Automated warfare

[Lindaegan]

I have a feeling that you sould stick to Victoria 3, for your own good. Because your kind is the reason Victroia 3 warfare is fundamentally and permanently broken, unfun and overall disgusting. I do not wish same fate to EUV.

There, you can enjoy "press to win war" button and clicking construction sectors all you like. But please, do not soil Europa Universalis with mobile and cookie clicker mechanics and ideas.

Do you hate Vic3 more than you like EUIV? Because it sounds like you do. This kind of vitriol is hilariously unhelpful, and I suggest you resist the urge to spew it whenever the letters "v", "i" and "c" are strung together.

 

[stallins]

Then Vicky 3 is automation, because I constantly have troops reassign to other fronts Joking an tomayto-tomahtos aside, it's a system that requires very little manual input and offers very little agency in how wars are conducted. At that point, whether it also assigns your armies or leaves that part to you is a meaningless distinction.

Mate the only reason they allow you to even do that is because it would be even more of a broken mess where your formation run around the world doing insane crap.

 

[stallins]

What they really need to do is balance the war score system so that you don't always need to have a total war in like 1520. At least in the beginning of the game. The less you need to carpet siege, the less tedious it is to manage your stacks and the less need for automation.

Also, if they do it how it works in CK3, where conquering the main city/castle takes the whole province that would also help a lot.

Yep, i would imagine it the same, wars in imperator where not too bad since you can occupy pretty large swathes of area with a single army.T

EU neved had issue with unrealistic army sizes. It is better to have million-strong army in napoleonic period than to constantly realisticly lose 50% of your army to diseases. Fun>realism.

The problem with eu4 was that supply limit didn't scale so you had to always split your armies causing a bit of a micro headache. If eu5 could solve this with some more interesting logistics so you don't always have to have your army split up over ridiculous distances during the time period.

 

[TitaniumMan91]

I have a feeling that you sould stick to Victoria 3, for your own good. Because your kind is the reason Victroia 3 warfare is fundamentally and permanently broken, unfun and overall disgusting. I do not wish same fate to EUV.

There, you can enjoy "press to win war" button and clicking construction sectors all you like. But please, do not soil Europa Universalis with mobile and cookie clicker mechanics and ideas.

If you have to go to my Vic3 forum posts to win an argument about what I've said in the PC forums, you've already lost.

Do you hate Vic3 more than you like EUIV? Because it sounds like you do. This kind of vitriol is hilariously unhelpful, and I suggest you resist the urge to spew it whenever the letters "v", "i" and "c" are strung together.

He's a great example of the sort who make threads like this a chore. They would rather endlessly hate on game A than talk about mechanics for game Z.

 

[Fizbun]

Yes, it will be similar to that one, but more evolved.

I kinda did like the feature in Imperator where I had to bribe generals of legions and levies if they became disloyal, so they would actually do what I want (fight battles, get disbanded, get replaced)

 

[Vlad123]

I kinda did like the feature in Imperator where I had to bribe generals of legions and levies if they became disloyal, so they would actually do what I want (fight battles, get disbanded, get replaced)

"I corrupt you, i corrupt your cow, i corrupt your soldiers, i corrupt your family" half-quote mushu fum Mulan.

 

[Álvaro Núñez de Lara]

I kinda did like the feature in Imperator where I had to bribe generals of legions and levies if they became disloyal, so they would actually do what I want (fight battles, get disbanded, get replaced)

I hope we have something similar here. Where if the levies you raise from a estate you piss off that estate, you would lose control of that army.

 

[Arbus]

I would expect project Caesar to get similar automation to Imperator, where if I remember correctly, you can hand over stacks for the AI to control.

I cannot overstate how much I loved this feature. Once you grow to a certain size, I can not be bothered to micro all armies, especially those in far away provinces. If there's a rebel next to you, kill them. If you're suffering attrition staying in one province, move to another. If a big doomstack is coming, move away. Just simple basic directions, I shouldn't need to tell them all the time while I'm focused on the front that really matters.

 

[Azkiol]

If PC goes with I:R style automation, I really do hope there's a way to group different stacks together and have the ai manage them as such. It got really annoying in I:R when I'd set a few stacks to 'Carpet Seige' and I'd end up with them all seiging the same fortless territory. Similar issue with having multiple 20k stacks on 'Independent Operations' attack the same 10k enemy stack.

If not that, at least have the automated ai be aware of other units' existence and act accordingly.

 

[Karalis123]

Yeah why don’t we automate everything? Why bother doing things when AI can do it for you?! Also please put a Subway Surfers video in game so I don’t get bored while playing!!! Now that I think about it: why play this game at all??

 

[ClavintheGreat]

Yeah why don’t we automate everything? Why bother doing things when AI can do it for you?! Also please put a Subway Surfers video in game so I don’t get bored while playing!!! Now that I think about it: why play this game at all??

This is a disingenuous argument. Do better.

 

[Karalis123]

This is a disingenuous argument. Do better.

It was just a joke, don't take it too seriously. I actually agree that some complex things (especially the ones that are tedious to deal with as a big nation) should be automatable but not that everything should be done by AI just because it's not super fun and require a little bit of effort. I would like automatisation like in Imperator where you can give some simple task to armies and they will do it. I wouldn't like war becoming completely abstracted. And it's true that it would be more realistic and less tedious but then why play this game at all?

 

[Kabian]

To be honest, i thought this post was a low effort bait to make people angry, and it seems it worked.

Vic3 "warfare" is not and should not considered a real warfare system.

In fact, a lot of discussions on vic3 forums defend the current system because "vic3 is not a warfare focused game and should never be".

Leave the "automated" system to vic3 and let project tinto have an actual war model thats well though and designed.

 

[jumbi]

To be honest, i thought this post was a low effort bait to make people angry, and it seems it worked.

Vic3 "warfare" is not and should not considered a real warfare system.

In fact, a lot of discussions on vic3 forums defend the current system because "vic3 is not a warfare focused game and should never be".

Leave the "automated" system to vic3 and let project tinto have an actual war model thats well though and designed.

OP is asking for automation akin to Victoria 3's economy (private investment construction) rather than abstraction as in its warfare system - note how the economy is what is called out rather than war when referencing V3. The mention of Victoria 3 at all seems to have raised some hackles, but Johan confirmed the automation approach, akin to private investment and more appositely Imperator's army stacks is what will be taken in PC:

Yes, it will be similar to that one, but more evolved.

 

[Kabian]

OP is asking for automation akin to Victoria 3's economy (private investment construction) rather than abstraction as in its warfare system - note how the economy is what is called out rather than war when referencing V3. The mention of Victoria 3 at all seems to have raised some hackles, but Johan confirmed the automation approach, akin to private investment and more appositely Imperator's army stacks is what will be taken in PC:

The economy in vic3 at no point is automated.

You have to build every building (except some cases with private queue which its a simple random building generator with some biases), and then set every PM.

once you reach local goods (transportation, electricity) you have to manually set up every province so it works with these, and update all the relevant buildings PM, which can be 5-15 individually in each province.

The fact that random buildings appears every now and while does not make economy automated.

Trade furthermore, is 100% manual, so are taxes levels, consumption taxes, tax laws...

I would be way more interesting for the OP to actually provide a detailed HOW TO appart from "pls make eu5 play by itself while i look graph go up"

 

[jumbi]

It could certainly do with much, much more automation in my opinion I agree, but a minor degree of automation is present in the form of buildings self-developing. Imperator would have been a better example for OP to use for several reasons, I'm just clarifying that the ask here is in no way to use Victoria 3's warfare system as many people assumed. Something like this has been confirmed to be the case for PC as well, so I think everyone is happy

 

[greywulfos]

Do you hate Vic3 more than you like EUIV? Because it sounds like you do. This kind of vitriol is hilariously unhelpful, and I suggest you resist the urge to spew it whenever the letters "v", "i" and "c" are strung together.

Gotta start censoring it like I'm saying a swear word. V!ctoria 3

 

[Tibi088]

It could certainly do with much, much more automation in my opinion I agree, but a minor degree of automation is present in the form of buildings self-developing. Imperator would have been a better example for OP to use for several reasons, I'm just clarifying that the ask here is in no way to use Victoria 3's warfare system as many people assumed. Something like this has been confirmed to be the case for PC as well, so I think everyone is happy

My problem with that is while I would agree with the idea if implemented there would be nothing left to do, it would I think kill the game. The only thing you really can do in that game is manage the economy - no other aspect of that game would I consider to be done in a way that allows for an engaging gameplay. I mean seriously, what would you do in the game in its current form if you could automate most of the economy?

 

[Superdark33]

The funniest things about this part of the forum are both the anti-vic3 pity party going on and the weird auteur worship that Johan is going through right now especially since i can see names i recognise posting retrofitted Dune memes abiut Johan right now who used to post bile hatred at him during the development and release of Imperator.


I Hope forts auto capture territories adjecant to them like in Imperator so carpet sieging wouldnt be neccesary, or that otherwise theres off-map garrisons that can actually put up a defense and not just exist to be rolled over.

 

[z13ux]

I respectfully disagree. But warfare like Hoi4 could be interesting!