Well, it could be a bug, but ive noticed that the numbers indicated on the map arent always completely accurate.
Is there also infantry in this army? If so, its possible that it counts like this:
20 infantry
20 cannons
= 40 total...
-
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.
Well, it could be a bug, but ive noticed that the numbers indicated on the map arent always completely accurate.
Is there also infantry in this army? If so, its possible that it counts like this:
20 infantry
20 cannons
= 40 total...
The number on the map is generally the number of units of construction. Cannons are built in 10's rather than 1000's as with infantry and cavalry. So if you've got 200 cannons it should say 20 on the map. Infantry and cavalry added in would of course change that.
I've found a good start-game (doesn't work so well later when there's bigger forts) army group is 20-25 infantry, 5 cavalry and 10 cannon units. As tech levels increase you have to increase the cannons. As France I usually field 2-5 of these units in continental France, depending on my territorial ambitions. England can usually get away with no more than 3, as you've less territory to defend and less fronts to fight on.
I've found a good start-game (doesn't work so well later when there's bigger forts) army group is 20-25 infantry, 5 cavalry and 10 cannon units. As tech levels increase you have to increase the cannons. As France I usually field 2-5 of these units in continental France, depending on my territorial ambitions. England can usually get away with no more than 3, as you've less territory to defend and less fronts to fight on.
What exactly is the use of 10 cannons besides slowing you down and letting you catch attrition? They don't really help in a siege either, too few of them. Unless you mean 10 units of 10 cannons which is 100 cannons and oh a nice thing to have
even a single cannon makes a huge difference during a siege, although 100 are betterOriginally posted by Alva
What exactly is the use of 10 cannons besides slowing you down and letting you catch attrition? They don't really help in a siege either, too few of them. Unless you mean 10 units of 10 cannons which is 100 cannons and oh a nice thing to have
Thanks. Actually I havce found that I can hardly even receive a seige bar when I don't have cannons when I seige some provinces
Originally posted by DarkCloud
Thanks. Actually I havce found that I can hardly even receive a seige bar when I don't have cannons when I seige some provinces
If you mean that your armies dont start sieging unless you add cannons, that sounds a bit weird to me... as long as you have enough infantry, your armies start sieging. Cannons only speed up the process.
They are seiging if I click on them, but the bar on the city does not exist until the cannons arrive?
Actually, 4x the level makes an even bigger difference: so for besieging small forts, you want either 60 cannon, or 80. The extra effect is, however, usually too small to justify the cost of building them, except in the latter game when forts are very big and you're swimming in ducats.
I've noticed this too and find it a little confusing.If I click on the troops they are sieging - the siege side panel appears , but on the main map there is no column of smoke over the provinces city graphic and no progress bar underneath it.Not of earth shattering importance , I was just wondering.
What difference are you saying it makes? Does it affect my seige value (left hand circle of the seige display?), or is it just that you think on the basis of experience that seiges seem to go quicker with 4x?
I'm quoting from other people who understand more about how the number-crunching works than I do
There are various ancient threads discussing this issue, if you can be bothered to do a search for them which I can't. The general consensus was that 30 cannon per fort level made a big difference, and 40 cannon per fort level made a small additional difference.
Hmmm. Forgive my scepticism, but a lot of the number-crunching expertise was based on the board game. It was never very clear whether the board game rules were applied to the computer game, and we are several versions down the line from then anyway.
And there are several dogmatic types who will make categorical assertions based on no more than guess-work or for the sake of making mischief. I certainly don't believe anything on the forum I can't verify (though there are lots of things I don't know, so I'm always interested to try and verify new suggestions).
Whilst some of the moderators look like they probably work for Paradox, that is not in itself a guarantee of accuracy (if Paradox were always accurate the game would not be bug-ridden). Also Paradox seem to have a policy that the more mystified we all are, the better off they are, though quite how they come to that conclusion is completely beyond me. (I am considering not buying EU2 when it is released in the UK, just to spare myself the rage at the lack of documentation and guidance that will make the first 200 hours of playing such a hit and miss affair)
How would one ever verify a 'small effect' on seiges? There is such huge variability in the rate of sieges anyway.