• 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.

Victoria 3 - Dev Diary #23 - Fronts and Generals

16_9 (1).jpg

Hello and welcome! Today we will dig into the core mechanics of land warfare, including Fronts, Generals, Battalions, Mobilization, and more. But let’s take a moment first to recall the pillars of warfare in Victoria 3 from last week’s diary, which should be considered prerequisite reading to this one.

  • War is a Continuation of Diplomacy
  • War is Strategic
  • War is Costly
  • Preparation is Key
  • Navies Matter
  • War Changes

Before we get started I want to point out that a few of the mechanics I will be mentioning below are currently still under implementation in the current build. While development diary screenshots should never be taken as fully representative of the final product, this is especially true in this case. In some cases images will be artistic mockups and visual targets, and in other cases very rough in-game screenshots that will be revised before release. The reason for this is simply because, as we have stressed previously in these dev diaries, Victoria 3 is a game about economics, politics, and diplomacy first and foremost. War is a very important supporting system to all those three which tie them together, but we needed to make sure those three aspects were mature enough before we put the final touches on the military system. Furthermore, being a drastic divergence from how warfare works in all other Paradox games, these systems have required a lot of time in the oven to feel as fully baked as the others. Once we are closer to release we’ll make sure to update you on any revisions, and release more finalized in-game screenshots!

First I want to present the concept of Fronts. In Victoria 3, rather than manually moving armies around the map, you assign troops (via Generals, as we will see later) to the border provinces where two combatants clash. All combat takes place on these Fronts, where a victorious outcome consists of moving the Front into your enemy’s territory while preventing incursions into your own.

Fronts are created automatically as soon as two countries begin to oppose each other in a Diplomatic Play, and consist of all provinces along the border of control between those two countries. Therefore a Front always has one country on either side, but it is possible for Generals from several countries to be assigned to the same Front.

Let’s take a look at a screenshot from the current build of the game:

An early draft view of the Texas Utah Front. This Front belongs to the Texan Revolutionary War of 1835, which is in full swing on the game’s start date. Two Texan Generals are assigned to this Front, Samuel Houston with an Advance Order and William Travis with a Defense Order. On Mexico’s side, José de Romay is advancing with 10 Battalions. The four stars on either side indicates relative average fighting skill compared to the world’s best - here Mexico and Texas are tied with 40 Offense and 35 Defense each. From Mexico’s perspective this Front has a slight advantage at the moment and indeed one battle on this Front has already been won by them.
dd23_1.png

As mentioned at the top, these visuals - and all other images in this diary - are far from complete! We have many parameters left to expose, more UI layout to do, and more visual effects to add before release. Everything you are seeing today is only to give you a better idea of the mechanics, but is in heavy revision as we speak and will look different on release. As such it is not to be taken as representative of what you will see in the final product.

The health and status of your Fronts is a primary indicator of how well the war is going for you. Do you have more troops on the Front than your enemy does? That’s pretty good. Have you advanced it far into enemy territory? Great. Are your soldiers there demoralized and dying in droves from attrition? Double-plus ungood.

In a large end-game conflict you might have hundreds of thousands - possibly even millions - of soldiers in active service, which is a lot to keep track of. The number of active Fronts, however, is likely to be much more manageable. The design philosophy here is the same as with the economic Pop model. Our aim is to make the game playable and well-paced, without requiring frequent pausing, on every scale while retaining the detail and integrity of the Pop simulation. For warfare, the scale ranges from a small border skirmish between minor nations in single-player to a massive multiplayer world war involving every Great Power. Using the Front system we can account for every individual Serviceman and Officer in meticulous detail while giving the player a high-level strategic interface to monitor and manipulate. Much like with the economic interface of Buildings or the political interface of Interest Groups, from this Front view you can drill down through your Generals all the way to the individual Pops that actually do the fighting if you want to.

After a particularly punishing battle the Texan Barracks are desperately trying to recruit replacements to send to the front.
dd23_2.png

Generals are characters who command Servicemen and Officers into battle on Fronts. Every country will start the game with one or a few Generals - many of them straight out of the history books - and can recruit more as needed.

Generals are recruited from Strategic Regions, and gain command of as many locally available troops in that region that their Command Limit allows. Command Limit is determined by their Rank, which ranges from 1-star to 5-star. If several Generals are headquartered in the same Strategic Region, the troops are split up between them proportional to their Command Limit as well. Military operations can be complex to manage, and to model this every General costs a certain amount of Bureaucracy to maintain. You can promote Generals freely, but while higher-ranking Generals can effectively command more troops they also cost more Bureaucracy.

Like other characters, such as Heads of States and Interest Group Leaders, Generals have a set of Traits that determine their abilities and weaknesses. Admirals, their naval counterparts, work the same way. These Traits determine everything about how the characters function and what bonuses and penalties they confer onto their troops, their Front, and the battles they participate in.

All characters have a Personality Trait, with different effects depending on what role they fill. For example, a Cruel General might cause more deaths among enemy casualties, leaving fewer enemy Pops to recover through battlefield medicine or return home as Dependents, while a Charismatic General might keep their troops’ Morale high even when supplies run short.

Characters can also gain Skill Traits which are unique to their role. Generals may develop skills like Woodland Terrain Expert that increases their troops’ efficiency when fighting in Forest or Jungle, or Engineer that increases their troops’ Defense. Freshly recruited Generals start with one of these but can gain more as they age and gain experience. Many Skill traits have several tiers as well, so Generals that remain active across many campaigns may deepen their abilities over time.

Characters may also gain Conditions due to events or simply the passage of time. These often affect the character’s health, but might also influence their popularity or ability to carry out their basic duties. Shellshocked is a classic example of a Condition your General might gain.

This fellow (whose full name I refuse to write out) has a Direct personality, prefers to command troops in Open Terrain, and is an expert Surveyor of the battlefield. He’s also become Wounded, probably as a result of some recent skirmish.
dd23_3.png

Like all characters, Generals and Admirals are also aligned with an Interest Group - which is often, but not always, the Armed Forces. For Heads of States and Interest Group Leaders the impact of this political allegiance is obvious, but why (you may ask) would this matter for Generals and Admirals?

In addition to industrialization and revolutions, the 19th Century was also known for its revolving door between military and political office. Often given assignments far from the capital with very limited communications, Generals and Admirals were given access to enormous man- and firepower and sent off with little possibility of oversight to see to the nation’s best interests. This autonomy not only granted them considerable geopolitical power while in the field, but also made them extremely popular figures once returning home from a successful campaign. As such, in Victoria 3 your decisions on who to recruit, promote, and retire - which should ideally be based on meritocratic concerns - sometimes have to be tempered also by concerns for internal power balance and stability due to the impact Generals can have on the country’s Interest Groups.

First off, the character contributes directly to their Interest Group’s Political Strength, which as we know determines their Clout. The amount provided is dependent on their rank, so granting a promotion to a promising young General will also increase the influence their Interest Group wields.

Second, if a General is becoming a little too big for their boots - or perhaps crippled by adverse Conditions, like that 79-year old fossil who just won’t leave active service despite senility and various ailments - and you want to force them into retirement so someone else can take command of their troops, their Interest Group’s Approval will be impacted. Understandably so, since you just robbed them of some political power!

Third, and most important, if an Interest Group becomes revolutionary - which will be the subject of another dev diary - their Generals and Admirals will take up against you. If you’ve put all your eggs in the basket of some farmer’s boy who turned out to be a strategic genius and you suffer an agrarian uprising, you may end up fighting a rebellion against that same brilliant commander using fresh recruits still wet behind the ears.

Commanders can also be the focal points of special events, caused either of their own volition or by a situation you have put them in. Your decisions in these events may end up affecting your country in any number of ways.
dd23_4.png

Both Generals and Admirals can be given Orders which they are obliged to try to carry out. We will go over Admiral Orders next week. The Orders you can give Generals are quite straightforward:

Stand By: the General returns home from their current Front, dispersing their troops into their home region’s Garrison forces to slow down any enemy incursions
Advance Front: the General gathers their troops, moves to the target Front, and tries to advance it by launching attacks at the enemy
Defend Front: like Advance Front except the General never advances, instead focusing only on intercepting and repelling enemy forces

These orders may end up executed in different ways depending on the General’s Traits, resulting in different troop compositions and battle conditions during the operations. For example, a Reckless General may provide his Battalions with increased Offense during advances, but fewer of his casualties taken will recover after the battle. Further, his recklessness may lead to making a Risky Maneuver during a battle, which could prove a brilliant or catastrophic move. If you want to play it safer you could assign a Cautious but well-supplied General to a frontline, even though that may be less prestigious.

