|
az jan jananam posted:I started replaying Victoria 2 (with HoD) as the United States and I keep getting destroyed by Mexico when I try to fulfill Manifest Destiny around 1846. What is the suggested force composition of armies? I built a deal of cuirassiers which I thought would be performing better. Should I wait until after 1850, when I can start building better army techs? I usually do stacks of 30k troops comprised of 2 hussars, 1 engineer, 1 artillery, and 6 infantry until around the 1880s.
|
#
?
May 29, 2013 14:29
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 21:41 |
|
|
az jan jananam posted:I started replaying Victoria 2 (with HoD) as the United States and I keep getting destroyed by Mexico when I try to fulfill Manifest Destiny around 1846. What is the suggested force composition of armies? I built a deal of cuirassiers which I thought would be performing better. Should I wait until after 1850, when I can start building better army techs? First of all, the most important thing I can tell you is to choose your battles. If you can avoid engaging the enemy's armies, then do that! Build stacks of 2 hussar 2 engineer 9 infantry, and laugh as you rampage across their countryside sieging down provinces in less than a week each. A stack of 13 regiments is enough to discourage the enemy from attacking you, at least in the early game when they haven't researched any of the supply limit techs. But if you DO need to engage the enemy in combat (and having a good decisive battle to crush them early on will make sieging much easier), the best army composition is much like it is in EU3. If the enemy has X regiments on its front line, you'll want to have X infantry and X artillery, plus 4 cuirassiers (later guards), 2 dragoons, 2 hussars, and 4 engineers. That's probably going to be too many for your supply limit to handle, but if you can manage to coordinate a simultaneous attack from multiple provinces, you will absolutely obliterate the enemy due to your ludicrous flanking bonuses.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2013 14:46
|
|
|
az jan jananam posted:I started replaying Victoria 2 (with HoD) as the United States and I keep getting destroyed by Mexico when I try to fulfill Manifest Destiny around 1846. What is the suggested force composition of armies? I built a deal of cuirassiers which I thought would be performing better. Should I wait until after 1850, when I can start building better army techs? General parts of a Vicky 2 Army - The Line: You main block of dudes who're there to trade bullets with the enemy until they fall down. For maximum killing power and durability, should be infantry backed with a support unit. (Artillery, engineers, planes, or armour) Ideally, as many as the battlefield can fit. I tend to go with 6 or 8 infantry per stack and combine as needed. The Flanks: Used to clamp down on enemies when your force is bigger than theirs, and provide recon bonuses. For most of the game, made of horses. Endgame, replaced by aircraft. For this, hussars are the best at providing recon, while dragoons have better direct combat stats. Both are obsoleted by planes. Shock Troops: Optional core of high-damage units used to punch open the enemy line. This is the use for Cuirassiers and guards, who can hit really hard but aren't as durable as normal inf and so suffer from prolonged battles. Since this involves laying down extra resources to pay for more fragile units, smaller or less wealthy nations are usually better off ignoring shock troops and just building a strong line. Shock-horses become obsolete around 1870. Tanks make ideal support for the shock troops. Support: Infantry, guards, and horses fight in the front line. Everything else hangs out in the back, lending its punch to the man in front of it. You never want support units to be left without someone to hide behind, and ideally you want every front unit to have some backup to get the best concentration of firepower. Artillery lend raw murder, engineers give good defence and grant the army seige bonus that helps negate dig-in and forts and greatly speeds occupation. Tanks, as said before, and kinda shock-support that give your centre a lot of punch, and planes are recon support that can reach huge slices of the battlefield. My usual build for a standup army unit is: A line of 8 Inf, or 6 Inf 2 Guards. Flank of 2 hussars, One for each side. Get replaced by aircraft late game. Support line of a pair of engineers, and as many artillery as there is extra space. Tanks and planes either displace artillery as they arrive, or lead to adding more infantry to the lines to cover them. Speaking of which, the other thing to keep in mind with army composition is your reserves. Push a button, and couple months later you're swimming in piles of extra infantry, but there are no recon, siege, or support reservists. With that in mind, you could build stacks which contain all the fancy extra bits for an army, but no line. Leave these standing at rally points waiting to get stuffed with bodies when you mobilize, and suddenly you have a bunch of fine upstanding fightstacks to throw at your enemies.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2013 15:32
|
|
|
Reposting from the CK2 thread because I've realised there's actually a chance of an answer here:quote:Problem: I am the King of England. My son, Duke Robert, asks me to join his plot to usurp the title of another Duke. I agree. This pushes the power of the plot into the stratosphere and he immediately declares war.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2013 19:27
|
|
|
Isn't there an "Offer to Join War" or something in the diplomatic menu for your son (or whoever is the war leader)?
