Teleporting generals

[echolot]

Diplomats or merchants need time to travel, the farer the relevant region the longer does the journey take. Logical and transparent system. However the generals use a Star Trek style teleporting system, they arrive in every army immidiately, no matter where every army is located. For example in my game as Russia I attached the general to the army fighting in Sweden, directly after the battle to the army fighting the rebels in Kamchatka and then to a colonial army in Indonesia to fight against Brunei. In all three armies he appeared immidiately. This is just weird, gamy and destroys the immersion to some degree.

Generals need to take time to arrive to each army in same style as diplomats or merchants. This would also add a strategical aspect. You need to plan carefully where to place not only your armies but also generals.

 

[Chlodio]

At very least generals should be locked to continent, so that your 3 star general has to sail to new world to lead there, but the best would be if generals would be locked to unit they're assigned to.

 

[magnusvejby]

I would say if they cant teleport you would need many more leaders, so if this would get implemented you should be able to have as many leaders as you would like to (I dont think its very realistic that a nation only has 1 or 2 leaders, when they really should have 15+) , and they should not cost MIL points to hire.

 

[Liquid Ghost]

"Beam me up, my king."

 

[ozyhuboi]

Naturally, like in Vic 2 and CK2, the problem is that this would require far more generals then we would have available. in CK2 and Vic 2, there were no hard limits on the number of leaders we could have (though I've heard that's been changed somewhat in CK2 now), so this wasn't quite the problem. For some reason in EUIV, it was decided to make a hard limit for the number of generals a nation could have despite the fact that there would most definitely be a large number of armies. I've heard a good idea regarding having a pool of generals like with advisors and hiring as many as your state is able to support. This would make more sense as certain military focused with smaller armies could then afford to higher better generals balancing out to a large state which would need to higher many subpar generals to lead its many armies.

 

[Rinyee]

I think, to a certain extent, every general in this game is not only an individual person. A "general" kind of represents a group of "commanding power".

 

[kitemasaki]

As said above, generals should be locked to the army regiment when in enemy territory. Meaning that you could still have that general go to another army within enemy lands, you would just need to split the army he is currently stationed within to manually move him. Outside of enemy territory, Generals should have a travel time just like merchants, colonists and diplomats.

This would force players to reconsider (as in posts you can see even on today's main forum) the vale of having that +1 leader bonus. The instant assignment that generals currently have doesn't make players think it is necessary to have more than a couple of generals. If this were changed, I guarantee players would better appreciate having a higher limit.

 

[Freudia]

The only way I will support the removal of general teleportation is if it comes hand in hand with a global increase in leaders you're allowed to have before you start taking a MP penalty. You are forcing the player to have more generals, so it's only fair he should get the softcap on generals raised at the same time without him having to invest into an idea sink just to get it.

 

[Sian]

Yeah, while the idea is decent enough, it would probably need some sort of raising leader cap to not be an 'unfun' change ... say prehaps 1 leaderslot per 20 Provinces, rounded down, to a mininum of 1? (so you'd have 1 leaderslot from 1-39, 2 for 40-59, etc

 

[BrokenSky]

Diplomats or merchants need time to travel, the farer the relevant region the longer does the journey take. Logical and transparent system. However the generals use a Star Trek style teleporting system, they arrive in every army immidiately, no matter where every army is located. For example in my game as Russia I attached the general to the army fighting in Sweden, directly after the battle to the army fighting the rebels in Kamchatka and then to a colonial army in Indonesia to fight against Brunei. In all three armies he appeared immidiately. This is just weird, gamy and destroys the immersion to some degree.

Generals need to take time to arrive to each army in same style as diplomats or merchants. This would also add a strategical aspect. You need to plan carefully where to place not only your armies but also generals.

[ForTheLulz]This would be good if you could have more than one by default. as it is I find the idea that I only have one commander with any skill whatsoever leading the army more jarring than his majical teleporting powers. Presumamly Generals are like demigods, which is why only other generals can beat them for tactics and all the mere human captains are left in the tactical kiddy pool. It's only natural that such superintelligent battlewizards be able to teleport between continents.[/ForTheLulz]

In all seriousness though, i think disallowing these generals to travel between armies would make the limit on the number you can have even more off a problem. Personally I would implement a travel system if It were viable, if I were the one making the decisions, but I would also increase the number of leaders one could field before receiving a military penalty, and possibly add +1 leader to quest for the new world, since you're likely to have a conquistador in near permanent hunt for seven cities, or an explorer doing something similar in addition to your normal military needs. Possibly as a triggered modifier though, and lose it after you've met some other criterion/a. "Age of Exploration" or something?

 

[Chlodio]

Yeah, while the idea is decent enough, it would probably need some sort of raising leader cap to not be an 'unfun' change ... say prehaps 1 leaderslot per 20 Provinces, rounded down, to a mininum of 1? (so you'd have 1 leaderslot from 1-39, 2 for 40-59, etc

Why would you want to tie it to provinces? Wouldn't it make more sense to to tie it to land force limit?

 

[Mattius]

Also colonists shouldn't go from their brand new colony => back home => to the province next to the colony they just finished.

 

[Mattius]

Why would you want to tie it to provinces? Wouldn't it make more sense to to tie it to land force limit?

Maybe that could result in a maximum amount of troops a general can effectively lead.

 

[Hakuromatsu]

IMO the problem here -- and this is a problem for EU5, not EU4 -- is that advisors, envoys, and leaders should all be part of a unified "great man" system. All great men are always linked to a province, army, or navy; they take an appropriate amount of time to travel to another province, army, or navy.

 

[Durnilhas]

Naturally, like in Vic 2 and CK2, the problem is that this would require far more generals then we would have available. in CK2 and Vic 2, there were no hard limits on the number of leaders we could have (though I've heard that's been changed somewhat in CK2 now), so this wasn't quite the problem. For some reason in EUIV, it was decided to make a hard limit for the number of generals a nation could have despite the fact that there would most definitely be a large number of armies. I've heard a good idea regarding having a pool of generals like with advisors and hiring as many as your state is able to support. This would make more sense as certain military focused with smaller armies could then afford to higher better generals balancing out to a large state which would need to higher many subpar generals to lead its many armies.

i already told many time this problem ^^. I agree with you. There is manyyy way to expand military leader through feature or only expand it without reason. You can blob half of the world, stack up to 4 army full strenght you will always have 1/2 leader teleporting for each battle. I don't understand this...
I think the problem is not the teleporting agent. since it's userfriendly and we don't need too much realism because it will destroy the user's experience. We are faaaar form a military simulation since the combat system is poor and casual. The problem is probably the military leader pool. Making them teleport is ok but if you have only one you will always make him teleport wich kill the immersive experience like you said but if you have plenty of leader you will never teleport them.

IMO the problem here -- and this is a problem for EU5, not EU4 -- is that advisors, envoys, and leaders should all be part of a unified "great man" system. All great men are always linked to a province, army, or navy; they take an appropriate amount of time to travel to another province, army, or navy.

EU5 is not for tomorow . And i'm wondering if they will ever make a eu5. They put all their idea in eu4 Trying to make it better each day without stoping. eu5 will probably only be a different game or only a graphics improvement.

 

[echolot]

Also colonists shouldn't go from their brand new colony => back home => to the province next to the colony they just finished.

Yes, that's also a good idea.

 

[Grand Pope Papa]

Give generals/admirals travel time and give us +1 free leader upkeep at Military tech level 10, 20 and 30.

 

[Martin_Mortyry]

Why would you want to tie it to provinces? Wouldn't it make more sense to to tie it to land force limit?

This. The limit should be based on your forcelimit - how will you manage your army AND navy while having massive chunks of land and only 2 generals? I think the most balanced system would be giving 1 slot per 20 land units or 25 ships.

 

[ruzen]

At very least generals should be locked to continent, so that your 3 star general has to sail to new world to lead there, but the best would be if generals would be locked to unit they're assigned to.

or maybe locked forever and removing them could cost prestige as in The Victoria 2

 

[Chlodio]

This. The limit should be based on your forcelimit - how will you manage your army AND navy while having massive chunks of land and only 2 generals? I think the most balanced system would be giving 1 slot per 20 land units or 25 ships.

Yes, in my Russia game my land forcelimit was 200, I was fighting war in 4 fronts and I only one leader slot while in my Tuscany game my land forcelimit was 30 and I had 3 leader slots, that's just silly.