Matrix Games Forums

ORIGINAL: IronWarrior

Really? I thought once a nation controls a country's forces, it was permanent. Do they revert back to neutral? Did that change with the patch?

ORIGINAL: Mus
As far as total war is concerned, in a normal war you would have defeated Austria right around the time she surrendered to Turkey if not before.

Thats why I dont think the total war was a good move. Plus Austria is a very large target to digest while surrounded by human opponents.

ORIGINAL: IronWarrior

I disagree... Austria's NM was rock bottom and would have surrendered in a turn or two. At that point I would not have really gained anything and would be facing Austria, Prussia, Sweden, and GB... possibly without Turkey.

ORIGINAL: Mus

I think just fleets remain under your control and land forces are removed from play. Thats what I have been observing anyways.

ORIGINAL: Mus


To some extent I believe this kind of situation shows that early surrender is too easily exploitable and that the amount of surrender points gained in situations like this isnt enough.

Its just like when you surrendered at the beginning of the game and I didnt receive enough surrender points to get anything out of it, even though me and Prussia in reality could have kept hammering you until we got acceptable concessions.

But I thought Austria won a big battle or two at the start of the war, so I think they might have actually held in longer than you think. No way to know since they werent allowed to surrender.

ORIGINAL: IronWarrior

ORIGINAL: lenin

I still find it amusing that the power that is 3-4 times richer than Prussia, has a larger territory, larger and better trained army, and probably twice the mobilisation limit continues to insist on calling the Prussians a "powerhouse"?

France is by no means a powerhouse in 1796 or 1792 like it is in 1803 or 1805. Being richer than Prussia? not so sure if you calculate all the subsidies from GB. Doubtful about mob limit considering Prussia has a larger army than France.

I can't say that Prussia is this game's France, because usually it's France vrs the world and Prussia is allied with everyone except France and Turkey. [:D]

To get an idea of the situation, here's the current GP standings. What would you have done? I can't say that Total War against Austria was the wrong decision at the time. [;)]

ORIGINAL: lenin

Of course, most of those GP's were gained against you, Bill[:D]
And of course, if I recall correctly, there may have been circumstances very early in the game where we might have been allied, but you chose not to go down what would have been the path of a beautiful friendship!

ORIGINAL: IronWarrior

(D) Well played Austrian side by yourself [;)]

ORIGINAL: Mus

Because of the fact you took Hanover from me, which kinda ticked me off, combined with the fact that Great Britain doesnt get very many of its better Generals in this scenario, I felt compelled to remove Nappy.

Also I politely requested you to not move your armies into conjunction with your fleets as a bargaining tactic or it would be looked at as a declaration of war and the Corsican Ogre did it anyways.

ORIGINAL: lenin

And I don't know why everyone is obsessed with the idea I'm about to immediately win the game! We've played 5 years and I'm not even half way there yet. Now if people would stop declaring senseless wars against me, plotting to stab me in the back from the Eastern front, declare total war against their allies and neighbours or conduct provocative diplomatic missions on Prussian held territory, there would not be so many opportunities for Prussia to gain large amounts of Glory. It was such reckless adventurism that led to the position we have now.....