by Guest Sat Apr 21, 2012 5:26 pm
Regor wrote:Now it would be unspeakably weird if "the real Louis" had morphed seamlessly into the "Real John Churchill"
Sorry to disappoint you Regor, but I'm not in the game any more. It is highly unlikely I will be returning to G7. I may return to another game of LGDR at some point in the future, but rest assured I do not try to settle scores against players who have opposed me. Each position (and character) is different.
I think Churchill has a very difficult task ahead of him. He made peace because he had no choice but to accept the French terms and this meant accepting King James. I do wish players would read the terms published in the newspapers and comment on what they have read rather than what they had hoped they would be. As I understand it Churchill has the backing of the Whigs in Parliament and a successful vote by Parliament to accept those terms. Those terms are quite clear on who is the King of England: so Parliament as a whole has confirmed King James as the legitimate King of England and ditched any former allegiance to William. I know from comments that certain players refuse to accept that King James can ever be King, but their hopes have been dashed by that vote! It may well be that some people in England don't like the way King James came to power, but as I have long argued, they cannot doubt his legitimacy, his right to rule, or that he is de facto King of England. Whatever oath Churchill may have taken to William under the delusion he was king, that oath would no longer be valid given the vote in Parliament. England clearly needs peace and Churchill did what was necessary to bring that about.
Churchill seems to be a bit of a pragmatist. 80% of England is still occupied by French troops and the English navy is still trapped in the Humber. If he was to turn on King James in some way then I suggest that it would be at least several months in the future when French troops had left, certainly not immediately. If it was immediately, then:
1. France would honour the terms of King James' Accession, which means war with Churchill and the immediate consequence that the English navy would be sunk by French forces. This would be the case even if King James met some untimely end as the next Stuart claimant could well be the Duke of Berwick who is the commander of French forces in England. Would that character really pass up an opportunity such as this to seize the crown himself?
2. Neither Whigs nor Tories in Parliament would know what to make of him. Has anyone really tried to rule England without the backing of one party or the other? The Whigs supported King James, just weren't as noisy about it as the Tory propaganda in the newspapers. As Parliament itself has voted to accept King James, Churchill would be taking on King and Parliament and France whilst surrounded by French forces. There is bravery, but there is also downright stupidity. To make peace for pragmatic reasons only to trigger war the turn after would make him not only confused, but a madman. That said, nothing would surprise me in this game where the madder the individual, the more they seem to get away with!
3. In addition to King James being able to charge him with treason, Parliament (whichever party was in a majority) would be able to impeach Churchill. His authority and attempt to form any kind of government would collapse before it had started, depriving England of potentially a great ruler and general. It takes a great deal of blundering to alienate all your supporters and potential supporters, then put yourself in the position of needing support! Perhaps he is the reincarnation of Ivar the Boneless!?
Of course, I can't be sure about how France would react as I'm not France any more, but it would be highly unlikely that any player for France would abandon the thousands of French troops in England or withdraw from occupied territory without being sure that England was secure. France didn't break treaties whilst I was in charge and given the English war came about because of England breaking her agreement with France over dredgers, I can't see any future player for France abandoning her obligations if she knows anything about the history of LGDR7! To the new English player, I'm sorry I had to drop out when I did for it surely spoiled your plans for an easy peaceful first few months in office. You inherited a wreck of a position and have played very well so far. I only wish I was still around to help you. For UDP to be of any threat to King James their navy would have to defeat the French navy and land troops somewhere in England. It is probably significant that UDP received a £7.5M payment the month before from Austria, and until that UDP was keen on staying out of the war. I guess she now feels the compensation from Austria makes it worthwhile fighting. Hardly the ringing endorsement of William that would normally be expected.
The historical Churchill was a very interesting figure who was originally loyal to the Stuarts, fighting to put down Monmouth's rebellion against King James. William of Orange never trusted him (despite allowing him a minor role in Ireland) and imprisoned him on suspicion of being a Jacobite supporter. He was out of favour until his wife's friendship with Queen Anne led to his re admittance to court. So it could be that the player is being very historical in his interpretation of the character. If so then he should be given credit for his loyalty to the Stuarts, however inconvenient that may be for those opponents of France who are just determined to find reasons to keep fighting. Perhaps the clue is in the name The 'Real' John Churchill? It shows characteristic forgiveness on the part of King James that he is willing to accept Churchill as his first minister, and an equal degree of trust on the part of TRJChurchill that he is willing to return to the cause he always really supported. Would your character serve a king who had thrown you in prison and ruined your family, or would you repay that action by siding with his enemy?
And just to clarify, France did not declare war on the Holy Roman Empire a month or so ago, but on Austria and any states of the HRE which are misguided enough to support her. Many states voted against Austria in the Diet and so do not necessarily support Austria against France. They simply want to stay out of the way and preserve their own resources and independence. Which is really how all this started a few years ago: France's positive vision for smaller nations to seek self determination vs Austria's determination to crush all opposition, real or imaginery.
Home
Portal
Search
Latest images
Register
Log in
