Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
Even without that, England is in a way better starting position with richer lands and more of everything.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QNVEYO4BNKQ
Plus their first king is 0/0/0 so after he dies they are of course going to be way stronger.
Even if you drain out all their manpower they will start churning out mercs instead, they cost money and will leave England indebted however Scotland still cannot hope to match England 1v1.
For Scotland to really beat England YOU as France will have to attack them together with Scotland and force them to hand over Northumbria to the Highlanders while securing your own footing on the continent as well. After that Scotland will be in a much improved position for the 2nd war on England.
Sure but I just love the scene where Longshanks orders his archers to fire into the melee (despite being notified that they will hit his own men too) because "we got reserves". And while Scotland occasionally won some battles (e.g. by using Schiltrons against the normally overwhelming english cavalry) in general they always were short on manpower, resources and everything compared in a 1:1 of England vs. Scotland. Only with the Auld Alliance with France could Scotland defend it’s independance for so long.
It was a glorious day!