• We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.

Dev Diary #44 - Battles

16_9 (9).jpg


Ave and welcome to another Dev Diary! Today I will be talking about how Battles work and what their consequences are. If you haven't already, I suggest you first read through the dev diary on Fronts and get acquainted with the concepts explained there.

Let's start off with a somewhat updated version of the Front panel. Do note that this is all still very much WIP and not all values are hooked in, balanced or polished. For example at the moment there are a lot more deaths in battles than there should be.

Who could’ve seen this war coming?

DD44 01.png


In order for a battle to happen one side must have at least one General with an Advance order. Once this happens an advancement meter will slowly start to fill up and once it’s full a new battle will be launched. Various factors can increase or decrease the time it takes.

When the battle is created a sequence of actions unfolds before the fighting begins. All of these are in script and can be tweaked by mods as desired.
  • The attacker picks their leading General
  • The defender picks their leading General
  • The battle province is determined along the frontline
  • The attacker determines the number of units they can bring
  • The defender determines the number of units they can bring
  • Both sides selects their units
While there can be several Generals on the Front, only one is selected for each side in a Battle. They are not limited to selecting their own units and so may borrow additional ones from other Generals or the local Garrisons.

In addition each side randomizes a Battle Condition which provides bonuses (or penalties) to their units similar to Combat Tactics in Hearts of Iron 4. Unlike HOI4 though these are fixed for the duration of the battle. For example a General with the Engineer trait has a higher chance of selecting the “Dug In” Battle Condition which provides defensive modifiers.

Königgrätz anyone?
DD44 02.png


Now the shooting (and dying) finally starts! The battle takes place over a number of rounds and will continue until one side is either wiped out or retreats. The round sequence is roughly as follows:
  • Each side determines how many fighting-capable men it still has
  • Each side inflicts casualties on the other side
  • Each side attempts to recover wounded casualties
  • Each side also suffers morale damage according to casualties
  • If one side is wiped or retreats, the battle ends

Units have two primary combat values: Offense is used when attacking and Defense is used when defending. It is wise to plan ahead and specialize your armies for the war you are planning to fight. There are of course a whole bunch of additional modifiers used in conjunction with battles.

Crack open the fortress of Liège!
DD44 03.png


Casualties are determined by both sheer numbers and the relative combat stats between the two sides. For example a numerically inferior force equipped with more modern weapons may still emerge victorious against a larger foe.

When a side takes casualties it is randomly distributed amongst its units with some caveats.
Each unit has a majority culture depending on the pops in its barracks and casualties are applied roughly in proportion to unit culture. So with 4 French/1 Flemish units fighting on the same side the French will take roughly 80% of the casualties.

Not all pops who take casualties will end up dead though. A portion of these may instead end up as Dependents of other pops. After a long bloody war a nation may thus end up with a large number of wounded war-veterans who need to be supported by the rest of the population. In the long term this may be a cause of unrest and financial strain on the economy.

Morale damage is inflicted in proportion to the casualties and will slowly recover over time outside of battles presuming the units are in good supply.

One step closer to Unification
DD44 04.png


After the battle is over two things will happen:

A number of provinces are Captured depending on how decisive the victory was, unit characteristics, Generals, etc. This will alter the frontline and the winner will occupy those provinces until retaken or the end of the war.
A victorious defender will only take back land that was previously lost to the enemy while a victorious attacker will push into enemy land and take control of more provinces owing to their aggressive posture.

Devastation is also inflicted on the State in which the battle was fought. Large, brutal battles waged with modern weaponry will increase the devastation caused. It reduces infrastructure and building throughput, increases mortality and causes emigration. These effects persist after the war and will take quite some time to recover.

That’s it for this week! Next week we switch over to the political battlefield and discuss Elections! *ducks back into the trenches*
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • 237Like
  • 125
  • 46
  • 29Love
  • 10
  • 4Haha
Reactions:
I wouldn't buy the game at launch, given what has been presented so far in dev diaries (which is a shame, since I did buy Vicky 2 at launch). I'd rather wait for DLC and/or Imperator/Stellaris style reworks. The problem arises if too many people think like me on this.
I'll probably buy it at launch, if for no other reason than because the only way to really know how it plays is to, well, play it. The rest of the game looks really interesting to me, and I have hope that they'll salvage the warfare system, or that modders will find a way to bend and stretch it into something that's actually fun and engaging.
 
  • 3Like
  • 1
Reactions:
If there are multiple generals in the same front, can you always use the same general for every battle? Is there some game incentive to alternate generals in the same front between battles? The number of units that a general can borrow from others generals in the same front is limited?
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Could you show the Details tab? What information is there?
Does it show devastation? Weapons used? Battle conditions?

Also, are these blue/red bars just decorative? I thought they are progress bars but they don't change on any of the screenshots (unless this isn't implemented yet?)

View attachment 833265
Yes, I thought they would change as well but it does not seem so, at least not at the time of the DD or of the leaked beta
 
I feel like there's a huge miscommunication about the complaints of the new system. Most people are not upset that this system doesn't have units and divisions. They're upset that the front system makes every single war a one front war.
I wasn’t really replying to any specific complaints, more just throwing my hat into the ring.
Though I might have misspoken on if I would/wouldn’t like the new system. I don’t actually know how the new system plays compared to the old system. I don’t have access to the completed game, and I suspect PDX doesn’t yet either. This entire debate is based on speculation mixed with incomplete information on an unfinished game.

edit: I realize that I worded this in a confusing way. I’ll reword it ASAP.
 
Last edited:
  • 4
Reactions:
Yes, I thought they would change as well but it does not seem so, at least not at the time of the DD or of the leaked beta
You mean nothing changed between the dev diary screenshots the are a month old and the leaked build that is a month old?
 
  • 11
  • 2Like
  • 2Haha
  • 1
Reactions:
Because the economy is political, politics are economical, and the police are both?
 
  • 8
  • 5
Reactions:
Don't be obtuse and condescending on purpose. Victoria is not just an "Economy" simulator. What's the point of having political parties and laws related to say, policing if you were just "Managing. the. Economy UwU."
does DD 0 need to be quoted a third time? it's a society sim. it's the people resisting this notion that are being deliberately obtuse.
 
  • 26
  • 12
Reactions:
does DD 0 need to be quoted a third time? it's a society sim. it's the people resisting this notion that are being deliberately obtuse.
Dev diary 0 will be quoted until understanding improves.
 
  • 13
  • 13
  • 4Haha
  • 1Like
Reactions:
So what does a Western Front of WWI look like in this context? Battles that go on for years, stretched out by massively high defensive values?

Additional question/related point - what will sieges of strategic points look like in this? Thinking, fx, of the siege of Vicksburg being key to the ACW.
The historically accurate approach to this would be to have devastation give large speed, and smaller combat, maluses to units fighting in or moving through a devastated area, and have late-game devastation be extremely severe. One problem with WWI simulation is that heavily favoring defense in the mechanics incentivizes just sitting there staring at each other. Historically, the attackers on the Western Front had an initial advantage, because they could choose where to concentrate reserves and overwhelming artillery firepower (to the point that despite machine guns and barbed wire, casualty ratios tended to actually favor the attacker in early stages); but attacks culminated quickly, because the enemy could quickly bring up reinforcements and supplies through intact railways, while the attacker's rear has become the destroyed former no-man's-land. Giving attack an advantage until devastation gets high would result in the bloody back-and-forth consistent with history, because if you just sat back and defended the enemy could inch forward bit by bit with favorable casualty ratios in each encounter.
 
  • 6
Reactions:
I'm completely happy with the new combat system being hands off and up to the competency of your generals and your economy to win.
But I would really love to see small armies fighting each other on the map.
 
  • 6Like
  • 1
Reactions:
Saying ‘DD 0!’ over and over again doesn’t change that the idea of warfare being neglected as some kind of minor thing with little importance would not be a good idea. It doesn’t matter if that is the intent of the devs or not; devs can have bad intents, or have the people with the DD 0 mantra completely memory holed Imperator? Things can work exactly as intended and still not be fun or good.
For the record, I’m not saying the devs are actually neglecting warfare, I’m saying that doing so would be a bad decision, and that the people saying ‘DD 0’ over and over again are trying to justify what would be a bad thing by just saying it’s an intended bad thing.
 
  • 33
  • 5
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Saying ‘DD 0!’ over and over again doesn’t change that the idea of warfare being neglected as some kind of minor thing with little importance would not be a good idea. It doesn’t matter if that is the intent of the devs or not; devs can have bad intents, or have the people with the DD 0 mantra completely memory holed Imperator? Things can work exactly as intended and still not be fun or good.
For the record, I’m not saying the devs are actually neglecting warfare, I’m saying that doing so would be a bad decision, and that the people saying ‘DD 0’ over and over again are trying to justify what would be a bad thing by just saying it’s an intended bad thing.
what makes you think they're neglecting warfare?
 
  • 23
  • 4
  • 2Haha
Reactions:
Question what's the benefit of having many generals of varying quality rather then 1 really really good general can more generals start more battles if the front is large enough?
 
  • 3Like
Reactions:
  • 28
  • 1
Reactions:
what makes you think they might be?
I have no idea if they are or not. My post was not intended for interacting with the devs. It was a comment about the people here saying DD 0 would excuse warfare being neglected.
I have no idea how the warfare system will be at release. Maybe it will feel unfun and be unsatisfying to use, but will produce results that fit the wars of the era; if that is the case, I will personally accept it, but I know many people will not. Or maybe it will be unfun, unsatisfying, and also fail to model the wars of 1830-1930; this would make it an objectively bad system. Either system might be the product of a lot of work by the devs. Or it might be the product of deciding to neglect this part of the game. I have no way of knowing, and hence was speaking in regards to hypothetical situations, addressing the way some here are seemingly trying to deflect any reasonable questions about or possible feedback on warfare because ‘it isn’t the main point of the game’.
 
  • 11
Reactions:
Question what's the benefit of having many generals of varying quality rather then 1 really really good general can more generals start more battles if the front is large enough?
"If you haven't already, I suggest you first read through the dev diary on Fronts and get acquainted with the concepts explained there."

As the dev diary says, it's explained there.
 
  • 6
  • 2
  • 2
Reactions: