|
VDay posted:Fort Stuff
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2015 23:26
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 28, 2024 13:03 |
|
|
Yeah I'm on the beta. I should mention that there are instances where the number of troops needed is actually more (and maybe sometimes less, but I haven't seen that) than just fort level x3 because some nations can get bonuses to that stuff. Ming, for example, has forts that need like 35,000+ men to siege because they get crazy defensive bonuses, but the base for that 35k number is still 24k and is based on a level 8 fort times three.
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2015 23:29
|
|
|
So basically when declaring war try to snipe every single fort you can day 1 or within the first month because it will save you years of attrition and waiting. x2 if it's coastal. I know which forts I'm beelining for now 
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2015 23:31
|
|
|
Just assault them if you miss the first tickover. VDay posted:I should mention that there are instances where the number of troops needed is actually more (and maybe sometimes less, but I haven't seen that) than just fort level x3 because some nations can get bonuses to that stuff. they do? what bonus does that? I think there are a bunch of extra factors none of us understand 'cause some of these conclusions seem to run counter to what I've experienced.
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2015 23:33
|
|
|
Can't assault unless you breach the walls (for that underwhelming +1 siege roll bonus).
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2015 23:39
|
|
|
On a closer look there is definitely something going on, and I take back some of what I said on the last page. For example I sieged a level 2 fort of a nation that has the Quantity bonus and it showed up in the tooltip as giving a 25% bonus, but it still said I needed 6,000 men to siege it, not 7,000 (or 7.5k technically). But then if you siege Ming the 25% bonus from Quantity stacks with the 25% from the Great Wall, and 24k base men needed turns into 36k needed. So maybe it does give a bonus, but only if you're past a certain point or have a big enough fort? 
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2015 23:40
|
|
|
VDay posted:On a closer look there is definitely something going on, and I take back some of what I said on the last page. I dunno for sure I can check it out later today, I just always thought Quantity + Defensive was a particular nasty attrition combo because the Garrison Size meant you had to commit +25% or however many additional stacks to siege it. In the beta patch if you have just finished sieging a fort and it's below some minimum (100?) garrison size, it will just instantly turn over like an unfortified province. However I think above 100 is just uses the maximum garrison for the siege size, though it might tick over faster (?) and you can assault it easily.
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2015 23:53
|
|
|
So a Bastion (Lvl 4 fort) with 5,000 max garrison (4k*1.25) takes 15k men to siege because 12 * 1.25 = 15 A Fortress (Lvl 8 fort) with 12,000 max garrison (8k*1.5) takes 36k men to siege because 24 * 1.5 = 36 But a Star Fort (Lvl 6 fort) with 7,500 max garrison (6k*1.25) takes 21k men to siege despite the fact that 18 * 1.25 = 22.5 And a castle (level 2 fort) with a 2500 max garrison (2k*1.25) takes 6k men to siege despite the fact that 6 * 1.25 = 7.5 So it looks like the reason we're confused and mixing things up is that the higher garrison size does affect how many men you need to siege...except when it doesn't. Seems like the bonus only works in 3k men chunks aka a fort level. So the bigger garrison bonuses will increase how many men you need to siege, but only if they add at least 3,000 men and rounded down to the nearest multiple of 3.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2015 00:06
|
|
|
Poil posted:Can't assault unless you breach the walls (for that underwhelming +1 siege roll bonus). I swear that I read that there would be three levels of wall breaching during the Common Sense hype. Am I crazy or did they say that? Because that would REALLY help against level 4 forts.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2015 00:06
|
|
|
Node posted:I swear that I read that there would be three levels of wall breaching during the Common Sense hype. Am I crazy or did they say that? Because that would REALLY help against level 4 forts. There is 3 levels of wall breaching.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2015 00:08
|
|
|
Tsyni posted:There is 3 levels of wall breaching. I haven't seen it happen a single time and I've been playing CS since release. I must have incredible luck. It always shows 1, never 2 or 3 under the icon for a wall breach.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2015 00:12
|
|
|
Bort Bortles posted:I would love it if I could declare a limited war with my declaration of war declaring what I will take if I win. As for what would constitute a limited war, I'm not sure. Goals like force conversion probably shouldn't be allowed, and the modifier for the enemy joining the war should probably be reduced according to the distance and value of the war goal in question. Let's say the Ottomans want to declare a Limited War on Genoa for their Greek/Black Sea provinces. The chance for their hypothetical ally France to accept their call to arms would in this case be modified like this, since France considers every one of these provinces distant, reducing their value to the base province war cost when it comes to whether France will defend Genoa. Limited War: -100 Distant Wargoal - Scio: 7 Distant Wargoal - Cafa: 14 Distant Wargoal - Mantrega: 8 Distant Wargoal - Azov: 11 Which amounts to a total negative modifier of -60 in this case. Meanwhile, Genoa's ally Serbia borders the Ottomans, and furthermore considers one of these provinces to be nearby. Both double the value of the provinces the Ottomans are declaring for in terms of whether they'll accept a call to arms. Limited War: -100 Nearby Wargoal - Scio: 28 Distant Wargoal - Cafa: 28 Distant Wargoal - Mantrega: 16 Distant Wargoal - Azov: 22 Which would in this case mean the Limited War goal would be essentially meaningless for the Serbs in regard to whether they would join in, though of course it couldn't be used to somehow circumvent alliances and in this case grab Serbian territory. The numbers are of course just examples.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2015 00:16
|
|
|
Node posted:I haven't seen it happen a single time and I've been playing CS since release. I must have incredible luck. It always shows 1, never 2 or 3 under the icon for a wall breach. I didn't read it in the patch notes but I noticed it happening in the game I am playing right now. Maybe there is some other criteria? I'll take a SS next war.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2015 00:16
|
|
|
While it's not a big deal, there should probably be a UI tweak to show you how many men you'll need to siege a fort on the province screen rather than just on the actual siege screen that only shows up if your army is actually actively sieging. Showing the fort level doesn't mean much if the actual number you need to siege is max garrison rounded down to closest multiple of 3 times 3. And the "Can siege forts up to this level" box on the individual army screen is meaningless since the garrison bonuses basically add invisible fort levels. It all seems like a real goofy loop, and I wonder if it's just a result of how they had to code it. Unless I'm wrong of course, but that's obviously never happened before and is impossible. VDay fucked around with this message at 00:21 on Aug 6, 2015 |
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2015 00:18
|
|
|
VDay posted:So a Bastion (Lvl 4 fort) with 5,000 max garrison (4k*1.25) takes 15k men to siege because 12 * 1.25 = 15 Awesome, this is good to know.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2015 00:25
|
|
|
I only ran this Muscovy/Russia game to get the Patriarch Authority and Australian colony achievements, but when I saw that popup in 1705 that gave me an option between -1 stability or -5 stability and become a Republic, well, what could I do? Now I'm about done with the Master of India achievement too! Thanks, random insane event!
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2015 00:33
|
|
|
Node posted:I haven't seen it happen a single time and I've been playing CS since release. I must have incredible luck. It always shows 1, never 2 or 3 under the icon for a wall breach.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2015 00:40
|
|
|
Is there a trick to sieges in the late game? Through the whole game, even pre-cannons, I never find they take THAT long. As armies grow and more and more arty makes up armies it seems sieges remain balanced, but in my experience it all goes out the window with the max level forts suddenly taking years and often getting stuck unless you have a good siege leader or some ridiculous siege army that's mostly just a massive pile of cannons. Also does the +10% siege ability idea just affect assaults or does it some how add a bonus to siege rolls or... how's it work exactly?
