Is Austria really the stronger one?

[Stoertebeker]

In many discussions I hear people saying things like: "Hardest activation rules could balance things for Prussia" and such, giving me the impression that Austria was the clear favorite in any game.

Now I ask myself, if that's true. Reading those two great AAR's by Narwhal and loki in the Paradox Forum and winning one game as Prussia because of AI stupidity might have given me a wrong pricture, though. I have to admit, that in the beginning I also felt that Austria with it's sheer numbers would be the clear favorite, also in an PBEM (I already bet, that baris would win the PBEM against Narwhahl: :bonk . But now I think, the opposite is true:

Prussia not only has the better troops and the much better generals, but it also has the advantage of being able to concentrate its forces while Austrias forces are completely split.
Austria also has to attack. Prussia leads in victory points right from the start. Only taking Königsberg and Wesel will not suffice for Austria. Even less if one considers that prussia will most likely win more battles than Austria thus gaining even more VP's. Last but not least, Prussia gets much more events that raise her national morale. Austria has to struggle to keep the morale just above 90.

That's the reason why I start to think that Prussia is the real favorite, even in an PBEM. What do you think? Am I wrong? What do those people who already played some PBEM's say: Were there more Austrian or more Prussian victories? And what do experienced players say?

[Anazagar]

While much of what you say is true remember one thing - Prussian player can't lose an army. If he does it's game over for him. Austrians OTOH can lose a sizable part of their forces and still be in fighting condition.

Another thing - even though austrian side is divided by 78 it should outnumber the opponent on each front and force Prussians to concentrate their army.

Austrians have cossacks - about 20k of light cav that allows you to cover ground in an extraordinary pace something Prussians can't match. Also you have more cav in general.

As far as worse generals go that problem can be quite quickly dealt with by promoting much better.

[Hohenlohe]

While much of what you say is true remember one thing - Prussian player can't lose an army. If he does it's game over for him. Austrians OTOH can lose a sizable part of their forces and still be in fighting condition.

Another thing - even though austrian side is divided by 78 it should outnumber the opponent on each front and force Prussians to concentrate their army.

Austrians have cossacks - about 20k of light cav that allows you to cover ground in an extraordinary pace something Prussians can't match. Also you have more cav in general.

As far as worse generals go that problem can be quite quickly dealt with by promoting much better.

I think that although Austria could overwhelm Prussia by sheer forces with all their Coalition forces Prussia has definitely the better generals from start and the better infantry by some terms in morale and quality at start. And if a good Prussian player use his forces in the right manner he could eventually outmaneouver the Austrian coalition forces in the first two years by holding the inner line and simply concentrating his main forces decisively against his enemy. If Prussia will be able to win most of his battles it can get more VPs than someone would expect. But it is strongly adviced that the Prussian player plan his movements and future battles more careful.

But as Anagazar told the Austrians have a clear advantage in cavalry, especially light one - the cossacks - so a Prussian player should plan carefully- If he manages to station some "Freikorps" and militia units alongside the Oder he can perhaps prevent that some mobile enemy forces can capture Berlin like it happened historically.

As I have seen sofar in my last campaign the AI tried that special operation more than ever either with Austrian cavalry or with Russian cossacks.

So you should be warned. If you take the time to prepare the Berlin garrison with more garrison and militia units under the command of a decent general and if you put some additional artillery inside you should be able to withstand with your garrison long enough until fresh Prussian line forces can arrive. That is especially important in mid- and late game turns if the AI tries it again to capture Berlin.

But why is Berlin so important for a human Prussian player...Simply spoken, if you loose Berlin in mid- or late game and your Morale is not high enough you could be easily defeated by the Austrians if your human foe will be able to defeat you in some battles in which Frederick or Prince Henry are not present.

And additionally it seems that with every turn Berlin is captured you will loose some Morale.

heartly greetings

Hohenlohe

[Stoertebeker]

While much of what you say is true remember one thing - Prussian player can't lose an army. If he does it's game over for him. Austrians OTOH can lose a sizable part of their forces and still be in fighting condition.

Another thing - even though austrian side is divided by 78 it should outnumber the opponent on each front and force Prussians to concentrate their army.

Austrians have cossacks - about 20k of light cav that allows you to cover ground in an extraordinary pace something Prussians can't match. Also you have more cav in general.

As far as worse generals go that problem can be quite quickly dealt with by promoting much better.

