• We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
How do I get rid of an Imperial Admonition? Is it only through that province coring, or could it be from me beating the Emperor in a war?

edit: I just realized that this AAR isn't very inclusive to non-MM players. Is anything confusing you guyz that I could elucidate with my words?
 
Last edited:
Conquest and its Consequences

By the summer of 1611, it was an open assumption in both Prussian and foreign courts that Gdansk would soon, legally or illegally, be annexed to Prussia. There are two peices of evidence for this--the first being that, for the first time, Prussia was being approached for non-competition agreements.

EU3_33-5.jpg
EU3_34-5.jpg

By the end of the year, Naples, Alsace, Lorraine, the Palatinate and Switzerland had approached Prussia for non-competition deals. Only the Palatinate and Switzerland would gain one.

The second was that, for the first time, trade was on the King in Prussia's mind. The issue would have been forced anyways, but it played entirely into Frederich Wilhelm's hands. The Silesian Estate felt that, by the March of 1611, the Kingdom was in such a state that Frederich would not be able to deny any of their wishes for fear of a revolt. As such, they convened by April, and in June demanded a change in trade policy towards Silesia's old system, meaning that there would be no tariffs between provinces, and that many of the state subsidies built around several industries (notably Printing) would be abolished.

This was fantastic for the King. Not only did this mean that he would deal another blow to the provinces, and to the Kronesohr in turn, but abolishing the printing subsidies would allow cities other than Berlin and Konigsberg to have nascent printing industries. Most of all, ending inter-provincial tariffs would allow trade to flow towards Danzig with the greatest of ease.

EU3_32-6.jpg

While Berlin was angered by Frederich's decision, in the long run it allowed Danzig to act as a catch basin for a far greater number of goods

As all this was happening, the Prussian army was moving, albeit slowly, farther and farther east. The Lithuanian estates were captured in July 1611, and the cities of Plock and Kalisz fell to the Prussian armies. By now, it was clear that the Doppelkorps would only be satisfied with the annexation of the Teutonic territories.

EU3_29-5.jpg

Poland by the Fall of 1611

The collapse of the Polish army had other consequences in Poland as well--it destroyed the consensus over which the Korona had been built. A country which had once been one of the most tolerant countries in Europe was now tearing itself apart in religious struggles--an estimate of the Prussian Scout and Intelligence Corps was that by 1612 roving anti-Semitic bands outnumbered the Polish army. Hearing the pogroms that were tearing Lithuania apart, Rabbi Michael (a man who claimed to represent all of Prussian Jewry) offered a deal on behalf of the Prussian rabbis--if the Armee Von Preusse were to stop the Pogroms happening in the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, they would preach in support of the Kingdom of Prussia.

EU3_28-6.jpg
EU3_51-2.jpg

Prussian Jews fought dissent against the war effort in return for Prussian support for Lithuanian Jews. The men of Modzewski would be Prussia's largest foe during the later stages of the war

On the eastern front, the Doppelkorps were faced with a tri-fold surprise--the incompetence of the Russian Army, the competence of the Rigan one ,and the presence of Scandanavian forces in the black sea region. Soon enough another surprise came to Neukoln in the form of a treaty--the Swedes had signed a peace with the Poles in return for the island of Osel. However the Rigan and Danish troops quickly filled in the gap in the northern front. The Poles were desperate at this point, and, praying that the Prussians would be content with northern acquisitions, offered a peace treaty.

EU3_54-2.jpg

Unfortunately for the Poles, I wanted their Western Territories

Frederich Wilhelm entered the occupied city of Warsaw at the front of the Royal Guard, riding right to the Polish estates. In front of the collected representatives which the Prussian army had captured, he offered his peace terms--Riga would get Kurland to defend its southern territories, and Russia would annex Mogilev, and Prussia would add Gdansk, Poznan, and Torun to its Kingdom.

EU3_55-2.jpg
EU3_57-2.jpg

The Treaty of Warsaw and Poland after the First Partition

Even at Frederich's moment of triumph, this annexation presented major problems for the Kingdom of Prussia. Prussia's government followed in the old style of Despotic Margravatism, but was becoming increasingly Absolutist, while Poznan and Torun were used to something that was close to democratic rule. By the end of 1612, mayors from Torun and Poznan were requesting the ability of self governance. Frederich agreed, as this was playing into his planned governmental reforms. The Grand Duchy of Posen, a devolved government similar to the Silesian estates though with less rights, was formed at the dawn of 1613.

EU3_63-1.jpg

The Creation of the Grand Duchy of Posen

This reform was in purely Eastern European fashion, "which is the exact opposite of the Western, liberal concept of Reform by consent and by mutual concession...the Eastern form is reform 'from the top', and aimed at revivification of authoritarian systems". However while Russian reform usually came at the very last minute, Prussia had a long history of pro-active reform which helped both the common man and the government bureaucrat--most notably from Bismark's health care reform, the first of it's kind in the world.

However, the shift in governance from the Kronesohr to the MunzeArchiv (heretofore known as the Directory) was long in coming, and was sure to happen ever since Frederich opted to stay in the Kronesauge. The Kronesohr had been a thorn in the King's side ever since Georg II had allowed its creation, and their new economic weakness and the huge amount of popularity of Frederich Wilhelm allowed him the chance to implement French-style reforms.

The King's court had long been divided in three parts representing the 3 major bureaucracies and Prussian governance had been split between two ideas--Foreign Politics represented by the Doppelkorps and Domestic Politics represented by the Kronesohr. Linz, one of the few Comparative Governance Scholars to focus on Authoritarian Rule, splits authoritarian rule into two categories--totalitarian, in which 'everything is politics, but politics is own by the government', and authoritarian, in which there is a degree of diversity in power groupings. Both of these types need to stay total/apolitical, or else they will start to fragment.

In Fascist Italy, for instance, power was split between the Church, the Army, the Monarchy, and the Government. Because power is total in an authoritarian system, if 'politics' (defined by the rhetorical and sometimes physical conflict between differing groups/ideologies) were to be introduced into this system, then those institutions would now be at each others necks for the right to control the state. The Kronesohr consistently threatened to introduce this element to Prussia, especially because they had power of administration and the power of the purse. Beyond this, the power of the purse controlled by the Kronesohr meant that 'minor projects' dominated the Prussian budget. Most importantly, the powers of the kronesohr meant that the denizens Estates of Silesia and the Grand Duchy of Posen were enraged by their lack of representation, as well as Prussian jewry, who by now were on similar numbers to the Prussian Catholics, but who remained unrepresented. The last major problem with the Kronesohr is that, when it was made, there were only 12 Prussian 'major towns' (meaning that they had a population higher than 8,000). Now there were nearly 170, and still mayors from all matter of small towns were demanding on be present on the Board of Mayors.

Frederich Wilhelm announced on the 16th of July, 1613, that the Directory would take control of all administration duties (defined as different from 'governance' as there is no politics in administration) of all provinces. The Kronesohr would be replaced by the new Director of Landers (Landarchiv), and the Board of Mayors would be replaced by the Lord Electors, who despite their name, had only an advisory position. The electors would be made up of--

4 Lords of the 4 Prussian Landers (a great deal of the new Prussian proto-constitution defined how large these landers could be, preempting any conquests that would occur)--Ostmark, Westmark, Preusse, and the Grand Duchy of Posen
3 Religious Lords--the Bishop of Altmark, the Rabbi of Prussian Jewry (generally a Berliner or a Breslaun), and the Prince-Priest of Potsdam
The Mayors of Berlin and Konigsberg, chosen by the King
and the King himself, though he reserved the right to choose a surrogate

EU3_2-9.jpg

The Landarchiv's organization as of 1615: The 4 Landers plus the 4 military districts of Silesia, white dots signify cities which were ruled by Lord Electors

Many historians have noted that the Landarchiv was far more aristocratic than its predecessor, the Kronesohr. This is because of its scale--the Margravate of Brandenburg was comprised of two larger cities (Potsdam and Berlin) and massive amounts of small towns and noble estates. The Prussian government, in the modern, bureaucratic sense of the word, was built in order to deal with the problems presented by large cities. In the countryside, nobles controlled their estates and singular families dominated the towns. The amazing tolerance of the Prussian government came out of this unique concept.

