Mercenaries, WAD?

[jockedahl]

A major disadvantage of mercs is that they don't upgrade when you get new techs. Or at least, they didn't last time I played Burgundy.

Yes this can be quite annoying, there's no hint as to when the new types of mercs become available or how the merc pool works.

 

[HansBaer]

My usual strategy usually is to have a standing army of regular troops according to your Forcelimit, then go over it with mercs in times of war, as you want to disband surplus units afterwards anyway. Unless i'm swimming in manpower, then regulars are the way to go.

 

[Gustav91]

Historically, nations depended very heavily on mercenaries in this time period. The majority of both the Spanish and the Dutch armies in the Eighty Years War where foreigners. The Thirty Year War saw heavy use of mercenaries.

Especially early on, the standing army was a rarity. Take a look at this: http://celyn.drizzlehosting.com/jherek/16thMilSci.pdf
It gives the examples of standing armies: France 1566 had 16.000 standing soldiers, while in wartime its army would swell to at least 50.000.

At the end of the period, certainly, mercenaries fell out of use and the levee en masse replaced them completely. But certainly in the first half of the game, if history is to be followed, the majority of your European army should be mercenaries.

Swedish Army during the TYW. 30 000 Swedes 220 000 Mercenaries (at it's max). Just some perspective.

 

[guga912]

I think they are ok since they are the only way small nations can win wars, and they also give a reason to actually take loans.

 

[wolfing]

A major disadvantage of mercs is that they don't upgrade when you get new techs. Or at least, they didn't last time I played Burgundy.

But an advantage is that you can get upgraded units that you don't have access to yet. Not sure how the game determines it, but usually you can hire artillery mercs before you have access to them.