From: farrell@junk.cis.ohio-state.edu (christopher k farrell)
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
Subject: Re: EiA: Great Britain
Date: 14 Oct 92 20:15:06 GMT
Article-I.D.: cis.1992Oct14.201506.223
Organization: The Ohio State University Dept. of Computer and Info. Science

In article <1992Oct14.185047.28261@ncar.ucar.edu> nexus@ylum.cgd.ucar.edu (Jeff
	Berry) writes:

>	On another point, I always have a hell of a time convincing people
>to gang up on Britain.  It is easier (but not much) to convince them
>France needs stomping, but no one wants to risk Fleets against GB.
>

	Great Britain does have a very strong position, but only really 
because of France's strength.  If Britain goes down in flames, there will be
no counterweight to France; France will have naval superiority as well as
land superiority.  Consider:  France starts with I think 3-5 fewer ships
than Spain, once the Dutch are factored in, as well as 5 fleets to Spain's 3
and Russia's two.  Toss in the Venetian Fleet and Denmark fleet, and you
easily have enough fleets to blockade everyone else AND get some naval 
transport done.  Sweden's fleet can be neutralized by a ground campaign once
Britain's fleet is neutralized and the crossing arrows in Scandanavia opened,
as can Sicily (especially if the Kingdom of the Two Sicilies is not in play).

	I once played France when Britain had been knocked out of the war due
to a particularly disasterous ground war and the capture of Wellington.  Those
12 or so months were enough to establish control of Egypt, drub the Turks, 
conquer Syria and Palestine, and other miscellaneous adventures in the 
Mediterranean, and the near-total destruction of the Russian fleet.  In this 
particular case, Britain and her Navy came back in 12 months; if her Navy had 
been on the bottom, things would have been *quite* a different story.

	Every major power gains somthing in the struggle against France from
Great Britain.  Spain gets protections for her navy (can you imagine how
much easier an invasion of Spain would be with French naval superiority?),
Prussia and Austria gain quite substantial subsidies, and Russia also gains
naval protection.  Her fleet is no match for the French navy either, and a 
naval invasion of St. Petersburg and Sweden would be most unpleasand indeed.
All this compared to what Britain usually gains ... not a lot.  She must
usually gain most of her Political Points from manipulation, since the
puny army is unlikely to inflict too many defeats by itself.  Naval combat
is unlikely unless the other players are particularly agressive and/or
foolish.  Maybe you can get in a war with Turkey, but it's unlikely they would
allow it to continue too long without a conditional surrender (I would be
suprised if they didn't surrender virtually immediately, actually, and opt
to choose the peace condition that protects them against ceding ... in light of
their lousy chances of actually winning any battles against your 4.5 morale.
Far better to cut your PP losses).

	So, if you are planning to gang up on Britain, carefully consider the
consequences.  Can you thrash France almost immediately after hammering 
Britain?  What will the naval situation look like after the battle?  Will 
France come out even more ahead?  Is it not better to put heavy pressure on
Britain to contribute to the continental war so that they and France will be 
bleeding themselves?  Most of the other European powers like nothing better 
than to see British and French corps beating the hell out of each other on 
really bloody charts.  If one or the other of them are out of it, the balance 
will switch dramatically; however, knocking out Britain influences the balance
more because France is the second strongest naval power (since they start with
only a couple fewer ships than Spain and a MUCH stronger economy and potential 
for growth), whereas Britain's army by itself is not likely to scare anybody 
too much.  Except maybe Turkey and Spain.

	I'm not saying that an invasion of Britain and/or the destruction of 
their fleets can't work; I'm just saying that if you want to cooperate with
France in this regard think *very* closely about what's in it for you.  The
answer may well be loss of subsidies and British and American trade, and 
finding what used to be freedom of the seas is now a blockading French fleet. 
What's good for France is almost always bad for virtually anyone else.

	As an aside, it sounds like you folks may not be bidding enough for
Great Britain.  In the game I'm currently in, my (winning) bid was I believe
46; I was prepared to bid more, up to about 55 or so.  If Britain only has
to exceed her printed requirements, it can be quite easy.  However, Britain
shouldn't really go for less than 35 or so.  You really have to consider these
bids quite carefully.  I may well be screwed since the second highest bid was
for France at 15.  Nobody seemed to really want them!  The French may have a
very easy time of it.  So I guess you really need to consider people's bids 
as well.  If Britain did get off with a very low bid, you may need to take
extrodanary measures.  But I'd drub France first.  Make a conditional surrender
part of the naval obligation or somthing, or a huge payoff before the plan
is enacted.  In short, you probably have to make the cost of co-operation
so high that a reasonably sane France will not accept.

	Ah well.  Enough rambling for one day.

						Chris
-- 


"If every man says all he can, if every man is true
	Do I believe the sky above, is Caribbean blue ..." - Enya
Organization: Doctoral student, Mathematics, Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA