PSA : The AI is hardcoded to not regain manpower when disbanding units, even at 100% army professionalism.

[Question]

As some of you may have realised, in 1.30, Paradox made the AI not build to force limit in peace anymore. So they build to force limit when there is a war and then disband the units once the war ends. There are also a number of bugs that cause the AI to get stuck in a loop of hiring and disbanding units, keeping them on low manpower forever.

I noticed that the AI was permanently stuck on low manpower because they do not get the manpower back when disbanding. I assumed this was before they got professionalism high enough to regain manpower when disbanding, so i modded the game so that you regain manpower when disbanding even at 0% professionalism. Simple workaround right?

Nope. I just noticed that Bohemia was not regaining manpower when disbanding after a war. I tag switched to them and disbanded their units manually, and they did get manpower back. But when the AI is doing it, they do not regain manpower.

I suspect that Paradox hardcoded it so that the AI doesnt actually disband units...they delete them using the delete command, so they never get their manpower back when disbanding their army after a war.

Somehow, when they were coding this, nobody said "Hey...isnt it a bad idea if the AI doesnt regain manpower when disbanding their units?".

Classic Paradox coding guys.

If you want to see this in action, simply use the console to make an AI your subject, give them 100% army professionalism and see what happens to their manpower pool when they disband their army.

The screenshot shows Bohemia's manpower pool, notice that after disbanding 10+ units, they are still on 3,782 manpower. I tag switched to them and they are still on 3,782 manpower.

 

[RAID186]

The whole disband-hire-disband thing also costs the AI hugely too in sheer recruitment money, it almost forces a loan at the beginning of every war.

I don't even think PDX know what they're trying to make the AI do at this point.

 

[Question]

The funny thing is 1.29 had no issue with this since the AI would build to force limit all the time if it could. But they made the AI stop building to force limit in 1.30 (probably to force them to use the new mercs) and that created a whole bunch of problems. Problems that players noticed in the first few days after release, that Paradox failed to notice durng the whole development period.

 

[iClipse]

The funny thing is 1.29 had no issue with this since the AI would build to force limit all the time if it could. But they made the AI stop building to force limit in 1.30 (probably to force them to use the new mercs) and that created a whole bunch of problems. Problems that players noticed in the first few days after release, that Paradox failed to notice durng the whole development period.

In all honestly, not having them be at force limit all the time isn't an issue to be honest. Being at force limit costs a lot of money, especially if you've completed Offensive or Quantity ideas. So, in a way it makes sense to not be at force limit all the time. As a player, I'm usually not at the limit either, unless fighting a really taxing war.

The disbanding regaining manpower should be fixed though.

 

[Me_]

It's an interesting and important find, but the constant condescending tone is.... let's say that just because the US president likes to insult people left and right it does not make it a good norm. It's bad enough that Stellaris forum was lost entirely to this kind of thing, there's no need to lose EU4 forum as well.

Somehow, when they were coding this, nobody said "Hey...isnt it a bad idea if the AI doesnt regain manpower when disbanding their units?".

Classic Paradox coding guys.

 

[Canute VII]

It's an interesting and important find, but the constant condescending tone is.... let's say that just because the US president likes to insult people left and right it does not make it a good norm. It's bad enough that Stellaris forum was lost entirely to this kind of thing, there's no need to lose EU4 forum as well.

I see nothing condescending in this. The AI is on a downhill slope since several patches. That is condescending.

 

[Meglok]

The issue is not getting manpower back. That has long been locked behind having Professionalism 60. The issues are the AI priorities of using and keeping mercs at the expense of regular units. PDS is aware of the problem and hopefully it will be addressed in 1.31.

My personal opinion is that recovering disbanded manpower could be locked behind mil tech. Something like a sliding scale of 25/50/75% back as your mil tech gets better. What I am not sure of is how that change would affect game balance, esp with major powers like France, Spain, Ottomans, Ming, etc. Allowing players to recover manpower while saving money during peace might really tilt the balance towards majors.

 

[Laurent1944]

A rework of the global system should be done at some time, right now there are too many concepts added successively without coordination.

Basically, at start, there is no permanent army in most countries. When you need an army, you raise it (using manpower) and when the crisis is over, you disband it: then units go blackflagged and return to their home province, where they disband, giving you manpower back).

Army tradition is simulating the value of the fighter class of the society (basically the noblemen). For me it should impact cavalry quality, leader quality and morale, but that's all.

As countries before richer, they can start to maintain permanent armies. These could be trained, and professionalism gained. Professionalism will impact all arms (infantry, cavalry, artillery).

At some stage, professionalism will raise over military tradition, and this should create events where non-noble officers and noble will struggle for power.

As for mercs, there is no IRL reason that hiring mercs will decrease the quality of your national troops, so I will rather have no impact on professionalism when hiring them.

Right now, the AI is somehow able to detect threats (so basically if you have a claim on a neighbout and place an army on the border, the AI will increase army maintenance so the army goes back to full morale, same for forts). This can be adjusted to check how much troops your potential enemies have: if they raise their army, you raise one too (if you can).

As for losing money while hiring/disbanding units, this is clearly not the case. The maintainance cost of an unit for a year is roughly its creation cost, and most countries will be at peace more often that at war, so they will have more money to raise an army. The issue is that with the lost manpower, they can't raise it again, and so hire mercs instead. The end result in my game is that in 1650, Ming, Russia and Commonwealth have beetween 50% and 80% of their troops that are mercenaries, while having very few manpower despite not fighting heavy wars in the last year.

 

[Jordedude1234]

It's an interesting and important find, but the constant condescending tone is.... let's say that just because the US president likes to insult people left and right it does not make it a good norm. It's bad enough that Stellaris forum was lost entirely to this kind of thing, there's no need to lose EU4 forum as well.

If we can't rightly criticize the game at all, then this game will slowly fade into irrelevancy, as it is player feedback that often rebalances the game after updates, or tells Paradox what content they should focus on. Yeah the OP was making a joke at the dev's expense, but he didn't insult any devs personally, and frankly the AI faults introduced in 1.30 had to come from somewhere, like the code introduced in 1.30, with screenshots as proof to boot.

 

[Question]

In all honestly, not having them be at force limit all the time isn't an issue to be honest. Being at force limit costs a lot of money, especially if you've completed Offensive or Quantity ideas. So, in a way it makes sense to not be at force limit all the time. As a player, I'm usually not at the limit either, unless fighting a really taxing war.

The disbanding regaining manpower should be fixed though.

Except that the AI cant handle it if they arent at force limit.

Here are some common scenarios in 1.30 :

-AI revokes privileges/seizes land, estate rebels spawn. The estate rebels curb stomp the standing army since the AI doesnt build to force limit anymore. Most of the time, the rebels cant siege down the fort because they are too small for the fort size, so the AI is crippled till outside intervention changes that. You see this all the time with OPMs in the HRE. A small rebel stack trying to sieging down some OPM's capital, but they are too small so they can never siege down the fort and the AI will never accept rebel demands so they are stuck there forever.

-AI sees that their rival has a small army. Declares war. The enemy alliance builds to force limit. The attacker is outnumbered 2 times and is unable to win. The AI looks at standing army rather than their force limit, so underestimates enemy strength because of this.

-AI keeps disbanding troops after each war. Loses tons of manpower each time. Permanently stuck on low manpower.

 

[Question]

The issue is not getting manpower back. That has long been locked behind having Professionalism 60. The issues are the AI priorities of using and keeping mercs at the expense of regular units. PDS is aware of the problem and hopefully it will be addressed in 1.31.

My personal opinion is that recovering disbanded manpower could be locked behind mil tech. Something like a sliding scale of 25/50/75% back as your mil tech gets better. What I am not sure of is how that change would affect game balance, esp with major powers like France, Spain, Ottomans, Ming, etc. Allowing players to recover manpower while saving money during peace might really tilt the balance towards majors.

The issue is that it is IMPOSSIBLE for the AI to get their manpwoer back when they mass-disband after a war, even if they are at 100% professionalism. The AI is permanently stuck on low manpower because of this. Mercs have nothing to do with it. Bohemia doesnt even have any mercs in that screenshot.

 

[Beagá]

Let´s all just agree the AI is a mess in many areas and I for one don´t care about the native american rework. I just want GOOD AI!

 

[Question]

Yea, how can they be working on the next DLC when there are so many issues to fix that are crippling the core game? It just makes no sense. Its like your landlord getting people to give the house a new coat of paint when the door lock is faulty and there are leaks everywhere.

 

[Canute VII]

Yea, how can they be working on the next DLC when there are so many issues to fix that are crippling the core game? It just makes no sense. Its like your landlord getting people to give the house a new coat of paint when the door lock is faulty and there are leaks everywhere.

Because AI programmers are the bottleneck. Game and content designers aren't.

 

[Alyosha]

What’s the logic for requiring 60% professionalism to get manpower back at all? Why not just give whatever manpower back when disbanding or deleting armies? If I’m not mistaken HOI (at least the third iteration of that game) have manpower back when disbanding troops.

 

[klingonadmiral]

If I’m not mistaken HOI (at least the third iteration of that game) have manpower back when disbanding troops.

Because one game takes place in the 16th century and another in the 20th century.

 

[Question]

Because AI programmers are the bottleneck. Game and content designers aren't.

Except that many of these are game mechanic issues, not AI issues.

 

[Question]

Because one game takes place in the 16th century and another in the 20th century.

It doesnt make sense either. Your manpower pool is the amount of men eligible for military service.

So after you disband these troops, they suddenly vanish into thin air? Obviously not. They go back home and you can call them back if necessary.

 

[Meglok]

It doesnt make sense either. Your manpower pool is the amount of men eligible for military service.

So after you disband these troops, they suddenly vanish into thin air? Obviously not. They go back home and you can call them back if necessary.

Historically it was extremely hard to "reuse" former troops. 16th century warfare aged men fast between disease, privation, and wounds. And as males got older they married, had families, and were very reluctant to leave the farms. Also men who had served once got very good at disappearing when recruiters showed up in the village. They had a pretty good idea what to expect and wanted no part of it. It wasn't until much later that standing militias and professional armies allowed the call up of "reservists".

 

[EarlKonrad]

What’s the logic for requiring 60% professionalism to get manpower back at all? Why not just give whatever manpower back when disbanding or deleting armies? If I’m not mistaken HOI (at least the third iteration of that game) have manpower back when disbanding troops.

If I recall correctly, the reason the devs gave for it was twofold: To be an incentive for getting to and staying at high manpower, and to somewhat represent how armies evolved from militias to somewhat professionals who could be disbanded and reissued if needed be. (I'm oversimplifying the argument btw because this is what I remember).

You can learn more by reading the original DD talking about Army Professionalism (CoC related) and on the newer one where they talked about rebalancing AP and give you more incentives to make use of Drilling (Emperor related).