Home Trending Latest threads New posts Developer diaries

HoD DD 4 – Wars and The Military

Jump to latest Follow Reply
  • 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.
Victoria 2 17560 After Action Reports (AAR)
Show only dev responses
Arbus said:
Isn't this a bit too much? The defender has to wait 2 years before even starting to get WS from land control?
Click to expand...

I don't think so, the Attacker needs a period to attack before the Defender starts racking up score from the Status Quo, and if they are doing well they can still gain WS in other ways. Still, it's a value in defines, so it's easy to edit if you want it to be less.

DominusNovus said:
I read that as meaning that it would take 2 years for warscore to accumulate from simply not losing territory.
Click to expand...

Exactly.
 
That mobilisation-system looks sweet! And finally, battle plans! Schlieffenplan, ich komme! :D

Now just take my money!

Just one question though: You won't add historical plans, would you?
 
Last edited:
Button to get rid of brigades with pops too small! Battle Plans!? Awesome. +1
 
Nice. Managing army compositions and soldier pops is still going to be annoying, though - particularly for soldiers levied in Africa, where the tiny stacks of pagan soldiers slowly turn into tiny stacks of Christian soldiers. How about making recruiting happen on a state level, or make recruitment ignore the religion of the source pops?

Also, I'd like to see base supply limit increase - at least in peace time. It is very tedious when redeploying soldiers, where you have to ensure that two armies never pass through the same province.
 
Darkrenown said:
In other WG news, you can no longer Justify Goals against nations you are at war with, but on the other hand, Goals you have a valid CB for no longer cost Jingoism to add to wars.
Click to expand...

I didn't really understand this sentence. Could someone explain it?

Also, I'm very excited about the new land combat stuff. It sounds awesome, and I am actually much more excited about the changes to land combat than the changes to naval combat. The maps are a nice touch, too. :)
 
Great DD. Those changes look as amazing as the new naval combat.

Finally all units have some use and have central roles to fill.

Especially the demotion from artillery (since Artillery in game is better than Soldiers and in most game costs less than infantry or nearly the same= as one unit beats all is a great step forward ;). Did you by any chance introduce a dismiss General button as well :p?
 
Holy Mathematical Gameplay Dark-man! If it works as it does in Crusader Kings 2, though, this should an improvement.

PS - whatever fix King is implementing to cure army ping-ponging in MotE (partiuclarly the retreat-behind-lines problem) should be copied over to Vicky.
 
Emperorheinrich said:
I didn't really understand this sentence. Could someone explain it?
Click to expand...

Which part? The justifying thing seems obviously, so I assume it was the part about Jingoism you didn't get, so:
Each time you want to add another goal to an existing goal it costs 7% Jingoism, if your population isn't Jingoistic enough you can't add more goals. We have changed this so that if you have a Valid CB, you can add these goals for free. This can be pretty helpful when fighting a nation that holds a lot of your cores, you can add all your core state Goals without waiting for Jingoism levels to rise.
 
Darkrenown said:
I don't think so, the Attacker needs a period to attack before the Defender starts racking up score from the Status Quo, and if they are doing well they can still gain WS in other ways. Still, it's a value in defines, so it's easy to edit if you want it to be less.
Click to expand...

I understand that, but it just seems too much. The attacker, when he decides to attack, already has his armies prepared. The defender has to react, mobilize, repel the invasion, and hold it for 24 months. During that whole time, each day the invader occupies your land adds up and doesn't go down. I don't know how much you get from winning battles, so it can be that you can defeat the invasion that way, but since land ownership seems to weight more for this specific WG, I don't know. Anyways, the testers should know weather or not this is too much and it's easy for me to change.
 
Darkrenown said:
Which part? The justifying thing seems obviously, so I assume it was the part about Jingoism you didn't get, so:
Each time you want to add another goal to an existing goal it costs 7% Jingoism, if your population isn't Jingoistic enough you can't add more goals. We have changed this so that if you have a Valid CB, you can add these goals for free. This can be pretty helpful when fighting a nation that holds a lot of your cores, you can add all your core state Goals without waiting for Jingoism levels to rise.
Click to expand...

Huh? I've never heard of costing Jingoism or raising levels of Jingoism as a mechanic. Is this something new?
 
Darkrenown said:
Which part? The justifying thing seems obviously, so I assume it was the part about Jingoism you didn't get, so:
Each time you want to add another goal to an existing goal it costs 7% Jingoism, if your population isn't Jingoistic enough you can't add more goals. We have changed this so that if you have a Valid CB, you can add these goals for free. This can be pretty helpful when fighting a nation that holds a lot of your cores, you can add all your core state Goals without waiting for Jingoism levels to rise.
Click to expand...

Do Absolutist, Fascist or Communist governments get exemption from this?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back