Later in the game, money isn't a big problem, as you can easily fill your forcelimits with all kinds of regiments. Lategame artillery is very, very lethal and will be easily worth its money.
Artillery discussion
- Thread starter KPJ
- Start date
-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
Later in the game, money isn't a big problem, as you can easily fill your forcelimits with all kinds of regiments. Lategame artillery is very, very lethal and will be easily worth its money.
Thanks guys this has been very helpful, I'll check out that link on army composition shortly.
In my current game I'm one tech behind Swivel Cannon (using Leather Cannon, I believe), and have made one army with artillery involved (13 inf/4 cav/7 art). I've used this army in a big war and once again the maneuverability kind of screwed it up. I use about 6 or 7 armies each of 24 units, that split into 3 groups of 8 when the major enemy stack(s) have been defeated. The major enemy stacks, there were about 3 of them, each with 21-23k troops, and they basically refused to engage any of my big stacks, so it came down to chasing and cornering, for which the artillery army wasn't too helpful. I guess I'll have to find an enemy with a bigger stack to really test them in battle.
In my current game I'm one tech behind Swivel Cannon (using Leather Cannon, I believe), and have made one army with artillery involved (13 inf/4 cav/7 art). I've used this army in a big war and once again the maneuverability kind of screwed it up. I use about 6 or 7 armies each of 24 units, that split into 3 groups of 8 when the major enemy stack(s) have been defeated. The major enemy stacks, there were about 3 of them, each with 21-23k troops, and they basically refused to engage any of my big stacks, so it came down to chasing and cornering, for which the artillery army wasn't too helpful. I guess I'll have to find an enemy with a bigger stack to really test them in battle.
This is an interesting post.
This sounds like Victoria II, where the same stuff regarding artillery applies, but you are almost forced to use it, because combat width decreases. If your support limit is 50 regiments, but combat width is going to be 20, an army with lots of artillery sits there shooting the whole time, whereas an army with lots of infantry would consist of a bunch of guys behind the main line, smoking cigarettes.
Artillery sound like a good deal in EU3 as well, but there are two problems that don't seem to be present in Victoria. The first is that if you go against someone with an army that is the same size, and one is (for example) 6 infantry and 2 cav, and the other is 4 infantry and 4 artillery, the artillery is going to have to be pretty potent to make up for having four extra flanking units. The other is that (at least in the early game, I haven't played in the later game yet) a primary way of killing an enemy stack is to force a retreat and then beat them to the retreat province. An attacker without artillery could out-race a beaten defender who is stuck dragging his artillery, and an attacker with artillery could reorganize his artillery out, and chase without them. It sounds like if you lose a battle when you have artillery in your stack, you would be dead meat.
I remember that I loved it in HTTT when the AI started using artillery, because pursuit was so much easier.
Loaded up a save game at land tech 32.
Artillery (swivel cannon)
Offensive/Defence Fire: 3/3
Offensive/Defence Shock: 2/2
Offensive/Defence Moral: 4/4
Manoeuvre: 2
Cost: 0.75 ducats/month
Infantry (Highlanders):
Offensive/Defensive Fire: 3/4
Offensive/Defensive Shock: 6/3
Offensive/Defensive Moral: 8/4
Manoeuvre: 1
Cost: 0.32/month
So...no.
with 1.75 fire modifier for artillery and 1.1 for infantry , artillery has some uses , maybe the bonus defense , the stats vary depending on levels
That army composition link is really informative and helpful.
Yes, it seems that by land tech 25-30 (depending on your funds) it becomes worth it to put artillery in your armies. And if you're going to do it, it's best to put it in equal numbers to your infantry, because if you're going to bolster some infantry, why not all? I think for myself I will have 2-3 doomstacks that have 4 cav, 12-16 inf, 12-16 art. Then a few other stacks of 4 cav, 20-25 inf, for moving about better. Of course, once the majority of the enemy force is destroyed these can all be reorganized in enemy lands for sieging, sending the correct number of artilleries to the higher level forts. Correct me if I'm wrong, but you want essentially double the number of cannons to the number of defenders in the fort, to get the best bonus, yes? I mean, obviously you could put 6000 artillery against a 1000 garrison (lvl 1 fort) to get a huge bonus, but economically, you'll get a nice bonus with double, right?
Yes, it seems that by land tech 25-30 (depending on your funds) it becomes worth it to put artillery in your armies. And if you're going to do it, it's best to put it in equal numbers to your infantry, because if you're going to bolster some infantry, why not all? I think for myself I will have 2-3 doomstacks that have 4 cav, 12-16 inf, 12-16 art. Then a few other stacks of 4 cav, 20-25 inf, for moving about better. Of course, once the majority of the enemy force is destroyed these can all be reorganized in enemy lands for sieging, sending the correct number of artilleries to the higher level forts. Correct me if I'm wrong, but you want essentially double the number of cannons to the number of defenders in the fort, to get the best bonus, yes? I mean, obviously you could put 6000 artillery against a 1000 garrison (lvl 1 fort) to get a huge bonus, but economically, you'll get a nice bonus with double, right?
You're not proving anything with that. The fire and shock modifiers are more important than the unit type pips.
Artillery (swivel cannon)
Offensive/Defence Fire: 3/3 x 1.75 = 5.25/5.25
Offensive/Defence Shock: 2/2 x 0.25 = .5/.5
Offensive/Defence Moral: 4/4
Manoeuvre: 2
Cost: 0.75 ducats/month
Infantry (Highlanders):
Offensive/Defensive Fire: 3/4 x 1.1= 3.3/4.4
Offensive/Defensive Shock: 6/3 x 1.1= 6.6/3.3
Offensive/Defensive Moral: 8/4
Manoeuvre: 1
Cost: 0.32/month
So, numerically, you're right. The cost doesn't make the actual fire value worth it (it's less than double, the cost is more than double). But with the back-rank ability of the artillery, it improves your infantry to be 5.4ish on the attack, 6.6ish on the defense (for fire), and additionally, better sieging ability. Then again, less maneuverability.
So... sometimes. But not in every army. Definitely worth it for a sort of elite army that can't be beaten by enemies.
Offensive/Defence Fire: 3/3 x 1.75 = 5.25/5.25
Offensive/Defence Shock: 2/2 x 0.25 = .5/.5
Offensive/Defence Moral: 4/4
Manoeuvre: 2
Cost: 0.75 ducats/month
Infantry (Highlanders):
Offensive/Defensive Fire: 3/4 x 1.1= 3.3/4.4
Offensive/Defensive Shock: 6/3 x 1.1= 6.6/3.3
Offensive/Defensive Moral: 8/4
Manoeuvre: 1
Cost: 0.32/month
So, numerically, you're right. The cost doesn't make the actual fire value worth it (it's less than double, the cost is more than double). But with the back-rank ability of the artillery, it improves your infantry to be 5.4ish on the attack, 6.6ish on the defense (for fire), and additionally, better sieging ability. Then again, less maneuverability.
So... sometimes. But not in every army. Definitely worth it for a sort of elite army that can't be beaten by enemies.
You can´t simply compare those numbers since they are only one part of the equation. You have to take the modifiers into account. Cavalry gets a huge shock modifier in the early game, but since it doesn´t evolve much, it makes less of an impact later on. Artillery on the other hand gets a huge fire modifier late game.
Also, you will have to take flanking and the second line into account. Cavalry can flank which will give you an extra punch in the shock face. Artillery can fire from the second line. And since there is a limit to how broad the first line can be, artillery will be decisive in combat between two large stacks. If you have two lines of fire power and you enemy only one, it doesn´t matter if he outnumbers you. The only thing his extra infantry in the second line will be doing is dying.
So then the most effective stack would be 4 cav, and each inf combined with an artillery? something like 4/12/12
Pretty much seems so, fleetothemoon, notwithstanding maneuverability of artillery armies is slower.
Another thing I'm uncertain of, however, is: Is there certainty where units will be positioned?
If you had an army of 3 inf and 3 art, would the combat place the artillery behind the infantry always? Or do they line up against a foe of 6 inf, to have everybody toe to toe? Or do the artillery stay behind the infantry and the enemy extra 3 infantry are facing nothing while your artillery empowered 3 inf. face their first 3 inf.?
Another thing I'm uncertain of, however, is: Is there certainty where units will be positioned?
If you had an army of 3 inf and 3 art, would the combat place the artillery behind the infantry always? Or do they line up against a foe of 6 inf, to have everybody toe to toe? Or do the artillery stay behind the infantry and the enemy extra 3 infantry are facing nothing while your artillery empowered 3 inf. face their first 3 inf.?
Those calculations aren't done the right way. The unit type pips/ratings are just added to the 0-9 rolls that each unit makes during combat. This makes the impact of unit pips much smaller than your calculation suggests. They do matter, just not as drastically.
Think about it; a unit type with zero pips can still do damage. That's because the basic 0-9 roll is still there.
Gahh, that shows me for trying to act smart!
So does the modifier (by tech level: 1.1 for infantry at tech 32) affect the die roll and not the pips? Or does it affect the pips, and then the total number affects the die roll? And it IS a multiplier, right? Or is it simply added to.. the die roll (or the pips)?
So does the modifier (by tech level: 1.1 for infantry at tech 32) affect the die roll and not the pips? Or does it affect the pips, and then the total number affects the die roll? And it IS a multiplier, right? Or is it simply added to.. the die roll (or the pips)?
The basic die roll is unaffected. The die roll is added to the rating of the attacking unit (if any), and the rating of the defending unit is subtracted. Terrain penalty, if any, is subtracted, and any leader bonus is applied. That number is then truncated (eg. stuff above 12 is reduced to "just" 12) and multiplied by the fire or shock modifier as appropriate and the discipline rating, and multiplied by 6. That's the number of casualties.
It's described here. Just ignore the stuff about 5-day phases, they only last 3 days now (and their order is reversed, AFAIK).
It's described here. Just ignore the stuff about 5-day phases, they only last 3 days now (and their order is reversed, AFAIK).
First, what you try to prove here is that artillery is worse than infantry if money is the restricting resource. Yes, infantry is more cost-effective in terms of ducats than artillery. But the point I was making is that ducats aren't the limiting factor late-game, manpower and force limits are.
Second, as many people pointed out already, you make the common mistake that 2 pips are 2x better than 1 pip. The pip are added to 0-9 die rolls, which are used to calculate casualties by multiplying the modified die roll with the appropriate modifier.
So take for example land 32, no terrain or leader modifiers and your units and we let the swivel cannons fight against the highlanders. Artillery will do (4.5 + 3 - 4) x1.75 = 7 damage in the fire phase on average. The 4.5 is the averae die roll, the 3 is the offensive pips for artillry and the 4 is the Highlander's defensive fire, the 1.75 is the fire modifier for artillery at land 32. Likewise, in the shock phase artillery will do (4.5 + 2 - 3)x 0.25 = 0.875 damage.
For the Highlanders against the artillery the calculations are : (4.5 + 3 -3)x1.1 = 4.95 damage in fire phase and (4.5 + 6 - 2)*1.1 = 9.35.
Total average damage in both phases: 7.9 for artillery, 14.3 for infantry. So one on one the infantry is indeed better than artillery. But artillery should fight from the back. Only artillery can fight from the second line, applying half its damage and lending half its defensive pips to the unit in front of it. This basically means that artillery "upgrades" the infantry in front of it, making it more deadly and resistent to damage.
So if we take a highlander versus a highlander backed up by artillery (which gives +1 defense for fire and shock, as I round down), we get the following:
Lone highlander shock damage: (4.5 + 6 - 4 )x 1.1 = 7.15
Lone highlander fire damage: (4.5 + 3 - 5 )x 1.1 = 2.75
Total lone highlander damage: 9.9
Highlander + art shock damage: (4.5 + 6 - 3)x 1.1 + 1/2*0.875 = 8.69
Highlander + art fire damage: (4.5 + 3 - 4 )x 1.1 +1/2 * 7 = 7.35
Total Highlander + art damage: 16.0
As you can see, the highlander/art combo does much more damage against the unsupported highlanders than vice versa. This means that you can win battles against larger armies that do not have artillery, as an artillery-backed army can do much more damage per front unit than the other army, which can only add four more frontline units even if it outnumbers the artillery army to a large degree.
In practice, you will see that around tech level 26 armies with lots of artillery will win battles agains armies without artillery and that around tech level 40 artillery is outright lethal and dominating. I don't care if its not "cost-effective" versus infantry, at that point you will lose battles if you don't bring artillery.
Last edited:
Some rules of thumb:
(1) The first time ART becomes really worthwhile in battle is around 1500 (to be exact: 1518 (land tech 17, fire modifier 0.5) or 1530 (land tech 18, fire modifier 1.0)).
(2) From this point on, ART will stay almost the same for a whole century. The next noteable increase of firepower is around 1644 (land tech 29, firepower 1.5). At the same time the shock modifier increases to 0.2, allowing ART to deal at least minimal shock damage in melee. Try CAV heavy armies supported by INF and ART during this timeframe.
(3) Around 1700, ART in your army is a must have: From LT 29 onwards, ART becomes stronger and stronger with each tech level. In 1690, it already has a 2.0 fire modifier, in 1700 it has 2.5, in 1709 it has 3.0.
(4) Your ideal combat-power-per-frontage army should consist of 50% frontline troops and 50% ART.
*giggles*
When fighting 4 vs 8, half the combat power comes from flanking. When fighting 6 vs 10, only 40% does. Even during the early game, combat size will regulary go up to 20k per siode, and while fighting 16 vs 24, only 20% combat power comes from flanking. During the mid and late game, some battles will have a size of 50 to 80k - and around 1750, I have seen battles with more than 100k troops involved on both sides.
(2) In fact, this can even be turned around:
The smaller your frontage in comparison to your enemy, the less exposed your units are - and more enemy units will sit around doing nothing.
(3) ART is in fact a great protection from being overrun:
Since they start in the second row, they provide an additional morale buffer. If you retreat manually once your frontline collapses, your ART can still fight in the next battle and allow you to lose a 2nd battle. If you manage to retreat at the end of the month, an ART heavy army can even survive 3-4 battles while on retreat.
And I still remember that MP game where we played the seven years war: My prussian army utterly clobbered by two 0 vs 9 rolls in the deceisive battle, retreating towards Pommern - during the following battles, I had decent die rolls, weakening the chasing army - until in the 5th battle, I rolled an 8 vs 1 and a 9 vs 2, overrunning them. Gosh, that was so awesome.
(4) And we should not forget: Ever since fire is now (again) the first combat phase, a decent die roll during the first 5 rounds can become even more devestating with ART.
When it comes to losses, late game battles usually are very bloody. I remember a fight in the same MP game mentioned above, 80k prussians vs. 110k austrians with losses of 6k vs. 11k per side per round. Sometimes you don't even overrun the retreating army in the following battle, you simple kill all their remaining men in combat.
(1) The first time ART becomes really worthwhile in battle is around 1500 (to be exact: 1518 (land tech 17, fire modifier 0.5) or 1530 (land tech 18, fire modifier 1.0)).
(2) From this point on, ART will stay almost the same for a whole century. The next noteable increase of firepower is around 1644 (land tech 29, firepower 1.5). At the same time the shock modifier increases to 0.2, allowing ART to deal at least minimal shock damage in melee. Try CAV heavy armies supported by INF and ART during this timeframe.
(3) Around 1700, ART in your army is a must have: From LT 29 onwards, ART becomes stronger and stronger with each tech level. In 1690, it already has a 2.0 fire modifier, in 1700 it has 2.5, in 1709 it has 3.0.
(4) Your ideal combat-power-per-frontage army should consist of 50% frontline troops and 50% ART.
Well, I bet it is!
*giggles*
Well, since both games use the same combat system - yes, it is very similiar. And you are right - since the front is larger in EU3, ART is not so terrible overpowered as in Vicky.
(1) The larger stacks become, the less drastic is flanking:
When fighting 4 vs 8, half the combat power comes from flanking. When fighting 6 vs 10, only 40% does. Even during the early game, combat size will regulary go up to 20k per siode, and while fighting 16 vs 24, only 20% combat power comes from flanking. During the mid and late game, some battles will have a size of 50 to 80k - and around 1750, I have seen battles with more than 100k troops involved on both sides.
(2) In fact, this can even be turned around:
The smaller your frontage in comparison to your enemy, the less exposed your units are - and more enemy units will sit around doing nothing.
(3) ART is in fact a great protection from being overrun:
Since they start in the second row, they provide an additional morale buffer. If you retreat manually once your frontline collapses, your ART can still fight in the next battle and allow you to lose a 2nd battle. If you manage to retreat at the end of the month, an ART heavy army can even survive 3-4 battles while on retreat.
And I still remember that MP game where we played the seven years war: My prussian army utterly clobbered by two 0 vs 9 rolls in the deceisive battle, retreating towards Pommern - during the following battles, I had decent die rolls, weakening the chasing army - until in the 5th battle, I rolled an 8 vs 1 and a 9 vs 2, overrunning them. Gosh, that was so awesome.
(4) And we should not forget: Ever since fire is now (again) the first combat phase, a decent die roll during the first 5 rounds can become even more devestating with ART.
Well, ever since CAV received the same movespeed as INF, this has become much less of an issue. Outracing is only possible in large provinces or with a good leader (maneuver 3+). Although I agree, the reduced movement speed can be cumbersome.
When it comes to losses, late game battles usually are very bloody. I remember a fight in the same MP game mentioned above, 80k prussians vs. 110k austrians with losses of 6k vs. 11k per side per round. Sometimes you don't even overrun the retreating army in the following battle, you simple kill all their remaining men in combat.
Last edited:
In my experience, artillery will always be in the second line unless your infanty and cavalry have no morale, forcing the artillery to fight in the first line. In your example, the 3inf + 3 art would line up 3 units wide, while the 6 inf would have 5 infantry on the front line, with 1 infantry on the second line doing nothing.
Yes, and unless changed in DW (I doubt so), this allows some nice extra exploitation (imo it is an exploit) with proper micromanagement:
If you send a small army ahead of your main stack (one or two days are enough) the enemy will place a lot of units in the 2nd line during the battle setup. Once your main army arrives, the units in the 2nd row will not join the fight until their comrades on the frontline are broken, allowing you to outnumber an enemy who has more men than you.
An example:
Austria has a 18 INF / 2 CAV stack. Hesse has an 6 INF stack and a 8 INF / 2 CAV stack. Hesse's 6 INF stack will arrive one day before the main army.
During the first round, the battle setup will look like this:
(x INF, + CAV, # empty)
Once Hesse's main army arrives:
Now add some ART to these army setups and you will see how important ART is when it comes to unit placement and OOB:
ART will always take the second row, moving your excess melee units to the flanks, improving your OOB in case enemy reinforcements arrive.
If you send a small army ahead of your main stack (one or two days are enough) the enemy will place a lot of units in the 2nd line during the battle setup. Once your main army arrives, the units in the 2nd row will not join the fight until their comrades on the frontline are broken, allowing you to outnumber an enemy who has more men than you.
An example:
Austria has a 18 INF / 2 CAV stack. Hesse has an 6 INF stack and a 8 INF / 2 CAV stack. Hesse's 6 INF stack will arrive one day before the main army.
During the first round, the battle setup will look like this:
(x INF, + CAV, # empty)
Code:
AUS ##[COLOR="Red"]xxxxxxxxxx[/COLOR]## or ###[COLOR="Red"]xxxxxxxx[/COLOR]###
AUS ##[COLOR="Red"]+xxxxxxxx+[/COLOR]## #[COLOR="Red"]+xxxxxxxxxx+[/COLOR]#
HES ####[COLOR="YellowGreen"]xxxxxx[/COLOR]#### ####[COLOR="YellowGreen"]xxxxxx[/COLOR]####
HES ############## ##############Once Hesse's main army arrives:
Code:
AUS ##[COLOR="Red"]xxxxxxxxxx[/COLOR]## or ####[COLOR="Red"]xxxxxxxx[/COLOR]####
AUS ##[COLOR="Red"]+xxxxxxxx+[/COLOR]## ##[COLOR="Red"]+xxxxxxxxxx+[/COLOR]##
HES [COLOR="YellowGreen"]+xxxxxxxxxxxx+[/COLOR] [COLOR="YellowGreen"]+xxxxxxxxxxxxxx+[/COLOR]
HES ######[COLOR="YellowGreen"]xx[/COLOR]###### ################Now add some ART to these army setups and you will see how important ART is when it comes to unit placement and OOB:
ART will always take the second row, moving your excess melee units to the flanks, improving your OOB in case enemy reinforcements arrive.
Last edited:
But doesn't the enemy unit placement change during the next days, adapting to the new situation? This exploit will give an advantage only during these few days, right?