Molotov

Have all your merry discussions, ask your questions and debate other aspects of the game in this very area.

As there isn't really a signup thread, I'm uh, reiterating my switch to Siam.

Gesar wrote:As there isn't really a signup thread, I'm uh, reiterating my switch to Siam.

Sure thing, and by total coincidence, a sing up thread is now open.

How exactly are you scaling units? Are they whole armies? Divisions? Regiments?

A unit is ?

And ships. Are they individual ships of actual fleets?

Is it just me or does none of the income maths seem to make sense?

The Brits have way too many land units imo. They should have the smallest army of all the European GPs.

Also I think you have France's economy as way too low. France most certainly has a bigger economy than Austria and Russia at the time and it probably is still bigger than Prussia in 1830. Britain should be in its own economic tier, and then US, France, and Prussia should be roughly similar in the second tier, and then everyone else significantly below them.

Cephal wrote:How exactly are you scaling units? Are they whole armies? Divisions? Regiments?

A unit is ?

And ships. Are they individual ships of actual fleets?

A unit equals 1000 men, a ship is a ship.

Huojin wrote:Is it just me or does none of the income maths seem to make sense?

In what way?

Andre Massena wrote:The Brits have way too many land units imo. They should have the smallest army of all the European GPs.

Also I think you have France's economy as way too low. France most certainly has a bigger economy than Austria and Russia at the time and it probably is still bigger than Prussia in 1830. Britain should be in its own economic tier, and then US, France, and Prussia should be roughly similar in the second tier, and then everyone else significantly below them.

You think 3000 Income is more appropriate? Or is too much/too little?

In terms of incomes, I'd be tempted to move the decimal place one position to make for smaller numbers, but that's just me.

In terms of military stats, the British ought to have an absurdly tiny army themselves, though the East India Company's armies in India are -massive- (of course the loyalty of these armies to the Company is questionable to say the least!). The Royal Navy is, however, at this time of Pax Britannica post-Trafalgar, pretty much big enough to take on the next three navies and win through numerical superiority, even if quality was not a factor.

Serenissima wrote:In terms of incomes, I'd be tempted to move the decimal place one position to make for smaller numbers, but that's just me.

In terms of military stats, the British ought to have an absurdly tiny army themselves, though the East India Company's armies in India are -massive- (of course the loyalty of these armies to the Company is questionable to say the least!). The Royal Navy is, however, at this time of Pax Britannica post-Trafalgar, pretty much big enough to take on the next three navies and win through numerical superiority, even if quality was not a factor.

Maybe i could have the east india company as a separate entity in game? (Subject to Britain of Course)

Since some have brought up the british army size, how much do you all think it should have? 100 Units? 150 Units? Less? What do you all say?

Having looked it up: the British Army's establishment numbered about 92,000 after the post-Napoleonic Wars military spending cuts, down from 250,000 at its peak in 1813 during the Peninsular War. The East India Company's combined armies numbered approximately 200,000 in 1824, of which ~16,000 were Europeans.

Serenissima wrote:Having looked it up: the British Army's establishment numbered about 92,000 after the post-Napoleonic Wars military spending cuts, down from 250,000 at its peak in 1813 during the Peninsular War. The East India Company's combined armies numbered approximately 200,000 in 1824, of which ~16,000 were Europeans.

So maybe 100 Units would be more appropriate for the brits? Plus 200 from the EIC.

Luc wrote:

Andre Massena wrote:The Brits have way too many land units imo. They should have the smallest army of all the European GPs.

Also I think you have France's economy as way too low. France most certainly has a bigger economy than Austria and Russia at the time and it probably is still bigger than Prussia in 1830. Britain should be in its own economic tier, and then US, France, and Prussia should be roughly similar in the second tier, and then everyone else significantly below them.

You think 3000 Income is more appropriate? Or is too much/too little?

Dunno what the exact number should be tbh. This is a decent guide for historical GPDs, but it doesn't take industrialization into account:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angus_Mad ... _GDP_(PPP)