Generals charged with advancing a Front will favor marching towards and conquering states marked as war goals, but their route there may be more or less circuitous depending on how the war is progressing and possibly other factors such as the local terrain. Other such designated priority targets, which the player could set themselves to alter the flow of battle, is a feature we’re looking into adding to represent strategies and events such as General Sherman’s march to the sea. This is not currently in the game but is something we think would add an interesting dimension to the strategic gameplay, so something like this is likely to make its way in sooner or later!

Fronts targeted to Advance or Defend can also be a Front belonging to a co-belligerent, as long as you can reach it by land or sea. For example, if Prussia supports Finland in a war of independence against Russia, they could send one or two Generals to advance their own Front against Russia and another to help defend the Finnish-Russian Front, ensuring Finland can stay in the war for as long as possible while simultaneously striking at Russia’s own war support. To do so it needs to send its troops helping Finland across the Baltic, which require naval support we will learn more about next week.

Generals cannot be given Orders unless they are Mobilizing. In peacetime, all Generals will be demobilized, doing whatever it is 19th Century Generals do in peacetime (probably drink copious amounts of wine, have sordid affairs, and plot against their governments) while their troops are on standby doing occasional drills to keep readiness up. As soon as a Diplomatic Play starts, and for as long as the country is at war after that, players have the option to Mobilize any and all of their Generals, which will increase the consumption of military buildings (guns, ammo, artillery, etc) and start the process of getting that General’s troops ready for frontline action. The speed by which troops are readied is dependent on the Infrastructure in their local state, so high-infrastructure states can mobilize many more troops quickly while low-infrastructure, rural states might take much longer to gather and organize a lot of manpower.

This means when you choose to start mobilizing, and how many Generals and Battalions you choose to mobilize, will matter a lot to your initial success in the war - and as everyone knows, the first few battles could well prove decisive if the other party is taken by surprise. The magnitude of mobilization becomes immediately visible to the other participants in a Diplomatic Play as soon as the decision is taken. Choosing to mobilize big and early in a Diplomatic Play tells the other participants two things: one, you’re serious, and two, you’re hedging your bets that this won’t end peacefully. This in turn can trigger a cascade of mobilizations, and before you know it, a peaceful solution is no longer on the table. Choosing to hold off on mobilization until late means you save precious money and lives until it’s needed, but may cost you the war if that’s what it comes down to.

Mobilized Generals cannot be demobilized until the war is over. Once you’ve committed your troops to the war, they expect to be in the field and well-supplied until a peace is signed. If getting what you want out of a war takes a long time, your expenses may eventually begin to exceed the value of the potential prize.

In-progress artistic mockup of an Army overview, listing all your Generals with shortcut actions. In this case only General Long-Name has been mobilized (activated), preparing his men to go to the front at the expense of increased goods consumption and attrition.
dd23_5.png

Your land army is composed of Battalions, which are groups of 1000 Workforce with Servicemen or Officer Professions. Like all other Pops these work in Buildings, in this case either Barracks or Conscription Centers. The difference between these are that Barracks are constructed manually and house the country’s standing army, which are considered permanent troops, while Conscription Centers are activated as-needed during a Diplomatic Play or War and recruit civilians into temporary military service. In addition Barracks have a wider selection of Production Methods to choose from, particularly high-tech late-game Production Methods. How your army is divided between professional and conscripted soldiers depends on your Army Model Law, which we will cover in more detail in a few weeks.

The Production Methods in these two buildings work like other Production Methods do: they employ Pops of certain Professions, and consume goods to provide a set of effects. In this case they employ Servicemen and Officers in proportions depending on your organization style, consume a number of military goods, and in return provide Battalions with different combat statistics such as Offense (indicating how useful they are during an advance) and Defense (indicating how useful they are when defending against an advance).

Since military buildings work according to the same logic as other buildings, such as factories and plantations, all core mechanics such as Market Access, Goods Shortages, Qualifications, etcetera apply to them in exactly the same way. If one of your Barracks’ Battalions are supported by Armored Divisions but you cannot supply it with enough Tanks, recruitment will slow down to painful levels and both Offense and Defense will suffer. If you don’t have enough qualifying Officers the number of Battalions the building can actually create will be throttled. Just because you have researched a new type of artillery piece or a more efficient way of organizing your army doesn’t mean you’ll be ready to modernize straight away, and if your local infrastructure suffers the acquisition cost for the requisite goods could reach astronomical levels.

Upgrades to Production Methods in military buildings take considerable time to take effect. While any goods consumption changes happen immediately, improvements to combat effectiveness takes some time to realize. Keeping military spending low during peacetime by reverting your military to pre-Napoleonic warfare doctrines might be pleasant for your treasury but less great for both your war readiness and Prestige, the latter which is directly impacted both by how large and how advanced your army is.

In-progress artistic mockup of a Battalion/Garrison-focused list. Illustrations are selected for a collection of similar Battalions based on dominant Battalion culture (defined by the Pops in the military building) and tech level (defined by the Production Methods in use in the military building). Collections can be expanded to display the full list. From there the player can click through from a given Battalion to the military building supporting it.
dd23_6.png

All this leads us to Battles. Advancing Generals will eventually gather enough troops to launch an attack into one of the enemy-controlled provinces along the Front, which will be intercepted by defending troops and possibly an enemy General. In short, a battle then takes place over some number of days until one force has taken enough casualties and morale damage to retreat. We will go over in more detail how battles play out in a future diary, but suffice to say for now that a bunch of Battalions go in along with a number of different combat-related stats and conditions, some of them related to the General and their troops, others due to conditions like province terrain and chance. If the advancing side wins, they capture a number of provinces depending on how large their win was, what sort of technology they use, how dispersed or concentrated the enemy forces are across the region, and so on. If the defending side wins, they repel the advancers and will likely be able to launch their counter-attack at a nice advantage.

An item of note here is that just because one General might command 100 Battalions while the other side’s General might only command 20 does not mean every battle outcome on this Front is predetermined. A single Front can cover a large stretch of land and just because a General with 100 Battalions is “on a Front” does not mean they travel with 100,000 individuals in their encampment; those Battalions are considered to be spread out, simultaneously planning their next advance while intercepting enemy advances, and as such the force size each side in the battle can bring to bear may vary. Furthermore, Battalions under the command of other friendly Generals on the same Front may be temporarily borrowed for a certain battle, and even Battalions without mobilized Generals (considered part of the region’s Garrison) can be used to defend against incursions. However, Battalions not under the direct command of the General in charge of the battle do not gain the benefit of his Traits.

This variable sizing of battles, particularly when combined with mobilization costs, counteracts the otherwise dominant strategy of “doomstacking” and make wars feel more like a tug-of-war than a race. Each side can choose to either try to gain marginal advantage over the other on the cheap, or spare no expense to increase their chances for an expedient victory, with any position on this spectrum being a valid option in different situations.

We’ll get deeper into some of the combat statistics that go into resolving a battle in a few weeks when we explore military buildings in more detail, and we will talk more about how Battles play out and look on the map in a diary a little further down the line. We’re anxious to show them to you, but need to give these visuals a little more attention first!

That’s land warfare in a nutshell. In the two upcoming dev diaries we will go over the major role that navies play in this system as well as the economic and human costs of war, which are closely interrelated. For now I want to close by saying that we appreciate your patience in waiting for details on warfare mechanics! The reasons for why we’ve chosen to diverge so far from the classic GSG military formula would be hard to grasp until you’ve seen how the different economic, political, and diplomatic systems function.

Next week we will talk more about warfare mechanics as we get into how your navy plays into all this. Until then!
 

Attachments

  • 16_9.jpg
    16_9.jpg
    1,1 MB · Views: 0
  • dd23_1.png
    dd23_1.png
    2,6 MB · Views: 0
  • dd23_2.png
    dd23_2.png
    748 KB · Views: 0
  • dd23_3.png
    dd23_3.png
    321,4 KB · Views: 0
  • dd23_4.png
    dd23_4.png
    849,2 KB · Views: 0
  • dd23_5.png
    dd23_5.png
    2 MB · Views: 0
  • dd23_6.png
    dd23_6.png
    2,4 MB · Views: 0
  • milpad.jpg
    milpad.jpg
    3,9 MB · Views: 0
  • Thumbnail.jpg
    Thumbnail.jpg
    315,3 KB · Views: 0
Last edited by a moderator:
  • 407Like
  • 247Love
  • 217
  • 47
  • 22
  • 5Haha
Reactions:

EUnderhill

Happy Feet!
26 Badges
Mar 27, 2002
5.043
1.630
Visit site
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
  • Europa Universalis 4: Emperor
  • Europa Universalis IV: Golden Century
  • Europa Universalis IV: Dharma
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rule Britannia
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cradle of Civilization
  • Europa Universalis IV: Third Rome
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mandate of Heaven
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rights of Man
  • Hearts of Iron IV Sign-up
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mare Nostrum
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cossacks
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • 500k Club
  • Victoria 2: Heart of Darkness
  • Victoria 2: A House Divided
  • Victoria 2
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • For The Glory
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
  • Europa Universalis IV
I don't agree there is 'absolutely nothing interesting here' as you will have to make decisions every war you fight. Which fronts to prioritise. Which fronts to push on, and which fronts to defend on. How long should I push for until I take a rest to recover from fighting. How can I use my fleet to help me win this war. Is fighting this war 'worth it' in terms of gain vs cost.
In a game with the scope of a century, that is about the right level of focus.
 
  • 6
  • 4
Reactions:

CrackingShow

Captain
62 Badges
Apr 6, 2011
383
902
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • Europa Universalis IV: Third Rome
  • Victoria 2: Heart of Darkness
  • Victoria 2: A House Divided
  • Semper Fi
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • March of the Eagles
  • Magicka
  • Heir to the Throne
  • Hearts of Iron III: Their Finest Hour
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • For the Motherland
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
  • Arsenal of Democracy
  • Divine Wind
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • Europa Universalis III: Chronicles
  • Europa Universalis III
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Crusader Kings II: Sunset Invasion
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
  • Crusader Kings II: The Republic
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Together for Victory
  • Hearts of Iron IV Sign-up
  • Stellaris: Digital Anniversary Edition
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rights of Man
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cradle of Civilization
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mandate of Heaven
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Death or Dishonor
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Age of Wonders III
  • Age of Wonders II
  • Stellaris
  • Europa Universalis 4: Emperor
  • Crusader Kings II: Conclave
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cossacks
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Pride of Nations
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
  • Stellaris: Humanoids Species Pack
  • 500k Club
  • Victoria 2
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
Too bad that bilateral wars will generally have one front. So your decision, barring naval invasions, will go down to click attack or defend.
A war between France vs Germany or Qing vs Russia will have less player input than a war that has multiple co-beligerents, since frontlines will be created in each state border.

The only outcome of this is that people will cheese naval invasions all the time, not because of how cool they are, or how immersive to the time period. They will repeatedly do naval invasions precisely because that will be one of the few things that they will have an input on during the war.
We don't know how naval operations will be conducted. So I think that speculating about them is pointless right now. I would say its very unlikely it would be the awful Vic2 system where I have to manually put troops on transports, and manually move them off transports, for EVERY stack.
 
  • 2
Reactions:

wilcoxchar

Field Marshal
98 Badges
Nov 15, 2004
5.114
17.647
  • Europa Universalis III: Collection
  • Victoria: Revolutions
  • Europa Universalis: Rome
  • Semper Fi
  • Sengoku
  • Victoria 2
  • Victoria 2: Heart of Darkness
  • Rome: Vae Victis
  • 200k Club
  • 500k Club
  • Cities: Skylines
  • Cities: Skylines Deluxe Edition
  • Crusader Kings II: Holy Knight (pre-order)
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
  • Europa Universalis IV: Pre-order
  • Europa Universalis: Rome Collectors Edition
  • Mount & Blade: Warband
  • Mount & Blade: With Fire and Sword
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
  • Crusader Kings II: Horse Lords
  • Cities: Skylines - After Dark
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cossacks
  • Crusader Kings II: Conclave
  • Victoria 3 Sign Up
  • Divine Wind
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Crusader Kings II: Charlemagne
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Crusader Kings II: Rajas of India
  • Crusader Kings II: The Republic
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
  • Crusader Kings II: Sunset Invasion
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Deus Vult
  • Diplomacy
  • Europa Universalis III
  • Hearts of Iron Anthology
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • Europa Universalis IV: Call to arms event
  • For The Glory
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • Heir to the Throne
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • March of the Eagles
Too bad that bilateral wars will generally have one front. So your decision, barring naval invasions, will go down to click attack or defend.
A war between France vs Germany or Qing vs Russia will have less player input than a war that has multiple co-beligerents, since frontlines will be created in each state border.

The only outcome of this is that people will cheese naval invasions all the time, not because of how cool they are, or how immersive to the time period. They will repeatedly do naval invasions precisely because that will be one of the few things that they will have an input on during the war.
Even with a single front you still have multiple generals, so you still have to decide which generals to have attacking or defending, which generals to push forward, and which to hold back, and maintaining the supply lines to the barracks and the front while keeping your economy afloat and managing the politics and interest groups on the home front. And the home front management of war is what a game like Victoria should be prioritizing in war anyway since it's an economy, politics, and society centered game first and foremost.
 
  • 13
  • 4
Reactions:

IsaacCAT

Field Marshal
141 Badges
Oct 24, 2018
3.411
7.720
  • Victoria 3 Sign Up
  • Imperator: Rome
  • Imperator: Rome Deluxe Edition
  • Imperator: Rome - Magna Graecia
The discussion may be described as Eurogamers vs Wargamers.

It seems some players are suspicious that Vic3 is going full eurogame. However, I think there is room for Vic3 to incorporate aspects of abstract strategy games to the war aspect of the game.

We need more DD's to know, thus the polemic will drag on.
 
Last edited:
  • 3Like
  • 2
Reactions:

Drakken

Kawachi-no-kokushu
93 Badges
Jan 1, 2001
5.305
2.953
  • Rome Gold
  • Europa Universalis IV: Call to arms event
  • For the Motherland
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • Hearts of Iron III: Their Finest Hour
  • Heir to the Throne
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Cities in Motion
  • Semper Fi
  • Sengoku
  • Victoria 2: A House Divided
  • Victoria 2: Heart of Darkness
  • Europa Universalis IV: Third Rome
  • Europa Universalis IV: Pre-order
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mare Nostrum
  • Crusader Kings II: Jade Dragon
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • Crusader Kings II: Charlemagne
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Hearts of Iron II: Armageddon
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Crusader Kings II: Rajas of India
  • Crusader Kings II: The Republic
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
  • Crusader Kings II: Sunset Invasion
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Deus Vult
  • Europa Universalis III
  • Divine Wind
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Colonel
  • Crusader Kings II: Conclave
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cossacks
  • Crusader Kings II: Horse Lords
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
  • Pillars of Eternity
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Pride of Nations
  • Victoria 3 Sign Up
  • Crusader Kings II: Holy Knight (pre-order)
  • 500k Club
  • Victoria 2
  • Victoria: Revolutions
Most people like it or are willing to give it a chance. A small but very vocal minority of a few posters are falsely claiming it's the end of the world and that they are the majority.

Don't forget that the latter make the spurious accusation that Victoria 3 is now Candy Crush.
 
