What is it about the pike & shot era that scares strategy game devs so much? Literally more strategy games have been set in the Bronze Age than in the pike & shot era.
muttoids can't understand it. muttoids are a large market.
and not just by body mass
>>1733590Fucking rent free. The real answer is that it wasn't super popular 20 years ago and therefore there's nothing to remake or steal from back then.
>>1733590Why is it American dev's responsibility? There are plenty of Euro strategy devs who could do the job.
>>1733581I can only think of cossacks, and honestly, it sucks real hard
>>1733581Little interest in the period and no one can really make a game out of battle dynamics that are sort of contradictory. Pike formations are both good in melee and good in range.>>1733614Cossacks was fun. It was jank, but it was fun and the best attempt at the period.
>>1733606lmao get dabbed on pablo
>>1733581Does Shogun 2 not count?
>>1733622Its was an okay attempt, but honestly is so simple and easier compared to the age series, that it was no wonder it got forgotten pretty easy
>>1733634Technically yes for the greater time period and a lot of the technology used overlaps, but regionally, specific tactics, and politically no.
>>1733581there was that german mod for medieval 2 iirc, and pic related.
>>1733581I really wish there was an English Civil War game. THe pike and shot era was truly kino. Knights with guns but still an era where guns wern't overpowered or widely available
>>1733581Scissors-paper-stone of Pike-Horse-Shot is just too difficult a concept to comprehend for developers.We'll get lootboxes in Creative Assembly games before it.The main reason is probably that you'd have to command formations rather than right click enemy + zoom in to watch the animations.
>>1733632
>>1733581>finally google battle in pic after seeing it used in 6 gorillion pike and shot threads>it was a defeat for the pike and shot dudeswhat givesaren't there any paintings from battles where the pike and shot dudes won to use as thread starters
>>1733581>men on horses shoot blindly into squares>if you break formation and chase the horses then they slaughter yousounds like a shitty meta
>>1733659<P&S CampaignsBasedCan't go back to Total War after playing Slitherine's games. The battles feel way too unrealistic and gookclick-y.
>>1733581Unironically requiers high IQ to appreciate the ear and warfare.
>>1733833*era
>>1733581Formation-intense warfare with a heavy focus on gunpowder, cavalry, and artillery. Mixed formations were common as well. It doesn't sound easy to develop, at least for an RTS.
>>1733609burgers are a large market. you must expect your game to sell in america, otherwise it fails.
The best you'll get is a Total War game and it'll suck cock, just like everything eurodevs make
>>1733823>Slitherine's gamesI like them too, but turn based strategy isn't very realistic as well
>>1733740But the French also used pike and shot tactics back then
>>1733740>>1733950I sort of remember reading about this guy who was like the pike&shot hardcore pro that mastered the way of warfare and beat anyone else at it, until he fought the guy who had devoted his mind to countering the pike&shot. It was pretty sad and hilarious at the same time.
>>1733950ah okay. i was going by this sentence from wikipedia>Rocroi shattered the myth of invincibility of the Spanish Tercios, the terrifying infantry units that had dominated European battlefields for the previous 120 years. The battle is therefore often considered to mark the end of Spanish military greatness and the beginning of French hegemony in Europe during the 17th century.[7][8] After Rocroi, the Spanish progressively transformed the tercio system incorporating more of the line infantry doctrine used by the French over time.thought the tercios were the pike and shot dudes and the french were using line infantry at the battle but i guess that's not what it says
>>1733970Ah yes, I couldn't find much info on the armies' composition, but I'm pretty sure pikes were still a thing in western armies until the late 17th century. But iirc the French would progressively change tactics by focusing on infantry firepower that became the norm in the 18th century.
>>1733686The problem with an English Civil War game is that Cromwell and his New Model Army are genuinely too OP compared to the other factions. More so even than Caesar was with his legions or Napoleon with his Grand Armee. Cromwell built the New Model Army from scratch and proceeded to buckbreak the rest of the British Isles within a few years without losing a single battle or siege. The game would just be a rush for the other factions to crush the Parliamentarians before 1645 when Cromwell's military reforms go into place.
>>1733968That's just military meta evolving in real time for you. Sucks when you get caught at the tail-end of a certain style of warfare you specialize in becoming obsolete. Like the Burgundarians getting destroyed by Swiss pikemen. Or the Swiss pikemen themselves getting destroyed along with French cavalry by early Spanish pike & shot tactics at the Battle of Cerignola.
>>1733581It's a relatively obscure and brief era of history and largely involves minor, regional wars in europe and Spain/Portugal subjugating indigenous populations in one-sided colonial wars. It's not nearly as marketable as the preceding late medieval era or the following 7 Year War era, French Revolution etc.
>>1733946I disagree. Historically speaking an average pitched battle lasted for hours, so a form of abstraction is needed. Four-part turn system represents it much more accurately than one side beating the other because of better micro in a battle lasting 10 minutes.
>>1734015>charging into a gunline behind a ditch with stakeswhat the fuck is with the French and their suicidal cavalry charges?
>>1733581It’s my favorite era and yes I’m American. I read three books on it
>>1733970The line infantry here refers to more linear formations that contrasted with the square formations of the tercios and were a natural progression regardless of nation. In any case, the details of the battle itself wasn't actually a decided by the pike and shot tactics in question, but by French cavalry winning the cavalry battle and proceeding to rout the Spanish mercenaries and flank the Spanish infantry.
>>1734037Sounds more like a matter of taste to me.Btw it would be very cool to have TW-style campaigns for Field of Glory, did Slitherine ever consider this?
>>1734075There's Field of Glory: Empires and the incoming Kingdoms version, but they heavily resemble a tabletop game. Converting saves to the mainline game to fight battles is still a feature, though.
>>1733581It was dominated by the Spaniards and there is no chance the anglos recognize the major power they fucked to hell and back to become the major superpower in the last 250-ish years.
>>1734083>dominatedSource needed.
>>1734052In their defense, this is literally THE battle where arquebuses/muskets become the bread & butter weapon of infantry and not just substitutes for crossbows. The plan wasn't to route the enemy, but just to clear out the arquebusiers in the frontline so that the Swiss pike mercenaries (still considered damn-near invincible in close quarters) could close the distance without being harassed by a barrage of missile fire. The French tactics at Cerignola were actually better than the ones at Crecy and Agincourt. Unfortunately, the Spanish tactics at Cerignola were also better than the English tactics at Crecy and Agincourt.Also, Gonzalo de Cordoba, the principle Spanish commander during the Italian Wars, severely outclassed his rival general at Cerignola. Dude was the Father of the Pike & Shot Era and remained one of the six best practitioners of the art until its obsolescence imo (the other five being the Grand Duke of Alba, Gustavus Adolphus, Oliver Cromwell, Turenne, and Eugene of Savoy).
>>1734095Any book on military history will tell you that>>1734077It would be nice if they added those for future titles. It seems a lot of work thoughever
>>1734109>Any book on military history will tell you that"Golden age" Spain lost nearly every war they've been at.Even the Italian Wars were a failure because they destroyed de jure Habsburg land to deny it France.
>>1734118Lmao absolutely not true. Cope.
>>1734118t. Francis I King of France
>>1733581You say that as if the bronze age isn't an almost perfect strategy game setting and the pike and shot era isn't one of the worst. It is a shitty transitional period between pre-gunpowder warfare and the bayonet, where you get the worst of both worlds as far as gameplay goes, and the European wars of the period have almost zero cultural relevance today.
>>1734083Are these anglos in the room with us?
>>1734121There was no Spanish expansion in Europe. The Spanish dreams of an empire were beaten out of them by everyone around them.Spaniards only inherited lands through succession and even then they couldn't hold them, see the 80 years war.>>1734122>French monarchs plunder the shit out of pro-Habsburg Italy and leave>pro-Habsburg Italian states lose relevancy forever>S-Spain totally won these wars!
>>1734118t. French scum
>>1734102Wouldn't a grande batterie done the job better? Or was that too early. I swear they were using them before Napoleon.
>>1733686Go to Steam and look for "Fire and Fury: English Civil War".As for the time. We have 'The Thirty Years War' and 'Pike and Shot'.Also, the end of Medieval 2 is literally early 1500s warfare, while Empire Total War starts with 17th century pike and shot.
>>1734131I think the French artillery didn't arrive in time to the battle
>>1733740The image only became popular after the artist posted it on wikipedia to promote illustrate the art style
>>1733933you can make some extremely successful games without the mutt market. just look at world of tanks, they've made money hand over fist and the US server has been on life support for a decade now.
>>1734131cannons were siege weapons before people started using those "gonne" things in the battlefield
>>1734131Cannons at the time needed significant emplacement time. They were carried with the baggage train and deployed for static fighting, like sieges, but too slow and cumbersome to employ in battles between maneuvering armies.Cannons that could keep up with the army in battle, as well as the complex gunnery math that actually gave them some degree of accuracy, were a paradigm-shifting breakthrough in warfare.
>>1733740The battle of Rocroi is famous mostly due to the fact that the Spaniards stood against a French artillery bombardment without breaking and routing like the German and Italian contingents allied to them.The French commander bid them to surrender and the Spaniards famously replied "your excellency forgets that he is talking to a Spanish regiment". The French commander allowed them to leave the field with their weapons and standards, which was an honourable defeat.So Rocroi is the end of Spanish military supremacy but it shows that even up to that point Spanish units were renowned for their discipline and fearlessness.>>1733970as this anon said >>1734071 , both Spanish and French were using a mixture of pikes and gunners, but the battle was really decided by French cavalry and artillery.The thing is, there was a smooth transition from the OG Spanish tercios, which were squares of pikes with gunners on the sides to shallow lines of pikes with gunners on the sides. The first to use these lines were the Dutch in their rebellion against Spain.The Swedes took this line model but added depth to it by putting several of these lines together in an arrow formation, which he dubbed "brigades".The Swedes used their army to defeat the Spaniards at the battle of Breitenfeld pretty badly. Afterwards the Spanish adapted to the times and pretty much abandoned the deep squares of the 16th century, instead using formations pretty similar to those of the Swedes. With this the Spanish stalemated the Swedes at Lützen and then absolutely buck broke them at Nördlingen, forcing France to join the 30 years war to prevent the Spanish from dominating central Europe, hence the battle of Rocroi later onThe point being that the tightly packed squares of the original tercios were long obsolete by the 1640s and weren't used at Rocroi. Both sides fought with lines of pikemen and gunnersLines of only gunners with bayonets only became a thing around the very end of the 17th century
>>1733634It does which is why it was so good
Gonzalo Fernández de Córdoba, Maurits van oranje and Gustavus Adolphus are the big three men of the military revolution of the early modern period.
>>1734126>There was no Spanish expansion in Europeseems like after the middle ages, none of the big dick badass military countries like france, spain, sweden, everyone was afraid of really expanded in europe for long. only the clown car countries like the habsburg monarchy and russia stayed huge for centuries
>>1734126>>1734126>There was no Napoleonic expansion in Europe. The French dreams of an empire were beaten out of them by everyone around them.Retard.All the other powers of Europe were scared shitless of Spain, which is why they all banded together against it several times. The main focus of France's military for two centuries was preventing Spain from growing more powerful.Spain was fighting France, the Dutch, the Ottomans, Switzerland, half of Germany, Sweden and England. The fact that Spain managed to keep that for over a century is incredible.The main problems of Spain were that they had a small population (compared to France) and that their need to focus on the Mediterranean to keep the Ottomans at bay prevented them from building up Atlantic naval superiority. Then again, pretty hard to fight off the navies of France, England and the Netherlands all at the same time. This forced Spain to be a land power in Europe.The logistics of the Spanish road were unseen since antiquity. No other power could have held to a detached piece of land surrounded by enemies such as Flanders like Spain did.
>>1734326noted spaniards pappenheim and willenstein, lmao
>>1733581>This thread for the billionth time>Except this is bait this time aroundAs always, zoomers too young to know about Cossacks
>>1733992>Cromwell and his New Model Army are genuinely too OP compared to the other factionsThis can be said about how many armies are represented in strategy games. Don't forget that he started off losing the war before he created the New Model Army. >The game would just be a rush for the other factions to crush the Parliamentarians before 1645 when Cromwell's military reforms go into placeWhy couldn't this work? You could also have the Royalists do their own reforms to hold the Parliamentarians back for long enough to rouse up international support. Get the Catholics on side as they wanted to. There's plenty of opportunity for the Royalists to get the upper hand. Take HOI4 for example. Its possible for Poland to steamroll Germany from 1936-1938, but by 1939 it will likely be a loss. It's also possible for Germany to be worn down by a two or three front war as they were historically. Does this take away from the fact Germany had very good tech and a highly professional army? Not really. Cromwell and his army was only a part of the Parliamentary forces, albeit a very important one. The rest of the parliamentarians were fairly ambivalent toward the idea of a republic. Swaying them could be a mechanic. Outside the realm of strategy it might even be nice to see an assasins creed style game set in the era.
>>1734553The Spanish commanders were busy fighting in Flanders.Most of the elite troops of the Imperial HRE armies were from Spain.Also at Nördlingen the Imperial armies were being led by a Spanish commander, cardinal Fernando.
>>1734536Again with the schizophrenic Spanish solipsism.Spain was a part of a greater empire and even bigger coalition, fighting against other coalitions, who had no problem fighting each other at different times.The only country in Europe that truly fought alone against everyone was the Ottoman Empire, and Spaniards have no right to compare themselves to them, they were in an entirely different league.Spain was a paper tiger propped up by American metals. When Spain was fighting a prolonged, losing war against Dutch merchants, France was funding an immensely successful Swedish intervention and eliminating internal revolts against centralization.The result? The Spain was beaten on a strategic level, while France annihilated the Spanish-supported rebels and created the first modern state.
>>1734601Take the L already kid
>>1734607Ran out of arguments already? I figured.
>>1733581napoleon total war is slow as shit and is not as popular, same as empirecossacks too is very nichethere just isn't a big enough market for it
>>1734601Turkroach detected
>>1733581The era less well known turning it thus into more of a niche market.Doesn't help that it's harder to make a decently working combination of melee and gunpowder combat.
>>1734601>The only country in Europe that truly fought alone against everyone was the Ottoman Empire, and Spaniards have no right to compare themselves to them, they were in an entirely different league.Rangeban roaches
>>1734635No, you got obliterated already, roach
>>1733590Why tf can't they understand it? Their country was born during that era
>>1733581What's there to fucking play? They just stand there and shoot each other.
>>1733590I am an American mutt and I want some good pike and shot games thoMy white friends only care about WW2 or the early middle ages, which are also coolWhat now nigha?
>>1734727But he's right? Also Turkish ISP's have 4chan banned, so there already is a pseudo-rangeban.
>>1734756this is the last period of history when dedicated melee units and cavalry breakthroughs were actually common.
>>1734770He isn't. The Ottomans had mutually beneficial, if not outright friendly relations to some European countries. What allies did Spain have? Austria and some German statelets? In exchange Spain was drawn into fights with fucking Sweden. Check a map. Sweden and Spain should never have had a reason to go to war otherwise.
>>1734984Ottoman "allies">France (except when they weren't, e.g. at Candia)>Romanian principalitiesSpanish allies>Portugal>all of Italy>the Pope himself>Austria, Bohemia, Croatia, and royal Hungary>Catholic majority of the HRE>Flanders>Poland-LithuaniaSpain had lots of allies, full stop. Even at Lepanto the Spaniards formed a minority of the Holy League since they were too weak to match the Ottomans in a proper one-to-one combat. Spain never experienced anything even remotely resembling the Great Turkish War.
>>1733581>>1734083Because it's not a good time for Anglos so the Anglosphere don't buy it>>1734022One good thing about Europa Universalis is making me realize that this era also has super rich history. And it took the Swedes to take up the mantle.
>>1734125Considering this is an anglo website, yes.
>>1735107>>all of Italylol not even close>>Bohemia, Croatia, and royal HungaryNot really allies, more like enemy nations that were conquered.>>FlandersA money sink.>>Poland-Lithuania????Sure they also fought Sweden and the Ottomans but it was due to their own reasons, unrelated to Spain.Also you are ignoring population numbers. Most people don't realize how underpopulated Spain is.In the late 16th and early 17th centuries Spain had about 8 million people. Their Italian territories and allies had about 5 million more. The von Habsburg controlled territories in the HRE had 8 million *after* Bohemia was conquered.On the other hand, the Ottomans alone had 30 million, France 20 million, England 5 million and Sweden and the Netherlands about one and a half million each.Not sure why you seethe at the idea that Spain was the military hegemon of the 16th century in Europe. When Charles V died, he gave Spain to his eldest son and the HRE to his youngest son, that should give you an idea of which realm was valued more.
>>1735150>lol not even closeVenice, Milan, the Papal State, and Naples already amounted to nearly the entirety of Italy and that's before even counting minor Holy League members.>more like enemy nations that were conquered.Bohemians were Habsburg subjects in the past, and the Bohemian revolt completely ended the ambitions of Bohemian Protestants to secede. Wallenstein himself was a Bohemian. Hungary and Croatia were inherited and integrated peacefully>A money sink.And the richest provinces in Europe per capita. France or England claiming the Netherlands would be a disaster for the Catholic cause.>????>Sure they also fought Sweden and the Ottomans but it was due to their own reasons, unrelated to Spain.I've had enough. Nigger, you have no idea what you are talking about.You can only think in nationalistic narratives, but remain completely ignorant of the actual context behind said narratives. In 16th and 17th centuries all of Europe was embroiled in a series of gigantic, interconnected wars, Spain was not fighting alone. Numerous conflicts had a direct impact on Spain's war effort even if they did not involve Spain in any way, and the wars Spain did involve itself in was due to Spain's own interest. Your isolationist fantasies of alternative timeline where Spain is better off without Austria has no basis in reality.>b-but muh populationCan you actually name the problems with Spain having lower population than France and how that impacted their wars? If you think it was a matter of manpower, don't bother, and read on the recruitment in the early modern period worked, how the prolonged war affected it, and how post-Westphalian elites tried to address it in the following decades.
>>1735150>Not sure why you seethe at the idea that Spain was the military hegemon of the 16th century in EuropeYou're making an outlandish claim and then act surprised when you get called out on it. Spain wasn't hegemonic in any way, she was firmly checked by the French and the Dutch, and having a high quality military does not mean much when you can't actually back it up with successes.The Ottomans were considered the hegemonic power in the West and thus were the most politically isolated. What little allies did they have absolutely hated them, did not cooperate, or outright switched sides. By the end of the 17th century even the French, Protestants, and the Orthodox joined the Holy League's effort to take a part of an eschatological final struggle against the "Antichrist". Martin Luther himself wrote about the Turks, and not Spaniards, being God's punishment for christian sins.This is the level of fear and awe the Porte projected, as opposed to Spain, which was merely a regional power.>When Charles V died, he gave Spain to his eldest son and the HRE to his youngest son, that should give you an idea of which realm was valued more.Ferdinand wasn't his youngest son, he was Charles' own brother, and his inheritance wasn't based on prestige but actual political needs of the time. Philip was granted Spain because he was essentially a Spaniard, and numerous lands to the West such as Flanders were given to him because Spain was still in England's good graces at the time and with territories close to Austria he'd be forced cooperate with the Austrian branch due to shared geopolitical threats. Ferdinand on the other hand was firmly an Imperial and was thus more qualified to rule as an emperor. And the Holy Roman Emperor, should I add, was still the most prestigious title in christian Europe.
>>1735256>The Ottomans were considered the hegemonic power in the WestLet's not get delusional here Mehmet.They were the hegemonic power in the Balkans and eastern Med. Most European powers spent far more resources fighting amongst themselves than with the Ottomans, ie your Great Turkish war was an afterthought compared to the war against the French going on at the same time.
>>1735256>>1735107>>1734601evet evet the osmanli empire was very stronk and slaugheted the puny raiya! and also cok enlightened, unlike evil unjust hristiyanlik colonizers :))))btw i am white german man from frankfurt this is simply TRUTH :)))
>>1735371Ah yes fellow yaya. I am Heinz Herman also from Frankfurt eyalat and I am truly demoralized now.We should have accepted ottoman superiority.
>>1734330How the fuck does Swedish system work being so packed without massive amount of friendly fire?
>>1735377It is less packed than the original Spanish tercios but it has more depth than Maurits' lines.Over the late 16th and early 17th there was a shift towards more fire and less melee in Western Europe. Even cavalry mostly stopped charging and instead just discharged their pistols before retreating to reload.But Gustavus Adolphus campaigned in Poland-Lithuania, were he saw firsthand the effectiveness of the Polish hussars, which were still charging. Gustavus realized that musket technology still wasn't at the point where entire battles could be decided by small arm fire and that melee was still relevant. He reintroduced charging cavalry to Western Europe and gave more depth to his formations so that they could resist enemy charges and so that they could advance and fight against the enemy without breaking and getting flanked like the Dutch lines tended to do.Keep in mind Gustavus didn't disregard fire. He drilled his musketmen more so than any other army and he created the concept of regimental artillery pieces, giving a small cannon to each unit.>friendly fireummm anon, people don't fire if they got their allies in front of them. The entire unit doesn't have to fire all at one.The frontage of the unit (how wide it was) was a huge issue at the time for military theorists. Basically the idea was that wider units could have more musketmen firing simultaneously BUT were more susceptible to charges than deeper units.The Swedish brigade was a good compromise that was both efficient and stable.
