Changes compared to EUII

[Stoertebecker]

Hi there.

I'm going to participate in a For the Glory Mulitplayer (someone should tell the people, that it works nicely, by the way, it's a pity that most MP's in this forum never started for technical reasons). That's why I really would like to know some exact effects of the changes that were made in FTG 1.2 compared to EUII.

Conversion and colonization success chances now computed at arrival.
Colonists add 150 people to a colony. (A powerful change, by the way.)

Another important change is manpower: It now rises with each city level: Am I correct to state that it's like that?

• 1000: 0,25
• 5000: 0,33
• 10000: 0,4
• 20000: 0,5
• 40000: 0,6
• 80000: 0,7
• 200000: 0,75

This values modified by culture and nationalism: 0,7 for wrong culture, another 0,7, 0,8, 0,9 for nationalism.

It's an important change, since that means, that provinces with lower MP-values will now be more worthwhile for a wrong-culture conquerer. (Provinces with really high MP-values will slightly lose importance).
Did somebody test it? Could the developers correct me, so that we have precise information?


Another important change is, that enemy troops now kill much more of the population.
On the other hand: Rebel farms are much more difficult to set up, since rebels will disappear, if they haven't enough troops to besiege a city and there's no revolt risk in a province. So: If my spain want's to to lower population in atztec cities to less than 5000 inhabitants for cheaper conversion, it should do this before inheriting them.

Attrition and naval supply have obiously changed. 100 ships now can suffer naval supply attrition, land armies will now suffer much more attrition on higher technology levels than they did before. Naval attrition seems to be generally higher as well. This are good changes, but I'd really like to know, how exactly the new formula works.

Did I miss important points? Are there changes to the economy? Are there changes regarding the random events? Are there changes regarding combat power?

I'd really appreciate, if the developers could help to set up a faq section for FTG. Since the basics remain the same (at least, I guess so), it wouldn't be much work to set up a thread, where changes like those stated above are explained to the benevolent EUII-veteran.

 

[ConjurerDragon]

...
I'd really appreciate, if the developers could help to set up a faq section for FTG. Since the basics remain the same (at least, I guess so), it wouldn't be much work to set up a thread, where changes like those stated above are explained to the benevolent EUII-veteran.

You mean something like the development diarys in which severa of the changes from EU2 to FtG are explained?
http://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/showthread.php?429833-Development-Diary-Archive

 

[Stoertebecker]

You mean something like the development diarys in which severa of the changes from EU2 to FtG are explained?
http://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/showthread.php?429833-Development-Diary-Archive

No, I don't. I really loved the developement diaries, but they don't answer my questions.

 

[Therion]

I'm not a developer but I can answer most of these questions.

Conversion and colonization success chances now computed at arrival.

Yes.

Colonists add 150 people to a colony. (A powerful change, by the way.)

Yes, and this is moddable. (I would personally change it back to 100 in MP - AFAIK this change was meant to help the AI)

Another important change is manpower: It now rises with each city level: Am I correct to state that it's like that?

• 1000: 0,25
• 5000: 0,33
• 10000: 0,4
• 20000: 0,5
• 40000: 0,6
• 80000: 0,7
• 200000: 0,75

Not sure of the exact details but manpower change is now more linear. Basically it retains the values of EUII at 1000 and 20000 but has more levels in between. Your list is probably correct.

This values modified by culture and nationalism: 0,7 for wrong culture, another 0,7, 0,8, 0,9 for nationalism.

Correct for province income. For province manpower it's 0.7 for wrong culture and 0.5 for nationalism. Again, these are viewable in defines.txt and moddable.

It's an important change, since that means, that provinces with lower MP-values will now be more worthwhile for a wrong-culture conquerer. (Provinces with really high MP-values will slightly lose importance).
Did somebody test it? Could the developers correct me, so that we have precise information?

That seems to be the case. Taking only culture into account, the neutral amount of province MP with respect to EUII is 3.33 (from 0.7y = y-1). So the penalty for non-cultured provinces is decreased for provinces with less MP than that value and increased for provinces with more.

Another important change is, that enemy troops now kill much more of the population.

Yes, also moddable.

On the other hand: Rebel farms are much more difficult to set up, since rebels will disappear, if they haven't enough troops to besiege a city and there's no revolt risk in a province. So: If my spain want's to to lower population in atztec cities to less than 5000 inhabitants for cheaper conversion, it should do this before inheriting them.

Indeed.

Attrition and naval supply have obiously changed. 100 ships now can suffer naval supply attrition, land armies will now suffer much more attrition on higher technology levels than they did before. Naval attrition seems to be generally higher as well. This are good changes, but I'd really like to know, how exactly the new formula works.

Attrition values are viewable from defines.txt. I don't know if attrition is higher than before.

Did I miss important points? Are there changes to the economy? Are there changes regarding the random events? Are there changes regarding combat power?

One important change is Transport Capacity. Warships can now carry 2 and transports 3. Again, I would change them back to 1 and 2 for MP as this was mostly done to help the AI perform naval invasions.

The most crucial change that you should probably be aware of in MP is that controlled provinces now behave as if they are owned in terms of supply. Owners of provinces will have the same supply penalties in their own non-controlled provinces as they do when fighting in foreign lands. Consequently wars now significantly favour the attacker.

 

[Stoertebecker]

I know that most of the things are moddable. But I don't like to mod things, especially for Multiplayers (we will reduce colonist size to 100 for our coming MP, but little else, I hope). Usually, developers put a lot of efforts into things, to make them good.
I know, the culture in this forum is another and almost all multiplayers used at least WATK-maps. In the german SI-Forum, the community is quite conservative and almost always plays vanilla games.

Attrition values are viewable from defines.txt. I don't know if attrition is higher than before.

In the defines.txt, I find modifiers for maximum attrition and supply. But attrition is based on basetax and tech level (at least it was in EUII). In EUII, in the Napoleonic era, there was no attrition in non-looted plain provinces and very little in woods, for example. Yesterday I played a napoleonic campaign and found my troops suffering much more attrition than before. It was stated in the developers diaries, that the system has been overworked. I'd would like to know, how exactly.

One important change is Transport Capacity. Warships can now carry 2 and transports 3. Again, I would change them back to 1 and 2 for MP as this was mostly done to help the AI perform naval invasions.

The most crucial change that you should probably be aware of in MP is that controlled provinces now behave as if they are owned in terms of supply. Owners of provinces will have the same supply penalties in their own non-controlled provinces as they do when fighting in foreign lands. Consequently wars now significantly favour the attacker.

That's indeed important to know and the kind of information I hoped to find in this thread. Thanks, Therion.

Another thing I recently discovered: Annexations of countries with other religions and annexations of core provinces (in some cases) now are really cheap in BB - it's even cheaper to annex a country than to take a province in an offensive war. I never discovered this in my FTG-games, just because I was so used not to force-annex anyone.
But I'm still a little confused by the new system. I can annex Dulkadir (core) as Ottoman for 1 BB, but when I annex Mantua (core) with Venice, it costs me 4 BB?
Who can annex who for which costs of BB?

 

[Therion]

Usually, developers put a lot of efforts into things, to make them good.

True, but in some decisions SP mode understandly took precedence. So things can be good for SP but not that good for MP. In this case, there is hardly any conflict given that values are moddable.

But I'm still a little confused by the new system. I can annex Dulkadir (core) as Ottoman for 1 BB, but when I annex Mantua (core) with Venice, it costs me 4 BB?
Who can annex who for which costs of BB?

Hmm. Assuming you force-annexed, it should have been 5 in both cases. Diplo-annexing costs 1 per province. It doesn't matter that a province is a core when annexing.

	_COUNTRY_BB_PROVNOEVENT_      = 1.00 #Positive
	_COUNTRY_BB_PROVEVENT_        = 0.25 #Positive
	_COUNTRY_BB_PRIVATEER_        = 1 #Positive
	_COUNTRY_BB_CHANGERELIGION_   = 1 #Positive
	_COUNTRY_BB_DOW_              = 1 #Positive
	_COUNTRY_BB_DOWNOCB_          = 1 #Positive
	_COUNTRY_BB_DOWGOODREL_       = 2 #Positive
	_COUNTRY_BB_PLAYERDIVIDER_    = 3 #Positive
	_COUNTRY_BB_ANNSAMERELIGION_  = 5 #Positive
	_COUNTRY_BB_ANNOTHERRELIGION_ = 2 #Positive

 

[Stoertebecker]

Yes, I was wrong. Annexing a same-religion country costs more.

_COUNTRY_BB_ANNSAMERELIGION_ = 5 #Positive
_COUNTRY_BB_ANNOTHERRELIGION_ = 2 #Positiv

Yes, I read the defines.txt. But I don't understand, how it works practically.

Some examples: I start the 1619-campaign with the ottomans.
I release Tunesia (no core) and Iraq (core) as vassals.
Dowing costs 4 BB each. Normally, I had expected that dowing Iraq would be cheaper, because I have a core on Iraq in this scenario. Actually I found out: A core gives no CB, if the owner is a vassal. That's a good change, but you have to know it.

I annex Iraq (core): 6 BB. I'd expect 5, since I have a core. It remains 6 if I cancelled vassalization before attacking.
I annex Tunesia (no core): 6 BB.
I annex Georgia (no core): 1 BB.
I annex Ragusa (core): 1 BB.

Yes, I double-checked my defines.txt: the values there are exactly those that you posted here. But they don't seem to correlate with the ingame results. At least, I don't understand how they do.

 

[MichaelM]

PROVNOEVENT applies in an annexation regardless of whether there is a core. This is unchanged from EU2.

 

[Stoertebecker]

PROVNOEVENT applies in an annexation regardless of whether there is a core. This is unchanged from EU2.

