|
that just reeks of a vicky 2 sort of "yea just make this army comp with this setting okay later"
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2018 17:27
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 06:55 |
|
|
Why? I don't think it does at all; with the differences in tradition it sounds like it's gonna change a lot depending on your circumstances, way more than most Paradox games'. I think this sounds pretty good, definitely way better than the combat reveal from that previous diary. I could see it ending up being balls to balance and with lots of ways to exploit it but for a foundation it seems interesting enough.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2018 17:39
|
|
|
With what we have been told I don’t really see a reason why it’s not always skirmish frontline, heaviest infantry second line and cav on flanks. The diary straight up says this is mostly going to be the case like it’s a lot of options but mostly just avoiding the trap choices. I see actual choices for: - choose cav or anti-cav for flanks (i.e. 50/50 roll the dice, whatever the AI doesn’t pick the counter to) - choose thin line or concentrated centre (i.e. do you outnumber? Put more on the flanks) I feel like it needs something like terrain effecting areas of the battlefield forcing you to switch up tactics or use them to your benefit every single battle. Marshy left flank (revealed by my generals skills?), great I can focus cav on the right and leave the left for skirmishers. Thin ravine ambush, best get the heavy infantry in the front line as there’s little room for skirmishers to retreat. Right direction in general though.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2018 18:11
|
|
|
I see a whole bunch of meaningless choices. The EU battle system is garbage no matter how many bells and whistles you hang on it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2018 19:24
|
|
|
Has there ever been a Paradox battle system that didn't boil down to "more guys wins".
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2018 19:29
|
|
|
You can win at a fairly ridiculous disadvantage if you know what you're doing in CK2
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2018 19:37
|
|
|
Fister Roboto posted:The EU battle system is garbage no matter how many bells and whistles you hang on it. 
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2018 19:40
|
|
|
Vicky can get ridiculous with the right tech and terrain.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2018 19:56
|
|
|
Yeah vicky is v good for that. Precious memories of my advanced yet small South German army heroically fighting against a French army 4 times their size and inflicting enormous casualties in a valiant last stand (seriously getting the machine gun tech is insane)
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2018 20:02
|
|
|
Not the Messiah posted:Yeah vicky is v good for that. Precious memories of my advanced yet small South German army heroically fighting against a French army 4 times their size and inflicting enormous casualties in a valiant last stand (seriously getting the machine gun tech is insane)  
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2018 21:22
|
|
|
it still takes me like three tries to read the godawful casualty reports correctly.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2018 21:49
|
|
|
What the christ is that map mod though
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2018 23:38
|
|
|
Funky Valentine posted:Has there ever been a Paradox battle system that didn't boil down to "more guys wins". The gently caress is this thread even talking about. CK2 is the only one where it is mostly "more guys wins"; in EU4 numbers are pretty low down the list of what's important. Fellblade posted:With what we have been told I don’t really see a reason why it’s not always skirmish frontline, heaviest infantry second line and cav on flanks. Heavy infantry are expensive as balls, you're not gonna be fighting the Roman Empire circa the 2nd century in every battle, and against other unit types you might want other things in your main lines, especially if there's other cultural bonuses and so on. Also even if balance is hosed on launch and it is just a trap (which is not unlikely tbf), it's not like this stuff can't be balanced for later/modded to be meaningful, whereas in an inflexible system like you're saying it can't at all. Terrain disrupting things would be good though.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2018 00:08
|
|
|
in ck2 it's more guys win solely because there aren't any high-powered tactics anymore. ck2 combat wants to make you build your army to take advantage of cool trait/culture/etc.-enabled tactics, but you have little control over army composition beyond your personal lands and you can't transform an army of archers into gods with a welsh commander anymore, so it ends up a numbers game
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2018 01:07
|
|
|
a retinue stack can easily defeat an army 3-4x its size
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2018 01:09
|
|
|
You have to go to some special effort for that though and in normal play you can get by with numbers, whereas in EU and HOI if you go in thinking numbers are what you should be focusing on then you'll get completely curb stomped.Jazerus posted:ck2 combat wants to make you build your army to take advantage of cool trait/culture/etc.-enabled tactics, but you have little control over army composition beyond your personal lands and you can't transform an army of archers into gods with a welsh commander anymore, so it ends up a numbers game This but with you actually getting control over it sounds a lot like the Rome combat, from what we know. With the downside that if there's so much to manage I do think "good enough" is gonna be the rule in a lot of actual games, but I think it seems like it'll have the potential flexibility for when we want it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2018 01:35
|
|
|
Funky Valentine posted:Has there ever been a Paradox battle system that didn't boil down to "more guys wins". lmao have you ever played a paradox game?
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2018 01:39
|
|
|
Wow, Stellaris is good now. I knew waiting would pay off.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2018 01:40
|
|
|
Mantis42 posted:Wow, Stellaris is good now. I knew waiting would pay off. Stellaris is basically a simpler version of Victoria in space now. Definitely a learning curve if you expect the economy to act anything like previous versions. If you're at all on the fence, holding off on actually purchasing the DLC for now is a perfectly cromulent choice. You get the economy revamp for free and the marquee feature (Megacorps) is still in active balancing/bug fix mode. Also avoid machine empires until they get patched (shouldn't be long) - Paradox has acknowledged they got hit by the nerf stick too hard. Lum_ fucked around with this message at 21:04 on Dec 11, 2018 |
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2018 21:01
|
|
|
Lum_ posted:If you're at all on the fence, holding off on actually purchasing the DLC for now is a perfectly cromulent choice. You get the economy revamp for free and the marquee feature (Megacorps) is still in active balancing/bug fix mode. Also avoid machine empires until they get patched (shouldn't be long) - Paradox has acknowledged they got hit by the nerf stick too hard. What happened to machine empires? I love playing Rogue Servitors, and was planning to give the new DLC a spin with them
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2018 21:23
|
|
|
Machine empires use large quantities of raw minerals for just about every single production chain they have now, but they don't really have significantly better mineral production than normal empires (or, well, they might technically produce 30% more but they consume 150% more so you get the idea). So machine empires are perpetually mineral-starved and spend the entire game trying to dig their way out of a serious resource shortage, which you can only do by building more robots and colonies at the expense of minerals you don't have.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2018 21:36
|
|
|
Koramei posted:in EU4 numbers are pretty low down the list of what's important. No this just not true. 99% of the time superior numbers win. Like, maybe you think that your army with a 3* general and +50% morale and +25% discipline and +20% combat power for every unit type can easily take on an army twice its size that's sieging a mountain fort with no general and they just rolled a 0 for the siege tic, and you'd probably be right if it was just those two armies in a vacuum. But as soon as you engage in the battle, every army from every ally, vassal, colony, and condottieri come in with everything for a HUGE party and you lose. e: and then for whatever reason your army only retreats a single province and you get stackwiped Fister Roboto fucked around with this message at 22:13 on Dec 11, 2018 |
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2018 22:08
|
|
|
I was gonna say that’s bullshit but you have a point about allies; when it’s a mess of different tags it does start to average into numbers. That’s really not anywhere near as common as you’re making out though, I’d say 90% of battles are nothing like what you’re describing. And in those other ones, other factors are dramatically more important. The statement was stupid. e: also yes that whole one province away retreat is one of the most bullshit things in EU4. I’d love to know some actual reasons for what causes it. E2: even in those ally ones, I think I find situations where my side looks stronger in numbers and only find out via battle that they totally neglected military quality and end up losing horribly not much less than I find things actually averaging out. Koramei fucked around with this message at 22:24 on Dec 11, 2018 |
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2018 22:20
|
|
|
Yeah numbers only really matter really early game or huge wars that don’t happen often.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2018 22:21
|
|
|
Playing the new stellaris, I'm missing some of victoria's automation and feeling kind of silly about this whole situation
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2018 03:15
|
|
|
Senor Dog posted:Playing the new stellaris, I'm missing some of victoria's automation and feeling kind of silly about this whole situation Suggest renaming Sector AI "Capitalist Pop", for the authentic building-the-wrong-factory experience.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2018 03:42
|
|
|
OddObserver posted:Suggest renaming Sector AI "Capitalist Pop", for the authentic building-the-wrong-
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2018 03:49
|
|
|
Funky Valentine posted:Has there ever been a Paradox battle system that didn't boil down to "more guys wins". That's actually EU4, because of combat width you can't keep piling more guys in and tech and commander advantages are huge (and used to be even bigger, they keep toning it down).
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2018 11:43
|
|
|
Kaza42 posted:What happened to machine empires? I love playing Rogue Servitors, and was planning to give the new DLC a spin with them The building that increases robot assembly speed was made planet unique shortly before release because Kaiser Johan was doing too well in the dev clash after building two on every planet. Since pop growth speed is super important now that nerfed machine empires too hard, and they're probably going to buff them soon.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2018 13:55
|
|
|
about EU4 and its combat system: assume the combat width for a particular battle is 14. I have 6 armies with each 14 infantry and 6 artillery. Is there a scenario where rotating the various armies in and out is preferable, or is it simpler to just throw all 6 into the meat grinder and see what happens.?
