|
ExtraNoise posted:Continuing with interface design for the Modern Age Mod: Hey, I'm really diggin' what you're doing, but I think you might be able to subdue the popping color tabs a bit and get a better result. Colors that are a bit duller and darker would have the text still be legible and pop, and simply having color at all will still make those tabs pop from the dark colors. Something closer to this for example: http://www.colourlovers.com/palette/110225/Vintage_Modern But I'd probably go a touch darker and less saturated for yellows and other naturally bright colors. Keep the text popping out and legible. Ultimately, it's all about contrast and keeping text legible, which your newspapers kept up pretty well. By the way, those newspaper headers are so awesome! I don't know if you'd like a little help with small graphics like pops or whatever, but I could probably help a little in my spare time.
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2013 03:03
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 21:07 |
|
|
YouTuber posted:As it stands now in EUIII there would be no reason to ally with the Iroquois as a colonial power since it is faster to just annex them. Secondly there is no inter-country politics to meddle with so if the Iroquois managed to survive contact they would either be a hard ally with one or the other power. There would be no playing both sides off against the middle as occured in real life. There was a point in time where the Iroquois were importing enough firearms that they could have survived contact. I assume you mean EU IV, but you reminded me of someone's suggestion of making transports unable to cross oceans until a certain tech level- the result is that you have very limited armies in the new world (You can recruit an irregular or two, and only from well-developed areas) so you have to make nice with native countries if you want to survive. Throw in a bunch of event chains for politics with the natives and boom, you've got something that resembles the colonial experience in North America. For South and Central America, you'd need to take into account the massive amount of luck the Spanish had, maybe with some events tied to whether one or both participants is player-controlled (It'd be total bullshit for someone playing the Incas to have no hope of fighting Pizarro's expedition, after all.) Epinephrine posted:Overall, I'm sort of thinking a Windows 95 aesthetic would work well for the mod given that it is, after all, the 90s. I like this idea- you could also make the various resource icons and such with mid-90's sprites as well. 
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2013 03:28
|
|
|
That is the key to it all; there has to be some reason why any old European power can't just immediately ship 5000 men across the Atlantic and immediately gently caress up all the natives. There's no way an early colony could possibly support those troops, and it would be implausible for them to be immediately beating the natives on their home turf. Then add DHE chains for the fall of the Aztecs and Incas I guess.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2013 04:36
|
|
Yes, it's like a lava lamp.
|
Kavak posted:I don't understand the amount of complaining about EU4's New World. It's not that it isn't woefully inaccurate, it is (I really need to read 1491 some day), it's that this is one of the most mod-friendly game lines in existence, where a historically accurate and dynamic America could easily be created without an official DLC of any kind. I'm probably going to get answers that will completely destroy my previous point, but what kind of new mechanics would be needed to flesh out the New World? The various new world nations shouldn't just fall over and die when the Europeans come (well at least not in battle. From smallpox and other diseases, yes ).The North American natives were involved in political shenanigans and alliances for quite some time as a powerful force. Simply annexing them shouldn't be so easy and they should at least be capable of fending off a small attack. As far as a large attack goes, it shouldn't be possible to ship over 10 regiments of troops as soon as you discover the new world. Sending an army across the Atlantic at that time was simply unfeasible. Cortez conquered the Aztec with diplomacy and guile. Had the Tlaxcalan's simply killed him (which they nearly did anyway when they encountered Cortez) instead of allying with him, history would have told a different story. In the case of the Inca, they were largely destroyed by diseases brought from previous European expeditions and civil war before Pizarro even showed up. The Maya, which were conquered later, successfully resisted the first few attempts of conquest until eventually the Spanish managed to do it with local auxiliaries. EDIT: If you got horrible attrition of normal troops/ships when outside of naval range, that would help a lot. Maybe have explorer type leaders exempt a single led ship/troop from the effect. You would at least have to have nearby colonies to launch attacks from instead of simply sailing on up with thousands of men and taking poo poo over. Without the ability to land silly amounts of troops, you would have to play nice with the natives, at least until your colonies/tech catch up and allow you to sail armies around and kill them. Could add event chains to model the Aztec collapse whenever you land an explorer (tons of free native troops join your dudes to go kill the Aztec), and then add horrible disease events to destroy the economies and stability of others, like the Inca. Nuclearmonkee fucked around with this message at 05:30 on Jul 21, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2013 05:19