>>1735407>Basically the idea was that wider units could have more musketmen firing simultaneously BUT were more susceptible to charges than deeper units.lol just research kneel fire, these oldies were dumb AF
>>1735254>Your isolationist fantasies of alternative timeline where Spain is better off without Austria has no basis in reality.????????????????????????????meds>>1735256>The Ottomans were considered the hegemonic power in the WestOH NO NO NO NO
>muh ottoman strong>gets btfo in the Mediterranean by Spain>gets btfo in the Indian Ocean by Portugal>gets btfo in Hungary by Austria
>>1735416Why don't you try to speak like a human being, instead of chimping out when people disagree?
>>1733581They don't know how to model pike blocks. They've literally never succeeded at realistically portraying a pike formation in combat in real time.
>>1735256>The Ottomans were considered the hegemonic power in the WestMaybe by the countries east of them, but Europeans and North Africans not ruled by Turks certainly didn't believe that.>and thus were the most politically isolatedLmao. Turks made friends with other Yuros all the time. The Swedes, English, and Dutch especially had good relations with the Ottoman Empire because their respective countries were separated by other nations they were all constantly fighting with. It was the eastern, central, amd Mediterranean Europeans who had all had constant beef with the Turks.
>>1733581Play M&B WFASplay GSG's COSSACKS
>>1735256>The Ottomans were considered the hegemonic power in the WestWe did not care>But LepantoYes, that is it.
Right now WW1 and Medieval era seems to be the "thing" in the more normie GSG sphere. You've had a lot of WW1 hit or miss (mostly miss) games being released over the past 10 years spearheaded by Battlefield 1 (FPS, I know but still it had an influence). Medieval period has been gaining popularity again in the past few years but it looks like CA won't be able to deliver due to all of their failures beating them down until they've nearly collapsed, so there's nothing on the horizon there. There's some M2TW modder that's trying to make his own M3-like game, and a bunch of colony sims there instead.
I've only played the free siege of vienna one, but wargame design studio pike and shot stuff is fun.
>>1735315>>1735371>>1735414>>1735565>>1735585>all this historically illiterate cope and seethe by 3rd estate subhumans (not actual Spaniards)Another W for me.
>>1735775Behold the seething turkroach!t. Spaniard
>>1735507Does ANYONE know how to model pike blocks??
I blame the american education system. as far as most people are concerned history skipped from medieval times, which they imagine as the lord of the rings and skyrim, right to abe lincoln freeing the slaves in the civil war.even this brainlet>>1734124is saying the period wasn't culturally relevant even though the 30 years war was basically world war 0.5.
>>1735814why do americans have to make all your video games?
>>1735775thisispanyastan tercio would LOSE to elite turkish YENICERI
I don't get what's going on in this thread. Clearly both the Spaniards and the Ottomans were a big deal in the 16th-18th centuries. Yeah if you were France you probably spent more time worrying about Spain than the Ottoman Empire and if you were Poland-Lithuania you spent more time worrying about the Ottomans but that's to be expected and doesn't detract from either of them
>>1734022>Brief era>Lasts 200 years>Minor, regional wars>30 years war, minorThe problem is public education not just mutts but europoor as well. You spend weeks on WW2 but like a day on the 16th and 17th century.
>>1734126>There was no Spanish expansion in Europe.Why would they need to conquer the continent they rightfully inherited?
>>1735143>Because it's not a good time for Anglos so the Anglosphere don't buy itIt's not a good time for anyone, even the people who were on top. It was an incredibly interesting and based time though.
>>1736073Except the roaches, and only them. Maybe they should be the one who make the games
>>1733590chinks can't understand it eitherit's exclusively a theme for european chuds
>>1735254>Can you actually name the problems with Spain having lower population than France and how that impacted their wars?The larger a population is the larger the military it can field and supply. A lot of people produce a lot of stuff. Simply by virtue of being a huge market international trade will be routed to population dense areas. That has obvious effects on the money the monarch can take out of the economy to finance his projects. Be those wars, prestige buildings or modernizations of the state organs.There is a reason Elisabeth crapped her pants when the Spanish Armada was sent against England.
>>1735256>Martin Luther himself wrote about the Turks, and not Spaniards, being God's punishment for christian sins.Because the Spanish were christian.>Spain, which was merely a regional power.Spain was the first empire where the sun never set. Stop being such a turk roach, greek rape baby.
>>1735256England, the Netherlands and France helped the Ottomans in every way they could
>>1736016They couldn't even hold what they owned. Beggars can't be choosers.>>1736130Neither Spain nor France had mass conscription. There was no way for these millions to actually compete in any way.Spain was richer than France thanks to colonialism.>>1736134>Because the Spanish were christianAnd they were papists. Being a Christian of different denomination was already almost as bad as being a Muslim.>Spain was the first empire where the sun never setA meaningless statement. Spain owning trade outposts all over the world doesn't equate to actual power projection, which is why Spaniards got assfucked by everyone in Asia.>greek rape babyGreeks are even more mixed than Turks are.>>1736254English and Dutch assistance amounted to sending their prayers. Only France directly cooperated with the Porte, and only sometimes, in a very limited scope. Otherwise they were akin to the Safavids, meaning a secondary front while the real action was happening where the Ottoman invasion was commencing.
>>1736343>mass concscriptionA large population is good for far more than manpower. The more people a state has the larger the economy is. It's clear that you just don't want to admit that you are wrong.
>>1736351>A large population is good for far more than manpower.Economy was not the reason for Spain's failures. Spain had no power to tackle on France and was defeated on a strategic level in the Netherlands.Spain simply wasn't strong enough to compete with France or the Ottomans, and I'm sorry that it hurts your nationalist feelings.>It's clear that you just don't want to admit that you are wrong.That's rich coming from someone who thought Ferdinand I was Charles' youngest son, doesn't know the sheer extent of Spain's possessions in Italy or the usual members of the Holy League, and what impact the Ottomans had on the European psyche.
>>1736360I was answering your inane claim that population numbers don't mean anything in war without mass conscription.And, midwit, you're talking to several different people. You're the only one here who thinks you are smart.
Wow, a pike-and-shot thread topic with over 100 posts? Neat! I--Oh.
>>1736716Unavoidable.
>>1736700Armies of the TYW increased over time despite the economic and demographic devastation.Unless war manages to impact the demographics of the military class in any major way, population doesn't matter.Spain lost militarily, not demographically. Having five more people in your shithole village did not impact the greater strategy of the war, brainlet.
>>1736716You knew it. I knew it. Everyone knew it.That's why this board is shit.
>>1736730Spain lost because of economic and organisational factors, not military defeat. The expense of nearly a century of continuous warfare - which fell mostly on an increasingly impoverished and depopulated Castile - in combination with the inability of the later Habsburg monarchs to reform the state and organise revenues in the manner that the Protestant powers had managed and the creeping economic crisis caused by poor management of New World trade and silver led to the Spanish Empire simply burning out. It wasn't until after the Bourbon absolutists began their reforms that Spain had the resources to play the role of a great power, and by then England and especially France had surpassed her
>>1736101there is no chinese videogame market (there is a huge chinese GAMBLING market)
>>1735799I do.
>>1736796you couldn't model a spherical cow faggot
>>1736771So you're saying that Spanish failures caused the wars to last decades, and the decades of war caused an internal crisis they could not recover from?I'm glad you're agreeing with me. No idea why you're so obsessed with putting the cart before the horse, though.
>>1736794Every RTS/RTT developer is stuck in chink pandering mode, whether it’s pointless or not
>>1736730>Armies of the TYW increased over time despite the economic and demographic devastation.Yeah, well nearly all other expenses were cut in exchange. It's not that a desperate state can't field a large army for a time. It's that a bigger population base allows one to afford a larger army.>Unless war manages to impact the demographics of the military class in any major way, population doesn't matter.That's absolutely stupid. I won't repeat myself. Just make fun of you. You really are pathetic. Just admit that you were wrong.
>>1736343>English and Dutch assistance amounted to sending their prayersAbsolutely delusional
>>1736900>Yeah, well nearly all other expenses were cut in exchange. It's not that a desperate state can't field a large army for a time. It's that a bigger population base allows one to afford a larger army.The armies didn't increase for a time, they increased for years, decades, beyond all sustainable levels. European states simply couldn't field 100-200k armies for longer than one or two campaigns without harming their economy. The armies increased as a part of the arms race between the Catholics and Protestants and it wasn't a result of some magical population growth, the peasants that had their villages burnt and family killed had no perspectives beyond joining the army themselves. The population shrank, the army grew.>It's that a bigger population base allows one to afford a larger army.Again, Spain was the only Christian state that could afford such an army. And for decades. With no effect.They failed to achieve their military goals, which means they failed, which means they were defeated. So much for their military hegemony.If you can't understand that fact, you're simply retarded.>That's absolutely stupid. I won't repeat myself. Just make fun of you. You really are pathetic. Just admit that you were wrong.You're not making fun of me, you're just making a fool out of yourself. You're a historically illiterate contrarian that lives in the present and has no knowledge about the contemporary circumstances you're discussing.>>1736903Tell me about that time when a Dutch-English-Ottoman coalition formed a fleet to defeat the mighty Spanish Armada.
>>1733590fpbpmongrel men in shambles
>>173393370% of Europe is brown Muslims and the other 30% are antifa sissies 4 bbc who think history games are for fascists. white amerigods are the only humans who’d buy and appreciate pike and shot game
>>1736343turk copethe ottomans were always the secondary theatre compared to france
>>1737366You still don't get it. The armies in the 30 years war took their supplies from the populace of the occupied territories. More people = more soldiers that can be supplied. Mr. Dunning-Kruger, you are defending the indefensible.>Spain eventually ran out of steam therefore they never domunated European battlefieldsNapoleon eventually lost and therefore was never dominating continental Europe.
>>1734022>It's a relatively obscure and brief era of history and largely involves minor, regional wars in europe and Spain/Portugal subjugating indigenous populations in one-sided colonial wars.>30 Years War>The real World War I>Wiped out 1/3 of the population of Europe>Minor
>>1733581Imagine someone playing a Total War game in that era who has no idea about history.>Where the fuck is Germany?>Why is there an empire named after pillows and carpets?>Why the hell is playing Poland "Very Easy?"
>if you don't conquer the entire European continent then you failed and were never really powerful to begin withWell I guess then Great Britain, France, Germany, Russia, the Ottomans and everybody else failed, according to the turk itt.The France of Louis XIV and of Napoleon were checked in place by coalitions. Great Britain could never own large tracts of territory on the continent. Germany was btfo in both world wars. The Ottomans were checked by the Holy League.It is a constant of European history from the early modern period onwards that whenever someone gets too powerful other actors band together to keep them in place. In the 16th century that someone was Spain and thus a coalition against them was gradually formed, spearheaded by France.
>>1737967And Napoleon lost in a decade while Spanish military supremacy lasted a century.
>>1738231>an empire named after pillows and carpetsAlright I'm blanking on that one, which do you mean with that?
>>1738229no murica no interest.europe is no longer the heart of the civilized world. perhaps there is no civilized world anymore.
>>1738467Ottoman Empire
>>1738480Fuckin hell, I might be retarded
Anyone play this? The time period interests me and the system is fine, but are the battles themselves fun?
>>1738480i thought persia because persian carpets
>>1733590>>1733933>>1735814Why do Americans gush so hard for ancient Rome, Medieval knights and Vikings, or samurai then? They aren't from any of those cultures either.
>>1742682Hollywood.
melee will always be cooler than guns
>>1733992The New Model Army was revolutionary because of its recruitment/regimental system rather than battlefield tactics. IIRC it was one of the first modern military forces where troops were mixed with men from other regions/cities under a professional officer corps rather than being regional levies serving all together under the command of their local lord. It was consequently able to refresh units immediately after a battle. I think their actual tactics differed little from other factions but the troops were diehard ideologically driven puritans/republicans/proto-socialists while their enemies were fighting for some noble or the Catholic church.
>>1738537>JTSthe big downside is all his games are built around multiplayer. AI is nonexistent in a lot of scenariosthe company that took over JTS, Wargame Design released some more pike and shot games
