This, 100% agree; very useful for my ageing eyesight to pick out elements that are necessary
Development Diary - 10th of December
- Thread starter Trin Tragula
- 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.
This, 100% agree; very useful for my ageing eyesight to pick out elements that are necessary
Looks okay but never been a fan of this type of battle system.
Like, I can't make battles where infantry hold lines while protected archers fire from the rear etc etc.
Missing a lot of nuances, which I hoped we'd get, with respect to how some battles from this era took place.
It seems a very much a straightforward wide-line game of "war" (the card game)
Like, I can't make battles where infantry hold lines while protected archers fire from the rear etc etc.
Missing a lot of nuances, which I hoped we'd get, with respect to how some battles from this era took place.
It seems a very much a straightforward wide-line game of "war" (the card game)
Please don't make supply limits hugely dependent on terrain as they are in EU4. In EU4 a province with a huge development doesn't give much supply limit just because it's mountainous.
Combat looks pretty good. Will tactics affect how your troops get set up?
Also, are there any plans to improve on sieges in basegame or DLC? Sieges were a major part of warfare in this time period, more than open battle even, and from the gameplay releases, it seems that they're just like other Paradox games.
Also, are there any plans to improve on sieges in basegame or DLC? Sieges were a major part of warfare in this time period, more than open battle even, and from the gameplay releases, it seems that they're just like other Paradox games.
Actually, large battles almost always were horrendously lopsided. Small battles weren't, but large ones were. According to most military historians of the time period, the vast majority of casualties in large battles in this time period were during the pursuit of an already broken army. That said, I won't complain if this is lessened in the game; playability is more important than absolute historicity.
A question about 1st and 2nd frontline:
When the 1st frontline is beaten, does the 2nd frontline replace it as a whole, or does it go cohort by cohort?
When the 1st frontline is beaten, does the 2nd frontline replace it as a whole, or does it go cohort by cohort?
Interesting question. I could see a game mechanic in that, something like more organised armies fill the line cohort by cohort.
I was also curious whether there'd be a chance for undisciplined flank troops, especially Cav to run off chasing the broken flank and head for the baggage train
A question to the devs, is there going to be a movement lock like in EUIV? The footage released implies it is not in the game, at least yet. In my opinion it would be a really important feature, which would remove the army dance when trying to engage.
EDIT:
Whoops, I should have watched more footage first, The Spiffing Brit clearly said it is there. Ignore this post.
EDIT:
Whoops, I should have watched more footage first, The Spiffing Brit clearly said it is there. Ignore this post.
Last edited:
Just a little suggestion from visual point of view - please make some sort of planner where one can actually choose certain type of troop for first /second lines and flanks.
So far, the visual "list" of units is not at all helpful
So far, the visual "list" of units is not at all helpful
Wrong, Heavy infantry is not good against Everything. The only units it get bonuses against are Heavy cavalry, chariots and light infantry and it is quite weak against horse Archers who they get penalty against while horse Archers get bonus against Heavy infantry.
So glad to hear about the way the ranks behave and the ability to change locations of units... When the units were first announced, it was said that archers would be in the back rank, and I assumed that meant that they would fight from there like EU artillery - which is a very very bad way of representing their role.
When the units were first announced, it was said that archers would be in the back rank, and I assumed that meant that they would fight from there like EU artillery - which is a very very bad way of representing their role.
Moreover I expect HI would be quote expensive and an experienced HI cohort would be quite valuable. You don't want to waste it against some archer/skirmisher. Even of you are full of Manpower and Gold, you probably want to mix some low values units in the Frontline, to *soften* the enemy .
I think that if you design large enough flanks, eventually using units with a good maneuver rate and adding some infantry, IF your center doesn't collapse too early "de facto" you are encircling your opponent (your Flanks do the trick) .
I don't know if a Flank attacking the frontline has some special bonus , anyway (they should have..)
Last edited:
Yes the current information Place Heavy infantry as one of the most expensive units. It have several drawback such as only one manuver (which make it poor at flanking and defeating outnumbered enemies) as well as a significant weakness to horse Archers.
The bonus is that you have more units attacking the enemy which is probably enough of a bonus.
I'm actually glad that they finally found a use for Light Infantry that actually approaches their historical use. Although an interesting consequence of this battle system is that better morale for archers and LI would actually be a detriment to their combat value.
So let's hope that Paradox has learned from this and/or people start understanding combat mechanics better this time around.
In EU this wasn't possible because units couldn't flank enemy units that were further than 2 slots away from them, so if you had a large numeric majority those extra troops were almost completely useless once deployed.
So let's hope that Paradox has learned from this and/or people start understanding combat mechanics better this time around.
Last edited:
Could we maybe get a warning icon on army paths if they'll pass through cities that will cause attrition for them? Yellow if there's minimum attrition, red if they'll go over the supply limit. Preferably these would appear over the cities that will cause attrition.