  • 6
  • 4
  • 2Like
  • 2Haha
Reactions:

MTGian

Colonel
50 Badges
Jul 27, 2004
1.128
2.715
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
  • Crusader Kings II: Horse Lords
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cossacks
  • Crusader Kings II: Conclave
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mare Nostrum
  • Stellaris
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Colonel
  • Crusader Kings II: Reapers Due
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rights of Man
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Together for Victory
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mandate of Heaven
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Death or Dishonor
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Stellaris: Apocalypse
  • Stellaris: Megacorp
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Crusader Kings III
  • Battle for Bosporus
  • Victoria 3 Sign Up
  • Hearts of Iron IV: By Blood Alone
  • Hearts of Iron IV: No Step Back
  • For the Motherland
  • Crusader Kings II: Charlemagne
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Crusader Kings II: Rajas of India
  • Crusader Kings II: The Republic
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • Hearts of Iron III: Their Finest Hour
  • Hearts of Iron III Collection
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Semper Fi
  • Victoria 2
  • Victoria 2: A House Divided
  • Victoria 2: Heart of Darkness
  • 500k Club
Since I really don't want to read 44 pages of posts, could someone in short describe what does the community feel?

I would say that there are serious concerns within the community over the proposed system, but that the dialogue is mostly constructive at this point without a lot of the vitriol from last week.

I detailed this in an earlier post:

One thing that I want to point out is how unified voting on posts have been about the following issues:

Not enough player agency during war / suggesting more player agency during war
Concerns over generals assigned over single front / problems with single front for ACW / No Schlieffen plan

Here are vote totals for posts related to those items (through page 14 - I think, I forgot when I stopped):

No player agency: 53 up, 7 down, 1 help
ACW concerns: 33 up, 1 laugh, 1 help
More control over fronts: 7 up
ACW only one front: 7 up
No Schlieffen Plan: 17 up
No player choice / veneer of gameplay: 31 up, 11 down
Need more options than attack/defend: 35 up, 1 laugh
ACW problem: 5 up
Seems too basic: 18 up, 2 down
No interaction after assigning frontline: 29 up, 5 down
Need multiple fronts: 12 up
Most simplistic form of warfare in any PDX game (negative tone): 30 up, 2 down
Overly abstract: 5 up
ACW problem: 4 up
Player can only press "execute plan" (not enough to do): 16 up, 3 down
Only actions are attack, defend, and standstill (which is a problem): 16 up
Not particularly strategic: 26 up
Need specific targets - advance is not enough: 9 up, 1 down
Need more than attack/defend: 5 up
I'm confused. What can a player do during war to influence the outcome?: 22 up
Long post suggesting three fixes (position generals, more order types, strategic targets): 55 up, 2 down, 3 helpful
Needs more depth: 28 up
Short post suggesting three fixes (position generals, more order types, strategic targets): 17 up
What can I do after war starts to influence outcome (not enough is implied): 20 up
Entire border is one front (which is a problem): 7 up
Single front (which is a problem): 5 up

That is pretty much united. Obviously, a lot of those votes are from the same folks, so a sum might not be meaningful, but I added it up anyway.

512 up, 33 down, 5 helpful, 2 laugh

I believe all of these posts agreed with the vision of the system, but feel that it needs more depth. While there is much less yelling and shouting and throwing of things than last week and people are being generally constructive in their suggestions, posts with concerns/criticisms of the proposed system are getting a lot of up votes.

I thought that was important if people/Paradox did not notice.

I want to highlight the long post with 55 up votes to 2 down votes. I hope Paradox considers this proposal. I don't think this would break the vision that the developers have proposed. A player doesn't need to slow the game down to decide where on a front to position the generals and give generals a target and a posture. That is all strategic, high level stuff that shouldn't take more than a couple of minutes. If there are concerns about micromanaging postures and targets, then put a long delay into the system. Problem solved.
 
  • 4
  • 1
Reactions:

Sharkseant

Corporal
59 Badges
Mar 21, 2020
39
52
  • Stellaris: Distant Stars
  • Cities: Skylines - Mass Transit
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mandate of Heaven
  • Europa Universalis IV: Third Rome
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Death or Dishonor
  • Stellaris: Synthetic Dawn
  • Cities: Skylines - Green Cities
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cradle of Civilization
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Stellaris: Humanoids Species Pack
  • Stellaris: Apocalypse
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rule Britannia
  • Cities: Skylines - Parklife
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • Europa Universalis IV: Dharma
  • Cities: Skylines Industries
  • Stellaris: Megacorp
  • Europa Universalis IV: Golden Century
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Prison Architect
  • Cities: Skylines - Campus
  • Stellaris: Ancient Relics
  • Stellaris: Lithoids
  • Prison Architect: Psych Ward
  • Hearts of Iron IV: La Resistance
  • Hearts of Iron IV: No Step Back
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cossacks
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • Europa Universalis IV: Call to arms event
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Cities: Skylines
  • Cities: Skylines Deluxe Edition
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
  • Mount & Blade: With Fire and Sword
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
  • Cities: Skylines - After Dark
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Cities: Skylines - Snowfall
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mare Nostrum
  • Stellaris
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rights of Man
  • Stellaris: Digital Anniversary Edition
  • Stellaris: Leviathans Story Pack
  • Cities: Skylines - Natural Disasters
This comment is reserved by the Community Team for gathering Dev Responses in, for ease of reading.


Contiguous provinces between two hostile nations act as a single Front, no matter the length. Fronts cannot be divided manually, but if two countries border in two different places they will of course have multiple active Fronts.

We did, in the past, play around with auto-splitting Fronts that went past a certain length into multiples. In the end it didn't add anything to the game and resulted in a lot of logical headaches (how do these Fronts interact when they move? what if the border length decreases again, do the Fronts merge? what if one Front disappears but the other is still valid, what happens to the Generals assigned? etc). In the end what matters in this system is which General is assigned to lead their forces against which country.


What we're considering adding is a method of prioritizing the various targets in the war, and setting custom targets, on a national (not Front- or General-) level. What we need to be careful with here is to not add methods of control that make the player technically able to control with precision how Generals act in every moment by microing their priorities.


Wartime map graphics is something we'll definitely return to in a later diary.


Characters can switch roles under certain circumstances, yes. They cannot currently hold multiple roles at once, though.


Different tech tiers of military goods are not modelled as separate goods but rather as larger quantities. This doesn't just go for military goods but all goods in the game: increased quality is modeled as an increase in quantity. Better bakeries don't produce different bread, just a larger number of Groceries. When Pops buy better quality clothes, we represent that as more clothes rather than level 5 clothes.

There's some exception to this! Luxury Clothes and Luxury Furniture are separate goods from the basic versions. Similarly there are distinctions between Man-o-Wars and Ironclad ships, since this represents not just an increase in the quality of a fleet but a huge shift in approach where entire industries had to retool.

It would of course have been possible for us to add every military invention as new goods, but other than performance concerns it would also have made e.g. the trade game a lot more cumbersome as you'd have to ensure you trade with the country who produces exactly the guns your troops need, and if they switch to something different you have to find a new trading partner, etc.


When recruiting new commanders you're given a few options to preview and choose between.


We're working on it, yeah!


Yep, this is a thing we've noted, and will likely design some sort of exception for when such edge cases arise. But permitting Generals to demobilize anytime would take away the whole dynamic of choosing when to mobilize which troops, so the default will be that by committing those troops you've committed for the duration of the war.


There are a number of factors that influence these things. Your decisions here come down to which Production Methods you activate in your military buildings, which is what determines your Battalions' attributes, and which Generals you hire, promote, and deploy where. In other words, you don't say "we're going to win this war with a slow methodical march", you ensure you have Generals who take their time, ensure good supply, and stay away from putting your war budget into newfangled inventions like tanks.


"Mobilization" as a term in Victoria 3 covers everything involved in getting Battalions readied and organized under the command of a General. So in your situation, if you have built some Barracks in a colony and recruited a General to lead them, you can choose to Mobilize only that General if you wish. Despite your colony probably having low Infrastructure, since you're not mobilizing very many troops they will probably not take too long to get ready, and since the General is right next to the Front it won't take him long to travel there to advance it.

On the other hand if your standing army was in London, you might have a much larger force under a more experienced General, but it will take him considerable time to travel to the Front by your colony. There's also the issue of naval supply to consider in that case. So it can definitely be beneficial to maintain a local colonial force to defend your colony if tensions run high there.


We definitely plan to have the AI react accordingly, yes.


We'll be covering military Production Methods more in a couple of weeks! But I can confirm that what you listed as "Engineer" is actually the category for "Specialist Corps".


If there's a war between, say, Iceland and Britain, (at least) one Front would have to be created via a Naval Invasion, which I'll cover next week.


They're hard caps for how many Battalions that General can directly command. A particular battle can include troops outside of that General's direct command as well, if there are multiple Generals on the Front or if there are Garrison forces to draw upon for defense. But only directly commanded troops benefit from the General's traits.
The reason it's not a soft cap is because the dynamic of only being able to grant a General more troops than their peers through giving them Promotions, and the political implications from that, is an important design element we don't want to water down.


They merge, and all Generals assigned to either are now assigned to the same Front with the same Orders as before.


When I play, I tend to spend a lot more time than is technically necessary paying attention to the frontlines, because I'm interested in seeing how things progress. But things don't slow down at home just because there's a war on (rather the opposite) so you can't ignore that side of it. Your domestic affairs also strongly influence how long you can stay in the war, which is major reason to ensure you see to your "home front" as well. In raw numbers, for me it's 60/40 frontlines/domestic, but I'd say the design target is to permit for a split of up to something like 30/70 as needed.


Yes, assuming the provinces are adjacent the Fronts will merge.


Oh, it is almost assuredly a sure thing over time, but not in any given battle.
This matters because every numeric advantage in manpower is squared over time. So if the first battle was sized 100-20, it would assuredly win and would probably on average leave 93-10 battalions remaining. The next battle would have an even greater advantage, and so on.
But with the sizing of each battles being closer together, the outcome of any given battle is less guaranteed, and over time a numeric advantage is not squared in the same way. This doesn't mean that there's a good chance the country with 100 battalions will lose, but since war is a considerable expense the opportunity cost of maintaining those 100 mobilized troops vs the ease of winning will be greater than for the country with 20 battalions.


Provinces were increased to model frontline movements on a more granular level, particularly so as to better simulate the changing conditions between 1836 and 1936.


You can give new Orders to Generals at any time; choose to mobilize more of them; give Orders to Admirals, which are quite different from those available to Generals and which we'll learn more about next week; choose to activate more Conscripts (more on that in a couple of weeks); choose to move them to different Fronts or focus on specific Fronts; and handle all the economic aspects of the war and its impact on your industry and Pops, to name a few things you might need to deal with during war, in addition to all the stuff you usually deal with during peace.


We are implementing DDs ahead of time to make sure that everything works as it should - and hitting "Publish" button on Thursdays. Sometimes it may result in a date inconsistency. :)


Generals dying in battle would be a random event type thing, there's no specific mechanics for this. It is however not uncommon for Generals to gain various Conditions during war, which affects their health and can cause them to die at some point in the future. This can also happen naturally due to age.
When Generals die their Interest Group will lose the Clout they conferred upon them and their troops would be reassigned to other Generals, or the Garrisons if nobody has enough Command Limit for them.


We've definitely run into a lot of edge cases with how Fronts behave while developing this system, but it currently looks quite stable.
Since we actually compute how many units are allowed to be involved in a given battle and don't throw all of a General's men into battle after battle, the risk of units "teleporting" even along long fronts is in practice virtually non-existent.


Then they split, the Generals decide where to go, and if any newly created Front ends up unstaffed (maybe you only had 1 General on the Front that split) you are notified.


1. Flexibility; having Generals with different qualities can be a good thing
2. Political concerns; having a single General in command of all your troops could make one Interest Group too cocky / powerful
3. Command Limit; if you have a huge army, or want the ability to command a large number of conscripts, you might need several high-ranking Generals to effectively command them all


Your mountain expert will favor defending in the mountains if this is possible. But he can't hunker down in the mountains and never risk getting attacked outside of a mountain province, because he's been charged to defend the entire Austrian front - not to avoid engagements with the enemy if a mountain encounter is impossible. If there are multiple defending Generals on that front though, this increases his chances to only be engaged in his preferred terrain. You tell your Generals who to advance and defend against; they try to accomplish this to the best of their ability given the resources you've made available to them.


Impassable terrain exists and will split Fronts, yes. However, since province-based unit movements are not a thing in Victoria 3, there's less need for very small patches of impassable terrain that would otherwise cause a lot of Front fragmentation. Most impassable terrain in Victoria 3 is of the "inhospitable wasteland" variety like deserts and tundra.


Commanders will gain experience over time and faster while in the field. This affects the rate at which they gain or improve their Traits. You cannot explicitly "train" them though, it's assumed they're always trying to get better.
All characters have a Culture, and while the Generals you recruit tend to mostly be of your primary culture(s) it's possible for minority culture Generals to join cultural uprisings.


You would give your General a Defend Order, and when prompted which Front to defend, select the Finnish-Russian Front (which already exists, since Finland and Russia are hostile towards each other). If you're actually Advancing that Front on behalf of Finland, it's still Finland that is the "occupier" since this is the Front that has moved. You cannot directly interact with occupied territory (it'd suck to have had a state occupied for a couple of days during which the enemy just demolished all your factories and made half a million people unemployed) but you hurt it indirectly - more details on that in a few weeks.


Troops are assigned automatically, to some degree in accordance with Rank, but also prioritizing minimizing fracturing between military buildings. So a certain General is likely to get all 10 Battalions from the Barracks in one state, while another get 20 from three different states, rather than the first getting 2-3 and the second getting 5 from each state. This way you can tell which General has command of units from which Barracks and make adjustments accordingly.

Battalions from Strategic Regions without Generals can still defend their region from incursions, but do so completely hands-off without the benefit of a General's trait and with no ability to concentrate them on a specific Front. But a single General with low Command Limit is not particularly expensive in Bureaucracy, virtually all countries would hire one in that situation without breaking a sweat.


They can no longer be supplied by their Barracks, which will cause the General's supply score to drop proportionally to how large a percentage of the force they make up. This in turn decreases the max morale of all troops under that General's command.



Yes, you build Barracks to recruit soldiers who go into the Garrison by default, and will only leave it if they're assigned to a mobilized General.
Since Barracks are buildings, they hire according to the priorities of normal government buildings do. If they run out of local qualifying Pops to hire they won't forcibly move people from other parts of your country there, but over time people will move there naturally to take those available jobs.


All other things being equal and taken as an average, intuitively I'd say the odds of a 60 / 40 Front should work out to about 70 / 30 with this system.

With a traditional system where all troops in a stack are involved in every battle, there can still be a number of variables that smooth out the squared effect of numeric advantage (like combat width, for example) but what it comes down to is usually the dice in that first battle. If the first battle favors the underdog, the post-battle numbers might be 40 / 35 and at this point all bets are off. But if the first battle favors the advantaged side, it might be 55 / 20 and then the rest is just a given.

The other aspect of relevance is that our peace system doesn't necessarily require a front to be "won or lost" - it can sometimes be enough to have made only a partial incursion to force a peace deal, without wiping out the other country's whole army. So even if your 60 / 40 has been reduced to only 30 / 20 and not the big win you hoped for, if you've made gains in the process that might be enough to get what you want. More on peace in a few weeks.


This is precisely our aim, and so far I'm quite hopeful.

There is no specific "guerilla warfare" mode, though I agree with you that this system is well suited to it and we have discussed it internally already. It's unlikely we can include this for release but it seems very likely to appear in the future. On that note I can also mention that "limited wars" in the sense of wars limited to a certain geographic region (e.g. colonial wars) is also something we think would work very well in this system, and are considering in much the same way.


No :( Because if I asked people to write unique names for 40,000+ provinces they'd quit :(:(:(
On the upside, there are 4-5 named cities in every state region, which means over 3000 uniquely named specific locations!


We're currently fine-tuning this actually, but some variables we're using currently include the base command limit of the Generals involved, the size of the Garrisons, the power differential, and the length of the Front. Tech will also play a role at some point, so early battles tend to be smaller than the potential meat-grinders towards endgame.


In the case of US/Canada, the Fronts would be bisected by the Great Lakes at least. There are also a great many decentralized nations that would interfere with longer Fronts from time to time.


The latter. Splitting Fronts by Strategic Region would be way too arbitrary and annoying to manage since Fronts shift around. Strategic Regions are only used to determine the "home" of Generals and Battalions.


It's weight-based, not deterministic. But in this case there's a high chance that the battle will take place in either mountain or forest compared to other terrain - because the advancing party will want to fight in mountain, while the defending party will want to fight in forest, so both will try to arrange for the battle to transpire in "their" province.

An important mindset shift here is that it's not that one army is trying to seek out another army to do battle, but rather that the advancing army is trying to capture territory - preferably without a fight, or fighting as small a number as possible - while the defending army is trying to stop that with as large a force as possible. This is a bit different from other PDS games where you usually try to make your stack chase down an enemy stack, with sieging provinces being something you only do after the enemy stack is defeated and before they come back with a larger force.


Netherlands - Belgium
Germany - Belgium
Germany - Luxembourg
Germany - France


Yes, indirectly - it depends on their Rank, which affects how many troops they are "owed".

Rehoming Generals between Strategic Regions is not part of the system as this would be too fiddly and introduce some unfortunate exploits. However, getting this option as a one-time thing to deal with a problematic General would be a very cool event! I'll ping the appropriate people. :D


You can build Barracks in Yorkshire, recruit your lads, and send your Yorkshire lads to Singapore when there's trouble brewing there if you like.
You can also raise conscripts in Yorkshire and ship 'em out as you need them.

But we're not talking about sending an army for temporary deployment overseas here. If you want a military base in Singapore, that houses, trains, and equips your troops, serves as a military logistics center, and supports their families for multiple generations - your ability to operate it will depend on the local market access, infrastructure, population etc. in Singapore. You can encourage Pops to move there from other parts of your country, certainly, but that's a separate mechanic.


The Barracks in Yorkshire is still considered their logistics center, so the troops now in Singapore must be supplied via an overseas route (more on that next week) from the Barracks in Yorkshire that handles all their acquisitions.
I kinda like it because we it kinda makes sense that you can’t control it directly on the other hand I want to control it directly XD.

now to my questions:

how would a victor be determined?
i mean of course if I occupy all of a nation I likely win but is it like the victory points. Stellaris ticking wargoal or something else. And how Much am I’m allowed to take? This entire when is somebody victorious and how much do they get is soemthing I still ask myself

how does the occupation work? Can I order my troops to act like savages and ravage the countryside? Will they do this on their own because warcrime always happen even if troops aren’t orderd?
Will they even be nervous because they never saw a war before and commit certain warcrimes accidentally? And how do The ethics of the nations affect this?
 

SirArag

Recruit
102 Badges
Jun 19, 2016
2
4
  • Semper Fi
  • Impire
  • King Arthur II
  • Knights of Pen and Paper +1 Edition
  • Magicka
  • Majesty 2 Collection
  • A Game of Dwarves
  • Naval War: Arctic Circle
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Victoria: Revolutions
  • March of the Eagles
  • Sengoku
  • Victoria 2: A House Divided
  • Victoria 2: Heart of Darkness
  • Pillars of Eternity
  • Cities: Skylines - After Dark
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cossacks
  • Cities: Skylines - Snowfall
  • Stellaris
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • Hearts of Iron III: Their Finest Hour
  • Cities in Motion 2
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Crusader Kings II: Charlemagne
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Crusader Kings II: Rajas of India
  • Crusader Kings II: The Republic
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
  • Crusader Kings II: Sunset Invasion
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • Hearts of Iron III Collection
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • For the Motherland
  • Europa Universalis IV: Call to arms event
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
  • Magicka: Wizard Wars Founder Wizard
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Cities: Skylines
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
  • Hearts of Iron IV: No Step Back
  • War of the Vikings
  • Crusader Kings II: Conclave
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mare Nostrum
  • Victoria 2
  • Hearts of Iron IV Sign-up
I'm more interested in economic/social side of the game than the warfare (map painting is not really my thing, but to each their own).
Still - is it planned or would it be possible to add/mod-in some sort of hidden event-based battle system to make battles more dynamic/interesting?

Let me explain:
Game decides that based on your general's traits and current situation it is appropriate to fire an event in the background.
Your general has an idea: let's feign retreat and encircle enemy after he takes the bait.
So battle is started, you lose and retreat.
Event then decides - either enemy takes full or partial advantage of the situation (and maybe if enemy general has particular trait like cautious, he will not fall for it at all - just like with normal events in let's say CK - only in these player doesn't really interact with them).
After that if enemy takes advantage, he creates a salient and new battle is initialized. Now the enemy is encircled and has a disadvantage. He can of course still win since event just "spawns" normal battle with a modifier, in which case you just lost some ground and have nothing to show for it except for maybe a bit higher casualty rate on enemy's side.

Just an idea that randomly popped to my head. Maybe I'm just overthinking it :D
 
  • 4
Reactions:

EUnderhill

Happy Feet!
26 Badges
Mar 27, 2002
5.043
1.630
Visit site
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
  • Europa Universalis 4: Emperor
  • Europa Universalis IV: Golden Century
  • Europa Universalis IV: Dharma
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rule Britannia
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cradle of Civilization
  • Europa Universalis IV: Third Rome
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mandate of Heaven
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rights of Man
  • Hearts of Iron IV Sign-up
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mare Nostrum
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cossacks
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • 500k Club
  • Victoria 2: Heart of Darkness
  • Victoria 2: A House Divided
  • Victoria 2
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • For The Glory
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
  • Europa Universalis IV
I'm more interested in economic/social side of the game than the warfare (map painting is not really my thing, but to each their own).
Still - is it planned or would it be possible to add/mod-in some sort of hidden event-based battle system to make battles more dynamic/interesting?

Let me explain:
Game decides that based on your general's traits and current situation it is appropriate to fire an event in the background.
Your general has an idea: let's feign retreat and encircle enemy after he takes the bait.
So battle is started, you lose and retreat.
Event then decides - either enemy takes full or partial advantage of the situation (and maybe if enemy general has particular trait like cautious, he will not fall for it at all - just like with normal events in let's say CK - only in these player doesn't really interact with them).
After that if enemy takes advantage, he creates a salient and new battle is initialized. Now the enemy is encircled and has a disadvantage. He can of course still win since event just "spawns" normal battle with a modifier, in which case you just lost some ground and have nothing to show for it except for maybe a bit higher casualty rate on enemy's side.

Just an idea that randomly popped to my head. Maybe I'm just overthinking it :D
Similar to what I've been having cooking in my head.
 

Druplesnubb

Lt. General
42 Badges
May 14, 2013
1.380
1.105
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Sengoku
  • Sword of the Stars II
  • Europa Universalis IV: Pre-order
  • Stellaris: Synthetic Dawn
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • Stellaris: Humanoids Species Pack
  • Stellaris: Digital Anniversary Edition
  • Stellaris: Leviathans Story Pack
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mandate of Heaven
  • Age of Wonders III
  • Stellaris
  • Stellaris: Apocalypse
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rule Britannia
  • Stellaris: Distant Stars
  • Stellaris: Megacorp
  • Europa Universalis IV: Golden Century
  • Imperator: Rome Sign Up
  • Stellaris: Ancient Relics
  • Stellaris: Lithoids
  • Stellaris: Federations
  • Europa Universalis 4: Emperor
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
  • Crusader Kings II: Horse Lords
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rights of Man
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
  • Crusader Kings II: Charlemagne
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Crusader Kings II: Rajas of India
  • Crusader Kings II: The Republic
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Magicka
  • Imperator: Rome
This is like Runescape combat with a map
Aren't war in all Paradox games like Runescape combat with a map. It's certainly how it works with EU4, CK2 and Stellaris. I haven't tested HoI4 because it's war focused and war has been my least favourite part of every Pardaox game I've played.
 

Druplesnubb

Lt. General
42 Badges
May 14, 2013
1.380
1.105
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Sengoku
  • Sword of the Stars II
  • Europa Universalis IV: Pre-order
  • Stellaris: Synthetic Dawn
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • Stellaris: Humanoids Species Pack
  • Stellaris: Digital Anniversary Edition
  • Stellaris: Leviathans Story Pack
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mandate of Heaven
  • Age of Wonders III
  • Stellaris
  • Stellaris: Apocalypse
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rule Britannia
  • Stellaris: Distant Stars
  • Stellaris: Megacorp
  • Europa Universalis IV: Golden Century
  • Imperator: Rome Sign Up
  • Stellaris: Ancient Relics
  • Stellaris: Lithoids
  • Stellaris: Federations
  • Europa Universalis 4: Emperor
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
  • Crusader Kings II: Horse Lords
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rights of Man
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
  • Crusader Kings II: Charlemagne
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Crusader Kings II: Rajas of India
  • Crusader Kings II: The Republic
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Magicka
  • Imperator: Rome
Victoria 3 is set in time period where wars, conflicts and crisis have shaped the world we know today, not to mention wwl, destruction of empires, colonialisam, ruusso japanesse war...

I assume that you've simplified war, just to make us bored with warfare so that we divert our attention to diplomacy and pops. Shame. I feel disappointed.

Where are the unit sprites, where is ability to draw fronts, to choose strategys and paths of advencment, how do you plan to recrate east asian colonisation where fronts did not existed, how about siege of premszyl, frontless american civil war.....

If your goal was to make us concentrate on diplomacy pops etc, you didn't have to ruin warfare you could make wars more expensive, more costly in terms of recovery, infamy and exhaustion, you didn't have to ruin warfare completely...
Yeah, this is so in depth i can press two buttons, attack/defense, and reshape the world history.

Shame
It's true that this is a result of the greater focus on diplomacy and economy, but your reasoning is entirely wrong. The economy and political gameplay is intended to be involved enough that you will be able to focus solely on it during peacetime and have a complete gameplay experience, it's meant to stand alone as a complete gameplay loop. The problem is, that none of this goes away when you start a war, in fact it the economic side of the game will likely become more hectic than normal due to the costs of warfare. Add the warfare mechanics on that, and you have an an additional gameplay system on added just as your previous complete gameplay system goes into overdrive. Thus, any warfare system they add must be simple enough that you can be able to do it while also focusing on the economical/diplomatic/political stuff at the same time without things becoming too cumbersome.
 
  • 4
Reactions:

Kazanov

Tawantinsuyu Irredentist
85 Badges
May 30, 2016
1.542
9.335
  • Crusader Kings II: Reapers Due
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
  • Crusader Kings II: Horse Lords
  • Hearts of Iron IV: No Step Back
  • Cities: Skylines - Green Cities
  • Crusader Kings II: Conclave
  • Hearts of Iron IV: La Resistance
  • Cities: Skylines - Campus
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Stellaris: Ancient Relics
  • Imperator: Rome - Magna Graecia
  • Crusader Kings III
  • Battle for Bosporus
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rights of Man
  • Stellaris: Digital Anniversary Edition
  • Stellaris: Leviathans Story Pack
  • Cities: Skylines - Natural Disasters
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Together for Victory
  • Crusader Kings II: Monks and Mystics
  • Europa Universalis 4: Emperor
  • Cities: Skylines - Mass Transit
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mandate of Heaven
  • Victoria 3 Sign Up
  • BATTLETECH
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Death or Dishonor
  • Europa Universalis IV: Golden Century
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rule Britannia
  • Cities: Skylines - Parklife
  • Stellaris: Distant Stars
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Europa Universalis III
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Europa Universalis IV: Dharma
  • Crusader Kings II: Holy Fury
  • Stellaris: Apocalypse
  • Imperator: Rome Deluxe Edition
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Imperator: Rome Sign Up
  • Stellaris: Humanoids Species Pack
  • Victoria 2
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Age of Wonders: Planetfall
  • Cities: Skylines
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
  • Crusader Kings II: The Republic
The lack of realism worries me, the wars of the period were rarely fought in massive fronts but i have yet too see how naval disembarks will work and how war will be handled in general before saying that this system is good or not
 
  • 4
  • 2
Reactions:

BeauNiddle

Lt. General
78 Badges
Oct 5, 2011
1.393
2.950
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Semper Fi
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Tyranny: Gold Edition
  • Victoria 2: A House Divided
  • Leviathan: Warships
  • Victoria 2: Heart of Darkness
  • Heir to the Throne
  • Hearts of Iron III: Their Finest Hour
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • For the Motherland
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • Divine Wind
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Tyranny: Archon Edition
  • Tyranny: Archon Edition
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Colonel
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Stellaris Sign-up
  • Hearts of Iron IV Sign-up
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Together for Victory
  • Stellaris: Digital Anniversary Edition
  • Stellaris: Leviathans Story Pack
  • 500k Club
  • Shadowrun: Dragonfall
  • BATTLETECH
  • Surviving Mars
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Death or Dishonor
  • Shadowrun Returns
  • Age of Wonders III
  • Tyranny - Bastards Wound
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Hearts of Iron IV: No Step Back
  • Stellaris: Distant Stars
  • Stellaris: Apocalypse
  • Stellaris: Humanoids Species Pack
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Shadowrun: Hong Kong
  • BATTLETECH - Digital Deluxe Edition
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Victoria 2
  • Surviving Mars: Digital Deluxe Edition
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
  • Pillars of Eternity
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cossacks
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mare Nostrum
I'm more interested in economic/social side of the game than the warfare (map painting is not really my thing, but to each their own).
Still - is it planned or would it be possible to add/mod-in some sort of hidden event-based battle system to make battles more dynamic/interesting?

Let me explain:
Game decides that based on your general's traits and current situation it is appropriate to fire an event in the background.
Your general has an idea: let's feign retreat and encircle enemy after he takes the bait.
So battle is started, you lose and retreat.
Event then decides - either enemy takes full or partial advantage of the situation (and maybe if enemy general has particular trait like cautious, he will not fall for it at all - just like with normal events in let's say CK - only in these player doesn't really interact with them).
After that if enemy takes advantage, he creates a salient and new battle is initialized. Now the enemy is encircled and has a disadvantage. He can of course still win since event just "spawns" normal battle with a modifier, in which case you just lost some ground and have nothing to show for it except for maybe a bit higher casualty rate on enemy's side.

Just an idea that randomly popped to my head. Maybe I'm just overthinking it :D

They talk in the DD about generals with certain traits being more prone to Risky Maneuvers. Now what player interaction there is with those, how often they happen, are there counters, etc. we don't know and I guess we have to wait until the battle/combat DD is posted. Is it like HOI4 tactics which provide modifiers for a few ticks? Or does it cover the whole next battle? (we do know there will be multiple battles on the front - and, glory be!, they are shorter than most Paradox battles)

These orders may end up executed in different ways depending on the General’s Traits, resulting in different troop compositions and battle conditions during the operations. For example, a Reckless General may provide his Battalions with increased Offense during advances, but fewer of his casualties taken will recover after the battle. Further, his recklessness may lead to making a Risky Maneuver during a battle, which could prove a brilliant or catastrophic move. If you want to play it safer you could assign a Cautious but well-supplied General to a frontline, even though that may be less prestigious.
 

Voodoo Lilium

First Lieutenant
70 Badges
Nov 30, 2017
274
870
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mandate of Heaven
  • Surviving Mars: First Colony Edition
  • Stellaris
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Crusader Kings II: Reapers Due
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rights of Man
  • Stellaris: Digital Anniversary Edition
  • Stellaris: Leviathans Story Pack
  • Crusader Kings II: Monks and Mystics
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • Cities: Skylines - Mass Transit
  • Cities: Skylines - Snowfall
  • Crusader Kings II: Holy Fury
  • BATTLETECH
  • Surviving Mars
  • Stellaris: Synthetic Dawn
  • Cities: Skylines - Green Cities
  • Stellaris: Distant Stars
  • Europa Universalis IV: Dharma Pre-order
  • Stellaris: Humanoids Species Pack
  • Stellaris: Apocalypse
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rule Britannia
  • Surviving Mars: Digital Deluxe Edition
  • Cities: Skylines - Parklife
  • Europa Universalis IV: Dharma
  • Crusader Kings III: Royal Edition
  • Imperator: Rome
  • Stellaris: Megacorp
  • Victoria 3 Sign Up
  • Stellaris: Lithoids
  • Cities: Skylines - Campus
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Surviving Mars: First Colony Edition
  • Crusader Kings III
  • Stellaris: Necroids
  • Cities: Skylines Industries
  • Victoria 2
  • Europa Universalis IV: Golden Century
  • Stellaris: Ancient Relics
  • Cities: Skylines
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
  • Crusader Kings II: Horse Lords
  • Imperator: Rome - Magna Graecia
  • Stellaris: Federations
  • Crusader Kings II: Conclave
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
If my front is winning, is it COMPLETELY RANDOM what provinces will they capture? I imagine if Germany attacks russia and wants to get Baltic coast, but victory of frontline makes them occupy southern Poland...
From what I understood it sounds like they're chosen dynamically based on things like terrain or possibly General traits. I imagine they'll go over specifics in a future DD.
 