|
|
|
Vodos posted:And one more, this time some Indian state and the Timurids. While I stand by what I said about Quill being a fine choice to demo the games, I can't help but feel his demos have something added to them that makes his demos really annoying all of a sudden that I don't think was in the vanilla game... (That said the breakup of Japan into smaller substates is a huge plus. Hope Catholic Japan is still possible)
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2013 05:27
|
|
|
Kavak posted:I assume you mean EU IV, but you reminded me of someone's suggestion of making transports unable to cross oceans until a certain tech level- the result is that you have very limited armies in the new world (You can recruit an irregular or two, and only from well-developed areas) so you have to make nice with native countries if you want to survive. Throw in a bunch of event chains for politics with the natives and boom, you've got something that resembles the colonial experience in North America. For South and Central America, you'd need to take into account the massive amount of luck the Spanish had, maybe with some events tied to whether one or both participants is player-controlled (It'd be total bullshit for someone playing the Incas to have no hope of fighting Pizarro's expedition, after all.) What could be done is something as simple as an event chain starting if you're in the New World, not Westernized, and have stability under 0 after Europeans - and especially when Europeans - discover you. As a player, it means using extreme caution and requiring strong monarchs - or monarchs who focus on stability - and for the AI, well, it's always had trouble with stability anyway
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2013 05:36
|
|
|
DrProsek posted:While I stand by what I said about Quill being a fine choice to demo the games, I can't help but feel his demos have something added to them that makes his demos really annoying all of a sudden that I don't think was in the vanilla game... At least he removed his fedora for this play session.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2013 05:41
|
|
|
Thank god there's a notification for rebels crossing the border from another country.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2013 06:16
|
|
|
My introduction to Quill was a woefully botched attempt at slogging through his Vicky 2 tutorial series. His style absolutely drove me insane only a couple episodes into that series, but I watched all 5 parts of that EU4 demo without complaint and now I've started creeping through his Brave New World Venice LP. I'm just insane, I guess.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2013 06:16
|
|
|
He knows a lot more about Civ games than paradox games. That being said, his Alpha Centauri LP is really tough to watch. His Venice LP is pretty good, though. Avoid his Spanish Civil War HOI3 let's play at all costs.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2013 06:38
|
|
|
CK1: Any chance I can dump my first king title? I have way too many vassals, and the Southern Italians are being pains in the rear end constantly. I think I'd have more fun trying to finish uniting Africa, but at the moment the game won't let me grant King of Sicily to anyone and if I start a war and just recognize the Duke of Sicily as the King, woops all of a sudden everything I've ever vassalized as KoS (in this case the main issue is the 60% of Northern Africa I want to play with) becomes his vassal.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2013 06:43
|
|
|
Chief Savage Man posted:Thank god there's a notification for rebels crossing the border from another country. That has lost me wars more than once. It's a wonderful thing having someone else's trash dumped in your lap and completely knocking you around the bend. :P
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2013 06:47
|
|
|
I wonder if that bonus hordes have, that make them fight better on plains, might be a way to improve the performance of less technologically advanced states when fighting on home turf. That is, if it's possible to create a different type of government (or even to add similar bonuses to other stuff, like ideas.) for them that gives them a bonus while fighting on another type of terrain, or possibly even with another trigger. (Region would be fantastic.) That way you could have states that have a real chance at defending themselves, without allowing them to export their bonuses.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2013 09:50
|
|
|
I've been playing EU3 to hold me over until 4 comes out. I have the latest MiscMods (.799DW), and as the Ottomans I keep getting a popup repeatedly (the one regarding the strait). Sometimes it comes up twice in seconds, even. Is there a bug of some sort?