Ah, okay, that explains the 6 BB for core-annexations. But why only 1 BB for an annexation of a false-religion minor if there is _COUNTRY_BB_ANNOTHERRELIGION_ = 2 #Positive?

And, as you're already here, MichealM, could you maybe help to lift my veil of ignorance regarding the other things? Especially manpower and attrition?

 

[Toio]

Ah, okay, that explains the 6 BB for core-annexations. But why only 1 BB for an annexation of a false-religion minor if there is _COUNTRY_BB_ANNOTHERRELIGION_ = 2 #Positive?

And, as you're already here, MichealM, could you maybe help to lift my veil of ignorance regarding the other things? Especially manpower and attrition?

in regards to attrition in war for the populace, its added from different parts of the defines files, as an example

_PROV_POPGRWTH_ENEMY_ = -15.0 #Negative
_PROV_POPGRWTH_SIEGE_ = -5.0 #Negative
_PROV_POPGRWTH_OCCU_ = -3.0 #Negative
_PROV_POPGRWTH_LOOTED_ = -9.0 #Negative

enemy in province and looted = -24 % ( or is it 15+3+9 = -27% )
occupied and looted = -12%

I usually see around 20% attrition

looting IIRC lasts 9 months

 

[MichaelM]

Ah, okay, that explains the 6 BB for core-annexations. But why only 1 BB for an annexation of a false-religion minor if there is _COUNTRY_BB_ANNOTHERRELIGION_ = 2 #Positive?

ANNOTHERRELIGION only applies to religions that are marked annex_other_penalty = yes in religions.txt. In vanilla, that means only pagans. (I realize we didn't do a great job of documenting all the defines; I'm trying to remedy that situation.)

And, as you're already here, MichealM, could you maybe help to lift my veil of ignorance regarding the other things? Especially manpower and attrition?

For manpower, your list looks correct to the first decimal place (it's (citylevel/3 + 1)/4, where citylevel ranges from 0 to 6).

I don't recall a major change to late-game attrition for navies. We did begin calculating attrition in floating-point instead of rounding down to the nearest integer, which could result in marginally higher values overall (or in cases where the rounded result was 0, it would result in attrition where there was none before).

For land troops, your experience may be the result of changes to the supply limit calculation. Is that the case?

 

[Stoertebecker]

ANNOTHERRELIGION only applies to religions that are marked annex_other_penalty = yes in religions.txt. In vanilla, that means only pagans. (I realize we didn't do a great job of documenting all the defines; I'm trying to remedy that situation.)

Ah, okay. Now it's much clearer. And actually, it's reasonable. What I don't like, though, is, that annexing a core-minor and annexing a non-core minor doesn't make a difference in terms of bb.

For manpower, your list looks correct to the first decimal place (it's (citylevel/3 + 1)/4, where citylevel ranges from 0 to 6).

Ah, that's the formula I was looking for. Thank you.

I don't recall a major change to late-game attrition for navies. We did begin calculating attrition in floating-point instead of rounding down to the nearest integer, which could result in marginally higher values overall (or in cases where the rounded result was 0, it would result in attrition where there was none before).

Okay. I haven't tested this excessively. So it's still possible to explore without attrition with a maneuver-5-explorer by reorganizing every 2 months?

For land troops, your experience may be the result of changes to the supply limit calculation. Is that the case?

I don't know, as I don't know, how supply limit calculation has changed (except the things therion already mentioned).
But when I start the Napoleon campaign as France, for example, and I move a 100k stack into a plains or forest province with not enough supply, I don't suffer any attrition while suffering 2% in a mountain province. (Non-looted, owned provinces). If I do the same in For the Glory, I suffer 2% attrition in plains and forests and 7% in mountains.
So it seems that there were changes not only in supply limit calculation, but also in the role of technology level regarding max attrition.

 

[MichaelM]

Ah, okay. Now it's much clearer. And actually, it's reasonable. What I don't like, though, is, that annexing a core-minor and annexing a non-core minor doesn't make a difference in terms of bb.

I would agree with that.

Okay. I haven't tested this excessively. So it's still possible to explore without attrition with a maneuver-5-explorer by reorganizing every 2 months?

...Maybe. If so, it's because that particular exploit slipped my mind. One of my goals is to make micromanagement of units not worth it.

I don't know, as I don't know, how supply limit calculation has changed (except the things therion already mentioned).
But when I start the Napoleon campaign as France, for example, and I move a 100k stack into a plains or forest province with not enough supply, I don't suffer any attrition while suffering 2% in a mountain province. (Non-looted, owned provinces). If I do the same in For the Glory, I suffer 2% attrition in plains and forests and 7% in mountains.
So it seems that there were changes not only in supply limit calculation, but also in the role of technology level regarding max attrition.

Yes, that is a change, and that value seems to be a rounding error. From the /Db/Technologies/land.txt, the maximum attrition should be 3% at that level + 5% for mountains.