Beyond this, the argument that the Prussian government got more and more aristocratic over time misses the point of the Landarchiv--it was primarily a rubber stamp organization, who had small amount of money collected through excise taxes and little else to do. By 1650 nearly all of Prussian governance was performed through the Directory, an organizatin which was, firstly, operated directly by the King, and secondly, primarily urban in nature.

EU3_66-2.jpg
EU3_40-3.jpg

What this actually meant

There was another consequence of Prussia's annexation of Poland's westernmost provinces. The Danziger government-in-exile protested to the Emperor for protection, and all historical records indicate that Ferdinand intended to use this instance to attack Prussia if it weren't for his timely death in 1612.

EU3_61-2.jpg
EU3_64-1.jpg

Sweet!
 
Last edited:
I have to admit, this is a very good read.

Well done.

Thank you! The library I work at is moving for renovations, and thus I lucked out and got The Origins of Political Order by Fukuyama as an early birthday present. Expect even better quality! Also, your Golden Horde AAR is amazing.
 
Thank you! The library I work at is moving for renovations, and thus I lucked out and got The Origins of Political Order by Fukuyama as an early birthday present. Expect even better quality! Also, your Golden Horde AAR is amazing.
Thanks Merrick Chance'. Its not every day you comment on an AAR and have its author start praising your own work. :p That said I don't think I recall you commenting on my AAR, so this just makes it an even bigger surprise :D

And enjoy the book, from what I've read its pretty good.
 
It totally is

So in MM, Absolute Monarchies are basically Despotic Monarchies with -2 maximum war exhaustion and higher Administrative efficiency. The thing is that max war exhaustion never comes up, AE will never come up for me as I'm a small homogenous country, and beyond that, France/Spain/England are deep into insane amounts of WE. So I'm thinking that I'll change Absolute Monarchies to something from -.05 to -.1 war exhaustion, does this seem good? Also what seems like a balanced value?

edit:I'm getting 'access denied'. Can I even edit the values?
 
I don't think that would be too much of a problem.

And the reason why you can't edit it is because you've downloaded EU3 into your programs file. You need to move the text document out of the program file (i recommend desktop), edit it, and put it back. To do this you have to be an administrative user, I'm assuming you are. If not then get on the administrative user. :eek:o

Of course I could be jumping to conclusions and be wrong about everything. :p
 
duhhhrrr alright, I've figured out how to fix it. With that stupid problem done i'm back to playing--I think that I may only be a couple of years ahead, that or I played a bunch of years ahead and I'll need to make up something important to fill the time...perhaps calling a king "the Great" isn't a good idea when you've only played 10 years into his rule...
 
duhhhrrr alright, I've figured out how to fix it. With that stupid problem done i'm back to playing--I think that I may only be a couple of years ahead, that or I played a bunch of years ahead and I'll need to make up something important to fill the time...perhaps calling a king "the Great" isn't a good idea when you've only played 10 years into his rule...
Most Kings would earn the honorific title "the Great" posthumously. So either have him do something spectacular, or have his son do something spectacular and dedicate it to the father.
 
Rule of Law and Frederich the Great's Reign

"Das Gesetz ist der König in meinem Reich"--Frederich the Great​

The historiography of Frederich the Great's reign is dominated by two large wars of aggression which ended Europe's sporadic peace and catapulted the continent into the 30 Years War. Many historians saw in Frederich "the origin of the twisted mix of ethno-national politics and national interest which found its terminus in Nazism" (Gordon Alexander Craig).

This is an immensely unfair characterization. While the reorganization of the Prussian bureaucracy into the Directory created a nearly all powerful institution, what is amazing is that rather than the all-out tyranny that the French or Mainzers suffered through, Prussia's absolutist monarchy is notable because of its restraint. This can be attributed to the last reorganization of the Prussian bureaucracy that Frederich managed before his mind was occupied with thoughts of war.

