G7 - France vs. England

yup

Basileus wrote:yup

yup to what?

...or france could keep bleeding england and ignore austria, after all no one can invade france at this point and expect to win. austrias army is not an invasion army. they will be bled down by forts and engkland will be in james's hands.

so in that scenario austria is just wasting his time and possibly playing puppet for someone.

i dont play in game 7 but from what i can see willian iv is dead duck. i would accept it and make peace. war with france is usually a bad idea, especially when you have impossible war aims.

incidentally why would france want to kill king james after spending so much time getting him on the throne? i think that must just be propaganda!

james is the only way france can avoid an anti-french england. killing him would trigger civil war and tie french troops down even longer.

baggins wrote:incidentally why would france want to kill king james after spending so much time getting him on the throne? i think that must just be propaganda!

james is the only way france can avoid an anti-french england. killing him would trigger civil war and tie french troops down even longer.

Exactly!

baggins wrote:incidentally why would france want to kill king james after spending so much time getting him on the throne? i think that must just be propaganda!

james is the only way france can avoid an anti-french england. killing him would trigger civil war and tie french troops down even longer.

not really England would still gain points from "avin a go" at France just because King Jim is on the throne will not mean he dances to frances tune! England and more importantly Parliament and the people would expect him to gain the upperhand or his honour would dive faster than the Lib/con alliance backing Unions!

france and England would never ever get on its historic and a fact......

well....apart from 1660-1688, its was not popular but it did happen. but generally i agree its more a case of how anti-French England can be!

The English will never get on with France, its just not cricket you know!

Whatever else you know France has a strong leader with a vision. I think he's become unstuck and somewhat isolated (oh, come ON Russia!) but I believe long term players of this 'game' plan in decades NOT years.

If I were France I'd continue to lop off bits of England as the opportunities present themselves, restore the integrity of France by defeating the Austrians and threatening the Spanish and sucking up to lots of minor states.

I'd make a note of who allied with whom and batter those by 1725 who don't align themselves with France....

France has a seasoned navy, a bit battered but nothing a good refit won't resolve plus some other ships of old England to repair.

Well I'm not France but there it is.

Regor wrote:Whatever else you know France has a strong leader with a vision.

Not one you'd want to get on the wrong side of by being tricked into war by a minor power then?
You don't seem to think Regor, that France would have any problem taking out England if he put his mind to it. If so then why hasn't he done it by now? The war seems to have dragged on for ages. Would you just annex England without bothering with the Jacobites though?
Looks like the consensus is that those who are at war with france should try to make peace rather than wait for a treaty to expire and then all hit france together?

what does it mean to be british in 1704?

baggins wrote:what does it mean to be british in 1704?

I don't know, but I'm sure it involves rum, sodomy, and the lash!

I dont think France can knock England out but Austria has a further 5 armies to crash over the Rhine, France has two armies on thwe Rhine, one being built in Paris and troops overseas, the Austrian plan is to bleed France to death and then let others finish France off

yes good plan right till it goes wrong and it happens the other way round!

Basileus wrote:I dont think France can knock England out but Austria has a further 5 armies to crash over the Rhine, France has two armies on the Rhine, one being built in Paris and troops overseas, the Austrian plan is to bleed France to death and then let others finish France off.

And you still class Austria as a medium-sized power? In the Herald the Austrian army was stated at 20F, 40H, plus artillery, plus garisson troops in Besancon. Another 5 of those means a total of 120F, 240H plus artillery. The upkeep on those 360 units even if just basic would be over £3,000,000 and totals 120,000 men. That is an awful lot of men to have to keep active for a long time if your plan is simply to 'bleed france to death'. 4 days ago you seemed to be seriously considering peace, but now it is back to war again.

how many troops do you think france has - you seem very well informed about his plans.

Numbers mean nothing unless well supplied and looked after they can soon rout or wither away due to lack of care....

where is prussia in all this i wonder, he usually doesnt like an overmighty austria, inactive?

Hi all - please take into account when posting that in-game matters are supposed to be kept in-game when it comes to diplomacy and the like. Discussing the game here is fine, but formulating alliances and plans is really crossing a line.

Consider this a shot across the bows, folks, to use a naval analogy!!!

Take heed or the plague shall visit yea!

I think Richard is right (of course I do otherwise my armies will sieze up!), we should use the forum to share experiences but not to find out what players think about a certain game or to put out peace feelers or get allies in our own games etc

The "truth" about what is happening in a game is always subjective so even a lesson in the history of any particular game needs to be trated with care. I guess its best to refer to the wiki if players want to know what has happened in a game as then its a level playing field.

I have tried to stay out of (commenting on) this thread during its recent activity because I will admit it has prejudiced my game position and actions.

This is why I am keen on the wiki being only facts.

I am not so keen on the game summaries, for example, as these introduce personal opinion.

But, the wiki can be edited by anyone, so I can't stop it.

i think its incredibly tempting to "cross the line" and although I must admit i dont play in game 7 I have come very close to the line myself on previous occasions. so i take my share of the blame and learn, as they say its only a mistake if you make it twice!

The arm of the GM is long and dangerous

My apologies to one and all if I took the conversation onto grounds it should'nt have strayed onto. I hold my head down in shame
Sorry in particular to count - de - monet if this has prejudiced your game views and most importantly enjoyment.
My mistake as I did not read the advice on posting, I just presumed it was no swearing, nothing offensive etc - my bad