Game 9 Start Up

sounds like a 70's rock invasion of Australia, AGAIN
Have just hired a Corsican to build my new Railway it goes from Paris to Waterloo Station.
One Grain.

Not long now before the start of the 9th game, may it last a long time.

I have often wondered when there are still so many positions up for grabs in the other games wny there is a call for for new start ups.

Is it the lure of the brandspanking new unsoiled position, Or simply trying something new right from the start?

Perhaps its the case players might be able to get the positions they truly desire. It might also be the unsoiled events timeline that goes along with it. So everything is fresh waiting for someone to ensure it explodes, or if necessary be nicer than before.

I agree with Mark, it is the chance to play the 'dream position' and/or do things differently. I also think it feels easier to move a nation forward when you are there from the start, if you take on a role in a game that has been going for more than a couple of years and/or a role that has been vacant for a few years, you always feel like you're playing catch-up to make up for the years of neglect-of course, the extra orders option can help there...if your bank balance can handle it

Yes, in the older games, the existing unplayed positions aren't close to keeping up with the played positions. If you're mostly interested in the roleplay, that's fine, but if you want to do anything war gamey, you're at a disadvantage.

Your economy isn't as strong, your military is weaker, you don't have discoveries you want, etc.

In a new game, you figure you're all starting fresh, and if you screw it up, it really is just on you!

I think personally its the shaping of how you wish to do things, you take there issues and try to deal with them.

So far my bank balance is coping with the unlimited orders...

Actually on that for those who have managed the major positions of England and France is there any out there who have managed without unlimited orders. I cant see how you could, considering the things I do for Hungary in G2. But again I think thats my personal style.

I can't imagine doing one of the larger positions without unlimited orders.

I've cut down a fair bit, but I still end up well over every turn.

I find that some months I dont have much then the next it sort of just implodes after I have had, what I can only construe as a genius idea. Also, because I like to RP a little with my ministers that adds to it.

Looks like all the key positions are taken, so looks like it's going to be a great game!

MarkTurner26 wrote:I find that some months I dont have much then the next it sort of just implodes after I have had, what I can only construe as a genius idea. Also, because I like to RP a little with my ministers that adds to it.

I used to RP with my ministers too, but found all I did was make problems for myself. There might have been an upside, but I didn't see it so I stopped doing it.

A bit of a pity, since I enjoyed it.

The first turn for game 9 have arrived and initial response is:

This is quite interesting

-Big starting army

-Strong starting economy and a full treasury, I usually have to play for years to get to this level

-Fewer recruits than earlier games, and the recruits seem to be located at the capital, listed on the turn with no treasury sheet (The amount of cash in the treasury is also listed on the turn).

This could get quite explosive if everybody have so much resources available.

Turn at hand and a bit of a culture shock. Still plenty of potential.
Does anyone know if we treat February turn as normal ie. issue orders etc.

Yes, I would think send your orders in as normal for February. The first newsletter seemed similar for game 8 and 7 with general news. But Richard seems to have taken account of some earlier threads in the forum in outlining some of the pre January 1700 issues which are around as some players have requested in the past. It seems to set the game up to move along historical lines.
The set up seems to have been inteligently done using the rules of the game but reflecting the historical reality of the time. So no big secret - I am Sweden, the unique Swedish recruitment system seems to have been accurately reflected, I know it by the term Tremanning but I believe other terms were/are used. But done in a manner which keeps it within the general play of the game. Also the historical Swedish flagship is there. It just gives a nice flavour and fills you with confidence for the games future. The army types and numbers are historically accurate representing the true regiments of the time. (I dont mean regiments are named etc but there are the right numbers of elite units to represent Livregiment guards, Trebants etc.) Simple but historically accurate. So if anyone is hesitating about joining this game I would say jump in!
I suppose to be fair, Richard is probably better at what he does now compared to when he started. I think I am better today at what I do compared with 20 years ago, so there is no reason why Richard doesnt learn as he goes along and make each start up that bit better when a new game starts.
Different games seem to have different "feels" about them, so it will be interesting to see which way this one goes. I suspect that as time goes on there are more and more experienced players out there to join in, but equally the decline of pbm/pbem may mean a smaller and smaller pool of players, not really certain on that and would be interested in others views?

Does this mean G9 is going to see a proper attempt at re-fighting the Great Northern War? And the War of the Spanish Succession?

Issues being settled using the tactics proper to a Gentlemen............Cold Steel & hot lead?

I wonder if John Churchill will ride forth from London once again?

It sounds like an interesting game. i look forward to regular updates

Basileus wrote:Yes, I would think send your orders in as normal for February. The first newsletter seemed similar for game 8 and 7 with general news. But Richard seems to have taken account of some earlier threads in the forum in outlining some of the pre January 1700 issues which are around as some players have requested in the past. It seems to set the game up to move along historical lines.
The set up seems to have been inteligently done using the rules of the game but reflecting the historical reality of the time. So no big secret - I am Sweden, the unique Swedish recruitment system seems to have been accurately reflected, I know it by the term Tremanning but I believe other terms were/are used. But done in a manner which keeps it within the general play of the game. Also the historical Swedish flagship is there. It just gives a nice flavour and fills you with confidence for the games future. The army types and numbers are historically accurate representing the true regiments of the time. (I dont mean regiments are named etc but there are the right numbers of elite units to represent Livregiment guards, Trebants etc.) Simple but historically accurate. So if anyone is hesitating about joining this game I would say jump in!
I suppose to be fair, Richard is probably better at what he does now compared to when he started. I think I am better today at what I do compared with 20 years ago, so there is no reason why Richard doesnt learn as he goes along and make each start up that bit better when a new game starts.
Different games seem to have different "feels" about them, so it will be interesting to see which way this one goes. I suspect that as time goes on there are more and more experienced players out there to join in, but equally the decline of pbm/pbem may mean a smaller and smaller pool of players, not really certain on that and would be interested in others views?

I wish you good luck with my home country Basileus! Even if the game starts when Sweden's era of great power is about to go into decline it's the only period in European history when Sweden made itself known. Well apart from Vikings and ABBA of course :-)

Looking forward to get the game started. I'm one of the medium-sized powers in Europe.

But Sweden was only defeated after a long war against Denmark, Russia and the Polish commonwealth with the Russians being heavily supported by the Dutch. Nobody wanted a strong Sweden controlling the Baltic.

Nobody but the leaders and perhaps merchants of Sweden.

The European states have always wanted to keep a balance between the Baltic powers, especially between Denmark and Sweden. When Denmark was about to get too much control over the Baltic about a century earlier they supported Sweden in naval warfare at least.

Jason wrote:It sounds like an interesting game. i look forward to regular updates

You hear that Stuart they expect regular updates... I am personally looking forward to everything, this being my first new game start. I am intrigued though as to who the main protagonists will be. Will the French steal th show will Russians ride forth like a steam roller.

Bearlord wrote:Nobody but the leaders and perhaps merchants of Sweden.

The European states have always wanted to keep a balance between the Baltic powers, especially between Denmark and Sweden. When Denmark was about to get too much control over the Baltic about a century earlier they supported Sweden in naval warfare at least.

I know you can not build everything into a game but generally speaking in Gloire du Roi the Maritime Powers of France, England, Spain & the UDP pay very little active attention to events in the Baltic.

Historically though the Dutch were 100% reliant on the Baltic for Naval supplies and imported much of their grain from the area. The others had other sources but these were genrally inferior and/or more expensive.

This tended to mean that historically the Baltic saw a lot more active Maritime powers fleets and diplomacy than you see in Glori du Roi.

One reason why the French Navy was less active in the WSS than in prior wars was that with its historic Swedish ally busy and Denmark in the alliance against it the French Navy was short of some types of supplies.

Earlier than our period all the Maritime Powers were strongly against Denmark levying "Sound Duties" on all trade entering and leaving the Baltic they were also less than keen on Sweden's levying tolls on Prussian and Polish Ports. These were vital sources of Royal Revenue for both these powers but got them in a lot trouble at times.

However, I think by our period things were fairly much sorted out with low sound duies or duties waived in return for a lump sum agreed by treaty with the Danes by the major powers (Zero fo Sweden due to historic agreement). Handy since it gave the major powers an economic advantage over minor rivals.

In game it might be interesting if the Danes re-visited the subject of Sound Duties but they would probably need a major backer.

Just out of interest is Sewdens navy split in Game 9 as it was historically into the highseas fleet & the inshore fleet? Or is that upto the player to decide?

As I understand it the inshore fleet was more an amphipious army that camped on land at night but manned galleys to defend the coast & also operate in the Baltic.

I generally find that sort of thing is down to the players forces organisation.

Hi Jason, the Swedish fleet is split into two, one part more of an aggresive high sea's fleet, the other more an inshore transport fleet, but no galleys.