G7 - France vs. England

Sorry Jamacia was the last straw. The French invading on my 1st turn and the state of England was bad enough, but when your orders are ignored or badly carried out you really are fighting a loosing battle. All the best and death to the frogs

A French invasion on your first turn? Wow. I'd pass that position back to Richard, but maybe that's just me.

Yes indeed, I was rather hoping England was going to run the French ragged: whilst I agree with Deacon above IF you choose not to pass the baton you will find that there are many positions keen to see the French fail.
The loss of England will cause the Spanish, Austrians et al to have to come in and the French will struggle - but then fighting Agema as the English??
Well whatever you choose to do good luck you have my admiration for taking it on!

I recall an earlier position of mine where I had grown from a humble colonial post to control a continent and 2 kingdoms...ahh those were the days. I love colonial positions!

Sadly though the forces of 'Balance of Power' kicked in and I was taken down several pegs.

It's interesting to see how these things grow (and shink). If the two warring parties don't reach an agreement then what could happen next? Austria has already declared for England. Does this mean France, who seems to have treaties with everyone, will call on a defence agreement with her own allies? Will then Spain become involved? And Russia? And the Germans? And where does the Pope stand? Keen for a Catholic King in England no doubt? Interesting times....

The key to a great game of LGDR, is balance. It looks to me, that France is too dominent. This kills longetivity in games. So players beware, keep the balance.

Well, just joined game 7... All, I can say is "hmmm, I have a lot to think about"...

Let me guess. You have take England?

I cannot confirm or deny such speculation, as we're not supposed to discuss these things

Then i wish you good luck. You will need it.

Can someone send me the newspapers for 1704? I need some history!

I can send you the newspapers. I only need your email address.

Frank, Thanks for the offer. I've sent you a PM with my e-mail address.

Frank, assuming the assumptions above are correct you have more friends you might think. Good luck - its an interesting game...

So another new player for England? How many is that now?

I wonder if this will be a repeat of the last players situation, or a new start (and breath of fresh air) into the game.

From what I can see, I believe some took advantage of the previous England (and will probably try the same thing again with the new player) to keep the French busy ready for their own mischief - which is fine, I have no problem with that (I'd do it myself).

But I think that now, if only to prevent an imbalance forming we need peace. France clearly has the ability to take England out entirely, and seems happy to do so if need be so she can focus on Austria (in fact seems happy enough to fight them both at the same time).

I'm no longer the 'interested party' I once was but am still active elsewhere in G7 - my thoughts are that the first thing England has to do is avoid repeating acts of the previous player, and negotiate purposefully with France to end the war.

Personally I find the peace proposals on both sides to be extreme (I'd accept parts of both though) but if left to their own devices hopefully they'll sort it out.

I agree with the above sentiments entirely. I strongly believe that there are some (not so well) hidden agenda's in play. There is a concerted effort to try and seriously damage France, who in turn is re-acting the only way it knows how...aggressively.

I dont see peace coming any time soon unfortunately as both sides of the equation seem hell bent on having a right old go at each other !

Hmm, interesting - There are a couple of viewpoints missed in the above: 1. England has been poorly managed to date. 2. France had become a very successful and aggressive position and even more so with the demise of the Petit Dauphin. 3. Didn't G7 start with two players per major position?

With that does France have the ability to destroy England? Not this year or next I'd argue and if she could would any of you want France setting the agenda?

But (and seriously) pity France. The cost of upkeep of the position must be huge! The loss of honour must be great and the benefits of taking England ever more remote.

Lastly pity England surrounded by folk who would lop off bits of her empire!

BUT and its a big BUT, a renascent England could gather a lot of smaller independent positions under a commonwealth banner. Better England settles with Austria and they agree a fair peace with France perhaps with Spain threatening to weigh in to make France seriously consider their proposals? I wish the English player all the best and hope the position becomes a real success even thought that may harm my position.

Phew! glad thats out!? Discuss???

Newspaper for December 1704 is on the wiki.

Newspaper for January 1705 is on the wiki.

Hello,
I've just joined the forum and play in Game 7
Very interesting posts.
I don't think the game started with 2 players per major position, certainly not in respect of the French Colonies. I seem to remember the French Colonies being active a few game years ago.
My question is what is the red-flagged fleet off the Azores? Are they parts of the English or French fleet which have mutinied or some 3rd party? Is Portugal joining the war?
Do you really think England can join lots of smaller countries together to fight France?

Yes.Game seven was very different,in the fact that it did start with two players per major position.

In the case of France,it was the king and the hugenot faction. In the case of spain,it was the hapsburg and bourbon representatives for the role of king,after the death of king carlos the mad.

I think the general consensus was that the experiment was a bit of a failure. Alot of players dropped out early. I did,i was spain.Still play in games six and eight though.

Interesting. I guess you must have been Bourbon Spain then for the main Spanish player has been in from the start. King Carlos the Mad did linger on rather a long time so it can't have been an easy position to play.
It is strange how some positions seem to have lots of players whereas others have some stability. Portugal, England and UDP all seem to have had multiple players since 1700.
I guess it did lead to lots of different options at 1700, but I imagine it must have been hard to play a divided Spain.

Game 7 has been a rather strange one (when compared to other game worlds). I think Richard did try pushing the Spanish War of Succession as an in-game event more in Game 7 by having two directly opposing Spanish players.

In some positions there has been a huge turnover in players, England being the prime example, but by no means the sole case. In other positions (that I am aware of)....France, Austria, Hapsburg Spain, Russia, Ottoman Anatolia there has been the same ruler since day one.

Taking on a position, especially in an established game is not always easy. Sucess tends to come with time and experience, and I suspect some players are too impatient for success hence the turn-over. A player drop out is also likely to be a result of a poor performing nation so that adds to the challenge.

I would suggest contacting the nations I listed as being present from day 1 (I guess ideally those physically closest) and strike up a friendship/alliance to give you an umbrella of protection while you settle in. The good fun for you is the listed nations are on opposing sides ! France and Russia in one camp, Spain and Austria in the other. Anatolia watching on.

I hope you have fun in G7 and welcome

With game seven and playing bourbon spain,i was making and giving orderds that were not carried out. Some orders were taken from me and some from hapsburg spain. A mixture of our two positions.All two player positions were played and run the same way.So it was very frustrating and annoying for alot of players.Paying for orders which are not always carried out as you wish,also seemed wrong, to me.

In games six and eight,i have been in from the start of both of these. Always the best way to play.

It must have been very confusing for you. Still, if you are enjoying games 6 and eight, then that is what it is all about.
Do you think Bourbon Spain is viable as a player position now the game has moved on and France and Spain are on opposing sides?

Bourbon spain would be a great position now.It would be murder for the spanish hapsburg player though. Too difficult and unfair on him.All his plans and orders would be undermined.

What about france? bring in a jacobite player,or hugenot player and undermine him. or a leader of the paris mob.

I think players want to build up their nations and or attack other nations. Not continually having to do the same things and rebuild their own position.This is where the fun is.

In game seven you were continually battling yourself.You were never in total control.Why spend money to take over a nation,when you can spend money to rule a nation from the very start?