Is this "destroy upon conquest" encoded in the buildings file... and therefore moddable ?
Please say yes... pretty please ?
Well, since you ask so nicely... yes.
Divine Wind - Developer Diary #5
- Thread starter Besuchov
- Start date
-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
Well, since you ask so nicely... yes.
I think he's worried about dropping an army in North America and having his provinces continually conquered because that army is busy chasing a ping-ponging rebel army.
I think even "unfortified" provinces should automatically have some kind of garrison. If a province really has NO soldiers loyal to your government in it, then how are you controlling the province in the first place? Who is going to force the peasants to pay their taxes?
This. To be frank, level 1 fort is pretty much always the first thing you build anyway, and what military would be stupid enough not to prepare for the most basic defenses when they know they'll conquer/colonize those provinces? "No, we only have the resources to work on five cities, like always. Yeah, we knew that we'd be getting seven new ones but didn't prepare at all, because we're capped at five."
One or more of three things have to happen: 1) level 1 fort requires no magistrate 2) level 0 gives some sort of basic protection so a fleeing army can't occupy the province in one day (which is stupid anyway, they're busy running away) 3) raise the magistrate cap.
I'd prefer 2) and/or 3). Make level 1 fort the first "military level" fortification and give provinces some type of time requirement for them to be occupied. On the other hand, I really don't want 1) to happen.
Overall, in my mind it's a good idea that you can't safely expand if you really don't have the magistrates. However, if you lose provinces to fleeing armies because you could only fortify five provinces because of the cap, then that's just stupid.
I 100% support the idea of Vicky's occupation period being ported into EUIII, it would solve the problem of instant control nicely.
But otherwise, please, please let us build a Lvl1 fort at zero magistrate cost.
And some say you get more with a nice word and a gun than with just a nice word ? :wacko:
Thanks, guys, for continuing to justify my love for you
That mean the end of the era of doomstacks!
No way!
And I like 300 years lasting sieges!
Promising! This is the first diary (other than the map one) that I actually am excited about. So, the province decisions are completely gone then, and merged with the buildings?
Too bad about the city view, I rather liked it though it was only a gimmick. I can live with what we get in return though.
You didn't like China and Japan?
Heck, just the peasants should be able to withstand one man that's running away for half an hour. To use the extreme example of a fleeing one man regiment taking control of an entire province before your army arrives on the same day. And all provinces are in theory vulnerable like this - could one man running for his life really take control of, say, Rome in less than a day?
Stationing actual armies in every single province just to keep a fleeing man under control is counterintuitive.
EDIT: Of course, this problem is already there, but if building the most basic form of defense is too restricted, then it could get out of hand.
That's great thank you
so we can add for example new categories easily , how the interface will change , we can add for example scroll bar if we want to have more categories than 7.
For example if I want to add one more category for my medicine technology . how the interface react? , I know probably I will have to change a bit, but it will be possible to look nice ? I hope you will understand what I'm talking about
Now I thinking about a lot more categories , special for overseas provinces etc.
I hope that will be possible
and thank you for reply
This looks cool. Better than the current cities and better than City ViewAnyway you can use those city view buildings on the map, they are very nice and it would be a shame to lose them, especially since the vanilla cities are the most miserable looking things I have nearly ever seen.
At least leave them as files I can use.
I agree, good point.
Do the city walls on the map change when we upgrade wall (like CK) ? It would be great if i can look at the star fort and know that province has fort level 6 instantly.
A fleeing man.
1. Never seen just one man fleein'
2. Never seen Rome without a fortification
3. Troops doesn't mean an army over 10k put one or two regiment to keep control.
4. The problems will be the colonies that where easy to take control over.
If I'm understanding everything correctly than this might really give being defensive (slider) over offensive a slight advantage if you are a colonial power. Getting free (no cash or magistrate cost) forts could be a huge benifit.
1. Seen one man fleeing
2. events can reduce the size of forts, Rome without fort is possible, but rare
3. Why build regiments when you could build garrisons? Garrisons guard the provinces, regiments can be moved more easily, especially for offensive warfare. Garrisons dig in and defend the place.
4. Asia, Africa, pretty much everywhere outside Europe?
This is great news, best announcement so far. I liked city view, I like improved functionality better
It sounds like a fantastic move to make level 1 forts require magistrates. No more walling in the americas with spammed colonies, unless you can defend them with men on the ground. If you've got a colony out in the middle of nowhere, it's not going to be able to look after itself, plenty of examples of that in real life.
That said, I would like to see a minimum level of occupation forces to be able to take an unfortified province. Say, 1000 men and at least 1 point of morale. It shouldn't take 9 months to take an undefended village with 10,000 men, but there should be a reasonable force with some degree of cohesiveness. Also, a magistrate cap more like 10-20 sounds in order.
Edit:
Seriously? If you've left Rome or some other important centre unguarded after an event destroying its walls you've asked for it. Unless the rebellion happens straight after the loss of walls, in which case you've got a great little narrative for an AAR.
Asia, Africa and pretty much anywhere outside of Europe were hard for Europeans to defend. They did it by... stationing troops, and building defences where they had the will to do so.
Though like I said, there should be a minimum requirement for taking a city of any level of fortification.
It sounds like a fantastic move to make level 1 forts require magistrates. No more walling in the americas with spammed colonies, unless you can defend them with men on the ground. If you've got a colony out in the middle of nowhere, it's not going to be able to look after itself, plenty of examples of that in real life.
That said, I would like to see a minimum level of occupation forces to be able to take an unfortified province. Say, 1000 men and at least 1 point of morale. It shouldn't take 9 months to take an undefended village with 10,000 men, but there should be a reasonable force with some degree of cohesiveness. Also, a magistrate cap more like 10-20 sounds in order.
Edit:
Seriously? If you've left Rome or some other important centre unguarded after an event destroying its walls you've asked for it. Unless the rebellion happens straight after the loss of walls, in which case you've got a great little narrative for an AAR.
Asia, Africa and pretty much anywhere outside of Europe were hard for Europeans to defend. They did it by... stationing troops, and building defences where they had the will to do so.
Though like I said, there should be a minimum requirement for taking a city of any level of fortification.
Last edited:
Seems that everyone is missing the "extreme example" part. No-one's claiming that a sane player would leave Rome unfortified, I'm just saying that it makes no sense that one fleeing man can in theory occupy Rome in less than a day. The same applies to any situation where a fleeing army insta-occupies despite an army giving chase - the example was just to highlight how dumb it is.
I wholeheartedly agree with the rest of your post, all of it really, but this part seems to miss the point I was trying to make with the whole Rome example.
Enewald already made a good post to answer to your post (Rome and one man is obviously an extreme example - I even said that - but the point is that it could happen), but I'd like to add that while "troops doesn't mean an army over 10k", army also doesn't mean over 10 k. One or two regiments is what I had in mind, it just doesn't make sense to station them in every unfortified province if the reason is to keep a ridiculously small fleeing stack from taking over the province before your main army arrives on the same day.
Please integrate the Buildings on the map like in Civilization IV, could be cool if you could even see the building getting build like in Civ V. A nice overhaul of the city graphics would be nice aswell, it's difficult too see the difference between a city of 50.000 and one of 500.000, could be cool to see sprawling cities on the map.
This is the best dev diary so far, this feature alone is enough for me to buy the expansion
That's where...
...came in. Put a requirement that you need the equivalent of a full regiment with more than one turn-of-the-month worth of morale, and the problem is solved. If you're chasing ping-pongers, you're fine as long as you don't let them sit around to reorganise. Of course, exact values are debateable - whether it's 1000 men or 500 depends on what effect you want attrition to have on strategy.