FOARP

Field Marshal
49 Badges
Sep 10, 2008
6.137
4.022
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Victoria 2: Heart of Darkness
  • Victoria 2: A House Divided
  • Sword of the Stars II
  • Sword of the Stars
  • Semper Fi
  • Victoria: Revolutions
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Naval War: Arctic Circle
  • Magicka
  • Heir to the Throne
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • Gettysburg
  • For the Motherland
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • Arsenal of Democracy
  • Crusader Kings II: Charlemagne
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Crusader Kings II: Rajas of India
  • Crusader Kings II: The Republic
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
  • Crusader Kings II: Sunset Invasion
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Darkest Hour
  • Europa Universalis III
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Divine Wind
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Steel Division: Normandy 44 -  Back to Hell
  • Steel Division: Normand 44 - Second Wave
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Death or Dishonor
  • Steel Division: Normandy 44
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Field Marshal
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Colonel
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Hearts of Iron IV Sign-up
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Mount & Blade: With Fire and Sword
  • Mount & Blade: Warband
  • 500k Club
  • Warlock: Master of the Arcane
  • Victoria 2
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Europa Universalis IV
To those who say 'you are the political leadership, the spirit of the nation etc you don't get involved in wars as in reality', I'll have you know in the Franco-prussian war there was a huge debate between Bismarck, Moltke and King Wilhelm if Paris was going to be bombarded and stormed or just sieged into submission. (snip)

As things stand, it even looks like something like the Siege of Paris, and the Battle of Sedan that preceded it, cannot actually happen in-game, since they were grand encirclements in which the heads of state of Prussia/France personally took part. At most maybe there will be small sieges and battles over which you have no control?

People saying "It's not a war game! You're just the political leader! It's unrealistic for the political leader to control the war directly! Who cares about encirclements!" need to reckon with France's actual political leader being an actual POW due to his actual poor conduct of an actual war that lead to him being actually captured in an actual encirclement on an actual battlefield!
 
  • 16
  • 1Like
  • 1
Reactions:

Paul-Alain Léger

Second Lieutenant
66 Badges
Sep 12, 2018
102
668
  • Europa Universalis IV: Pre-order
  • Divine Wind
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Together for Victory
  • Victoria 3 Sign Up
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
  • Pride of Nations
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
  • Crusader Kings II: Horse Lords
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cossacks
  • Crusader Kings II: Conclave
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Colonel
  • Crusader Kings II: Reapers Due
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rights of Man
  • Battle for Bosporus
  • Crusader Kings II: Monks and Mystics
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mandate of Heaven
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Death or Dishonor
  • Age of Wonders III
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cradle of Civilization
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rule Britannia
  • Europa Universalis IV: Dharma
  • Shadowrun Returns
  • Shadowrun: Dragonfall
  • Shadowrun: Hong Kong
  • Europa Universalis III
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Crusader Kings II: Holy Fury
  • Europa Universalis IV: Golden Century
  • Imperator: Rome Deluxe Edition
  • Imperator: Rome
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Imperator: Rome Sign Up
  • Hearts of Iron IV: La Resistance
  • Imperator: Rome - Magna Graecia
  • Victoria 2
  • Europa Universalis 4: Emperor
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Crusader Kings II: Sunset Invasion
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
  • Crusader Kings II: The Republic
  • Crusader Kings II: Rajas of India
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
  • Crusader Kings II: Charlemagne
As things stand, it even looks like something like the Siege of Paris, and the Battle of Sedan that preceded it, cannot actually happen in-game, since they were grand encirclements in which the heads of state of Prussia/France personally took part. At most maybe there will be small sieges and battles over which you have no control?

People saying "It's not a war game! You're just the political leader! It's unrealistic for the political leader to control the war directly! Who cares about encirclements!" need to reckon with France's actual political leader being an actual POW due to his actual poor conduct of an actual war that lead to him being actually captured in an actual encirclement on an actual battlefield!
Yeah the same people who say you're the political leader so you should not have a say at all in a war, are the same people who are perfectly fine for the political leader to micromanage how many people will work in each factory
 
  • 18
  • 3
  • 2Haha
Reactions:

SirArag

Recruit
102 Badges
Jun 19, 2016
2
4
  • Semper Fi
  • Impire
  • King Arthur II
  • Knights of Pen and Paper +1 Edition
  • Magicka
  • Majesty 2 Collection
  • A Game of Dwarves
  • Naval War: Arctic Circle
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Victoria: Revolutions
  • March of the Eagles
  • Sengoku
  • Victoria 2: A House Divided
  • Victoria 2: Heart of Darkness
  • Pillars of Eternity
  • Cities: Skylines - After Dark
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cossacks
  • Cities: Skylines - Snowfall
  • Stellaris
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • Hearts of Iron III: Their Finest Hour
  • Cities in Motion 2
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Crusader Kings II: Charlemagne
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Crusader Kings II: Rajas of India
  • Crusader Kings II: The Republic
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
  • Crusader Kings II: Sunset Invasion
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • Hearts of Iron III Collection
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • For the Motherland
  • Europa Universalis IV: Call to arms event
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
  • Magicka: Wizard Wars Founder Wizard
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Cities: Skylines
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
  • Hearts of Iron IV: No Step Back
  • War of the Vikings
  • Crusader Kings II: Conclave
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mare Nostrum
  • Victoria 2
  • Hearts of Iron IV Sign-up
They talk in the DD about generals with certain traits being more prone to Risky Maneuvers. Now what player interaction there is with those, how often they happen, are there counters, etc. we don't know and I guess we have to wait until the battle/combat DD is posted. Is it like HOI4 tactics which provide modifiers for a few ticks? Or does it cover the whole next battle? (we do know there will be multiple battles on the front - and, glory be!, they are shorter than most Paradox battles)
Yes, I know and I agree. We'll have to wait for more details. Until then everything's just a speculation.
It could already work similar to what I've said or it could be completely different.
 
Jan 19, 2019
35
78
It's true that this is a result of the greater focus on diplomacy and economy, but your reasoning is entirely wrong. The economy and political gameplay is intended to be involved enough that you will be able to focus solely on it during peacetime and have a complete gameplay experience, it's meant to stand alone as a complete gameplay loop. The problem is, that none of this goes away when you start a war, in fact it the economic side of the game will likely become more hectic than normal due to the costs of warfare. Add the warfare mechanics on that, and you have an an additional gameplay system on added just as your previous complete gameplay system goes into overdrive. Thus, any warfare system they add must be simple enough that you can be able to do it while also focusing on the economical/diplomatic/political stuff at the same time without things becoming too cumbersome.
This is not simple, this is disappointing and it fails to recreate important part of the world history, which is war.

It is arcadish, it is barebones, it is without imagination, it is without immersion, it is empty, and with this type of warfare, we actualy don't even need the map.
The finish of war is already precalculated in cpu memory, the moment when you declare war the cpu know who will win.

Yes you can try defend this, be my guest, you have right to your opinion, but to me and many otheres, this is an absolute fail.

What is more disappointing is the fact that devs. Could make (if they wanted to) a perfect warfare, but their intention was to make us "skip" or bored with war so that we concentrate on pops.

And one more thing.
If everything would be achievable with diplomacy every army of this world would stop existing.
 
  • 18
  • 11
Reactions: