Units should move 1.5 times faster.

[highsis]

Vertical length of modern france: 891km

Time it takes in-game to cross France: 60 days

In-game unit speed: approximately 15km/day



That's pretty much the slowest army movement speed. In RL, the maximum speed of marching armies were as following:

Macedonian marching speed vs Persia: 24km/day

Caesar's maximum marching speed: 35km/day

Napoloen's Grand Army: 40km/day

Batu Khan's mongolian invasion of Hungary: 151km/day



As you can see, long before 'force march' is unlocked, armies in real life have moved at a much faster speed. 15km/day is way too slow. It should be at least 22km/day and 33km/day while force marching to simulate RL examples. Marcedonian maries marched at maximum speed of 24km/day even outside of paved roads.

 

[dudebrodude]

Seems reasonable. I would agree with that. Any sources on the marching speeds of armies? I find that stuff pretty interesting.

 

[DSwann]

The game isn't RL

 

[Incompetent]

If anything, it's currently too easy to move armies long distances over land. Look how Russia can fling troops at China, for instance.

 

[MichaelM]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish_Road

The "Spanish Road" was a military supply/trade route used from 1567–1620, which stretched from Northern Italy to the Low Countries. It crossed through relatively neutral territory, and was therefore Europe's most preferred military route. In the days of its use it was known in French as "le chemin des Espagnols".

Soldiers were able to march the 1,000 km (620 mi) from Milan to Flanders an average of 23 km (14 mi) a day. Sea transport was much faster, able to cover about 200 kilometers (120 mi) a day, but was highly exposed to storms and enemy attacks. For large groups, overland communication was more reliable, allowing the Spanish to send over 123,000 men compared to only 17,600 by sea, between 1567 and 1620.

Not sure how applicable that speed is to a generalized campaign as opposed to marching from one end of a road to the other.

 

[Krec]

Armies move too fast in the game.

 

[moyang]

That's pretty much the slowest army movement speed. In RL, the maximum speed of marching armies were as following:

They were using forced march.

 

[Birdjaguar]

Supply trains and artillery slow armies down considerably. For Napoleon, 15-20 miles a day was speedy and better than most of his adversaries. Campaigning and normal redeploying are very different activities. On campaign armies would have to move along parallel routes some of which may not have good roads. There are lots of variables.

 

[joak]

Yes, armies are generally too fast. They can be too slow for 'realism' at some points, but armies weren't marching at the speeds in the OP continuously, let alone covering land in a straight line between two points.

A more sophisticated model might be something like high attrition, even in friendly provinces, if you are moving above a very slow speed. Good leaders wouldn't just increase the possible speed, they'd get a "logistics" or "administration" attribute to drastically reduce attrition while marching at high speeds.

 

[l3ol3o]

All the examples you listed were basically real life examples of "forced marched".

 

[highsis]

All the examples you listed were basically real life examples of "forced marched".

I know, but so what if they were forced marching?

I did the test on the lastest bookmark, French revolution era.

15km/day is 22.5km/day in a forced march. Napoleon moved twice as fast, and his enemies soon followed suit.

Mongolian cavalry speed of 151km/day is 7 times faster than in-game cavalries in force march.

Moreover, Roman legion and Alexander's armies marched on the speed I listed more than a millennial from the game's timeframe. Force march is not immediately available at 1444.

 

[joak]

I know, but so what if they were forced marching?

I did the test on the lastest bookmark, French revolution era.

15km/day is 22.5km/day in a forced march. Napoleon moved twice as fast, and his enemies soon followed suit.

Mongolian cavalry speed of 151km/day is 7 times faster than in-game cavalries in force march.

Moreover, Roman legion and Alexander's armies marched on the speed I listed more than a millennial from the game's timeframe. Force march is not immediately available at 1444.

You're confusing historical "forced march" with the in-game one. While exceptional leaders could pull off amazing feats, you couldn't force march every day for six months. You can in the game.

What was the average speed of Napoleon's invasion of Russia? Something like three and half months to go from the Neman river to Moscow, which is not much over 10 km per day if I've done my math right. That Napoleon could maneuver much faster under favorable conditions doesn't really argue for a change to the entire system.

 

[highsis]

You're confusing historical "forced march" with the in-game one. While exceptional leaders could pull off amazing feats, you couldn't force march every day for six months. You can in the game.

What was the average speed of Napoleon's invasion of Russia? Something like three and half months to go from the Neman river to Moscow, which is not much over 10 km per day if I've done my math right. That Napoleon could maneuver much faster under favorable conditions doesn't really argue for a change to the entire system.

You've got a point. I still think light-weighted armies way under the supply limit should be able to move faster. That was the point of dividing armies while marching.

 

[Pkunzipper]

Vertical length of modern france: 891km

Time it takes in-game to cross France: 60 days

In-game unit speed: approximately 15km/day



That's pretty much the slowest army movement speed. In RL, the maximum speed of marching armies were as following:

Macedonian marching speed vs Persia: 24km/day

Caesar's maximum marching speed: 35km/day

Napoloen's Grand Army: 40km/day

Batu Khan's mongolian invasion of Hungary: 151km/day



As you can see, long before 'force march' is unlocked, armies in real life have moved at a much faster speed. 15km/day is way too slow. It should be at least 22km/day and 33km/day while force marching to simulate RL examples. Marcedonian maries marched at maximum speed of 24km/day even outside of paved roads.

You should try the same experiment assigning to the army a 6 point maneuver leader as in many of the examples you provided there was a very capable commander at the top of those armies!

 

[Slargos]

You've got a point. I still think light-weighted armies way under the supply limit should be able to move faster. That was the point of dividing armies while marching.

What you and your brigade of forced march enthusiasts (kavalry shud march teh fastur!) don't take into consideration is that while armies could and did move quickly for very limited periods of time, they always had to stop for their supply trains to catch up sooner or later. This gives limited operational room for extending an army's range, especially if supplies can be moved via barge (see 30 years war) but only for parts of the units and only for parts of the time.

You can't force march a black smith or a cannon.

Mongols are an aberration in this aspect, and using them as an example is completely nonsensicaly.

 

[kuolema]

I guess there's also the fact that in real life planning and logistics takes time. In game troops across the world instantly know when their country is being attacked and they can return home immediately. To make up for things like that whatever balances the game trumps reality. But still, variations and complexities in troop movement and logistics would be interesting, although its a level of complexity in an area EUIV chooses not to focus on.

 

[Brainblow]

If anything, it's currently too easy to move armies long distances over land. Look how Russia can fling troops at China, for instance.

Yeah, that. One of the biggest reasons Japan defeated Russia in the Russo-Japanese war is because transporting troops across Siberia is not exactly easy, yet in the game you can do it with impunity.

 

[Veta]

Only if attrition is based on distance from unoccupied (allied) core province and gets severe fast.

 

[Jorgen_CAB]

It is really fantasy land that armies could march long stretches for any length of time. Any army commander had to consider supply, terrain, enemy forces, reconnaissance, possible reinforcement, friendly troop movements, knowledge about the terrain and how friendly or strong local forces might be, strongholds that would be passed that could disrupt your supplies etc...

It is more about the operational RANGE of your army than the speed of your army.

Armies such as the Huns and the Mongolians are very special cases NOT modeled by the game at all and are more or less completely irrelevant.

Any army could force march for a few days and move pretty fast if they needed to be somewhere fast for a reason, but in order to do so they would have to leave certain things behind that would have to catch up later. The game completely abstract this with the ability to use the "Forced march" ability and having good leaders with a high maneuverability and a relatively high average speed for moving your armies.

You have to understand that military leaders of this era did not have the perfect top down view of where all your forces were. Coordinating forces in the game are vastly easier in the game than it was in reality. If en enemy would lay siege to a fortress in one end of you country it might take days for you to even know what happened. And if you did not have troops ready for march it might take you days if not weeks to prepare for just moving a stationary army. Now, you might move pretty quick when you do move, but you would not arrive in force until a few weeks later even if the distance are not that great. These are real life conditions not very well represented by the game where you can instantly react to any movement at any time done by the enemy as if you had satellite link communications.

 

[oblio-]

If anything, it's currently too easy to move armies long distances over land. Look how Russia can fling troops at China, for instance.

As a Qara Qoyunlu marching troops in my colonized Siberia from Persia, without Forced March it takes 6+ months (probably more like 9) to get near Ming. Actually it takes probably longer since moving from just 1 province to the one next to it in the North of Ming takes more than 1 month. With Forced March you can probably cut the time in half - and I think Forced March should cause attrition when used for more than 6 provinces or so.

Anyway, I don't think that's why Russia is overpowered versus Asian countries