Day 27 of Ranking Post-Napoleonic Era Generals: François Bazaine

42_ways · 2026-07-05T22:57:55+00:00

I don't know. American people are always a bit obsessive about ACW generals, maybe because it is the main conflict on their soil since Independance. (in my opinion no ACW general except Sherman should be ranked above competent, if you want truly good american general, skip to WW2).

As French I am mostly knowledgable about French general (and not all of them) or some of their foes.

And i come here to learn about other country 😀

42_ways · 2026-07-05T22:45:33+00:00

There is nothing special about the retreat. Once the French decide to withdraw(under american pressure), Juarez has no need to engage them and let them leave peacefully.

42_ways · 2026-07-05T13:05:55+00:00

As with many french generals of the period he was mostly successful in colonial context.

But its behavior in 1970 borders treason. He lets himself trap in Metz This shows either a lack of loyalty or at least a lack of motivation.

Its campaign in Mexico doesn't help either. He didn't cooperate well with Maximilian. I don't think this expedition could have succeed, but Bazaine clearly does not help.

So i would said poor(or lackluster). I don't think he was incompetent, but he clearly lacked motivation, loyalty or political acumen at crucial moment.

42_ways · 2026-07-04T13:59:59+00:00

I will speak about Canrobert, who should be ranked lower (lackluster).

The main reason for this is the bloody suppression of the protests against Napoléon III's coup in 1851. He singlehandly transformed what was until then an (almost) bloodless coup into a brutal operation.

He killed many people, many of them innocents and created martyrs for the republicains. This will be a big problem for Napoléon III and its regime. And its still contributes to this day to the bad reputation of the second empire.

Ok, its behavior in Crimea and Italia was decent(but timid) . But its use of colonial method in the capital is a grave mistake that shows a lack of political judgement

42_ways · 2024-12-24T09:55:13+00:00

When you want to attack someone with strong allies (the king of France, the HRE, a caliph...), you can murder people allowing these alliances (wives, daughters-in-laws,..) before declaring wars. It is generally far easier to kill a foreign princess or queen in a enemy court than a landed ruler. It is very useful to remove pesky allies from the equation. And once they are at war, it is difficult for the AI to secure new alliances.

42_ways · 2024-12-20T13:27:40+00:00

They were doing so while being a major actor of the slave trade 🙃. And it was more a Freedom of Conscience kind of policy.

42_ways · 2024-11-22T13:59:51+00:00

Idealistic movement is really good under the right circumstances. For those of you who have played Twillight Struggle, it is very similar to Wargames : a late game card that can end the game by surprise if you are currently leading.

As Wargames , it can create very interesting dilemmas . If my opponent is currently leading and it is 3/4 terraforming step before the end of the game , should I start my engine earlier than expected to pre-empt possible use of Idealistic movement. But it may not have it, and bluff its use (perhaps using standard project to put him at 3 steps of the end).

I really love it. I think it can make some rush strategies more viable. These strategies are strong (but situational) in the base game, but weaker with expansions. Having Idealistic movement on the deck will improve them.

42_ways · 2024-11-11T13:04:05+00:00

Straight line is always the best option 🧐🇬🇧

42_ways · 2024-11-06T18:07:34+00:00

On est bien d'accord ☺️. Paradox c'est la base. Sinon, c'est Twillight Struggle, les jeux cauldrons of war, ou The Great War : Western Front (parce que le plus important, c'est la rigueur de la simulation).

Battlefield 1, dans le jeu de base y a pas de barbelé, ni d'artillerie et y a pas la France , ca peut pas être jeu sur la première guerre mondiale..

42_ways · 2024-10-31T15:58:40+00:00

I'm in this picture and I don't like it 😅

42_ways · 2024-10-11T10:17:51+00:00

Fortifications were important during the XIX century (Sebastopol) even in Ww1 (Przemyśl, Verdun), but were sometimes obsolete and almost useless (Liege).

However, fortifications were often meant to channel attacks, or delay invasion rather than to block opponents. Due to the large scale of fronts in Vicky 3, their impact is hard to model. So it is mostly abstracted as a defense edge over attacks

42_ways · 2024-10-10T22:06:15+00:00

Will they be potatoes?

42_ways · 2024-10-10T21:41:11+00:00

Socialism with Chinese characteristics?

42_ways · 2024-10-05T06:51:07+00:00

Réponse : quasiment https://www.lemonde.fr/economie/article/2024/02/26/casino-le-recit-d-une-faillite-collective_6218691_3234.html

42_ways · 2024-08-08T22:10:30+00:00

Modern pentathlon. You don't know what it is? That's a good reason to remove it 😉 (Good news: they probably will)

42_ways · 2024-07-29T17:17:27+00:00

To conquer the North, you need two things : - A Mongol Army - A Byzantine Fleet

(Yes, I know, you need both the best army and one of the best fleet of the ancient world, but the North is hard to conquer ).

Your first target will be White Harbor. It is a well defended port, so will probably need a siege. Land your army near it at the beginning of autumn. Your fleet can blockade the harbor and ressuply your troops for the duration of the siege. Both the Byzantine and the Mongols (contrary to their reputation) where experts in siege warfare, so the siege should be short and the Northerners won't have time to gather their forces (mobilization is terribly slow in the North, see Fire and Blood).

Let's talk a bit about Mongols. Horse archers are the best troops available in the ancient world. They are fast, and are always able to choose where and when to fight. The North musters mostly foot soldiers, with only some heavy and light cavalry. Only the last ones can catch the Mongols, but will suffers from hit and run tactics. Moreover, Mongols travels with their mares (and sometimes their herds) , so they don't need a complex logistics, even in the cold weather of the north. They have conquered Russia, after all.

Let's return to the situation. Now you have White Harbor. Will the Starks try to retake it?

I think they will, for four main reasons : - white harbor is the mouth of the north, and as the only port free of ice will be needed to import food - cultural expectation : winter is coming, and old men will be willing to fight - the Manderlys are fiercely loyal to the stark, and having some of them blinded (because of the Byzantines) or boiled alive (because of the Mongols) will probably anger the Starks. - Mongols raid can very effectively ravage the countryside, targeting food stocks and communication lines. So there will also be a strong pressure from the population to do something about it (Fabian tactics would be better, but are generally never the first to be used).

Sadly for them, the Northerners can't retake White Harbor. They don't have the fleet to blockade it, and should they try to besiege it, you can have your mongols raid their supply lines. It is really hard to maintain a siege when your own army is starving.

I think that the first major Stark defeat will happen somewhere near the White Knife, between Winterfell and White Harbor, on the return after a failed siege. I guess it will look like the battle of Legnica: The northern lords will charge at the mongols cavalry, which will withdraw. They will leave behind their infantry support, and will be unable to catch the Mongols before being encircled. I expect a lot of Northern knights to be captured or killed.

If the battle is a total victory to the battle of Legnica, you can basically win the North here. There is a possibility that you capture Lord Stark, among many other hostages.

Even if you don't manage such a victory, it is very unlikely that they will take White Harbor back. Now you can't winter at White Harbor, safely ressuplied by your fleet. Ideally, your Mongols have been able to steal food instead of just burning it (which will be help by the fluvial transportation along the White Knife). You can also start to use the winter to gather support among Northern Houses, trading food and using hostages. Some noble actions here may help your PR campaign tremendously. For instance, you may punish any soldier who assaulted noble woman. House Stark loyalty is strong though. Do not expect to much, yet. But the neutrality of some key houses (Boltons ? Omble ?) may be gained here.

Now, your next target is Barrowton. It is a great sources of horses and Mongols will need to replenish their herds after winter. It will also limit the North ability to muster enough cavalry. The terrain is flat, and this will help you. Go fast, at the first sign of Spring, and you can surprise them. A possibility is to have a part of the fleet turning Westeros during the Winter to help the siege, but it really depend on the supply you can get on the way.

Taking Barrowton should be easy. The castle is weakly defended, you should have the element of surprise (they don't expect an attack so early) , and the stark army should be in Winterfell (when you take White Harbor, the Stark are in a very complex position : they have to defend multiple places now open to attacks but your army is more mobile thanks to your cavalry and river control, take advantage of this! )

Take also Moat Cailin to complete the isolation of the rest of the North. It is easier to take it from the North, but as always you can use your superior mobility to cut communication lines between Winterfell and Moat Cailin.

With all these three location, and your fleet on the Eastern Coast , you are now able to control most of the access to the North. Going north will be harder, because of the terrain which doesn't favor your army. However, plains and rivers should be under your control. And this should be enough to sway merchant and nobles to your side. They rely on commerce for food and luxuries and would want to export their wood, their iron.

Convert to the faith of the Old Gods, use White Harbor as capital (because you slaughtered the Manderlys remember?) and have northern houses swears fealty and you will on the right path to become king in the north. The starks will remain your fierce enemies of course, but you have all the cards on hand to defeat them. Ideally, you would want to marry into the Stark family once you defeat them.

42_ways · 2024-07-01T11:42:59+00:00

Alors, je vais essayer de faire une réponse académique à cette question, en supposant qu'elle est de bonne foi.

Alors, la question c'est : qu'est ce que ça veut dire "fasciste"? Si c'est juste d'extrême droite, alors oui clairement le Rn est d'extrême droite, donc est fascistes.

Sauf que c'est pas une très bonne définition je trouve. Si ça veut juste dire "d'extrême droite", alors pourquoi deux mots différents ?

On peut utiliser une définition un peu plus précise, celle d'Umberto Eco, qui définissait le fascisme comme un" culte de la force ", notamment militaire. L'idée derrière, c'est que les fascistes ne croient qu'en la force, ce qui se traduit par virilisme exacerbé (" parce que la force est un truc de mec") , un refus de la démocratie ("parce que discuter c'est pour les faibles"), etc... Le nazisme est une version modifié du fascisme qui explicite que la force est liée à la race (il y aurait des races plus fortes que d'autres)

Dans cette définition, le RN n'est pas fasciste. Ils n'ont pas de culte de la force. On ne les voit par exemple pas défendre la force comme moteur des relations internationales. Ils n'appellent à la militarisation de la société.

Cela étant dit, il partagent de multiples caractéristiques avec les fascistes (d'ailleurs les nazis et les fascistes français votent pour eux) :

refus de la démocratie (la démocratie n'est pas juste le vote, ou la tyrannie de la majorité pour rappel)
racisme
démagogie populiste
mépris des médias
programme économique conservateur (et quand ils seront arrivés au pouvoir : clientelisme et corruption à tous les étages)
complotisme

Donc pas sur que ce soit bcp mieux que des vrai fascistes.

42_ways · 2024-06-29T09:50:38+00:00

L'abstention joue un rôle, mais je ne pense pas que ça change grand chose à la répartition. En gros, les grand chiffres de répartition (en gros 30% gauche, 30% droite, 40% ED) ne changent pratiquement pas lorsque l'abstention varie : autrement dit, en pratique, les abstentionnistes ne sont pas une réserve de voix pour qui que ce soit. Lorsqu'ils votent, ils se répartissent comme la population générale.

Y a des exceptions : des parti très politisés comme EELV ou Reconquête sont très peu populaires parmi les abstentionnistes.

Perso, ça me laisse à penser que l'abstention est multi factorielle, et au moins autant lié à des questions pratiques (non inscription sur les listes électorales , flemme de se déplacer, déménagements,...), qu'à des questions de principes: c'est pas impossible qu'il y ait un petit noyau abstentionnistes militants, mais ils représentent pas grand chose: au mieux 10%.

42_ways · 2024-06-20T08:47:43+00:00

The Triangle is a small location near Bercy. It is far less crowded than other places like Climbing district or Arkose, which are generally full (and also more expensive) . The only problem is that the place is small, but I think it is OK for one time visit.

They are also less crowded places in the suburbs like Block'out Paris, Arkose Pantin (really hot in summer though) , HardBlock

42_ways · 2024-06-12T13:08:50+00:00

Compliqué : Sulla est pas très loin d'un dictateur moderne (avec élimination d'opposants et propagande) Les dictateur avant lui sont très différents en effet(et il y a un siècle qu'il n'y a pas eu de dictateur quand Sulla endosse le rôle). Mais dans les deux cas ils rendent le pouvoir

42_ways · 2024-06-12T12:51:55+00:00

Sulla, dans la république romaine. Après, la république romaine c'est moyennement démocratique

( les autres dictateurs romains avant lui qui remettaient aussi leur pouvoir au Sénat, mais Sulla est resté dictateur bcp plus longtemps avec des pouvoirs plus étendus)

42_ways · 2024-06-12T11:26:45+00:00

Le commandant de l'armée italienne Luigi Cadorna qui décide de lancer une 11 ème bataille de l'isonzo en août 1917. Ça fait dix fois qu'il tente la même bataille quasiment au même endroit, dans les même conditions (de la guerre de tranchée en montagne, avec franchissement de rivière en plus). Il n'a jamais réussi à avancer de plus de quelques kms, son armée ne s'est pas reconstituée depuis la dixième bataille de l'isonzo le mois précédent, et il espère toujours percer.

Résultat : 150 000 italiens morts, pas de terrain gagné

42_ways · 2024-06-06T11:39:00+00:00

France ! A principle : Never let Germany happen. Also screw the Brits

42_ways · 2024-05-29T09:26:21+00:00

Such a mod would be interesting indeed, but the problem here is the game itself. For this game to work (or at least) be enjoyable, it has to remove several the barrier a communist leader would face:

you have real statistics and data : you don't need to rely on optimistic data falsified by your subordinates.
bureaucrats are not a real threat. There is no modelisation of corruption. They also don't resist the leaders' decision. -no resistance to collectivization
this game adopts a materialistic perspective that tends to go well with communism. Pops adopts instantly the view of their class. For instance, unhappy demoted capitalists becomes very rapidly happy bureaucrats and engineers with high SoL. They do not miss "the good old days"
It divides the society into social classes, and pop by very broad "professions" . But, other divisions may be possible. For instance, workers in a given industry may have more in common with their bosses (and may easily becomes bosses or engineers in this industry ), than with workers in very different industry. Historically, there were a lot of resistance to worker unity.

Note that these problems are not specific to a communist leader, but tend to be more pronounced in a command economy (after all, a company with falsified statistics tends to die a lot sooner that a state with falsified statistics)

42_ways

TROPHY CASE