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2013 19:31
|
|
|
NihilCredo posted:Isn't there an "Offer to Join War" or something in the diplomatic menu for your son (or whoever is the war leader)? I don't think you can join vassals' offensive wars. You have some options if you want to help your heir, but even if your heir loses, it won't be so bad. Worst case scenario, your heir loses some prestige. You could kill the person he's fighting, that may just destabilize him enough for your son to win. You could revoke some of the enemy's titles to weaken them (though you can't revoke titles that are currently being fought over in war).
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2013 19:38
|
|
|
Alchenar posted:Reposting from the CK2 thread because I've realised there's actually a chance of an answer here: It's probably too late, but you could also try raising the levies of all the vassals your heir is fighting. This prevents them from using the troops, letting him siege mostly unopposed. Also, if you have the money for it send him gifts, so he can buy some mercs.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2013 20:04
|
|
|
Yeah that's what I do in V2. I make big stacks of support units, like maybe 5 engineers, 5 arty, some horsies, and a few guards. Then I mobilized and attach these units. All-inf armies are at massive disadvantages. Sometimes it's good to stick a few more infantry in there so even if you're not at war you can take care of rebels easier and not get caught off-guard. Another important v2 tip is that after the early-game you really need to establish fronts. A super-stack doesn't work, you have to split your forces along your ENTIRE front with the enemy or they simply will go around. As the game progresses, defense gets growing and growing advantage. Make sure your lines are totally secure before moving forward, let the enemy throw its self at your forces and only advance into new provinces when doing so will not create any openings. Basically play like you're playing HoI2 or something. In V2 5 little 5-unit armies holding your borders will end up inflicting far more damage on defence than a 25 unit army on attack. And in fact in favourable terrain a 5 unit army can even win against a 25 unit attacker. I once had a properly mixed army of about 15 units sitting in a mountain fort while russia attacks with hundreds of thousands of conscripts over and over. Every battle ended with me losing a couple thousand troops and them losing tens of thousands. Defense is everything. Baronjutter fucked around with this message at 20:20 on May 29, 2013 |
|
#
?
May 29, 2013 20:10
|
|
|
Good advice, thanks all.
|
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2013 21:01
|
|
|
YF-23 posted:Perhaps it should be possible to force countries to give up claims in provinces/states where their primary/accepted culture POPs is under a certain threshold (like 20 or 25%)? That way it would be possible to force the Russians to give up claims to Sakhalin and the Kurils but it wouldn't be possible to force Germany to give up their claim on Alsace-Lorraine. You could even combine it with POD's genocide decisions to proactively reduce non-primary cultures to zero, THEN force the other country to give up its core!  I seriously cannot believe that mod does that.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2013 00:00
|
|
|
Are there anymore updates coming to HOI3 or has it been sent to the prisons.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2013 00:53
|
|
|
Necroneocon posted:Are there anymore updates coming to HOI3 or has it been sent to the prisons. I'm guessing there's nothing major in the future, Finest Hour is probably the last major update HoI 3 is going to get outside of mods, since the game (mostly) works now. Of course, EUIII got a 5.2 patch long after I thought they abandoned it, so maybe we'll get lucky and get one update more. Ignoring the fact that 5.2 was in beta for ages before it was officially released.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2013 05:53
|
|
|
I was actually going to say the opposite: Given that Victoria and CK2 just received expansions/patches, HOI3 would seem to be next to get some dev time.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2013 07:26
|
|
|
If I remember correctly, Johan said that Paradox's next big project after EU4 was something totally new.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2013 07:47
|
|
|
edit: woops, technically the wrong thread.
JT Jag fucked around with this message at 07:57 on May 30, 2013 |
|
#
?
May 30, 2013 07:49
|
|
|
Pakled posted:If I remember correctly, Johan said that Paradox's next big project after EU4 was something totally new. So it's too early to start clamoring for Vic3, then? Bummer. I would like to see Paradox put out a decent Cold War or modern-era game in Clause2.5, though. I feel like that's a 4x hole that hasn't been truly filled yet (well, at least, SR be damned). (efc: I don't think East vs. West will be sufficiently 4x-ey for me. I've never found the non-warfare parts of the HoI games terribly compelling) quadrophrenic fucked around with this message at 08:20 on May 30, 2013 |
|
#
?
May 30, 2013 08:17
|
|
|
How about a space empires game?
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2013 08:19
|
|
|
Pakled posted:If I remember correctly, Johan said that Paradox's next big project after EU4 was something totally new. Calling it now, their next project is Orion Universalis. quote:My Emperor, those fools! Tomn fucked around with this message at 09:31 on May 30, 2013 |
|
#
?
May 30, 2013 08:23
|
|
|
Tomn posted:Calling it now, their next project is Orion Universalis. Something along the lines of the ill-fated Red Shift would be the greatest.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2013 08:32
|
|
|
It'll be a social networking conquest strategy game where you conquer the world by guiding the development of memes that support your regime, 'raising awareness', and converting people to your religion with facebook comments.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2013 08:33
|
|
|
Or, just spitballing, a Clozwoz game set from the late Bronze/Iron Age to the start of Christendom, or maybe the rise of Rome or something earlier. It'd be cool to play as a burgeoning civilization. Maybe with the individual dynasties of CK2 and something like a really simplified version of a POP system from Vic2. Emphasis on building infrastructure and consolidating tribes, teching, and light warfare. I'm thinking with my Civ-brain here.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2013 08:39
|
|
|
e; ^ That's EU:Rome, but it so turns out that the emphasis ends up getting spent on either being one of the few huge blobs or on trying to survive them somehow. Perhaps instead of an EU4 DLC Laurasia Universalis will get its own grand release. YF-23 fucked around with this message at 08:45 on May 30, 2013 |
|
#
?
May 30, 2013 08:39
|
|
|
YF-23 posted:
Then when people bitch about Gondwanaland not getting any attention from the devs you can say 'well, it is called Laurasia Universalis' 
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2013 08:47
|
|
|
Baloogan posted:How about a space empires game? Fantasy game in CK style! 
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2013 09:00
|
|
|
I've always wanted EU Rome to be more full of intrigue and plotting and backstabbing and political maneuvering and legislative bullshit that Dan Carlin and Tom Holland made it sound like. Or, since I've been on a West Wing kick lately, I'd like to see Paradox take a swing at Stardock's The Political Machine. Leverage lessons learned from Victoria and make a Leo McGarry simulator.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2013 09:16
|
|
|
Laurasia Universalis. Dinosaur politics.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2013 09:22
|
|
|
My fantasy Paradox game is something focused on the colonization of India, where you could play as a European faction trying to control the subcontinent's resources and lock out the other Europeans or a native kingdom trying to hold on to your own autonomy (and maybe also control all of India's resources, if you're more ambitious). Probably won't happen, but I like to dream.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2013 13:44
|
|
|
If we're going to be making fantasy Paradox game, then let me throw in my suggestion as well. I want a city building game, set within a (very simplified) EU4-style world. Instead of just building semi-autonomous made-up modern cities like in SimCity, you would instead select real cities* and lead them through history, much like you do with states in EU4. Your city would not exist in a near vacuum like in the SimCity games, but would instead exist within a larger world that affects its development. If it's the capital of a major empire, then it's boosted by the wealth that flows in from all over the world, while a backwater border province might suffer from near constant warfare. Depending on the size and wealth of your city, you should also be able to influence the state, pushing it to do stuff that would be advantageous to you. *Or create made-up settlements, to satisfy anyone who lives in a tiny village and want to imagine it becoming a huge city. With a city start editor, you could even have the community creating cities/towns/villages that Paradox did not have the resources to make. I imagine the game consisting of 4 major eras; the Middle Ages (starting in AD 1000), Early Modernity, Classical Modernity, and Late Modernity, with the earlier eras progressing faster in-game than the latter*, with changing conditions making what were once great ideas problematic, making it difficult to plan your city in the same way as you can in the SimCity games. Unlike the grand strategy games, where such a long timepsan probably wouldn't work due to way warfare changed, I think it could work in a city builder game. I guess such a game would need a lot of art assets though. *As there's probably less to do in the 500 years from the High Middle Ages till Early Modernity than in the 100 years of Late Modernity. A Buttery Pastry fucked around with this message at 15:48 on May 30, 2013 |
|
#
?
May 30, 2013 15:44
|
|
|
Zilkin posted:Fantasy game in CK style! Post-apocalyptic CK2 game in a Mad max like setting is what I'd love to do  Morholt posted:Laurasia Universalis. Dinosaur politics. Or that...
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2013 16:03
|
|
|
Pakled posted:If I remember correctly, Johan said that Paradox's next big project after EU4 was something totally new. Every time they announce a new project I hope it is Dark Ages, and then I am disappointed because it is never Dark Ages. But I just can't stop myself hoping.  Baloogan posted:How about a space empires game? Emperor of the Fading Suns remade Crusader Kings style would also be acceptable. 
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2013 16:40
|
|
|
The Paradox forums can be bad sometimes. Random idiots keep posting in the Victoria 2 forum how HoD is not very good/disappointing.
James The 1st fucked around with this message at 19:57 on May 30, 2013 |
|
#
?
May 30, 2013 16:41
|
|
|
Autonomous Monster posted:Every time they announce a new project I hope it is Dark Ages, and then I am disappointed because it is never Dark Ages.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2013 17:50
|
|
|
Autonomous Monster posted:Every time they announce a new project I hope it is Dark Ages, and then I am disappointed because it is never Dark Ages. I'd be pretty interested in a simulation that makes you the governor of a province in a fictional, randomized Roman Empire at some point during its collapse. Try to keep your borders defended and keep the economy going while the imperial infrastructure that actually allows for that economy and the armies that guard it breaks down through corruption, civil wars, and invasion. A barbarian invasion knocks out the vital grain-producing provinces that were supplying your people - do you try to petition the Emperor for a counter-invasion, or try to do the job yourself with your provincial troops? You rule a rich, secure province in the heartlands - do you spend time maximizing trade with neighboring provinces at the risk of collapse if they fall, or do you try to maintain a level of self-sufficiency? A barbarian tribe threatens to overwhelm your province - do you defend the Empire to the last man, or do you try to reach an accommodation with the barbarians of some kind? The Empire is increasingly demanding more resources from you than you're getting in aid - do you try to declare independence from a collapsing structure and stand against both Imperial troops and neighboring barbarians, or will you try to slip politic bribes into the right hands to ease your burdens? A powerful general declares the current Emperor incompetent and rallies many to his cause - do you join his forces, declare loyalty to the Emperor, or throw your hat into the ring as an imperial claimant yourself? I think it'd be pretty cool, anyways.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2013 17:53
|
|
|
Morholt posted:Laurasia Universalis. Dinosaur politics. I tried making Dinosaur portraits for CK2 once but my graphical skills suck. 
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2013 17:59
|
|
|
James The 1st posted:The Paradox forums can be bad sometimes. Random idiots keep posting in the Victoria 2 forum how HoD is not very good/disappointing. Reminder that, judging from AARs (even new ones) or random questions posted in the V2 forums, like 50% of Vicky players run it totally vanilla, without even AHD. And they still find it fun and worthy of their playtime. The Paradox Golden Rule (for all games except CK2): buy the loving expansions.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2013 18:02
|
|
|
Including CK2.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2013 18:03
|
|
|
Autonomous Monster posted:Emperor of the Fading Suns remade Crusader Kings style would also be acceptable. Your tunnel vision will be your undoing.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2013 18:16
|
|
|
A Dune game done in Crusader Kings 2 style.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2013 18:19
|
|
|
I still want Paradox to make that human migration game set during/after the fall of Rome.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2013 18:28
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 21:41 |
|
|
ThePutty posted:I still want Paradox to make that human migration game set during/after the fall of Rome. Jon Shafer's At The Gates was looking pretty promising, last time I looked. Mobile cities!
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2013 18:39
|
|