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2015 00:40
|
|
|
Siege ability affects how long the siege takes. If you click on a province under siege, there's a clock on the left that tells you how long passes until the next siege tick- that clock goes quicker with higher siege ability (ideas, army tradition, tactics). Slower with war exhaustion, local defensiveness, certain terrain like mountains etc. Siege ability also affects how long provinces without forts can hold out- usually in practice it's about a month, but with stacked bonuses it can either go a lot quicker or a lot more slowly. Poil posted:Me neither. I've only ever seen a 1 from it, but of course I haven't constantly checked every single siege to see if it ever actually does go up to 2 or 3. The tooltip still claims that breaching walls is a +3 bonus though. You guys haven't been paying attention then, it goes higher than 1 all the time. On the level 1 forts not so much I guess, but when you're dealing with better ones I think it's uncommon to not get stacked breaches. Koramei fucked around with this message at 00:55 on Aug 6, 2015 |
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2015 00:52
|
|
|
The only real thing about late-game sieges is that you're going to need 15 or 20 cannons to get the full +5 bonus for artillery, so it's not a terrible idea to just have a 20 stack of cannons rolling behind your main army that you throw onto provinces you're sieging.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2015 00:57
|
|
|
VDay posted:The only real thing about late-game sieges is that you're going to need 15 or 20 cannons to get the full +5 bonus for artillery, so it's not a terrible idea to just have a 20 stack of cannons rolling behind your main army that you throw onto provinces you're sieging. I think it maxes out a bit higher than that. At least 25. Node posted:I haven't seen it happen a single time and I've been playing CS since release. I must have incredible luck. It always shows 1, never 2 or 3 under the icon for a wall breach. Here's a pic. The wall has been breached 2 times there. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2015 01:08
|
|
|
Also keep in mind, the more cannons you have, the higher the breach chance. If you're not getting above 1 breach regularly, you're probably not using enough cannons for sieging.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2015 01:12
|
|
|
Tsyni posted:I think it maxes out a bit higher than that. At least 25. You might be right, wiki says "at least 5 per building level" so presumably there's some defense ability or terrain modifier or something. Point being, if you're just playing normally and are using like 12/4/12 stacks then you're probably way short of actually getting the full artillery bonus.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2015 01:14
|
|
|
 Good luck with that rebels. PS: Ternate is broken as poo poo. Good lord.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2015 01:16
|
|
|
Hover over the little picture of a cannon in the siege screen and it'll tell you how many you need for the full bonus. It used to be just 5 for all the starting forts but they made it more complicated in the beta so now I can't remember 
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2015 01:16
|
|
|
My Russia run was a failure. I was trying to go for 1001 provinces and one million manpower. I didn't even come close. I might get 500 provinces and 500-600k manpower if I kept playing. I have a 360 force limit and can afford it all. I'm chewing into Ming and the Commonwealth. I think my biggest mistakes were 1) keeping patriarch authority low because I was scraping by. For manpower, 100 PA is important. 2) I allied the Commonwealth for most of the game until 1700 when they rivaled me. I should have been beating them up from the start, but I never felt strong enough to take them on. 3) I just wasn't aggressive the whole game. My idea order was Religious -> Defensive -> Administrative -> Trade -> Expansion -> Quantity -> Offensive -> gave up Anyone have suggestions for how to handle my mistakes, or any alterations to my ideas? Since I don't have humanism, every time I conquered a region, I would have to sit some armies down to quell the initial rebellions and I felt like it really slowed me down. And I just didn't declare enough wars. Getting my cultural union provinces from the Commonwealth would have been really helpful, but they were so powerful, and I could never find allies to help me take them on.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2015 07:17
|
|
|
I'd pick up Exploration as your second idea set. If you're going for 4 digit provinces, the 2 colonists make it so much easier and the sooner you get them the sooner you can start colonizing eastwards, letting you conquer southwards from the baltic to the pacific in rotation, making coalitions a non-issue. Day 1 war Novgorod, grab things westward towards the baltic, declare on the Livonian Order and hand their provinces to your vassals with the exception of the one that shares a sea with the baltic so you can fabricate on the TO. Once that war is done, declare on whichever russian minor Novgorod allied with and grab the rest of Novgorod. Declare war on TO, grab Danzig, release them as a vassal and either feed the remainder of the TO to it if you did it early, or just integrate it if you're approaching admin 10 so you can westernize.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2015 07:26
|
|
|
So I would actually take less losses if I assault as soon as there's a breach, instead of waiting it out and taking attrition?
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2015 07:30
|
|
|
Node posted:2) I allied the Commonwealth for most of the game until 1700 when they rivaled me. I should have been beating them up from the start, but I never felt strong enough to take them on. quote:My idea order was Religious -> Defensive -> Administrative -> Trade -> Expansion -> Quantity -> Offensive -> gave up I wrote a longer, spergy-er Russia post a couple of pages back when we had Russia Talk™, but I go Religious->Exploration->Offensive every Russia game now. Religious to deal with the Sunni lands, Exploration to quickly blob up, then Offensive to steamroll literally every neighbor to my South. Between the AE, the higher tech, and the alliances, Europe just isn't really worth screwing with unless you can pounce on a weak Sweden/Scandanavia or a Lithuania that either broke off from Poland or lost a war to the Ottos or something. The exception is to pick one well-timed fight to grab Danzig, but if PL get off to a crazy good start I'd be 100% ok with just delaying my Westernization and just focusing on chewing into Asia instead. VDay fucked around with this message at 07:54 on Aug 6, 2015 |
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2015 07:50
|
|
|
Node posted:My Russia run was a failure. I was trying to go for 1001 provinces and one million manpower. I didn't even come close. I might get 500 provinces and 500-600k manpower if I kept playing. I have a 360 force limit and can afford it all. I'm chewing into Ming and the Commonwealth. The exploration idea 2nd is really good, along with hitting Novgorod day 1 and getting through to Danzig. My extra tip is to use your other 2 diplomats to fabricate claims on Yaroslav or whatever is in the middle, and Ryazan. As soon as Golden Horde attacks Ryazan (they will), attack and vassalize it. You will inherit the war vs the GH for free and you can feed a ton of provinces to Ryazan and let them take care of the wrong religion stuff until you can handle it. War Kazan right after that and feed a few provinces to Perm. If you time everything right you can diploannex Pskov first, then by 1460 you can start to diploannex Perm and you'll finish annexing it just as you get your first colonist. Don't be scared about being in 3 wars at once. You might have to restart if Kazan and GH DOW you though you can still win. Oh and if you don't mind being gamey, as soon as you get one province in Siberian Asia, sell it off to a vassal or something to block your path. You'll still have a core in the area so you can core things. This makes all provinces in Asia now get a 50% discount on coring costs, along with not having to core any colonies anymore.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2015 07:57
|
|
|
Do you guys taking Exploration second as Russia ever switch it out? I took it second in my Russia game, but now I've colonized everything on the mainland. Colonies in America or the Spice Islands seem pretty  other than maybe tossing one down here or there for a mission bonus. Would it be a bad idea to just drop it?
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2015 14:00
|
|
|
Bold Robot posted:Do you guys taking Exploration second as Russia ever switch it out? I took it second in my Russia game, but now I've colonized everything on the mainland. Colonies in America or the Spice Islands seem pretty
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2015 14:08
|
|
|
Bold Robot posted:Do you guys taking Exploration second as Russia ever switch it out? I took it second in my Russia game, but now I've colonized everything on the mainland. Colonies in America or the Spice Islands seem pretty You really shouldn't have taken it in the first place if you don't want more than Siberia. Russia's free colonist is more than enough to for that.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2015 14:15
|
|
|
Bold Robot posted:Do you guys taking Exploration second as Russia ever switch it out? I took it second in my Russia game, but now I've colonized everything on the mainland. Colonies in America or the Spice Islands seem pretty I'm pretty sure colonies all the way down to Australia can push trade back towards Novgorod or Kiev so long as you have important central and south asian trade nodes like Samarkand
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2015 14:53
|
|
|
You can colonize Alaska and the West Coast of NA and feed it back to yourself (see here: http://www.eu4wiki.com/images/f/f7/Trade_nodes_with_arrows.png). Doing that would give you two Colonial Nations that each give you a merchant and it sends tons of valuable trade on the long trip through Siberia. As 420 Gank Mid said, if you want to go HAM in Asia you could colonize Australia and the Spice Islands and then, because you Westernized, make trade companies through SE Asia by conquering juicy bits of Indochina and India and feed allllll that trade up through India into Samarkand and up to Kazan.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2015 16:02
|
|
|
I dropped exploration for trade after I colonized Alaska. That was an odd situation where the Europeans had ignored Brazil, La Plata and Canada and focused on moving east instead. Wasn't able to colonize the spice islands, California, or Australia.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2015 16:32
|
|
|
Node posted:My Russia run was a failure. I was trying to go for 1001 provinces and one million manpower. I didn't even come close. I might get 500 provinces and 500-600k manpower if I kept playing. I have a 360 force limit and can afford it all. I'm chewing into Ming and the Commonwealth. What worked for me was to abuse the colony mechanic. I started out taking Religious/Exploration/Defensive/Administrative/Offensive/Expansion/Quantity, so similar to yours, except I took Exploration early on to start on the Siberia train. Why exploration instead of expansion when expansion has that nice policy set? Well, I was first into the Pacific, so I needed to explore to keep colonizing down south in the Indonesian region. I took Expansion later but it turned out to not be a great idea because by then I was mostly done colonizing. I started off aggressively with Poland/Lithuania but I also got lucky in that in my game the PU broke, partially because I was kicking Poland early on. I took Danzig for the free westernization. I fought a series of wars in the west but mostly finished up fighting Europeans by 1650 or so, by which time Lithuania was completely gone and Poland was its original borders minus the shoreline. Hungary was a good ally this game, they seem a lot stronger than they used to be. Scandinavia is absolutely not worth your time, as a vassal or otherwise. Take Neva and forget about them. For the manpower achievement European provinces are good but they're a pain in the rear end to take and imo not worth your time after the initial expansion. After I had a fair powerbase built up in the Pacific I started getting those "foothold in India" missions, which ended up being the key to A Decent Reserve. I ripped into Bahmanis and just started eating the Indian subcontinent as quickly as I could. Here's the thing: as long as there's no land connection, Indian provinces count as colonies, so the price to core them is discounted by 15% for Russian ideas, 25% for Adaptability (Administrative 2), and 50% for colony. That's a 90% discount. You pay 1 admin per development. So I got Master of India on the cheap and as soon as the achievement popped up I declared on Khorasan and connected India to my mainland, at which point almost all of India dropped to 0% autonomy (because, and I don't know if this is a bug, but the "real autonomy" level is tracked independently of the 75% autonomy floor) and added around 200k manpower instantly. Because I owned all of India, I steered all the trade in the area to Goa and collected it, which made me about 100 ducats a month alone. I had enough money to blanket my entire territory, even if it only had 1 military development, in Training Fields for 100% extra manpower. I fired advisors until I got the Manpower Modifier guy, enacted the Quantity/Exploration policy for another 10% manpower modifier, and it clicked over to a million. Master of India done, A Decent Reserve done. I didn't even touch Ming all game, because they were terrifyingly stable and had a billion forts everywhere. I did punch the Ottomans a bit, but only to restore the Pentarchy (which is kind of a wet fart of an event, honestly). I didn't go for the 1000 provinces because I already had it, but my suggestion to achieve it would be to do the India trick with Africa. Punch the Ottomans, take their southernmost provinces, don't link them up with a land bridge, and they also count as colonies. Then just start pushing south and west.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2015 16:42
|
|
|
An addendum to my post above: You can actually get three colonial nations that will feed wealth back to Siberia by going down to northwest mexico.aeglus posted:Oh and if you don't mind being gamey, as soon as you get one province in Siberian Asia, sell it off to a vassal or something to block your path. You'll still have a core in the area so you can core things. This makes all provinces in Asia now get a 50% discount on coring costs, along with not having to core any colonies anymore.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2015 16:48
|
|
|
aeglus posted:You really shouldn't have taken it in the first place if you don't want more than Siberia. Russia's free colonist is more than enough to for that. Well the objective here is just to get provinces fast, since 1001 provinces is a lot of provinces. I typically don't take Expansion or Exploration as Russia, but if you're going for 'conquer all of Asia', then you want those two colonists.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2015 17:19
|
|
Yes, it's like a lava lamp.
|
|
| # ? Apr 28, 2024 13:03 |
|
|
If i vassalize a bunch of electors will they all vote for me, or will the combined negative points for having vassal electors make it pointless? These assholes won't vote for the right superpower voluntarily so i'm trying the hard way.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2015 17:27
|
|