overpowered (according to even the design team) and unrealistic tool have ruined the suspense in the game for me. It's still a fun beer and pretzels game.

The distinction between protecorates and non-protectorates is meaningless as far as Britain is concerned. Any country that attempts insurrections against any British provinces will be a target for British insurrections both protectorate and non protectorate for the rest of the game. I guarentee that i will not use insurrections against anyone who does not start them on me first. And i will not change my stance to suit my position at a later date i.e. i mean exactly what i say.

One can spin history anyway they wish to justify in-game decisions, but the truth of the matter is that the French had Swiss, Bavarian, etc troops fighting for them the entire war. The British had KGL and Portuguese doing the same.

IMO insurrection is mechanic that makes the game less fun and we'd have been better off not using it. I personally think as a group we should do something about this right now or we are in danger of souring what has been a fun experience so far. Can't we rise above what happens to be good or bad for our side at this particular moment and do what is good for the game ??

I would recommend that Britain stop blockading ports with empty fleet containers (Eric's attention has been brought to this and it sounds like he is interested in doing something about this immediately).

Montesaurus is about to recommend that we do something about the game.

We do actually have 4 choices. They are as follows:

1. Keep playing with insurrections and empty fleets blockading ports.
2. Keep playing with house rules that there will be no insurrections and no empty fleets are allowed to blockade ports from this point on.
3. Keep playing with the principle that insurrections which are diplomat induced are not allowed and Sweden to regain Poland with a Russian or Prussian DoW on Poland when Sweden is ready for it.
4. Restart.

I have put a heck of a lot of work into this game (plenty of 5 am nights) and am not nuts about restarting.

Hey guys,

If you restart, I should probably take the chance to bow out. I don't know if everyone here knows, but I am the lead designer on a WCS project (which any fan of early modern gunpowder history should enjoy) and since this game has started, my work on the project has plummeted. Though my understanding of the game has gone up! The game is very important to me. But my top priority is to deliver an excellent game. And nothing can stand in the way of that.

I may continue to referee AltHist-A (which I should try to get started in a week or so, even if we need to find a couple of new players)

I am a bit torn on this.

ORIGINAL: Marshal Villars

I think in the AltHist game, they will be banned until further notice. Because suddenly, in this game, every diplomat is about to be switched to insurrection duty/expel duty because it is overly rewarded.

This was our experience in "Another PBEM" which was recently finished.

Countries that could afford the Textile cost all produced "Super Diplomats" out of their highest court province. I (British) had 5 diplomats, France either had 5 or 6.

The last year or two of the game involved 3-4 countries attacking me with their diplomats and most of my diplomats on capture/expel. I had the better half of my Army kept in Britain to defend against any sudden landing while I blockaded Russian and French fleets. The weaker half of my army was used trying to conquer new lands in North Africa from Spain to keep my head above water Empire points wise.

With +1000 National Morale I ended up losing control of Denmark/Norway to a Russian 40 espionage diplomat after I failed six expel attempts.

1. National morale of target should matter.
2. Garrison size should matter.
3. Provinces should go into unrest before they go into insurrection.

> The last year or two of the game involved 3-4 countries attacking me with their diplomats and most of my diplomats on capture/expel.
 
Ugh. Who wants to play that. Kudos to Monte for seeing where this was going and nipping it in the bud as it were... even though of course he was the one that started it [:D]

I agree. Everything was monte's fault! [:D][:D]

HiHi

Swedens T0 sent in.

All the Best
Peter

Russia turn 0 in!!

And away we go (again) [:)]

I have broad shoulders and can take the heat![&o]
French Set up Posted!

Just waiting on Austria, and hopefully will hear from Tomas soon!
Otherwise good to go.[:)]

Hello guys,

I am sorry.

I will send in my turn today. When I wrote that I am in an unresponsive ode I hoped that would end with the weekend, but it didn't. I spend last 9 days working almost every minute when I wasn't sleeping and when we finished yesterday evening I didn't have the strength to spend another 20 mins doing my turn, because I've just seen about enough of computer screen. I will send in my turn today and I am back in being responsive and hoping this will not repeat for my own sake and sanity. Isn't coding fun ?

Kind regards,

No problem Tomas!
Just glad to have you on board, and I understand how real life can affect game life!
[:'(]

Speaking of real life, from Saturday 11/30 through Thursday 12/3 I will be on vacation (in Hawaii; a great change from Seattle this time of the year).  I will have internet access and hopefully I can maintain a reasonably normal "gaming schedule"; but there may be some delays. 

Hello,

turn sent just now. Planned on sending it yesterday, but I was still unable to really touch the computer and think, especially not after a day spent shopping with my lovely woman. (she really isn't the shopping type at all, never seen her do it, but I guess one learns )

HiHi

Sweden T1 sent in.

All the Best
Peter

Russian turn 1 in.

It is so much quicker to complete a turn without worrying about being at war with half of Europe! [:)]

Turkish, France, and Prussian turns all posted!