Worst countries

Road2Victory wrote:

Worst country for me is Turkey and potentially Communist Russia.

I think he's saying in the 100p, where Communist Russia is surrounded by players and Turkey has two fronts, one in the east and one in the west.

try belgian congo its a nightmare watching 5 nations rushing for u aqnd angola and gabon racing for ur capital and banana

I have won games as Illinois & Mississippi in the USA, currently winning a global 1939 game as Argentina where I started with 6 units, and just wiped out Japan that started with a huge territory and navy advantage.

I have won with Finland and Russia.

France I got invaded by UK, Spain and Italy on the start of the game, so I did a troop evac to Iceland and survived to invade UK as an ally to Russia and other eastern countries. As the west allies (my enemies) moved east to invade my allies, I landed 100% of my units on the north tip of Scotland and rode through each city of UK and then landed in France and took over my homeland again. Did not get 1st, but was part of a winning coalition.

And steel is the key resource at the start of the game, needed to build more factories.

Chimere wrote:

For the 100 player maps, it all depends on what your resources are.

eg Nigeria and South-West Africa have plenty of oil AND that oil is near the sea, so free maintenance port for you. On the other hand, Tibet or Maranhao start with terrible resources (mostly steel). Maranhao is worse than Tibet.

In addition, some countries can really be leveraged better by a good players compared to a mediocre player due to geography. In particular, European countries or South Asian countries are cool from this regards.

Island countries (Australia, S-E Asia) are pretty bad, except maybe Madagascar and UK (need to check the resource start though).

Erichvonmanstein1940 wrote:

Chimere wrote:

For the 100 player maps, it all depends on what your resources are.

eg Nigeria and South-West Africa have plenty of oil AND that oil is near the sea, so free maintenance port for you. On the other hand, Tibet or Maranhao start with terrible resources (mostly steel). Maranhao is worse than Tibet.

In addition, some countries can really be leveraged better by a good players compared to a mediocre player due to geography. In particular, European countries or South Asian countries are cool from this regards.

Island countries (Australia, S-E Asia) are pretty bad, except maybe Madagascar and UK (need to check the resource start though).

Maranhao is actually pretty good. To solve your only problem(oil), contact saudi or one of the middle east countries to trade resources for oil, or simply buy oil from the market. oil at the early stages are $3/units cheap.

In 1.0 I disagree. Not only it has not enough oil (the most important resource late game in 1.0, and even at 3.0/unit you can't stockpile enough for late game consumption - I know this I have the "buying early" strategy as well - but you also have only one rare material NOT in a City, and Rare Materials is critical for industrialization and early/mid game.

Chimere wrote:

Erichvonmanstein1940 wrote:

Chimere wrote:

For the 100 player maps, it all depends on what your resources are.

eg Nigeria and South-West Africa have plenty of oil AND that oil is near the sea, so free maintenance port for you. On the other hand, Tibet or Maranhao start with terrible resources (mostly steel). Maranhao is worse than Tibet.

In addition, some countries can really be leveraged better by a good players compared to a mediocre player due to geography. In particular, European countries or South Asian countries are cool from this regards.

Island countries (Australia, S-E Asia) are pretty bad, except maybe Madagascar and UK (need to check the resource start though).

Maranhao is actually pretty good. To solve your only problem(oil), contact saudi or one of the middle east countries to trade resources for oil, or simply buy oil from the market. oil at the early stages are $3/units cheap.

1 or 1.5 ?

To be honest, I don't think any country is better than another (historical map excluded). If there IS a difference, it is about location (island countries will have their core exposed the whole game, for example; New Zealand has to travel far to get anywhere but anyone wanting to attack ALSO has to do that; Siberian provinces are HUGE; Maranhao will always be on the bottleneck between the old and new worlds, and stuff like that). Having said that, I've had many victories on the 100p map and they ranged from West Yakut, S.Sudan, Papua, Caribean, Kentucky, Tibet, France, Yugoslavia, and many more.

In historical there is China, Mongolia, Poland, Child, etc. This needs to be stopped

Comrade genz wrote:

In historical there is China, Mongolia, Poland, Child, etc. This needs to be stopped

Oh, and I've won as Mongolia. And the Mongolian military actually beat back Japan in the Khalkin Gohl (or however you spell it). And Poland has a large military. And Chile is remote. And China is a powerhouse.

You're lucky that's it

1. Poland will be smashed by Germany and soviets

JesterTheSheep wrote:

Comrade genz wrote:

In historical there is China, Mongolia, Poland, Child, etc. This needs to be stopped

child?

Oh, and I've won as Mongolia. And the Mongolian military actually beat back Japan in the Khalkin Gohl (or however you spell it). And Poland has a large military. And Chile is remote. And China is a powerhouse.

I've won as poland (and had like 99999999 nukes)

in historical?

if yes then it's luck. That Soviet and German didn't attack you in the same time

Its all luck .

I did manage to conquer both of them but I did it separately.

Northern us is the worst country, in the game im playing rn canada and me are destroying northern US

I have also won as Poland. The key is invading Germany before they can invade you. The player playing Germany chose to invade France first, allowing me to sweep in from the east. I also invaded the Soviet Union, which did in fact attack me first, however, I had built up my troop production and was able to overpower the invasion.

Poland has a terrible geography, but I wouldn't say it's impossible for it to win. Heck, you can win with any country with the correct combination of luck and skill. In the case of Poland, I would advise to ally with a southern country and preferably either west or east, focusing troops on as little fronts as possible. In 22p, I have won a coalition victory using Poland by conquering pretty much all of Northern Europe and Russia.

However, in the case of 25p, massive amounts of luck are needed. Being sandwiched between two superpowers, it would be a miracle (or the leaders of those countries are idiots) for Poland to somehow ally with one of them. Even when you managed to ally with one, the other also has a very powerful military that can easily overpower your own. That isn't to say it's impossible, just that it's exponentially more difficult than playing in 22p or even 100p.

You can win as anything if the circumstances are good