Hm, yes, I think you're right: Prussia has to be careful when and where to engage. But on the other side: It has all the ressources neccessary to do exactly that. Its troops are incredible fast and will need very few rest. One could say that Prussian infantry under Frederick is a large cavalry army: except that it has added firepower. And Prussia doesn't even have to conquer anything, it can easily live without her border-possessions. The nearer the enemies come (without to be able to combine forces, that is), the faster can Frederick knock one after another. He doesn't even has to stop his enemies, he just has to slow them down. He can bumble through till the end, whereas Austria has to conquer lands as much as possible and as fast as possible just not to fall behind in Location-VP's. It will lose some to those highly recommended promotions, some by events, some by having to recover nationale morale and it will fall behind further when Prussia converts its own NM into VP's.
Of course Austria has the much, much stronger armies around. But that's not what the game is about.


But to be true, I'm new to the game, I just want to provoke the veterans to share their experience.

[Bertram]

If Prussia wants to win it will have to engage decisive at the start of the game, when Austria is still mobilizing. That way it might get the Austrian side on a morale disadvantage that it will have trouble to overcome. So Prussia will have to be careful with its armies, as it will get not much new menpower, but it will have to strike hard as well. A pretty difficult balancing act.

If the Austrian player, on the other hand, can prevent serious losses in the first year, it can slowly overwhelm Prussia with its menpower advantage. The Austrian player should avoid loosing Prague, as that would be to costly, but otherwise he should try not to engage, and let winter keep Frederic at bay. After that he should build his armies the next year, advaning very cautiously. The next year he should be in position to constrict the Prussian player a bit more... taking care to keep his advance balanced, so the Prussian player can not afford to strike on eof his armies, for fear of the others advancing.

This is of course strategy by hindsight. In reality the Austrians thought they were stronger then they actually were, and tried to attack Frederic. And later they had more trouble coordinating their armies then the player will have. The AI will make the same kind of mistakes, a human opponent will (generally) not.

So I think the Austrians have the edge. The Prussian side can win, but need a player that is bold at the right moments, and has a bit of luck. The Prussians can't afford things going wrong (sieges that wont work, winter that starts very early, a series of bad die rolls). The Austrians will win if the Prussian player isn't bold enough, or is to bold, or has a bit of bad luck. The Austrian player just has to be patient. He even can afford some bad luck, he has time to let it swing back to him.

If you want a human opponent - I am willing to play Austrian against your Prussians.... I think I am on vesion 1.3 beta7 at the moment.

[Anazagar]

Unfortunately Prussian player can't just defend. He's supposed to be agressive in 56 (prague gambit) and 57 (normal prague attack/knocking out the swedes with hannoverian troops) and try to get the NM advantage because in 58 coalition will come knocking and most probably you will start losing groud (as it's nigh-on-impossible to defend both saxony and siliesia properly at the same time for example).

[Stoertebeker]

If Prussia wants to win it will have to engage decisive at the start of the game, when Austria is still mobilizing. That way it might get the Austrian side on a morale disadvantage that it will have trouble to overcome. So Prussia will have to be careful with its armies, as it will get not much new menpower, but it will have to strike hard as well. A pretty difficult balancing act.

If the Austrian player, on the other hand, can prevent serious losses in the first year, it can slowly overwhelm Prussia with its menpower advantage. The Austrian player should avoid loosing Prague, as that would be to costly, but otherwise he should try not to engage, and let winter keep Frederic at bay. After that he should build his armies the next year, advaning very cautiously. The next year he should be in position to constrict the Prussian player a bit more... taking care to keep his advance balanced, so the Prussian player can not afford to strike on eof his armies, for fear of the others advancing.

This is of course strategy by hindsight. In reality the Austrians thought they were stronger then they actually were, and tried to attack Frederic. And later they had more trouble coordinating their armies then the player will have. The AI will make the same kind of mistakes, a human opponent will (generally) not.

So I think the Austrians have the edge. The Prussian side can win, but need a player that is bold at the right moments, and has a bit of luck. The Prussians can't afford things going wrong (sieges that wont work, winter that starts very early, a series of bad die rolls). The Austrians will win if the Prussian player isn't bold enough, or is to bold, or has a bit of bad luck. The Austrian player just has to be patient. He even can afford some bad luck, he has time to let it swing back to him.

