Since it's Easter tomorrow, I might not have time for comment feedback. So figured I'd do it today.
Thanks for the comments everyone! And Happy Easter for those who celebrate it!
It's good that Brittany is at the stage where they can afford to throw lots of men into the meatgrinder and wait for the enemy to run out of men. Hopefully Brittany doesn't find a rival that can match their manpower numbers.
I think only the Ottomans can match us for manpower at this stage, I'll have to check the save. This is why I've focused on mil development, barracks, and soldiers' households so much.
On the catch up trail, hope you don’t mind a few retro comments/questions
On Ch 52:
Not at all!
Their star is definitely waning now. Even if in an intuitive sense taking down Britain in order to eventually defeat France seems a bit contra. But I get the position building aspect and disabling a rival colonial power. The establishment of Great Brittany proceeds!
I do get what your saying, you'd think having GB as an ally against France would be better. And if we had other places in Europe to expand to, I'd agree. But the land can be used better by Brittany.
Did that very large AE figure into the assessment of costs? Are there any coalition threats to Brittany now?
The AE is large, yes. But since GB is the only Anglican nation (and isolated on their island) most nations don't care. Really the only ones that do care are those we've been fighting: GB, France, and Portugal.
I too always find this quote amusing. It’s the kind of ‘virtuous circle’ of which Sir Humphrey Appleby would approve!
Had to look him up. Government administration is in many ways quite cyclical.
Ah hah! Interesting to know of this balance of power dynamic. While the face value numbers on each side clearly favour the Brittany alliance, if much is vested in colonies then the actual ground situation in the main theatre (Europe) may be closer?
Yes, though keep in mind France has to find a way to get men onto Britain. And they have the Spanish to deal with directly as a distraction.
<does theatrical double-take> Surely at least 200 years too early for such headlines!
The enemy of my enemy is my friend.
So much war in the last chapter I am breathless from reading.
I hope it is not too much. We've reached that stage in EU4 where we can expand pretty much with impunity.
I think I missed the part where Scandinavia allied itself to Russia, but nevertheless you fought on ably in two different theaters spanning the globe. Brittany is definitely the top world power now and dismantling the British.
Looking back through my screenshots, the alliance was not there in 1662. But it is there in 1665. So it is a sem0recent addition.
Given this outcome, it can't be too long before they return to retake the homelands.
The dismantling of Great Britain is going very well indeed.
The return is coming ever closer.
On Ch 54:
Some really big manpower losses in those battles, whether victory or defeat (this being the worst). In this case, maybe not all Breton but … what was the cause(s) of the high casualty ratios?
I know you haven't gotten to Chapter 55 yet, but I did include a screenshot of our army quality there. Reposted below:
So Brittany's quality (especially discipline) is not the best when compared to most others. We have refrained from taking a military idea group even though we probably should (
if you remember I wanted to showcase how you can still win in singleplayer without one).
And for that particular battle you're showing there are two reasons I think we lost it. One, the screenshot shows us on the receiving end of a 9-1 roll in the fire phase (late game, fire does the most damage). Two, we ran out of frontline for our artillery.
I also can't remember, but we might not have had a general for the first parts of the fight until Wales showed up. You never want to fight an even, pitched battle without a leader. I think my attention was elsewhere for a few seconds and GB surprised me.
A grand sweep of new lands.
Including other (more distant) behemoths such as the Ottos and Russia?
Regarding Russia, read on!
For the Ottomans we could probably fight them too. They might even be easier than France. But they're so far away that we don't compete with each other anywhere, unlike GB, France, and our other foes.
why did this strange war break? is Russia colonizing SE Asia?
They have a few colonies in SE Asia. So Russia does have interest in the region.
how does pros and cons of different kinds of vassal states (vassals, client states, eyalets of Ottomans, other special types if any) compare against each other?
This probably deseres a longer in-chapter explanation at some point. But for now I'll say this:
Vassals: gives taxes and forcelimit to overlord. Can be annexed.
Marches: like a vassal. More loyal. Has special defensive/military bonuses for itself. Can't be annexed (but can be turned into a vassal again) and doesn't give taxes.
Client States: a vassal that the player has artificially created, not a releasable or existing TAG. Can be annexed.
Eyelets: special Ottoman-exclusive subject. Gives tons of manpower to overlord but doesn't join wars.
oh I assumed we'd become the war leader when we joined
Yes. This isn't Victoria 2.
this is why I value morale pips less than direct pips. I didn't do the math, but for example in this situation you'd bleed them of their manpower faster and with losing less manpower if you lacked morale but had more attack/defense pips
I like the damage pips too. The main problem is our discipline.
Glad you enjoyed!
For all intents and purposes you've become France's cross-Channel rival and displaced the British empire! I look forward to how that plays out.
We will see how that plays out very, very soon over the next few weeks.
Great job against Russia! So when you captured their flagship and looked at your fleet it showed that ship with a Russian flag. I've captured plenty of ships but have never seen such a flag to show where they came from. Is that because it's the flagship? A new feature? Curious if you know.
The flag is just to indicate the flagship.