An extra 15% land maintenance looks just too damned expensive, but I realise I have no idea how good drill speed is, so my intuition might be way off. Anyone have any good idea how good this is?
Is the +15% land maintenance/+40% drill gain decision good?
- Thread starter Ketilsen
- 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.
Full drill stacks OBLITERATE no drill stacks.
Can you drill? Do you need military superiority thjat you don't have? Are your wars more defensive or spike-y in nature? Generally: Are you NOT doing a blob game?
Can you drill? Do you need military superiority thjat you don't have? Are your wars more defensive or spike-y in nature? Generally: Are you NOT doing a blob game?
Like, I know full drill is balls amazing, I'm asking if cutting down the time to drill up to full by a third is worth all that extra money (nobrainer lategame, but everything is a nobrainer lategame).
the decision is a 40% increase. So the more valid comparison is a 70% drill stack vs a 100% drill stack, and I feel this is quite generous as it assumes guy who takes decision is attacking in the timing period to max his drill advantage.
In such a case 'obliterate' would be exaggeration, more like trades slightly better for 3 battles. Then your drill is gone.
My intuition says trap decision.
Other considerations is it scales worse the more you invest into land maintenance reduction e.g. wartax, econ, defensive, quantity, NI. With all 5 active this decision effectively increases your troop maintenance by 62% (this would also be really bad paired with revolution bonus? Can't remember if it contains land maint) Of course this is an extreme situation but you get the idea, if you pick this decision choose your modifiers appropriately.
Last edited:
Even that's assuming the defender with lower drill doesn't just sit behind a fort and wait a bit for you to siege it down on 2-4% attrition, neutering a significant portion of the difference before a shot is fired, making this a hard advantage to press indeed.
And yes, target of rev is a whopping -50% maintenance reduction, so this decision would absolutely massacre the utility and more than double maintenance if you have defensive/quantity/target of rev. You can just turn it off at the cost of some professionalism so at least it's not a permanent screwjob, but it's a pretty unappealing choice regardless.
Does this modifier also affect professionalism gain from drilling? Then it starts getting interesting because prof doesn't vanish as quickly as drill.
If it did it might be worth taking the decision.
Additionaly profesionalism should generate a drill floor, im thinking 30% drill at 100 prof.
If you are playing a game where you are making significant use of drilling, and you have reached a point where you have more money than you know what to do with, then this decision becomes worth it.
If money is in any way scarce I would not be spending it on this.
One thing I will add; 100 drill, 100 professionalism, French NIs, and French age ability really does melt through enemy troops. No Mil idea groups required. Get a good roll in that first fire phase and your cannons turn into howitzers.
If money is in any way scarce I would not be spending it on this.
One thing I will add; 100 drill, 100 professionalism, French NIs, and French age ability really does melt through enemy troops. No Mil idea groups required. Get a good roll in that first fire phase and your cannons turn into howitzers.
It is an amazing decision. Make it always. The drill speed is huge. It lets you have army maintenance lower sooner after drilling, so if anything it SAVES you money so long as you drill.
The problem with that is that one of the major benefits of drilling is the professionalism gain. I'd rarely be drilling my armies up to 100% drill anyway since I'm busy using them to fight in wars. I'd rather spend extra maintenance on going over force limit, personally.
I have noticed I am getting drill anyways at lowered maintenance while abusing drill freeinforce, is this supposed to be intended?
But seriously if you are in singleplayer and you got the spare cash to drill you probably already won the game
But seriously if you are in singleplayer and you got the spare cash to drill you probably already won the game
Well, the freeinforce is probably one of the most impactful bugs ever introduced, but the drilling while a low maint is intended.
You pay normal maint for the non-merc part of the army.
My understanding is that drilling soldiers cost full maintenance regardless of where your maintenance slider is set.
You could argue that a decent player has already won the game the moment they start as a major. But I want to see if I can do the final phase of a WC without using mercs. It seems I can because Slacken turns professionalism into an amazing manpower storage and generation device. The frequent free 75 spy network against neighbors is a nice bonus, too.
You could argue that a decent player has already won the game the moment they start as a major. But I want to see if I can do the final phase of a WC without using mercs. It seems I can because Slacken turns professionalism into an amazing manpower storage and generation device. The frequent free 75 spy network against neighbors is a nice bonus, too.
Yes, I'm really surprised they haven't fixed it yet. The free reinforce for mercs is huge. Florryworry pointed it out during his pre-release stream already.
The combat power from drill > over force limit, everytime. It means you have more drill when going into war. Its simply more effective troops in every respect.
I'm drilling as QQ and stuff before I fight the Ottomans? Makes the difference. If my drill is bigger than theirs, I win. Drill is amazingly strong, and so is professionalism.