England seems to ruin West-European play-throughs

[Spikee78]

Hi,

For reference:
I'm new at the series, but have gotten pretty far through several runs. I found my run
with Poland the easiest, as you're pretty far removed from all the mess that's going on to
the west, plus it gets easy once Lithuania is annexed. I tend to overreach, which I
assume is natural ... so, I'm trying to slow things down now. I can survive for a very
long time just fine, but:

It seems that England/Great-Brittain ruins most of my West-European play-
throughs. They seem to like to ally against me, so I run into them everytime. Either
because I get dragged into a war by one of my allies, or because I'm trying to make a
vassal out of my neighbour.

When invading England as France (I had all their provinces around London + Cornwall), I
had to send a stack of 95 troops to defeat an English stack of just 14, I defeated them,
but had only 8 left! I had no negative terrain modifiers, morale was very high and
manpower was maxed.

Now with the most recent play-through, I invaded what remained of Portugal (as Castille)
to Vassal them, I told them to break with England earlier, they seem to renew that every
single time ...

Anyway, GB comes to help them with a massive fleet I can't stop, just to drop 10 soldiers
in my territories. I send 40 of mine to them, they get massacred totally without a single
GB casualty.

Troop morale was very good, I didn't see any negative modifiers, they were invading my home turf ... I don't get why it's this one-sided, and it's not that I didn't invest in military technology.

Things just never seemed this off with any other nation ... Or, am I doing something wrong?

Thanks!

 

[PanH]

General, tech level, and ideas of both countries ? What is your army composition ? What are your respective morale at the start of the battle ?
Also, manpower has no effect on a battle, it is used to create new units and reinforce them.

 

[incognitus]

95k against 14k and 8k survive? 40k agains 10k and no losses for the inferior army? That can only be "army maintenance at zero"... nothing else would have such dramatic consequences. Would it? Or is this very late in the game and you never bought a single Tech?

 

[Wizard12]

Was your 95 stack made of mercs? keep in mind they don't update like regulars so they need disbanding and rehiring every time your troops change. Perhaps you had just a bunch of old mercs?

 

[unmerged(809069)]

95k against 14k and 8k survive? 40k agains 10k and no losses for the inferior army? That can only be "army maintenance at zero"... nothing else would have such dramatic consequences. Would it? Or is this very late in the game and you never bought a single Tech?

Those are the only options. Maintenance or zero tech. Or maybe hes just lying a bit to make the loss a bit more drastical :closedeyes:

 

[Spikee78]

Those are the only options. Maintenance or zero tech. Or maybe hes just lying a bit to make the loss a bit more drastical :closedeyes:

I wish .

It was a large amount of mercs indeed I think about 60 regulars to 35 mercs. I put maintenance to about half during peace time, but max it again before declaring war, so I don't see how that would be bad. Unless a bad effect lingers?
I advance any techs whenever possible, so I don't think that's it, though possibly I might be (too) slow.

It's very well possible that I'm doing something (or even a lot) wrong, as it's a very complex game. I have much to figure out, but it's a fun game (even if sometimes a bit frustrating ), definitely a type of game I love to play.

 

[Golladan]

Are you upgrading your troops. Advancing tech isn't enough. You have to go to the military panel and select the new troop type when you unlock them.

 

[Opus]

I wish .

It was a large amount of mercs indeed I think about 60 regulars to 35 mercs. I put maintenance to about half during peace time, but max it again before declaring war, so I don't see how that would be bad. Unless a bad effect lingers?
I advance any techs whenever possible, so I don't think that's it, though possibly I might be (too) slow.

It's very well possible that I'm doing something (or even a lot) wrong, as it's a very complex game. I have much to figure out, but it's a fun game (even if sometimes a bit frustrating ), definitely a type of game I love to play.

It takes two-three month before morale is up to 100% again. Other then that, no long term effects on lowering maintaince.

Upgraded your troops? Took me a while to figure that out when I started to play EU.

 

[unmerged(553851)]

Army morale does take a couple of months to reach max again after raising the maintenance. I don't know if that's what you meant by "effect lingers"

EDIT: Ninja'd

 

[pkderek]

That's strange, whether it's me in control or the AI, Britain is actually one of the weakest land forces in the West, their only buff I believe is a discipline one.

 

[Spikee78]

It takes two-three month before morale is up to 100% again. Other then that, no long term effects on lowering maintaince.

Upgraded your troops? Took me a while to figure that out when I started to play EU.

If you mean select a higher tech type troop at the Military tab by upgrade, than I have. Might be bad morale than indeed, I think the British troops were pretty advanced though (looking like musketeers).

So, what's the general strategy I should follow? Starting at Western Europe, is like starting in the middle of a wasp's nest, there's always some war going on ... There's rarely time to just sit and let everything stabilize.

 

[Opus]

If you mean select a higher tech type troop at the Military tab by upgrade, than I have. Might be bad morale than indeed, I think the British troops were pretty advanced though (looking like musketeers).

So, what's the general strategy I should follow? Starting at Western Europe, is like starting in the middle of a wasp's nest, there's always some war going on ... There's rarely time to just sit and let everything stabilize.

Then it's all very strange... Whats Brittains army tech-level and whats yours? Do they have super generals and you have no general at all?

GB is usually a punching bag when you get man to man with them.


As for strategy, I tend to stay out of central europe. Too much hussle.

 

[incognitus]

I'm in my first EU4 game ever (played at least 300 hours of EU3 though and over 100 hours CK2) and I'm playing France. It's 1515 now and so far I've found things to be pretty easy (Playing on Ironman, Normal difficulty). It is imperative of course never to get more than 1 or 2 techs behind in military. I have astronomical AE (100-200 for most German countries), but the weak-ass coalitions they come up with can't do much against France, Poland, Hungary and Denmark (my alliance). Those allies seem to be ideal and very stable for France. Also make sure you don't waste MP, don't change culture, don't create and delete generals until you get a good one (as the idiotic manual suggests), don't suppress rebels by throwing MMP at them, rather crush them. Focus on ideas and techs.

 

[Spikee78]

Alright, I'll try a run where I don't touch MP unless for advancement (unless some event or whatever forces me).

Indeed I kept trying to find a better general, losing a lot of MP in the process. Still, doesn't that mean you're sometimes just stuck with crappy generals? You could make your ruler a general, if you need to risk it.

 

[Ruanek]

Alright, I'll try a run where I don't touch MP unless for advancement (unless some event or whatever forces me).

Indeed I kept trying to find a better general, losing a lot of MP in the process. Still, doesn't that mean you're sometimes just stuck with crappy generals? You could make your ruler a general, if you need to risk it.

The enemies often won't have great generals either, and deleting and rehiring generals is a tremendous waste of monarch points. And making your ruler or heir a general isn't that bad - it's rare that they'll die in battle.

What's your military tech compared to theirs? You can see them in the technology mapmode.

 

[incognitus]

Depends how willing you are to cheat/exploit/"re-roll the dice"... ^^ You can just load the game when you're at 100 Army Tradition and create a general, if you don't like it, load the game and try again. If you have a look here:
http://www.eu4wiki.com/General#Leader_skill_points_analysis
you will see that even with 100 AT you only have a 6% chance of getting a General with Siege 4, 1% to get Siege 5... fair enough if you roll the dice a few times. Works even in Ironman mode

Edit:

The enemies often won't have great generals either, and deleting and rehiring generals is a tremendous waste of monarch points. And making your ruler or heir a general isn't that bad - it's rare that they'll die in battle.

What's your military tech compared to theirs? You can see them in the technology mapmode.

I'd like to disagree. AI have TONS of generals, often with good values. Most ridiculously rebels often field really good generals!

 

[Viperswhip]

You can, maybe with loans, get a bigger navy than England, over half of their fleet are cogs typically, but you need 20-25 Carracks, that should be your major focus as Spain, no matter what your goals are. Crush Portugal's navy at some point, maybe capture a few ships from Morroco and the other African powers (I still don't know how best to capture ships), and then destroy the English Fleet.

Bottom line, you need a bigger navy than England or anyone else as Spain or even Portugal unless you like having to stay home at war.

As to the 95 v. 14 thing. I don't know, except England has a few pretty good Kings in there and some great military leaders and is a Lucky Nation if you play with that checked.

 

[Rain Envy]

If you have a problem with England simply do what I do. Base troops into Scotland....Vassalize Scotland then???

Profit.

 

[unmerged(804580)]

The thing is, you will get crappy generals if your army tradition is low. You could waste another 50 MIL point to get a new general but usually it's not worth it. As others said, you cannot possibly lose when you're numbering that much unless you're behind in tech.

To get higher army tradition, you need to engage in battles and sieges. Battles give you army traditions whether you win or lose, and winning sieges gives you tiny bits of army traditions as well. AIs can be pretty good at carpet sieging and many European nations are constantly engaged in one war or another, and that drives their army tradition up, even if they continuously lose war after war. AI doesn't cheat with the generals, except lucky nation bonuses. GB is one, so that plays a role if you're playing either ironman or a normal game with lucky nations on.

Harsh treatment for rebel suppression is usually not a good way to spend your points. Nor is culture conversion. Religious conversion is necessary, but if you see rebels, just be evil and kill them. You might get in a situation where rebel problems just go out of control, e.g. you're heavily losing a war, your overextension is too high, your religious unity is too low and you get into religious turmoil, Peasants War, event-based rebel turmoils like Times of Trouble or English Civil War. Usually, accepting their demands and forfeiting some tax income and prestige is a better option when you simply don't have men to fight the rebels. The local autonomy will end, eventually, and you'll regenerate your manpower. Harsh treatment on multiple provinces is just not worth the MIL point.

Risk your ruler if you have an heir. But often I use both ruler and heir in a war. There is a risk, but sometimes you just have to. When you can afford only one leader, and you need to command two armies to engage enemies, then one of them needs to be a king or heir. Between a king and an heir, I'd use king as long as my heir is of age.

There are some critical levels where you get a whole new set of units. Say, if you're MIL tech 11 and the enemy is 12, then the difference is only one but Tercio in level 12 has total pips 21, while your Landsknecht from tech 10 has 11 pips total. Big difference, just that one level.

Keep investing in tech, and I don't mind being a couple of years ahead but also unlock a military idea group so you can invest in ideas if you're too far ahead in time.

Landing in the British Isles can be tough. You can land troops in Scotland before declaring the war by getting military access if Scotland exists at all, but otherwise you'll have to break through their naval superiority. For that reason alone I usually stay away from Britain. Alternatively, if Norway (or any Scandinavian nation) still holds Orkney, there is a strait where you can walk to Scotland.

96 guys in one stack... sometimes it's just plain necessary if the enemy is doing the same thing with ridiculous numbers, but usually not a good idea. Most provinces cannot support that many troops, and you'll lose soldiers due to attrition. If your regiments are depleted in numbers, they'll be less effective. 100 regiments with 20% soldiers mean 20k army, and 20 regiments with 100% soldiers mean 20k army as well. All else equal, full regiments stack would win.

Lastly, check the terrain before attacking. You might have run into a mountainous terrain and faced a huge terrain penalty. Change to the terrain map mode, hover over the province where you want to attack. If the chance of getting into mountains or wastelands or deserts is too high, stay away. Split your army, lure the enemy to attack your smaller army, and reinforce. The smaller army will face casualties, but as long as they hold out before the reinforcements arrive, it will be fine.

 

[Aner]

Maybe the OP did an amphibous landing? It has a penalty.

And about bad generals: in my current game as Gelre I forgot to recruit my first general. But actually this turned out to be a good move. I simply took the bonus of an allied general. Meanwhile the army tradition rose. And afterwards I recruited a very good general. I like this trick.

And about launching an attack against England I have some experience. England lost a war against Scotland and France. They were very weak. They also had a regency without heir. So I claimed throne. Next king one year later was of my dynasty. But still disputed succession. So when Burgundy went for Calais I took my chance:
I allied with Scotland and arranged land + naval access. Landed my troops in Scotland. England had only 2000 army on the isle. Declared war with CB claim throne and conquered all provices. Only problem was their ally Portugal. I made the mistake of attacking the fleet of England with the Portugese aramade nearby. I thought the Burgundy fleet would support me, but they didn't. So I couldn't get a sufficient warscore for a PU, but still managed to take 4 provinces in the end. A vital step in controlling the London trade node. Before signing the peace treay I signed an alliance with France because of the 60(!) AE, but taking AE in such far awat corner like England shouldn't be much of a problem. This was in 1470...

I am still in doubt whether I should have release Northumbria as a vassal and should have fed the conquered provinces. But because of alot of alliances and RM's I preferred to save my DIP points. The good thing is that probably English will be an accepted culture because of the relative share. And in next wars I can simply conquer complete England. Or maybe go for a PU and then integrate?