Battles length

[zivf22]

You can add a retreat Option with morale loss

 

[pikaemperor]

How could this last a year?

Swarm strats, calculate to reinforce just before shattering and retreat the low morale stack just keep 1k stack with general. Don't have screens from the battles but.

 

[gdj]

...but i also suggested to eliminate RNG elements (so no flip of a coin) so only Thing remains is your army composition AT morale Generals and other varaialbe that can be influenced so they now have a bigger Impact for each battle day.

...so that France with their god generals and Elan always win? No, thanks. Again, RNG is necessary for balance.

 

[SgtSchmidt11]

This is the clue!
When I attack enemy, there is so much time that troops from the other side of country can join. It's completely unreal and ahistorical and ends with all the forces from both sides concentrated in one only province and battle of mega-stacks. That means less army micro-management, because I almost always have time to help my troops that are somewhere else. I have no possibility to crush one enemy to take care of another. If I try to do so, I will fight with both simultanously.

This is even more annoying when fighting on seas. Every bigger naval battle end like this - the whole my fleet vs. the whole fleet of rival and the one who loses, loses the war on sea (it's almost always impossible to rebuild fleet after such a battle before war ends)

I know - it's hard to invent better system. But I believe it's possible. It was possible to improve the fortresses system (that was as old as EU serie), it was possible to change traditional trade system and get rid of static historical events from EU2 (I couldn't imagine the game without them those times). I thing it is also possible.

I thing the troops in one province shouldn't be obliged to fight. There could be percentage probability of battle modified by offensive or defensive attidute of units or some other mechanism. I see some possibilities to make things better.

You can manually retreat (which unlocks in enough time for you to avoid suprise armies and navies.)

Also the percentage thing would get so incredibly annoying. Imagine a setting for guerilla (or defensive) and you basically can't engage the enemy while they steal your provinces (the easy ones) for free.

 

[SgtSchmidt11]

Swarm strats, calculate to reinforce just before shattering and retreat the low morale stack just keep 1k stack with general. Don't have screens from the battles but.

Meh, that's too gamey for me.

 

[zivf22]

...so that France with their god generals and Elan always win? No, thanks. Again, RNG is necessary for balance.

They wont win if the enemy manages to allocate a bigger stack with Terrain Advantages and and reasonable General. And France wont be able to reinforce that battle with an army stationed in brittany

 

[gdj]

Swarm strats, calculate to reinforce just before shattering and retreat the low morale stack just keep 1k stack with general. Don't have screens from the battles but.

Ah, yes, selective retreat. I never used this tactic excessively, never felt the need to.

But 1 year..and with that tech difference..your are to be congratulated sire, umm, i mean chief

 

[Tacticus101]

You can add a retreat Option with morale loss

How do you retreat from a battle shorter than a day?

 

[gdj]

Meh, that's too gamey for me.

Why gamey? This noria-like system was used (in a somewhat similar form) even as late as 1916 in Verdun, far beyond the timframe here..

 

[zivf22]

Also the percentage thing would get so incredibly annoying. Imagine a setting for guerilla (or defensive) and you basically can't engage the enemy while they steal your provinces (the easy ones) for free

larger armies shouldnt be able to conduct Guerilla warfare (30k troops hanging out in forests would starve). And smaller appropriate one should nt have the capacity to siege

 

[zivf22]

How do you retreat from a battle shorter than a day?

there can be a disengage button added (as an idea)

 

[pikaemperor]

Ah, yes, selective retreat. I never used this tactic excessively, never felt the need to.

But 1 year..and with that tech difference..your are to be congratulated sire, umm, i mean chief

I started using selective retreat strats after playing as a horde, microing merc infantry armies to act as meat sheild to hit with full strength cav in the shock fase in home plain territory results in unexpected for the ai stack wipes.

 

[Holgard]

Other thing that maybe did not happen in history: Two armies, upon finding themselves within the same administrative or geographic division immediately teleporting to each other to commence mêlée.

Wait what? I could have sworn all historical battles began with the Pokémon Battle theme.

 

[ChildeR]

Yes there woudlnt be reinforcements coming from the other side of your empire, but i also suggested to eliminate RNG elements (so no flip of a coin) so only Thing remains is your army composition AT morale Generals and other varaialbe that can be influenced so they now have a bigger Impact for each battle day.

If there was no RNG, why would the weaker army ever engage?

Wars would be an infinite chase after armies you never catch, or trivial to win by the superior side, or 100% down to sieges. None of those seem attractive compared to the status quo.

 

[SgtSchmidt11]

Why gamey? This noria-like system was used (in a somewhat similar form) even as late as 1916 in Verdun, far beyond the timframe here..

Because the AI doesn't use it. I get that it's real battlefield tactics.

BUT

both sides in a real war would use it. The AI isn't capable hence = gamey.

I'd much rather win via planning and strategy then gamey tactics that the AI can't handle.

I mean it's 100% a strategy game and 0% tactics in its intent. And so I play it that way.

 

[zivf22]

If there was no RNG, why would the weaker army ever engage?

because the weaker Nation has a better General, army composition or more discipline. we assume both have same size stacks because of attirtion

 

[gdj]

because the weaker Nation has a better General, army composition or more discipline. we assume both have same size stacks because of attirtion

How should a weaker nation reliably get good generals? Where should the AT come from if they cant risk "fast" battles? How can smaller nations afford ideal army compositions with plenty of cav early game? Sorry, but i dont find this very convincing.

 

[pikaemperor]

Because the AI doesn't use it. I get that it's real battlefield tactics.

BUT

both sides in a real war would use it. The AI isn't capable hence = gamey.

I'd much rather win via planning and strategy then gamey tactics that the AI can't handle.

I mean it's 100% a strategy game and 0% tactics in its intent. And so I play it that way.

The ai is unable to chose idea groups based on need they pick from a list that each nation has and nether cand they drop an idea group of feed vassals, so by your logic if the player pick an idea group not in that list or feeds vassals it is gamey.

 

[zivf22]

How should a weaker nation reliably get good generals? Where should the AT come from if they cant risk "fast" battles? How can smaller nations afford ideal army compositions with plenty of cav early game? Sorry, but i dont find this very convincing.

We assume russia declares war on prussia in 1750. Both have stacks of same size no to exceed supply Limits. Prussia might have a few stack in comparison of russia but better organized troops

 

[pikaemperor]

We assume russia declares war on prussia in 1750. Both have stacks of same size no to exceed supply Limits. Prussia might have a few stack in comparison of russia but better organized troops

Doesn't morale represent the organization of armies too.