What also allows you to beat Ottomans: taking 200-300 dev in the time you would take to get max drill
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.
Drill while you reinforce. Drill while you have no manpower. Drill during wars, even. You dont magically get 200 dev for not drilling, lmfao.
Drilling is mostly good for ppl that like to stare at the screen at speed 5 and do nothing for extended periods of time (the way the game is supposed to be played) 
Seriously this is a mechanic that encourages me to do nothing, at full army maintenance (!), and in the end will give me a very underwhelming bonus. I can see it being useful under VERY specific circumstances (…) but the opportunity costs are usually too big to make drilling a generally good course of action. So I never used it and I reckon that I basically will never use it in my SP campaigns unless it is for giggles (or the reward for drilling dramatically improves which tbh it is something that I would not like to see happen)
Seriously this is a mechanic that encourages me to do nothing, at full army maintenance (!), and in the end will give me a very underwhelming bonus. I can see it being useful under VERY specific circumstances (…) but the opportunity costs are usually too big to make drilling a generally good course of action. So I never used it and I reckon that I basically will never use it in my SP campaigns unless it is for giggles (or the reward for drilling dramatically improves which tbh it is something that I would not like to see happen)
Underwhelming? Its on par with most national ideas- its best to use when you're reinforcing and waiting for war exhaustion to go down/manpower to recover. There is always downtime, even if you play as fast as possible.
I also imagine you dont play in the HRE much, then.
I also imagine you dont play in the HRE much, then.
Yeah I don´t play in the HRE since 1.8 when I beat what was then the world domination record time (IIRC 1628).
Many times I have to wait for some ideas to be able to go HAM on the world and I do it because those can be totally worth it (...); by comparison drilling is just way too underwhelming and not worth the money/wait unless we REALLY don´t have anything better to do with the money/armies.
Use all the money that you would spend on drilling to go way above your force limit and therefore punch well above your weight.
Last edited:
Drilling sucks, unless i am SO boxed in, that my troops have nothing to do, besides drilling. Even though i am far from being the most rigorous blobber, my army is always fighting the enemy, whacking rebels or replenishing morale for the next war, i barely have time for drilling. I mostly only do it for the professionalism, because it doesn't decay with battles. And drilling decays oh-so-fast from even moderately large battles.
And +15% maintenance increase is HUGE for something that will completely go away in a few battles.
And +15% maintenance increase is HUGE for something that will completely go away in a few battles.
Last edited:
The only time i drill is when i don't have an expansion opportunity. Most of the time the reason I don't have an expansion opportunity is because I made a mistake. So drilling is not a mistake but being forced to drill is a mistake.
Yeah, I only drill when I've messed up - when I'm at force limit and for some reason am not at war. I'm always at war, though. Even then, I mostly drill for professionalism or for a very short-term bonus. I suppose it depends who you're playing as.
A more in-depth look is mandated here. The decision is basically a buff to big empires that have more money and forcelimits than manpower (i.e. the usual case).
Here's how it's best used.
Split your army into three parts:
- one is the "fighting part", usually a full max width army or armies. These armies you drill. These armies fight, but don't siege, except in exceptional circumstances (Paris etc).
- the second part is siege stacks that's a few foot soldiers and mostly cannon. These armies you don't drill.
- the third part is the rebel fighting stack with less cannon and less than max width (i.e. just about right for largest rebel stacks you expect).
Drill your max width armies into coastal farmlands (if applicable); they usually support max width armies with a general with some maneuver pips.
- If you have only one Fighting army, drill it whenever you're not at war.
- If you have two Fighting armies and are about to attack minors, drill one, use the other. Interchange them between wars.
- If you plan on attacking a big enemy, use whatever you need.
- Rebel fighting stacks can drill whenever there are no rebels to fight.
Let's say you have a 120k forcelimit and 25 max width.
- 50k is for the fighting army, constantly drilling.
- A 30k stack for rebel whacking/combat support, drilling half the time.
- Two 20k siege stacks.
In this sceario, your armies will be constantly in wars, so the saved-up drill time is more imortant than the cost, but your armies will rarely be at max drill, if ever.