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2013 10:09
|
|
|
A Buttery Pastry posted:I wonder if that bonus hordes have, that make them fight better on plains, might be a way to improve the performance of less technologically advanced states when fighting on home turf. That is, if it's possible to create a different type of government (or even to add similar bonuses to other stuff, like ideas.) for them that gives them a bonus while fighting on another type of terrain, or possibly even with another trigger. (Region would be fantastic.) That way you could have states that have a real chance at defending themselves, without allowing them to export their bonuses. I'm not sure what the combat mechanics will be like in EU4, but I've been thinking that maybe the fire/shock damage abstraction wasn't set up quite right in EU3. You had both the fire and shock multipliers as well as the fire and shock offensive and defensive ticks on all units increasing significantly as the game went on. I can understand fire starting at nearly nothing and then rapidly improving after a certain tech threshold, but shock continuing to increase significantly as well is harder to justify. This means you kind of end up with Napoleonic era line infantry who are orders of magnitude better at hand-to-hand combat than medieval men at arms, and unarmored cavalrymen with cutlasses who deliver a stronger charge than 14th-15th century guys in transitional plate armor mounted on warhorses. Maybe instead, shock growth should halt or even drop when fire begins to increase. Then you can at least end up having troops who can deliver a punch if they get past that fire phase.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2013 10:15
|
|
|
I think two things would make the New World much more interesting, less predictable and more historically feasible: a revised military maintenance / reinforcement mechanic, and a new disease mechanic. I don't know how military maintenance works in EU4 but I hope it's a bit more complex than EU3. I always thought it was weird how going to war doesn't actually cost any money. Military maintenance costs are exactly the same whether your army is sitting at home during peace time or spread all around the world during a war (unless I missed something?). I think maintenance costs should increase dramatically the further your armies get from the home country (or the nearest core province or whatever), and whenever they are in foreign territory. In the early game at least it should be prohibitively expensive to send large armies to the New World, which would force the player to send only very small expeditionary forces (and thus to rely on the native alliances that people have been posting about and which would make the game much more interesting). Similarly, I think reinforcement should be much harder in foreign territory. Just like maintenance, I always thought it was weird how my little conquistador army exploring into the heart of the Americas would be reinforced by like five men each month. Did five dudes cross the Atlantic in a little boat all on their own and somehow navigate across hostile territory to meet up with their army? How did anyone even know where they were or that they needed reinforcements? It would be more interesting and exciting if losses on expeditions like that were permanent, and the player had to make choices about whether to continue exploring / fighting and risk losing the whole army or whether to return to a friendly colony (or all the way home) to get reinforced. I'm not sure how a disease mechanic could work exactly, but if the spread of diseases could be modeled somehow then games would turn out very differently depending on what proportion of the native population are wiped out. Maybe there could even be a chance that diseases spread the other way (back to Europe), or are there sound historical reasons why this could never happen? (I remember something about Europeans having good immunity to diseases because they lived in close proximity to domesticated animals. I bet that's a Guns, Germs and Steel thing.) A disease mechanic would also allow limited epidemics to spread through parts of Europe from time to time, which might be interesting. But I guess diseases add a pretty huge slice of randomness to the game, which players tend not to like (it'd be like the comet but much worse). Also I suppose adding a whole new disease mechanic would be too much even for DLC.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2013 10:26
|
|
|
Kersch posted:I'm not sure what the combat mechanics will be like in EU4, but I've been thinking that maybe the fire/shock damage abstraction wasn't set up quite right in EU3. You had both the fire and shock multipliers as well as the fire and shock offensive and defensive ticks on all units increasing significantly as the game went on. I can understand fire starting at nearly nothing and then rapidly improving after a certain tech threshold, but shock continuing to increase significantly as well is harder to justify. *Though I guess then the military tactics bonus doesn't make that much sense. fuf posted:I think two things would make the New World much more interesting, less predictable and more historically feasible: a revised military maintenance / reinforcement mechanic, and a new disease mechanic. As far as I recall, gearing up for war might also take a bit longer in EU4 than in EU3, so combined, these two features seem to make regional warfare pretty good in terms of balancing realism and gameplay. If the gearing up time is reduced by technologies, even better, simulating the shift from medieval to modern warfare. fuf posted:I think maintenance costs should increase dramatically the further your armies get from the home country (or the nearest core province or whatever), and whenever they are in foreign territory. In the early game at least it should be prohibitively expensive to send large armies to the New World, which would force the player to send only very small expeditionary forces (and thus to rely on the native alliances that people have been posting about and which would make the game much more interesting). *Though the definition of "overseas" should probably be looked at. Allowing only a single army to cross over the Strait of Gibraltar seems a bit too much. fuf posted:Similarly, I think reinforcement should be much harder in foreign territory. Just like maintenance, I always thought it was weird how my little conquistador army exploring into the heart of the Americas would be reinforced by like five men each month. Did five dudes cross the Atlantic in a little boat all on their own and somehow navigate across hostile territory to meet up with their army? How did anyone even know where they were or that they needed reinforcements? Actually, another thing that would help would be supply. Basically, staying at a home provinces improves the units supply, reducing attrition until it is spent. Supply wouldn't be generally available until the late game though, but instead limited to only units lead by explorers. This would allow the game to model the preparation for an expedition as well, which combined with the need to return home to actually tell people about your discoveries, would make exploration much more realistic. Plus of course change up the gameplay a bit for the late game, simulating more well-coordinated warfare. fuf posted:I'm not sure how a disease mechanic could work exactly, but if the spread of diseases could be modeled somehow then games would turn out very differently depending on what proportion of the native population are wiped out. Maybe there could even be a chance that diseases spread the other way (back to Europe), or are there sound historical reasons why this could never happen? (I remember something about Europeans having good immunity to diseases because they lived in close proximity to domesticated animals. I bet that's a Guns, Germs and Steel thing.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2013 11:09
|
|
|
DrProsek posted:While I stand by what I said about Quill being a fine choice to demo the games, I can't help but feel his demos have something added to them that makes his demos really annoying all of a sudden that I don't think was in the vanilla game... I was going to point out that quill isn't annoying at all by LP standards, then I actually clicked the link and...why does he do that?  Was it really necessary for him to add a miniature version of himself speaking?
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2013 11:21
|
|
|
Shroud posted:I've been playing EU3 to hold me over until 4 comes out. I have the latest MiscMods (.799DW), and as the Ottomans I keep getting a popup repeatedly (the one regarding the strait). Sometimes it comes up twice in seconds, even. Is there a bug of some sort? Nightblade posted:Miscmods isn't compatible with 5.2. You need the compatibility patch from here.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2013 11:31
|
|
|
The one thing that annoyed me to poo poo in EU3 was playing the Ottomans, you'll do really well then all of a sudden a crusade is called on you, half of Europe begins invading from all corners of the empire and rebels slowly eat away at what is left.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2013 11:31
|
|
|
Phlegmish posted:I was going to point out that quill isn't annoying at all by LP standards, then I actually clicked the link and...why does he do that?
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2013 11:32
|
|
|
Thanks!
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2013 12:29
|
|
|
I think something like an expedition mechanic might be nice. Make normally long term sea attrition completely atrocious. Then allow you to tag a fleet as an expedition, reducing sea attrition for that fleet but also massively increasing maintainance costs. Then you can send however many troops you want...if you are rich as hell. And don't count on getting reinforcements to america if you are at war and losing money hand over fist.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2013 14:23
|
|
|
Zeron posted:I think something like an expedition mechanic might be nice. Make normally long term sea attrition completely atrocious. Then allow you to tag a fleet as an expedition, reducing sea attrition for that fleet but also massively increasing maintainance costs. Then you can send however many troops you want...if you are rich as hell. And don't count on getting reinforcements to america if you are at war and losing money hand over fist. Attrition should stay as a province modifier, for simplicity and intuitivity. Making colonial warfare realistically difficult could be achieved by making attrition scale with the distance from the nearest supply base (either a core province, or an owned province with high infrastructure). Although that wouldn't make much sense for pre-Napoleonic warfare in the Old World, since for e.g. Spanish troops it's not like "foraging" in Saxony or Anatolia would be particularly harder than foraging in Aquitaine; the problem with North America in that sense is that they didn't have that many farmers to (Armchair game design less than a month before release, ahoy!)
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2013 14:51
|
|
|
If inflation is caused by loans and gold production alone (no more minting) is Spain doomed to collapse under extreme inflation after conquering every single civilization in the Americas?
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2013 14:52
|
|
|
Dj Vulvio posted:If inflation is caused by loans and gold production alone (no more minting) is Spain doomed to collapse under extreme inflation after conquering every single civilization in the Americas? Depends how much money is siphoned away by the Francis Drake modifier, right? 
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2013 14:55
|
|
|
Well the way I was thinking was solely a ship tag. You can remove it when you get there, the expense was in the trip. The troops will be untouched(although an overseas reinforcement delay would be nice). The idea is that neither the troops or the ships are the expensive part, that would be the journey. Like, trying to cross the atlantic without the expedition tag would be suicide no matter how many friendly ports you have. And the cost of an expedition will be enormous, but as long as you aren't constantly ferrying troops across it'll mostly be a one time thing that you'll recoup in colonial profits eventually. Once you have a port in the americas you can have a local fleet that works just fine, just don't expect them to be repositioned in europe for war without paying for it. Like this, suddenly sending troops overseas to steal enemy colonies becomes far too expensive...unless you get the help of the natives that they have pissed off.
Zeron fucked around with this message at 15:02 on Jul 21, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2013 14:58
|
|
|
Dj Vulvio posted:If inflation is caused by loans and gold production alone (no more minting) is Spain doomed to collapse under extreme inflation after conquering every single civilization in the Americas? Sounds right to me.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2013 15:14
|
|
|
Eh, no tags. Why not a re-imagined shogunate system, but for the tributary empire of the Aztecs? European provinces can become part of it but Europeans are limited to only having as many soldiers there as their new world provinces support. They can then ally with internal states only within the scope of the tributary empire, i.e. if you ally with the tlaxcalans against the aztecs they won't join you against the french. In fact, make it one of the core mechanics of that system for people to form coalitions against the aztecs and for the aztecs to smack them down if they're too weak; make the eventual collapse and either colonization or reform of the aztec empire inevitable.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2013 21:12
|
|
|
Hey, newbie here. I picked up EU3 on steam, and I'm finding the tutorials... less than adequate. The big problem is that the one which teaches you how units and battles work appears to be glitched: I can't trigger the "Move your army to Brandenburg" objective. Is there a workaround, or am I just doing something wrong?
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2013 22:02
|
|
|
The EU3 tutorials are lovely and useless. Use this instead.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2013 22:04
|
|
|
DStecks posted:Hey, newbie here. I picked up EU3 on steam, and I'm finding the tutorials... less than adequate. The big problem is that the one which teaches you how units and battles work appears to be glitched: I can't trigger the "Move your army to Brandenburg" objective. Is there a workaround, or am I just doing something wrong? The tutorials were built on a much older version of the game and were never updated, so yeah, they're broken and functionally useless.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2013 22:18
|
|
|
Zeron posted:Well the way I was thinking was solely a ship tag. You can remove it when you get there, the expense was in the trip. The troops will be untouched(although an overseas reinforcement delay would be nice). The idea is that neither the troops or the ships are the expensive part, that would be the journey. Like, trying to cross the atlantic without the expedition tag would be suicide no matter how many friendly ports you have. And the cost of an expedition will be enormous, but as long as you aren't constantly ferrying troops across it'll mostly be a one time thing that you'll recoup in colonial profits eventually. Once you have a port in the americas you can have a local fleet that works just fine, just don't expect them to be repositioned in europe for war without paying for it. Like this, suddenly sending troops overseas to steal enemy colonies becomes far too expensive...unless you get the help of the natives that they have pissed off. Maybe you can simply make attrition increase exponentially (with modifiers for rivers, alliances, basing rights, etc.)?
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2013 22:58
|
|
|
It just occurred to me that the following could fix the New World exploration problem. First, limit cogs so they have a far shorter naval range than normal ships. This reflects the difficulty of sending large numbers of troops over long distances and should prevent Europe from sending large armies across the ocean until much later in the game. Next, add a conquistador or colonial militia infantry type. This combined-arms unit would represent a small European contingent and allied or mercenary natives and receive weaker than normal stats (for a Western tech group unit) to reflect this status. This unit is only recruitable in New World colonies. Allow for cogs to be built in colonies as well. In this way, 1) Europe will no longer be able to send doomstacks across the ocean; 2) this has the additional benefit of forcing colonial conflicts between European powers to be more low-key than they currently are, truly creating separate European and colonial theaters where the colonies were mostly without the support of the larger armies available at home; 3) challenging the Mesoamerican powers will require some investment and build up time (to recruit the necessary conquistadors and build the cogs to transport them) in the Caribbean beforehand; and 4) the game at least superficially recognizes that the Aztecs weren't just conquered by bunch of Spanish hero units.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2013 23:45
|
|
|
