Hey, was anyone around when you could, ...

    This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our Cookie Policy.

    • Hey, was anyone around when you could, ...

      Generally, this thread is meant for ANY stories of when things were different, but mine specifically is:

      Hey was anyone around for when they had "Nationalization"?

      I was wondering because I posted this in suggestions:
      ---------

      There should be a second tier Annexation for some countries - "Homeland Conformation" to allow countries with less than 7 Homeland cities to have 7 Homeland cities.

      Thus once Annexed, it could be "Annexed Again" and turn it into a Homeland city. This would bring the city in all respects up to the same value as a Homeland City. Though this would still put countries starting with less than 7 Homeland cities initially at a disadvantage, they needn't remain so. I think this would balance the game further, and encourage more people to join a game after all the 7 city countries were taken.

      -------

      To which Germanico replied (via a 3rd party):

      -----
      ... actually I must correct you. It was not for all nations. It was precisely what you are asking for. And it failed.

      Been there - done that - learned lesson.

      Closed

      ------

      And all that did was make me intensely curious as to HOW that could have gone wrong. Now it may be for a lack of imagination on my part, but I can't even think a way it could go wrong.
      *** The Creator of Zombie Farming ***
      The KING of CoN News!!!
      The "Get off my lawn!" cranky CoN Forums Poster - not affiliated with Dorado in any way


      "Death comes to us all. Shall I deal you in?" - DoD
    • people probably complained smaller countries always won; which games i have seen most the "superpower" countries go down faster in mid game than medium countries anyways; but everyone picks them first. yeah they get a head start in resources etc and ability to generate troops but their homelands are hard to protect (russia is a nightmare as have troops spread across 2 continents and border what almost a dozen potential enemies). China too as long trips to get from city to city.

      I like starting small and live with it. Think Myanmar 5 cities .. if I could swamp Thailand asap and homeland 2 closest cities that would be a Huge advantage over other 7 city countries as would have 7 concentrated cities to defend.

      Only "Big" country I ever played with is Australia but its isolated and setup navy defenses.

      Rest of countries Ive won with : Myanmar (multiple); syria (flash Mult); Ethiopia (Mideast); Cuba ; heck won with nicaragu on rising tides and started with 3 cities and annexed two more; and now doing well with Morraco on Blood and oil. All considered small to medium compared to super powers but choose strategic location over size(except rising tides and was curious of map and about only thing left). most maps starting well below 50 pct ranking in Vps and economy but rise up charts fast via conquest
      "And I looked, and behold a pale horse: and his name that sat on him was Death, and Hell followed with him "

      aka ...The killer formerly known as BuckeyeChamp

      The post was edited 1 time, last by The Pale Rider ().

    • Just to quickly add to Buckeye's point on huge countries: As we all know, many people THINK they want to play huge nations but don't really have the strategy/playstyle for it. I prefer smaller/medium countries too, but I do really well with the huge countries. I think it's because I recognize that there's got to be a difference in how you play them if you want to succeed. Many people see those big areas on the selection map and seem to believe it's a golden ticket, when really, it's a lot more management and attention.
    • PerigeeNil wrote:

      Just to quickly add to Buckeye's point on huge countries: As we all know, many people THINK they want to play huge nations but don't really have the strategy/playstyle for it. I prefer smaller/medium countries too, but I do really well with the huge countries. I think it's because I recognize that there's got to be a difference in how you play them if you want to succeed. Many people see those big areas on the selection map and seem to believe it's a golden ticket, when really, it's a lot more management and attention.
      agree 100 pct ... and will try some of bigger countries besides aussi as get bored playing same countries and trying to try didfferent strategies. that other Israel post thread has me thinking I have to try that challenge next though first but after that Russia to me is a big challenge.
      "And I looked, and behold a pale horse: and his name that sat on him was Death, and Hell followed with him "

      aka ...The killer formerly known as BuckeyeChamp
    • PerigeeNil wrote:

      Just to quickly add to Buckeye's point on huge countries: As we all know, many people THINK they want to play huge nations but don't really have the strategy/playstyle for it. I prefer smaller/medium countries too, but I do really well with the huge countries. I think it's because I recognize that there's got to be a difference in how you play them if you want to succeed. Many people see those big areas on the selection map and seem to believe it's a golden ticket, when really, it's a lot more management and attention.
      Agreed. This is spot on. If you consider most superpower nations irl, they actually didn't begin as big nations; the USA for instance. The US started as 13 small colonies, and then expanded to over half of the North American continent. Those big nations in CoN are mostly good for late game support in a coalition, where their increased production and mobilization capacity is excellent for getting troops to various frontlines away from the homeland, but in early game, smaller/medium countries have the advantage in force concentration, which enables them to utilize defeat in detail.

      In conclusion, large nations require strong coalition allies, generally varied in size, to help protect the larger ally from small nations ripping apart the larger nation, like in one game I was in where America got invaded by Cuba and Mexico. It's similar to large and small individuals in single combat: The large individual can bring more power to bear in total, but has more of a challenge actually bringing that power to bear, while the smaller individual has less power in total, but has an easier time of concentrating that power where it's useful, hence the essential role of coalition allies for larger nations. This is mathematically modeled by the concept of combat power, area, and the combined equation:

      combat power/area = force concentration

      Summarily, a large nation requires rapid deployment and a stabilized, minimized area front in order to enable them to maximize force concentration since they are dispersed in the early game, which generally requires allies in those stages in order to survive nations with higher initial overall force concentrations.
    • Buckeyechamp wrote:

      PerigeeNil wrote:

      Just to quickly add to Buckeye's point on huge countries: As we all know, many people THINK they want to play huge nations but don't really have the strategy/playstyle for it. I prefer smaller/medium countries too, but I do really well with the huge countries. I think it's because I recognize that there's got to be a difference in how you play them if you want to succeed. Many people see those big areas on the selection map and seem to believe it's a golden ticket, when really, it's a lot more management and attention.
      agree 100 pct ... and will try some of bigger countries besides aussi as get bored playing same countries and trying to try didfferent strategies. that other Israel post thread has me thinking I have to try that challenge next though first but after that Russia to me is a big challenge.
      I have a solo win with Russia in 64-player WWIII. You can do it, Buck.

      Just remember that it's not the same as playing a medium/small nation, and - here's my big suggestion to all Russia-players:

      Play toward the east (when and if possible). Probably the single biggest mistake unsuccessful Russia-players make is that they 1) push everything they have into one western line; 2) completely neglect the east until some east Asian country gets strong and it's too late; and 3) lose the majority of the units they have by trying to fight all of Europe while leaving the eastern half of Russia basically unprotected and without any backup.
    • defiantly Russia need a balance measure approach. but even starting a small / medium i like to push a even front .. see countries push way hard than get out flanked when their advancing stack creates a peninsula of sorts. problem is im pretty aggressive and dont like not taking at least 3 cities per day. to me biggest immediate threat with Russia probably Baltic states/ Belarus / Ukraine (so would pick one as ally -- probably Ukraine ). big mtns between Russia and turkey make hard for either to invade early.... Finland you can bottle neck some defense as only like two passes through....either way going to be fighting two front wars (which dont mind later in game) and would try to keep at that. (hard part is if 6 countries on your front get brave all at once). Id probably be more defensive in asia side as cant take all of china etc early.... probably take what auto countries that could and build perimeter defensive lines best as possible and slowly move front SW.
      "And I looked, and behold a pale horse: and his name that sat on him was Death, and Hell followed with him "

      aka ...The killer formerly known as BuckeyeChamp
    • Buckeyechamp wrote:

      defiantly Russia need a balance measure approach. but even starting a small / medium i like to push a even front .. see countries push way hard than get out flanked when their advancing stack creates a peninsula of sorts. problem is im pretty aggressive and dont like not taking at least 3 cities per day. to me biggest immediate threat with Russia probably Baltic states/ Belarus / Ukraine (so would pick one as ally -- probably Ukraine ). big mtns between Russia and turkey make hard for either to invade early.... Finland you can bottle neck some defense as only like two passes through....either way going to be fighting two front wars (which dont mind later in game) and would try to keep at that. (hard part is if 6 countries on your front get brave all at once). Id probably be more defensive in asia side as cant take all of china etc early.... probably take what auto countries that could and build perimeter defensive lines best as possible and slowly move front SW.
      Sounds like a great plan. My recommendation would be to do make moderate near max stacks with some air and naval support to be able to push and contend effectively alone with dramatically increased capability with air assistance, of course going with the Eastern gunship-MBT-SF+air sup setup. With Russia, I highly advise starting off somewhat defensively until offensive stacks, at least 5 units each, can be dispatched while the city is protected, itself with at least a 5 unit stack. From there, I advise getting enough nicely sized offensive stacks for one per city on a line perpendicular to your axis of advance every day, ideally also with some reserves. This optimizes the speed and continuity of the advance to prevent an event like Khalid's victory against the Romans at the Battle of Yarmouk due to the disjointed Byzantine advance and lack of proper breakthrough exploitation. I would suggest using a hammer and anvil style tactic once the cities are fortified of sweeping through a peninsula like Southeast Asia by starting at one side where the rear is secure, probably Vietnam once China, the Koreas, Japan, and the Philippines are taken care of, and pushing west from there, sweeping up cities and countries while not having to worry about being double teamed. Sometimes, a 5-15 unit stack defensively entrenched in and around a city with air support can hold out against a multiple nation assault, so this will enable clearing Eastern Asia, then sweeping West from there until the Southern Asian line is aligned with the Northern Asian and European line, at which point those lines can be pushed while eastern fortifications are moved out into the island chains with inland reserves and rapid deployment capable forces, assisted by the Eastern doctrine's late game favored armor, Tank Destroyers.
    • yeah only thing i dont like about russia is I'm big proponent of air/sea/land balance (really i do like 45 pct air/35 pct navy / 20 pct army as success for winning) and Russia needs to be very Land /Air ... I like doing damage with my Navy ;) and once get going my Air does mst of fighting.

      But playing blood and oil starting with morraco but getting more used to just Army/Air and my navy hasnt been utilized much.. but its ready and waiting as almost to saudi penisula ;)
      "And I looked, and behold a pale horse: and his name that sat on him was Death, and Hell followed with him "

      aka ...The killer formerly known as BuckeyeChamp
    • Buckeye,

      I always build three Naval bases when I play Russia. In my opinion, you have to guard AT LEAST against naval access through the Baltic, the Mediterranian, and the Pacific/Sea of Japan (that's not necessarily where I place my three naval bases, though).

      I think Russia has ten cities? I do three Navy, three Air, and four Ground. That's about as balanced as you can get.
    • PerigeeNil wrote:

      Buckeyechamp wrote:

      Just remember that it's not the same as playing a medium/small nation, and - here's my big suggestion to all Russia-players:

      Play toward the east (when and if possible). Probably the single biggest mistake unsuccessful Russia-players make is that they 1) push everything they have into one western line; 2) completely neglect the east until some east Asian country gets strong and it's too late; and 3) lose the majority of the units they have by trying to fight all of Europe while leaving the eastern half of Russia basically unprotected and without any backup.
      This "counterintuitiveness" Reminds me of the board game Axis and Allies, where the Axis could win almost every time if it threw everything at Russia from both sides and the worried about the rest later.
      *** The Creator of Zombie Farming ***
      The KING of CoN News!!!
      The "Get off my lawn!" cranky CoN Forums Poster - not affiliated with Dorado in any way


      "Death comes to us all. Shall I deal you in?" - DoD
    • Buckeyechamp wrote:

      people probably complained smaller countries always won; which games i have seen most the "superpower" countries go down faster in mid game than medium countries anyways; but everyone picks them first. yeah they get a head start in resources etc and ability to generate troops but their homelands are hard to protect (russia is a nightmare as have troops spread across 2 continents and border what almost a dozen potential enemies). China too as long trips to get from city to city.

      I like starting small and live with it. Think Myanmar 5 cities .. if I could swamp Thailand asap and homeland 2 closest cities that would be a Huge advantage over other 7 city countries as would have 7 concentrated cities to defend.

      Only "Big" country I ever played with is Australia but its isolated and setup navy defenses.

      Rest of countries Ive won with : Myanmar (multiple); syria (flash Mult); Ethiopia (Mideast); Cuba ; heck won with nicaragu on rising tides and started with 3 cities and annexed two more; and now doing well with Morraco on Blood and oil. All considered small to medium compared to super powers but choose strategic location over size(except rising tides and was curious of map and about only thing left). most maps starting well below 50 pct ranking in Vps and economy but rise up charts fast via conquest
      I've never started with a 7 HCity country, The Russia Problem is self evident, Italy gets smoked by a strong Navy, the USA has a smaller Russia problem, and Germany, well and Poland have each other. I always seem to start with 5 cities, and I think once or twice with 6.
      *** The Creator of Zombie Farming ***
      The KING of CoN News!!!
      The "Get off my lawn!" cranky CoN Forums Poster - not affiliated with Dorado in any way


      "Death comes to us all. Shall I deal you in?" - DoD
    • as Germanico said we had this annex thing already but it was taken out that is why your first Forum Thread got closed so :) read before you open a new one



      IT WONT COME BACK


      GO LIVE WITH IT :D


      To which Germanico replied (via a 3rd party):


      [i]-----

      ... actually I must correct you. It was not for all nations. It was precisely what you are asking for. And it failed.[/i]

      [i]

      [/i]
      [i]Been there - done that - learned lesson.[/i]


      read that last line :) then you know enough

      its just you that doesnt want to understand it and make new threads when @Germanico told the thing why it isnt here anymore :)
    • I still remember the time I played US and the only reason I was alive at the end of the game was because of the AI :D
      In all honesty for big countries create a huge army that no one wants to mess with (nuclear is even better than aircraft carriers as a deterrent), or have allies that’s even better. For me, I like a slow start, and the only reason why I didn’t die straight off was because Mexico didn’t attack me for some reason. So I slowly built up my forces until I had over a hundred units mid-game not doing anything!
      Next important thing: don’t get cocky. So I got cocky and decided to attack Canada for no real reason and nearly died because the player pushed straight towards me cities and it was only the AI that saved me in the end
    • MartijnTNL wrote:

      as Germanico said we had this annex thing already but it was taken out that is why your first Forum Thread got closed so :) read before you open a new one



      IT WONT COME BACK


      GO LIVE WITH IT :D


      To which Germanico replied (via a 3rd party):


      [i]-----
      ... actually I must correct you. It was not for all nations. It was precisely what you are asking for. And it failed.
      [i]

      [/i]
      Been there - done that - learned lesson.


      read that last line :) then you know enough

      its just you that doesnt want to understand it and make new threads when @Germanico told the thing why it isnt here anymore :)
      Maybe you are slow or think you are a hall monitor, I want to know what went wrong. I completely accept it's not coming back, so derp somewhere else and let others respond.
      *** The Creator of Zombie Farming ***
      The KING of CoN News!!!
      The "Get off my lawn!" cranky CoN Forums Poster - not affiliated with Dorado in any way


      "Death comes to us all. Shall I deal you in?" - DoD
    • PerigeeNil wrote:

      Deathdealer,

      Try India sometime. It's not unmanageably huge, but it is big, and, to me, "perfect" in a number of different ways (I don't want to give away too much).
      I have been meaning to try it, I am intrigued. I am just a sucker for the island nations because I love the naval game so much, but India DOES have enough ports, so I will give it a whirl soon, thanks!
      *** The Creator of Zombie Farming ***
      The KING of CoN News!!!
      The "Get off my lawn!" cranky CoN Forums Poster - not affiliated with Dorado in any way


      "Death comes to us all. Shall I deal you in?" - DoD