But if you have a 200k forcelimit and 25 max width, you can have two fighting armies so you get much more drill time and your armies at war will be basically at max drill all the time.
TLDR; Is drill worth it if you can afford it? Hell yes. To paraphrase florry: Stacku-wipu! The difference is significant, especially against "AI desperation merc stacks". Once you see the enemy is mercing up, you know it's over.
Here's how it's best used.
Split your army into three parts:
- one is the "fighting part", usually a full max width army or armies. These armies you drill. These armies fight, but don't siege, except in exceptional circumstances (Paris etc).
- the second part is siege stacks that's a few foot soldiers and mostly cannon. These armies you don't drill.
- the third part is the rebel fighting stack with less cannon and less than max width (i.e. just about right for largest rebel stacks you expect).
Drill your max width armies into coastal farmlands (if applicable); they usually support max width armies with a general with some maneuver pips.
- If you have only one Fighting army, drill it whenever you're not at war.
- If you have two Fighting armies and are about to attack minors, drill one, use the other. Interchange them between wars.
- If you plan on attacking a big enemy, use whatever you need.
- Rebel fighting stacks can drill whenever there are no rebels to fight.
Let's say you have a 120k forcelimit and 25 max width.
- 50k is for the fighting army, constantly drilling.
- A 30k stack for rebel whacking/combat support, drilling half the time.
- Two 20k siege stacks.
In this sceario, your armies will be constantly in wars, so the saved-up drill time is more imortant than the cost, but your armies will rarely be at max drill, if ever.
But if you have a 200k forcelimit and 25 max width, you can have two fighting armies so you get much more drill time and your armies at war will be basically at max drill all the time.
TLDR; Is drill worth it if you can afford it? Hell yes. To paraphrase florry: Stacku-wipu! The difference is significant, especially against "AI desperation merc stacks". Once you see the enemy is mercing up, you know it's over.
If you have multiple viable front-line armies, why are you not using them on multiple fronts?
On top of that, you do still need troops to deal with rebels (cuts into drill time for troops that aren't otherwise fighting).
Even after all that, the value of drilling compared to lucrative buildings is very questionable. I can see it having some value before big wars in MP for that initial punch, but in SP if you're moving at a decent clip it's usually losing to alternative actions.
On top of that, you do still need troops to deal with rebels (cuts into drill time for troops that aren't otherwise fighting).
Even after all that, the value of drilling compared to lucrative buildings is very questionable. I can see it having some value before big wars in MP for that initial punch, but in SP if you're moving at a decent clip it's usually losing to alternative actions.
I seem to hit 3k-4k dev on VH by 1600 with garbage starts just fine only using the drill button to reinforce my zero prof mercenaries.
In such a situation there is neither the time nor the money to drill.
You could call it magic, or not enacting what essentially is negative war taxes over almost entire game over something that gives marginal benefit. That probably helps
yeah I really like the assertion that there's something efficient about sitting at 20% army utilization during wars and bashing OPMs in single wars with 200 FL nations
Last edited:
But it can't just be that. After I conquer land I want my armies ready to take on the ensuing revolts and it takes 4 or 5 months to get their morale back so I can't drill then either. I think drill works best for non-expansionists and actually works as a balancing mechanism for them. In my game Ottomans had Professionalism at 0 in the late 1700s because they're always at war.
merc stacks means it's just beginning on VH. Ottoman in particular at game start without constantinople can sustain reinforcing 30k continuous mercs for years on end.
You can 100% warscore them, ledger reads -0.16 loans, they will casually pay off the loans within 5 years and go right back to warmongering.
In such an environment where practically every AI can sustain full force limit merc spam for 2-3 years and lucky ones can do so indefinitely (starting with 1% interest and going to 0.25% with one idea) your drill becomes an unaffordable luxury that obstruct putting enough bodies on the field.
When you're playing for efficiency on normal the same things apply but your expectations for being able to multifront are even higher.
I didn't bother with that decision. By the time I had money to burn I already had 100% professionalism anyways. Overall, I don't think it's a good idea.