Epinephrine posted:2) this has the additional benefit of forcing colonial conflicts between European powers to be more low-key than they currently are, truly creating separate European and colonial theaters where the colonies were mostly without the support of the larger armies available at home; This right here is perfect because it helps provide that separation between the colony and the homeland. It should also lower opinion of the homeland for the colony much like what happened during and after the French-Indian War in the 13 Colonies and provide a step towards independence for the colony.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2013 23:50
|
|
|
DStecks posted:Hey, newbie here. I picked up EU3 on steam, and I'm finding the tutorials... less than adequate. The big problem is that the one which teaches you how units and battles work appears to be glitched: I can't trigger the "Move your army to Brandenburg" objective. Is there a workaround, or am I just doing something wrong? Welcome. As said, forget the useless tutorial and just play a reasonably easy country, follow its missions and read everything before clicking yes. Spain or Portugal are recommended as a newbie. edit: My Eu3 has stopped working all of sudden, crashing after the first screen right after launching. Tried two computers, both failed even after playing on those for months. I'm baffled. 2nd edit: It has been confirmed that after patch 5.2 old copies of Eu3 DW need to have HTT installed in order to work. Hope this info helps anyone having the same problem. Dj Vulvio fucked around with this message at 02:47 on Jul 22, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2013 23:52
|
|
|
Another England video from Quill: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QW1xrx9Pa9o I am a huge fan of the detailed attitude/reasoning breakdown in the diplomacy tooltips. It looks even better than CK2! Scotland falling all over itself to ally with him so he wouldn't invade them was pretty funny.
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2013 02:53
|
|
|
What if the tribes operated on a different political mode? So the English can colonize an Iroquois province, but that only affects the European powers- the Iroquois don't give a drat what color it is on European maps, it's still their territory and they can treat it as such, until some end when they either have to give it up because the English overtake it completely, or they throw the colony back into the sea. Or some scenario where they live in peace and harmony... at least until the Iroquois westernize and start operating on European notions of territory.
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2013 06:33
|
|
|
YouTuber posted:
Not that its that big a deal, but the idea that Washington was carried by Lafayette of all people is kind of odd to be honest. Or Von Steuben for that matter. Engaging Cornwallis in Virginia for a short period of time is a strange way of carrying someone. Not to mention that Lafayette was utterly under Washington's spell and tended to harm, not help, diplomatic efforts with France. Lafayette tended to assume greater importance to himself than he could really muster, and his image was improved in early 19th century American society for a number of reasons. Washington was not a tactical genius, but the idea of Washington as incompetent has little backing in history. I blame this interpretation on a misunderstanding of French involvement in the war. France joining didn't guarantee victory, just look how concerned the French were that the Americans would seek a separate peace with Britain,allowing Britain to concentrate all its attention on France. Just look into how terrible the Continental army's organization and logistics systems were before Washington arrives and after. French aid means little if the rebellion loses its most visible military arm. Good luck getting the militia to suppress loyalists without a belief that the war might be won.( France joining wasn't a get out of jail free card, and they performed pretty poorly in North America until late in the war. French gunpowder and loans were much more important than actual troops and ships. Not to mention the embarrassing attempt at invading Britain) By the standards some judge Washington, most British and Rebel commanders should have been hung. Howe was more than decent on the battlefield, better than Washington, but had monumentally poor judgement in how best to deal with the rebellion. Not to mention his inability to deal with Lord North and friends. Cornwallis was aggressive in a positive sense on the battlefield in way other British commanders were not, but could not see his actions in a greater strategic sense of the war. As an amateur, Washington proved better to juggle political and military necessities better than the professional soldiers Gates and Lee. Washington screwed up plenty, like in the NY campaign, but he never lost his army. The same couldn't be said by Lincoln, Burgoyne, Cornwallis, and Gates. Didn't mean to spew all that out, but Washington tends to get an unfair treatment as a commander. Making mistakes doesn't make a commander terrible. There is a level between Napoleon and McClellan as far as generals go. That said, Greene and Morgan deserve much, much, much more credit than Lafayette or Von Steuben. Without their campaigns, its quite likely the United States would gain its independence without the Southern colonies. This would result in a much poorer nation due a loss in cash crop exports. Not to mention its unlikely the US would have received the Ohio Valley. That said, I totally agree with you that the Iroquois, or equivalent nation in EUIV should be a heavy weight in North America. They very much were kingmakers.
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2013 06:36
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 21:07 |
|
|
More work on the Modern Age Mod minimap:
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2013 07:54
|
|