If you want a human opponent - I am willing to play Austrian against your Prussians.... I think I am on vesion 1.3 beta7 at the moment.

Thank you, I've just started a PBEM - as Austria. (Nono, it's not like it seems, I'm not looking for an excuse when I got smashed.) Maybe I come back to your offer when I'm utterly beaten. )

Have you ever finished a Grand Campaign against a human?

Unfortunately Prussian player can't just defend. He's supposed to be agressive in 56 (prague gambit) and 57 (normal prague attack/knocking out the swedes with hannoverian troops) and try to get the NM advantage because in 58 coalition will come knocking and most probably you will start losing groud (as it's nigh-on-impossible to defend both saxony and siliesia properly at the same time for example).

Yes, Prussia will be in tactical offense while in strategical defense. But does Prussia really has to go for Prague? Wouldn't it be enough to sit there, waiting for the Saxons to give up and to prepare to knock out the Imperial Army before it forms, for expample? Why should they take a risk for Prague? Did anyone ever suceed to take it against a fairly experienced Human?

[Bertram]

Knocking out the Imperial army would be enough, but a human Austrain isn't coming to Saxony with that army - he will park it near Prague, and the only way to force him to engage, is to threathen Prague. Which, due to winter approaching, is pretty difficult to do convincingly.

I did two Grand Campaigns against Squarian. We went quite a way and stopped them because of some bugs - the first because the cavalry did a bit to well and the Russians did get no supply, the second because the Russians still did get no supply and because of the depleted elite regiments problem (not so much a bug as a design issue). I was waiting for those to be solved, before I wanted to start a new PBEM, but it has been several months now. I guess VoN is taking all the developers time.

did an AAR here http://www.ageod-forum.com/showthread.php?t=17648

[Anazagar]

Yes, Prussia will be in tactical offense while in strategical defense. But does Prussia really has to go for Prague? Wouldn't it be enough to sit there, waiting for the Saxons to give up and to prepare to knock out the Imperial Army before it forms, for expample? Why should they take a risk for Prague? Did anyone ever suceed to take it against a fairly experienced Human?

Taking prague means coalition can't push into saxony and makes attacking silesia problematic with the austrian armies due to the possibility of being cut-off from supplies and general supply problems (in one pbem game my hre army starved to death in dresden). Also it gives you some EP, resources and a large number of VP

And taking Prague in 57 is not rly that risky if you concentrate all the prussians (in 56 it can be due to unpredictable winter and siege mechanics) .

[Stoertebeker]

did an AAR here http://www.ageod-forum.com/showthread.php?t=17648

Looks as if you were far ahead in victory points, after more than the half of the game, even though your first adventures in Bohemia were not very effective. Do you think that Squarian would have taken all of your land by the time?

Taking prague means coalition can't push into saxony and makes attacking silesia problematic with the austrian armies due to the possibility of being cut-off from supplies and general supply problems (in one pbem game my hre army starved to death in dresden). Also it gives you some EP, resources and a large number of VP

Okay, IF Prague can be taken, the gain is huge, so far I'm convinced.

And taking Prague in 57 is not rly that risky if you concentrate all the prussians (in 56 it can be due to unpredictable winter and siege mechanics) .

Really? But in 1757 Austria has Daun plus two new Columns with a combined strength of 3000 Points: How did your opponent manage to cut through there without excessive losses?

[Anazagar]

Really? But in 1757 Austria has Daun plus two new Columns with a combined strength of 3000 Points: How did your opponent manage to cut through there without excessive losses?

Winter your troops in bohemia (build a depot in lobositz and use bateux to resupply if needed). Then do to your increased mobility you should be able to strike before most of the reinforcements arrive after the winter ends . Also you can try to force the opponent to move forces from prague by capturing other bohemian towns.

[Bertram]

In the game the AAR was based on Squarian could not use the Russians, due to a bug in the depot system. Obviously a large advantage for the Prussian player . An other bug made our cavalry rather heroical, making it possible to use them to wipe out infantry garrissoned depots - which made an Imperial advance into Prussia almost impossible. Combined those two issues helped me a lot - enouigh so that we stopped the game and restarted after a patch.

As to the Prussians wintering in Austria - I would be reluctant to do that against an human opponent, but it is a nice trick if you can manage it... it was certainly not possible in the version of the game we played (due to the same supply bug).


I hope the developers have some time to solve the remaining issues after VoN goes gold - I certainly would like another game after a patch...

[Stoertebeker]

In the game the AAR was based on Squarian could not use the Russians, due to a bug in the depot system. Obviously a large advantage for the Prussian player . An other bug made our cavalry rather heroical, making it possible to use them to wipe out infantry garrissoned depots - which made an Imperial advance into Prussia almost impossible. Combined those two issues helped me a lot - enouigh so that we stopped the game and restarted after a patch.

As to the Prussians wintering in Austria - I would be reluctant to do that against an human opponent, but it is a nice trick if you can manage it... it was certainly not possible in the version of the game we played (due to the same supply bug).


I hope the developers have some time to solve the remaining issues after VoN goes gold - I certainly would like another game after a patch...

That supply-Issue has been solved, as far as I know. There have been a couple of patches since the last summer.

Winter your troops in bohemia (build a depot in lobositz and use bateux to resupply if needed). Then do to your increased mobility you should be able to strike before most of the reinforcements arrive after the winter ends . Also you can try to force the opponent to move forces from prague by capturing other bohemian towns.

Like Betram I consider it a quite risky strategy, but okay. If it functions, it even strengthens my argument, that Prussia is not as disadvantaged as the sheer numbers of troops make us believe.

[Charles]

Yes, Prussia will be in tactical offense while in strategical defense. But does Prussia really has to go for Prague? Wouldn't it be enough to sit there, waiting for the Saxons to give up and to prepare to knock out the Imperial Army before it forms, for expample? Why should they take a risk for Prague? Did anyone ever suceed to take it against a fairly experienced Human?

I took Prague in a PBEM game, but it was in 1.02 where sieges are easier than in 1.03. I captured prague in june 57, wintered my main army there in 57-58, but my opponent massed forces in Bohemia in spring 58 which eventually forced me to fall back to dresden. He recaptured Prague in fall 58 after a long siege.

Capturing Prague can give you a 1-2 year break since it is the key position in Bohemia. Waiting around in Saxony just hands the initiative to the Austrians.

Prussia has the advantage until summer 57 and there is no downside to going after Prague. Frederick, because of his combat bonus, will rarely suffer a crushing defeat at the hands of the Austrians, if you use him wisely. Plus he can move his forces faster than the Austrians so you can usually easily break off contact and scoot back into friendly territory fairly easily if things get too hot.

[Stoertebeker]

I took Prague in a PBEM game, but it was in 1.02 where sieges are easier than in 1.03. I captured prague in june 57, wintered my main army there in 57-58, but my opponent massed forces in Bohemia in spring 58 which eventually forced me to fall back to dresden. He recaptured Prague in fall 58 after a long siege.

Capturing Prague can give you a 1-2 year break since it is the key position in Bohemia. Waiting around in Saxony just hands the initiative to the Austrians.

Prussia has the advantage until summer 57 and there is no downside to going after Prague. Frederick, because of his combat bonus, will rarely suffer a crushing defeat at the hands of the Austrians, if you use him wisely. Plus he can move his forces faster than the Austrians so you can usually easily break off contact and scoot back into friendly territory fairly easily if things get too hot.

Okay, so conquering Prague is a realistic option for the Prussian.

To get back to topic:
How did that game end? Who won (or at least was at the winning side)?

[Charles]

How did that game end? Who won (or at least was at the winning side)?

we stopped in 59 because of various issues. It was more or less a draw at that point.

On the larger issue, I would say the Austrians have a slight advantage overall. They have larger forces and can afford to take losses and even lose battles as long as they bleed the Prussian Army.

An Austrian player that fights an attrition war, coordinates his forces properly and concentrates his forces to besiege key Prussian fortresses can slowly grind down the Prussians. However, the coalition player still has the problem that he has to keep forces all around Prussia and it is still hard to manage the long Russian supply lines.

The Prussians have many advantages: better generals, better troops, faster armies, interior lines. They can concentrate their forces in an area more quickly than their enemy.

On the other hand, the Prussians can't afford to fight too many battles since even victories cost men. Plus with the way the game works, attacking the coalition can be very expensive. Many coalition generals are good on defense and if their armies have built up entrenchments (or a fort) and/or are in good defensive terrain, they can be impossible to beat.

After 59 as Prussians, usually your best strategy is just to stick close to the coalition and hope your opponent makes a mistake.