• 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.
With your slider at nearly fully offensive artillery is basically a waste of time.

PS To beat that Austria hold them up in the mountains (you can do this easily with a 2:1 or even 3:1 disadvantage). Then just use your fleet to blockade their entire country. With the WE, the blockades and the fact that most of their country probably has nationalism they will very quickly start to collapse.
 
It's a bit early for massive artillery in his armies, but what does the offence slider have to do with it?
 
It's a bit early for massive artillery in his armies, but what does the offence slider have to do with it?
It would affect how cost-effective artillery is; full-offensive artillery is 67% more expensive than full-defensive arty.
(Note that artillery is more viable in 5.2 than older versions since it no longer slows the army.)
 
It would affect how cost-effective artillery is; full-offensive artillery is 67% more expensive than full-defensive arty.
(Note that artillery is more viable in 5.2 than older versions since it no longer slows the army.)

Which is a pretty big change. In a lot of my games I only build 8 or so arty regiments for my anti-march stack. Otherwise the drag on speed isn't usually worth the greater effectiveness on the attack. Obviously if I expect to be doing a fair amount of defending (such as my Italy game) that is a different matter. Artillery backed stacks in the Alps are pretty tough to punch through.
 
Well i used 2k cavalry, 4k infantry 4k artilery as france. Sieged down half(second half i did assaulted - but it was IN where assault was easier) of spain very quickly(and used to defend in THEIR mountains XD). And it was at land tech 18 or earlier.

So what i think best way of low cost(manpower wise) war, is to have engineer corps plus max defensive, and make siege stacks plus assign to each a general with good siege(ussualy with engineer corps and max def, you get 2 or 3 siege generals at 0 war tradition).
 
What makes Arty worthless? Is it just the cost and speed? I guess i could use the slots for cavalry, but I thought they helped with sieges. Ive built my armies to be 10 inf 5 cav and 5 art. How should i build my armies then?
 
I use the X infantry and X-1 cavalry setup and 2-6 regiments of guns (depending on fort lvl, 2 at start and 6 at endgame) to make sieges somewhat smoother. I wasn't aware of the speed penalty they apply because it never bothered me. I do not rely on sheer speed rather my genuine tactical skill :D
 
Last edited:
What makes Arty worthless? Is it just the cost and speed? I guess i could use the slots for cavalry, but I thought they helped with sieges. Ive built my armies to be 10 inf 5 cav and 5 art. How should i build my armies then?
Ever since HTTT, after 1650: 1:1 infantry:artillery + some cavalry for flanking.
 
Ever since HTTT, after 1650: 1:1 infantry:artillery + some cavalry for flanking.

Just to clarify, this is because of the way the battle mechanics work. Artillery are deployed "behind" infantry, but they can fire over the infantry. As long as some infantry remain, they will never suffer losses, so, you effectively have a powerful fire and shock force that is practically invincible until your infantry meatshield are destroyed.
 
Morale pretty much becomes an obsolete difference late game as armies will always stick around long enough to wipe each other out.

And this always annoyed me. Not very often IRL did armies stay on the field to become completely massacred. IMO anytime a formation loses 15-20% of its strength it should automatically break and rout. But of course 'battles' in the game should really be more of a mini-campaign as they can last for weeks or more. Furthermore, pursuit of a fleeing army often resulted in massive casualties but this is not reflected in the game at all. If you manage to get to a province before a retreating army you might wipe it out altogether, which is not really the same thing. </rambling>