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2018 14:26
|
|
|
double nine posted:about EU4 and its combat system: assume the combat width for a particular battle is 14. I have 6 armies with each 14 infantry and 6 artillery. Is there a scenario where rotating the various armies in and out is preferable, or is it simpler to just throw all 6 into the meat grinder and see what happens.? Units take morale damage even if they're in the reserves, so it's better to reinforce as time goes on rather than to throw everything in at once. Also, with a combat width of 14, you don't really need/want more than 14 artillery in the battle at once, since they should be staying in the back row anyway. Ideally, you want a bit more than 14 infantry with 14 artillery backing them up, and then you want to reinforce with more infantry as your front lines weaken. Of course this is kind of a huge pain to micromanage, so I usually just end up saying gently caress it and throwing everything in at the same time.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2018 15:28
|
|
|
AnoHito posted:Units take morale damage even if they're in the reserves, so it's better to reinforce as time goes on rather than to throw everything in at once. Also, with a combat width of 14, you don't really need/want more than 14 artillery in the battle at once, since they should be staying in the back row anyway. Ideally, you want a bit more than 14 infantry with 14 artillery backing them up, and then you want to reinforce with more infantry as your front lines weaken. that's what I figured but I also wondered what the penalty would be of a whole front line of infantry disappearing and being replaced.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2018 16:45
|
|
|
No penalty! It's actually really dumb, they really need to do something to stop battles from lasting forever where one side keeps trickling in reinforcements and the other side can't (or just doesn't, because who knows how the AI decides such things); this isn't the age of Verdun. I'm actually not entirely sure why battles aren't just sped up to last like 5 days, tops.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2018 19:11
|
|
Yes, it's like a lava lamp.
|
Funky Valentine posted:Has there ever been a Paradox battle system that didn't boil down to "more guys wins". Victoria. All you need to conquer Africa are 6 guys and a machine gun.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2018 20:22
|
|
|
V for Vegas posted:Victoria. All you need to conquer Africa are 6 guys and a machine gun. Isn't that basically how the UK did it?
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2018 21:05
|
|
|
chairface posted:Isn't that basically how the UK did it? Remember that we have the Maxim, and they do not.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2018 02:55
|
|
|
V for Vegas posted:Victoria. All you need to conquer Africa are 6 guys and a machine gun. Well, in a battle between roughly equal powers numbers becomes slightly more of a factor, but post-machine gun the balance within a single battle skews heavily in the favour of the defenders so an entrenched army can easily mow down 3x its numbers before routing, making warfare much more about setting up a solid wall of a frontline and then trying to maneuver around your opponent so they're forced to attack you while you're occupying their territory (unlike in EU4 this does not grant defensive bonuses to the attackers). As a civilized vs. uncivilized nation, yeah numbers are meaningless. China can be pretty easily overrun by the British despite having functionally infinite manpower because all their troops are going to be absolute garbage.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2018 03:06
|
|
|
PittTheElder posted:No penalty! Because the tension of seeing if your reinforcements can make it in time is emotionally exciting.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2018 03:11
|
|
|
The Cheshire Cat posted:Well, in a battle between roughly equal powers numbers becomes slightly more of a factor, but post-machine gun the balance within a single battle skews heavily in the favour of the defenders so an entrenched army can easily mow down 3x its numbers before routing, making warfare much more about setting up a solid wall of a frontline and then trying to maneuver around your opponent so they're forced to attack you while you're occupying their territory (unlike in EU4 this does not grant defensive bonuses to the attackers). I always thought most of the defensive bonus comes from the artillery techs, not from Machine Guns. Bolt-action Rifles and whatever else comes after MGs gives you more attack bonuses to equalize infantry attack, but artillery keeps getting more defense than attack as you get inventions. Your front line's only reason for existence is protecting your artillery anyway.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2018 12:42
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 06:55 |
|
|
GrossMurpel posted:I always thought most of the defensive bonus comes from the artillery techs, not from Machine Guns. Bolt-action Rifles and whatever else comes after MGs gives you more attack bonuses to equalize infantry attack, but artillery keeps getting more defense than attack as you get inventions. Well this is mostly true, but machine guns kind of marks the turning point for when defense really begins to surpass offense in general as the stronger stat. Like you aren't really going to accomplish much without artillery no matter what year it is in the game, but the bonuses granted with tech skew a lot heavier to +attack in the early game and +defense in the late game (to the extent where defense ends up passing attack, not just evening out).
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2018 14:54
|
|