As I have noted before, an 'untied knot' left over from the Great Reorganization was the position of the police force, specifically the tax collectors. However, as Frederich and the Prussian cabinet thought on it, the question quickly became whether the entirety of the courts system should be put under the Directory. This led to a huge intellectual battle in which the Landarchiv attempted what Lord Johann Von Preusse called "a last stand" against the ever encroaching state.

The control of the law system was the last major area where the Landarchiv had any power over besides the allocation of the Lander's funds (which were very minor, and were usually used to build small, humble Protestant churches in towns without them). This was due to the Prussian conception of 'administration' versus 'politics'--The Directory was made with the idea that, in taking the politics out of things like accounting and governing (IE economic activities), the government could be made more efficient. Frederich vowed, however, that the Directory would not gain control over activities which were "by nature political".

This meant that the Landarchiv was able to cause an uproar throughout the Kingdom when Frederich announced that a second reorganization would be started, with the aim of simplifying the legal system. "Is this not the definition of tyranny, when the same man rules the moneylender, the garrison, and soon, the courthouse?" yelled Johann Von Preusse from his estate. Large portions of the printing class (who had lost most of their subsidies by this point) sided with the Landarchiv, putting the Kingdom under an intellectual siege. Soon the unholy alliance of Prussian nobles and Berliner artisans were demanding the return of 'responsibilities of administration' to the Landarchiv. The state responded to this by contacting the intellectual giant of the time for one final job.

Rembrandt-Harmenszoon-van-Rijn-Philosopher-in-Meditation-Oil-Painting.jpg

Rembrandt's painting of Posadofsky, father of rationalism, at his lowest point

Frederich Posadofsky, the father of Prussian Rationalism, had retired in the 1610s in protest against what he viewed as the unlawful acquisition of Polish territories. Beyond this, in many ways he was a relic of an older time by this point. The old split between the 3 bureaucracies meant that there would be 3 major groups in the court at Neukoln--bankers and bureaucrats representing the Kronesauge, diplomats and officers representing the Doppelkorps, and learned, cultural men whom the King appointed to represent him in the Kronesohr. Now, with the emasculated version of the Kronesohr that was the Landarchiv, there was no need for the Court to tie itself to the cultured classes of Berlin in order to represent itself adequately--indeed it had no obligation to represent itself to anyone until now.

Thus, while Posadofsky remained influential in Berlin, he was a relic from a swiftly dying era, who, rather than leaving Berlin to spread his philosophy to the courts in Paris or Vienna, stayed in Berlin and wallowed in an odd combination of celebrity and impotence. This was until Frederich Wilhelm came to his door, asking him for one last work.

On the Nature of Laws was not what anyone, and most certainly not what Frederich, expected. For one, though Posadofsky had not written philosophically at length in years (preferring to submit broadsides and shorter sections to contests), he had not lost any of his wit and his case was argued with the greatest of eloquence. Secondly, it rebelled against both of Posadofsky's masters, cutting a compromise line which neither von Preusse nor von Hohenzollern preferred, but which was amendable to the broader population. "Ideal law," stated Posadofsky, "is law that is untainted by the pandering of politics and by the tyranny of rule, for both consider themselves to be above the law. Law must be made not because of the screaming of the masses or because of the pressure of the few, but through a deliberative process of argument, in which the better argument creates the law."

Given a degree of the reigns, Posadofsky finally had the opportunity to get what he had wanted since his resignation in 1612--that sliver of limelight which would allow him to move Prussian history one last time. While Frederich, and his deputy Johann Below (the sheriff of Berlin) were able to take control of the tax collecting organizations within the Prussian police (which created the distinction between 'high' and 'low' crimes that remains to this day), Frederich was forced by popular and bureaucratic opinion to create an independent judicial "zweig" to the Prussian government. The effects of this are hard to accurately measure, however it did legalize Prussia's monarchical restrain. Fukuyama notes that rule of law is one of the most important parts of creating a modern state, and Prussia's secular, independent judiciary acted, in many ways, as the harbinger of a more Enlightened age, defending nascent concepts of property rights and the right of speech against more conservative kings. After collaborating with the newly empowered Prussian jurists to make a focused set of laws, Posadofsky died, happily, teaching in Paris in 1626.

While Frederich was dragged, kicking and screaming, into creating one of the most modern judicial institutions of his time, it's amazing, considering the actions of his predecessors, that he did not use recourse to violence in order to win his argument with the Prussian populace, nor did he attempt to abridge the Gesetz Buro's powers, in fact, after this decision most Prussian funds until the War of Silesia were put into spreading the Buro's power.

RuleofLaw.jpg

Sheriff's offices were set up in Breslau, Altmark, Ruppin and Berlin as well as Potsdam.
 
Last edited:
I have to admit, this is a very good read.

Well done.

I just hope that we won't see Prussians accepting "the end of history" as a plausible argument after the end of the 30 years war :)

Btw, I would like to recommend two books, if you guys are fond of Fukuyama. Both deal on the same subjest and both dislike Fukuyama's arguments :)

a) Black Mass: Apocalyptic Religion and the Death of Utopia by John Gray
b) The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order by Samuel P. Huntington

Reply to the AAR to Merrick Chance'

The latest updates are both great. If I may suggest, perhaps you could introduce some human flaws to the Prussian leadership, to make them a bit less omnipotent. The flaws don't even need to affect gameplay, but they could perhaps shine through the personal life or the way the Prussian kings arrive at their decisions or actions. E.g. Frederick William I of Prussia was a man of great deeds, but his personality was horrid. From my experience this actually happens quite often in history or atleast it is far easier for me to name a historical person of great deeds and of horrid character rather than of great deeds and of pleasent character.

Keep the updates coming!
 
'Provincial court systems'? 'Sheriff's offices'? In core provinces? What's the rationale? I've always seen these prov decisions as unnecessary luxury expenditures. The inflation reducing buildings are only needed in the capital. The courts might be useful in non-core, wrong-religion, wrong-culture provs. After all they cost a lot and they decrease your tax income. So why? Rolepalying?
 
I just created an account to tell you how awesome is your AAR. It's wonderfully written and i've spent a looooong team reading it. I just love it, keep up the good work !
 
I just hope that we won't see Prussians accepting "the end of history" as a plausible argument after the end of the 30 years war :)

Btw, I would like to recommend two books, if you guys are fond of Fukuyama. Both deal on the same subjest and both dislike Fukuyama's arguments :)

a) Black Mass: Apocalyptic Religion and the Death of Utopia by John Gray
b) The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order by Samuel P. Huntington


Clash of Civs was the first polisci book I've read. While I agree that Fukuyama is too optimistic and that the assumption that your ideology is occupying the 'end of history' is foolish at best and dangerous at worst (note the pseudo-essay I wrote on Hegel, Marx, and Weber), the idea of 'the end of history' is ultimately a German, or one might say Prussian, idea that came out of Hegel's philosophy of history. In fact there's quite a bit of evidence that Prussia-Germany considered itself at the end of history--the Sonderweg was an idea that originated in German historians/philosophers/social scientists thinking that Germany occupied a middle-ground that took the best parts of Eastern authoritarianism and Western democracy. Weber's 'iron cage' of laws that gradually infringed on the rights of the individual for the benefit of the whole came out of the experience of Germany (which he viewed as more bad than good), in which the law/government slowly became more powerful at the expense of the rights of its polity, rather than the other way around which occurred in the US, UK, and France.

I'd say that Fukuyama's latest book is way better than the idea that people have of the end of history in that it acknowledges that institutions can slowly decay, and that while I agree that the 'linear historians' are naive in many ways, they're more correct than the 'seasonal historians', which I view Huntington as one of. Beyond that I feel that a lot of Huntington's conclusions come out of his own biases. Beyond that, his view of Latin America as perpetually driven by either autocratic rule or badly governed democracies seems true now because in the 70's he was one of the people who supported American-sponsored autocracies in the Southern cone!

Reply to the AAR to Merrick Chance'

The latest updates are both great. If I may suggest, perhaps you could introduce some human flaws to the Prussian leadership, to make them a bit less omnipotent. The flaws don't even need to affect gameplay, but they could perhaps shine through the personal life or the way the Prussian kings arrive at their decisions or actions. E.g. Frederick William I of Prussia was a man of great deeds, but his personality was horrid. From my experience this actually happens quite often in history or atleast it is far easier for me to name a historical person of great deeds and of horrid character rather than of great deeds and of pleasent character.

Keep the updates coming!

I've been worried about this lately, especially considering Cicero's near perfection. Frederick is rather clearly based on the historical Frederick, and while the last chapter was a story of him being dragged into creating modern governance, I agree that he's a little too perfect. The last savegame I have ends at Bohemia starting a huge war against me, so I'll explain the negative effects of Frederick's rule (mostly that he was a realpolitick practitioner who, in helping out his state and countrymen, ended the bloc-based system I described before and created the calculation of national interest + religious nationalism that led to the 30 Years War. I'm going to start the 30 year's war event within a decade of this war ending if it doesn't start happening) in that chapter.

'Provincial court systems'? 'Sheriff's offices'? In core provinces? What's the rationale? I've always seen these prov decisions as unnecessary luxury expenditures. The inflation reducing buildings are only needed in the capital. The courts might be useful in non-core, wrong-religion, wrong-culture provs. After all they cost a lot and they decrease your tax income. So why? Rolepalying?

Do inflation based buildings only effect the capital?...I've never thought that. Sheriff's offices have given me quite a bit more direct taxes in, for instance, Breslau, but yeah I assumed that the inflation buildings lower inflation no matter where they're built. The provincial court system ones were built partially because I'm swimming in cash (200 census taxes, -1.2 per month), and partially because I'm preparing for 50-70 years of on and off war. But yeah, mostly roleplay.

I just created an account to tell you how awesome is your AAR. It's wonderfully written and i've spent a looooong team reading it. I just love it, keep up the good work !

Thanks dude! It's always great to hear compliments.
 
I actually can't agree with you that Huntigntons conclusions are based on his own experiences. Considering the fact that he wrote the book after the collapse of the USSR then his basic assumptions have found proof in the last twenty years. I believe the best example as of today is the so called "Arab spring". Despite the simplistic nature of the argument that demographics shape policies and a large population of young men will stirr up the Arab countries, I don't think anybody made such conclusions at the beginning of the 90ties. The correct arguments always look obvious in hindsight.

As for the linear or seasonal nature of history then the Death of Utopia handles it well. Gray traces the birth of the western world'd belief in the better future to the millenarian christian movements of the middle ages and through to the modern times. The idea that tomorrow will always be better than today seems to be engraved in our minds, yet it has no rational basis whatsoever.

I hope that the rational Prussians will not come to any absolute conclusions, it always signals the end of development and the beginning of stagnation. When your 30 years war ends then I would prefer the emergence of existencialism rather than idea of the end of history :)

Good luck on your major war!
 
Prussia's success, Europe's collapse: The Silesian War, part 1

39499-1.sm.JPG

The battle of Meissen killed 20,000 men and destroyed the entire Armee von Judea

While I have not, yet, explicitly said this, it very much deserves to be said: Prussia's rise, up until 1945, was bought at the cost of European instability. This had both positive and negative effects--there is little question that, by the 16th century, the Catholic church was an elitist and corrupt institution. However, Beckism and Cicero's tacit support for it helped break apart the Catholic order in Germany, leading to two decades of war and the illegal acquisition of Glogowski. Northern Europe was torn apart by wars of conquest and religion which killed hundreds of thousands, and it was not until the late 16th century that Europe stabilized into 3 religious camps.

These camps were not uniform--the Electorate of Hanover, who went on the warpath in a similar style as Prussia and Denmark, was routinely defeated by the Austrian Emperor in 5 wars, spanning over 40 years which ended with its vassalage. The Electorate's fate as a subjugated underling to the Emperor was a fearsome lesson to the Prussians on the costs of defeat. However, Prussia's paranoia was furthered by the collapse of Imperial authority and rule--a collapse which was engineered mostly by Prussia.

The unfortunate thing, perhaps, is that Prussian arms consistently defeated Imperial steel. The Imperial system was, by this point, moving toward more representative government (mostly in order to bolster the Catholic position in the Reichstag), and Imperial Law had moved forward since the Imperial Law Act into a highly comprehensive system, culminating in Emperor Ferdinand's creation of the Imperial Code, which divided law into the law of persons, things, and actions, and which was, perhaps, one of the most liberal institutions of the pre-30 Years War era.

However the only reason that Imperial Law was growing more and more rationalized was that it was swiftly losing it's meaning. The first partition showed two things very eloquently and succinctly--

1. That no state could rely on law alone to protect it.
2. That 'Defensive Alliances' like Poland's alliance with France (aimed against any possible aggression by a German state) were inferior to 'Offensive Alliances' like Prussia's.

Though most of Prussia's neighbors had some reason to feel bitter towards it, the last straw was Prussia's support of the Republican rebels in Pomerania. Both the Elector of Thuringia, which was being ravished by civil war, and the Imperial Court, which was angered at the continued usurpation of legality which were allowed in the Prussian circuit, were heavily angered by this. Perhaps Cicero, or Ferdinand I, could have weakened the effects of these aggressive actions, but Frederich felt no need to. Just as the cause for his annexation of Posen and Torun was a slightly more complex version of 'because I could', Prussia's support for the Petty Republic of Pomerania was explained mostly in terms of Prussia's connection to the Baltic.

Emperor Karel II was highly worried about the effects of the 'constant offender on the Elbe', who's disrespect for imperial law was leading other states into wars of conquest within the Empire (mostly in Italy). Karel II explained to his allies and fellow Catholics that, for the safety of the Empire, the state of Prussia would have to be 'reduced'. However, we should not take this only as the result of a good Emperor enforcing the law. Frederich's conception of 'Angesichts eines Mitgliedstaats' (raison d'etat) had spread deeply into the Bohemian court, and the Silesian War (called the War of retribution by the Bohemians) was clearly a war for the conquest of Silesia, which the Bohemians felt had been wrested from their grasp a hundred years before.

Uniting the German members of the Catholic Coalition and Poland, Emperor Karel II created the Alliance of Retribution, aimed directly against Prussia's illegal acquisitions. Indeed, discussions show that by this point, the Polish King, Thuringian Elector, and Bohemian emperor were agreed in turning Prussia back into "a primordial rump state, a mere attachment to the Imperial demesne and no more."

EU3_1-11.jpg
EU3_1-11-1.jpg

The Alliance of Retribution and its plans for Prussia--Brown would go directly to Bohemia, red to Poland, light blue to Thuringia and white to the Empire (later to Austria). Brandenburg would be made vassal of the Empire, though little effort was made as to how this would be implemented

The greatest success was the addition of Austria to the alliance. Austria, at this point, had little against the Kingdom of Prussia. Archduke Werner I was, in fact, married to a Hohenzollern, and despite Austria's anger at the seemingly uniquely Prussian ability to win any battle through force of arms, Austria had little at stake in the alliance besides Bohemia's promise that they would support them in the next imperial election.

Frederich, for his part, did prepare for the coming storm. The religious minorities of Prussia, who were generally exempted from service, were recruited and formed into the Army of Judea. While the regiments were highly segregated into Jewish, Brentan, and Catholic groups, the experimental nature of the army and the limitations of its segregated nature (in order to guarantee the loyalty of the army, the officers were made sure to be from a Beckist sect) led to an innovative command structure which Ferdinand II would use during his later reforms of the army, and the creation of the Army of Judea put Prussia at roughly equal numbers to Bohemia.

Beyond this, the Prussian army's doctrine of defeating the enemy army first and foremost would help it greatly against its Catholic foes. The large fronts of the Austrian-Turkish wars rewarded Austria's doctrine of splitting her armies into smaller contingents who would raid the Turkish countryside while the main Austrian army fought the far less prepared Turkish army (Note, I switched the Ottoman's ideas, giving them a pair of military ideas instead of a pair of religious ideas. Hopefully this will allow them to stop under performing in wars). Prussia also finally accepted Bohemia's organization doctrine of focusing on skilled generals commanding a rationalized army structure rather than skilled individual troops. However, the generals were trained in the more 'modern' art of fire tactics, with shock tactics and close combat being de-emphasized--unlike Bohemian tactics, which involved the use of cavalry in an offensive role, Prussian cavalry was a scouting and reconnaisance force which supported her musketeers and artillery.

The focus on officers was an extension of Frederich's conception of modernization and advancement, which necessarily had to be driven by skilled powerful individuals rather than 'mobs'. The 'annulling of the horde', or de-mobification of Prussia, was an overarching commitment of Frederich's government, from the focus on officers to taking administration out of the hands of the pseudo-democratic Kronesohr. Beyond this, the state had nationalized several iron mines for the singular use of building new artillery pieces.

EU3_21-9.jpg
EU3_22-7.jpg

Prussia's focus on officers rather than soldiers combined with the state's control of her iron industry created a far larger role for artillery at the expense of the average infantryman

The Prussian army had her flaws, however. Her generals, while well trained, were not generally experts in shock tactics, which left her armies open to destruction against a strong cavalry charge. The army system of 10,000 men in each army was made into law right after the War of Danish aggression, with the expectation that the front of any concievable war would be small--Neukyau and perhaps Altmark being at the front lines. The Alliance of Retribution went across all of Prussia's southern and eastern borders, and though there was a variation of political will through the alliance there was no question that the Brandenburgian countryside would be raided during the war.

It was late july of 1628 when the Bohemian-Austrian alliance was announced. After the signing of the treaty, Karel announced that he planned to 'wipe the heretic smudge off the face of our Empire'. This led both to the mobilization of the Prussian army and to the drawing up of battle plans in the case of a Bohemian attack.

The Doppelkorps saw 3 distinct fronts of the war

EU3_16-9.jpg

  1. The Western Front, in which the Armee Von Judea would strike deeply into the Thuringian line, destroy their army, and demand the independence of Saxony
  2. The Silesian front, characterized by the defencive operations of the Armee Von Silesia and the Konigsgard against Bohemia and Austria
  3. The Polish front, where the Armee Von Preusse and Mark would go into a swift aggressive action against Poland's western cities. Little resistance was expected

The War started in the spring of 1629, with several surprises. The first one was that Austria agreed to enter the war. At this time, Austria was fighting on 2 other fronts--another started by Bohemia (against the heretic-state of Venice) and one against a revolt by Muslim Greeks in Austrian Greece. The second was that France broke her alliance with Poland in order to honor her guarantee. The Silesian War, started by an Emperor who had bent Imperial rule in order to satisfy his urge for conquest and against a 'constant offender', had already broken the state of affairs in Europe.

EU3_9-10.jpg

The expected Russian response and the unexpected French response
 
Last edited:
So who are the defendants in this war, Prussia and France? What happened to the alliance with Russia?

I think you'd best avoid taking any more illegal HRE provinces, unless you intend to dissolve the HRE entirely sooner rather than later. Those penalties hurt! Poland, on the other hand, is free game, and there's always room for more cash and vassals ;)
 
The defendants are the Protestants + France and Russia. On the periphery of the war are my pseudo-allies who will distract Austria from me: Venice and Greece, and at the northmost point is Pomerania, who broke my alliance but has been at war with Thuringia for 5+ years.

And yeah, after this war is over Poland will be a rump state, weaker than even, I'd say, Denmark. Bohemia will have a similar fate, mostly because I only realized around the end of the war that Bohemia never shifted from Armored Knights.
 
France has demostrated that realpolitik never really goes out of fashion.

I am guessing that you have an enlarged army due to the military ideas? How many regiments? Are you over the limit, any minting required? And, what is your quality, land and discipline?

And hurry up with the update, the suspense is awful :p
 
You hinted the war has already been won. Wasn't manpower the problem? As here you seem to have been at a clear disadvantage. Of course France's involvement must have balanced this but still. And as I've never played Prussia in MM, do you have (or have you enacted) some Prussian decision boosting your military power. From my games it seems that as soon as Prussia forms (even by AI), their armies become very tough.