Am I the only person here who think that the numbers of combat width in the middle and late game are laughably small?
I mean, it's ok when in the XV century only 20 regiments are available for the actual combat, but in the end of game, in the age when Seven Years War and Napoleonic Wars were, 40 regiments doing actual fighting seems to be not very realistic. Maybe we need a slight improvement to 50 or 60 regiments? It also could make supply depots more useful as well as drilling.
Also I think that some generals should have a chance of receiving a trait that will allow them to include more regiments to the direct fight (+5 or something like that). As far as I remembers, admirals with high points in maneuver can do it, and it's totally reasonable. I suppose that option like this may be even included into some of the military idea groups. From my point of view, it just didn't make balance shift because more fighting regiments will mean more casualities.
I mean, it's ok when in the XV century only 20 regiments are available for the actual combat, but in the end of game, in the age when Seven Years War and Napoleonic Wars were, 40 regiments doing actual fighting seems to be not very realistic. Maybe we need a slight improvement to 50 or 60 regiments? It also could make supply depots more useful as well as drilling.
Also I think that some generals should have a chance of receiving a trait that will allow them to include more regiments to the direct fight (+5 or something like that). As far as I remembers, admirals with high points in maneuver can do it, and it's totally reasonable. I suppose that option like this may be even included into some of the military idea groups. From my point of view, it just didn't make balance shift because more fighting regiments will mean more casualities.
Last edited: