Good day. Tuesday has rolled around once more and that means it is time for our weekly Developer Diary for Europa Universalis IV. Today, we continue on from last week where we discussed Army Drilling to elaborate on how it can make an impact on having a better, more professional Army.

As part of the yet-unannounced expansion accompanying the 1.23 update, Your nation's army will have a Professionalism level, indicated both on the Unit view and the Military tab.

Your Army's Professionalism is a national value measuring how closely your army models a “modern” standing army versus heavy reliance on mercenaries. It is increased by:

• Drilling your armies (+1 per year if 100% forcelimit drills, to scale)
• Constructing military buildings: Barracks/regimental camps (+0.5 per tier)
• Recruiting Generals (+1 per general)

Conversely, Professionalism is decreased by

• Destroying military buildings: Barracks/regimental camps (-1 per tier)
• Recruiting Mercenaries (-0.25 per unit)

Professionalism has the following effect, scaling up from 0 to 100:

• Shock Damage +10%
• Fire damage +10%
• Movement Speed +20%

Additionally, low professionalism grants bonuses for the recruitment of mercenaries, starting from 0 and scaling down to nothing at 50 Professionalism.

• Mercenary cost -15%
• Available mercenaries +15%

All nations start the game with low to no Professionalism. Events, decisions and modifiers can affect these values positively and negatively, from standardizing your uniforms to deciding how extensively to loot fallen cities.

The value of your Army Professionalism unlocks a new interface look and new abilities for your armies at every 20 points. Starting at 0-19 professionalism, you'll have a more tattered look to your Unit view...

And as your army gains more Professionalism, the view grows more elegant

So what abilities are gained for each 20 Professionalism?

• 20 - Supply Depot Ability unlocked for army.

• 40 - Refill Garrison Ability unlocked for army

• 60 - Disbanded Units are returned to the manpower pool

• 80 - Military Generals cost half-price to recruit

• 100 - Your reserves take 50% less morale damage.

Supply Depot is an ability accessible in the revisited Unit view which, for a small MIL cost, established a depot in a province. Friendly supply in that entire area is increased by 50%. If the province is then occupied by a hostile force, the Depot will be destroyed, otherwise it lasts for 2 years.

Refill Garrison allows an army to take some of its manpower to restore the garrison of a fort instantly so you can proceed without having your new occupation snatched away.

Disbanded units are normally lost forever, however at 60 Professionalism you ensure that they return to the manpower pool

Half Price Generals cost is fairly self explanatory, they will cost 25MIL rather than the standard 50

Reserves, who normally take passive morale damage in large ongoing battles, will now take far less and can really turn the tide in a battle.

Caveat: All values/bonuses given in the dev diaries are subject to change pending testing and balance as development continues. Also as a note for modders, these abilities are all scripted in as modifiers and so can be used as you see fit.

That should cover the Drilling and Professionalism nicely. Next week we will take a look at a system which, overall, hasn't changed a whole lot in EU4's life, and how it had its influence on the Islamic world. Until then I....hold on, I have a feeling that people are wanting to see some other trade goods across the world, following the addition of 5 new goods. very well, let's look to the ....East!

And additionally, we felt that some local modifiers were in order:

That's it from us this week, see you next Tuesday!

 

[TheDungen]

You should use less condescending tone when you are talking about things you seem to have a little knowledge of. Arguing aganist notion that early firearms are easier to handle and achieve proficiency than swords, bows and other earlier weapons is a pretty brave.

Except you did not argue it. You just tried to pretend you have knowledge you don't have.

Obviously I did not mean everything. But on the other hand I never claimed that fire arms required greater skill to use so he was wrong about me claiming it.
Also he posted it pretty late by my local time so yeah sue me I did not refute him point by point. Partly because of the late hour partly because we were already getting of topic.

To add to this, Monarchs would now supply these units with arms and other supplies, so such levies became a standing army which became a profession

Yes to the first part to the second. Yes there were professional soldiers but I am suddenly unsure of if there are any european wars waged only or even majorly with professional soliders... ever. If we look at Prussia and the Swedish empire the poster childs for "professional armies" I realized that what they have are actually closer to conscription than full time professional soldiers. I mean Caroleans were sort of paid even when they were not at war in that they were given land they were allowed to use as if it was their own, and they were called in for training. But in some ways thee soldiers are levies too. In a way they are a bit like the knights of old, a warrior caste paid in land.

The main divide is really a standing army whether it is professional or conscripted versus a wartime army whether it's levies, conscripted or even made up of mercenaries.

The only standing professional soldiers I can think of in this era (prominently at least) are the aforementioned knights. Their main job was to wage war or make sure they were ready for war, as heavy cavalry lost it's position of dominance thanks to pikes and crossbows (and later guns), which requires much less training to use pretty much rendered standing professional armies redundant. The next instance I can think of of such an army is the British army in the years leading up to ww1.

Anyway regardless this mechanic is very much missing the point.

I agree blobs need more danger, but this game shouldn't be giving small kingdoms buff, just because for the sake of it.

Nah you're right small countries should be smarter not stronger.

 

[Emoneh]

Casting my mind back, in EU3, a mercenary unit would only use your base effects from tech in battle, all other factors like National Ideas and advisors did not strengthen them. As a result, they were a horrible liability in any battle a few decades into the game and were prohibitively expensive in the early game.

Thanks for the information, but that seems more of a balance/implementation issue than an inherent problem with the idea (which I like). If implemented today, there would presumably be other NIs that strengthen mercenaries, as well as (for example) events that buff them in regions/time periods in which many mercenaries were used, to encourage their use.

 

[Metz]

Any way to add some sort of supply train? Armies should rest a bit in fort provinces to restore the supplies. This would avoid a straight nonstop march all over the world.

Lack of supplies leads to higher attrition. In a way, this is also represented already in how ships need to go back to port after some time or they sink. You can already request the use of foreign ports and pay for it.

The army version would be to already have military access and then go to a fort province to purchase supplies. For enemy territory, supplies would be restored parallel to that of the devestation/loot system. Devestated provinces however would offer no supplies so the army can't just camp there forever.

The only way to keep getting constant supplies would be to have occupied territory in a connected line towards the nearest allied fort.

 

[peleliu]

Any way to add some sort of supply train? Armies should rest a bit in fort provinces to restore the supplies. This would avoid a straight nonstop march all over the world.

Lack of supplies leads to higher attrition. In a way, this is also represented already in how ships need to go back to port after some time or they sink. You can already request the use of foreign ports and pay for it.

The army version would be to already have military access and then go to a fort province to purchase supplies. For enemy territory, supplies would be restored parallel to that of the devestation/loot system. Devestated provinces however would offer no supplies so the army can't just camp there forever.

The only way to keep getting constant supplies would be to have occupied territory in a connected line towards the nearest allied fort.

Supply could be tracked per army via a bar like Morale and tick down as you move outside areas adjacent to those you control. To refill it you must return to provinces adjacent to those you control. Empty supply bars would dramatically increase attrition. This might encourage those AI stacks to stay within a reasonable zone of operations.

 

[Metz]

Supply could be tracked per army via a bar like Morale and tick down as you move outside areas adjacent to those you control. To refill it you must return to provinces adjacent to those you control. Empty supply bars would dramatically increase attrition. This might encourage those AI stacks to stay within a reasonable zone of operations.

This would help to deal with eternal sieges and a smaller army could recover if it keeps harassing the supply line.

Something could also be done with river provinces to make wars more strategical.

 

[TheDungen]

Supply could be tracked per army via a bar like Morale and tick down as you move outside areas adjacent to those you control. To refill it you must return to provinces adjacent to those you control. Empty supply bars would dramatically increase attrition. This might encourage those AI stacks to stay within a reasonable zone of operations.

Would be awesome to not see the AI hunting my one stack halfway across the world for no reason.

 

[Auron8]

Refill Garrison allows an army to take some of its manpower to restore the garrison of a fort instantly so you can proceed without having your new occupation snatched away.

This is a beautiful thing but, when I saw that new button in the previous DD, I hoped it would serve to hide an army inside a fortress!
It would be wonderful to be able to take more time, waiting for another army to come to the aid, and be able to deal better with an enemy too numerous!

 

[PedroLuiz]

This is a beautiful thing but, when I saw that new button in the previous DD, I hoped it would serve to hide an army inside a fortress!
It would be wonderful to be able to take more time, waiting for another army to come to the aid, and be able to deal better with an enemy too numerous!

It would be a better idea if if decrease defense for the fort if they went inside, varing for the proportion of Fort Level x Army Size

 

[Uber_Barleyman]

I'm surprised that Army Tradition doesn't effect Professionalism.

 

[Shiny Dog]

These new mechanics seem to make Quantity practically required for lategame armies or blobbing.
Hope Quantity gets a nice rework to not make it both the best and worst idea in the game.

Also, this talk about Mercenary Professionalism makes me wonder why "The Janissaries" modifier extends to Ottoman Mercenaries. Weren't the Janissaries exclusively a standing army? I'd love to have some way of beating the Ottomans between that modifier and the disaster, such as attacking them when their manpower pool is depleted and their much softer mercenaries would be your opponents.

 

[TheDungen]

These new mechanics seem to make Quantity practically required for lategame armies or blobbing.
Hope Quantity gets a nice rework to not make it both the best and worst idea in the game.

Also, this talk about Mercenary Professionalism makes me wonder why "The Janissaries" modifier extends to Ottoman Mercenaries. Weren't the Janissaries exclusively a standing army? I'd love to have some way of beating the Ottomans between that modifier and the disaster, such as attacking them when their manpower pool is depleted and their much softer mercenaries would be your opponents.

Again a standing army is pretty much just mercenaries who only have one employer.

 

[xMer]

As professionalism clearly rely on fighting with your own manpower....
Are there planned nerfs to quantity idea group? it is already considered to be strongest military idea group and professionalism would buff it even more. Not mentioning that quantity and professionalism shouldn't support each other.

It's very suspicious for me how recruiting professional soldiers aka mercenaries (like Swiss guards) would decrease professionalism of army.

 

[Kissing2]

Wait..Quantity? Strong? In Solo game maybe then nearly everything is strong in Solo Player. I've yet to see people in MP grabbing Quantity except when they cant develop anymore and already picked Offensive / T2 Land Limit buildings.

I'm really half / half on that professionalism thing, on one hand it looks like a buff on countries with good MP reserve and "middle of the road" Land Limit, on the other hand, I really wonder how will anyone will stand any chance at stopping a Russia now...Since everybody with a bit of sense is already building land limit everywhere and Russian MP allows them to basically say "what? mercs? what's that?" for most wars.

By the way, I wonder, does professionalism affect Stretlsy and Banners? Didn't see anything on that.
And how will countries with little MP (Spain comes to mind) will be able to wage anything else than a defensive war, I really wonder.

 

[otaats]

As far as i understood, the best armies were the battle-hardened and experienced armies. Yes, some of them had some kind of traditional training, but doesn't army tradition cover all that stuff? Aside from my main complaint (superpowers getting best troops now, in large quantities), this is also something to think about. I was hoping that experience (i.e. battles that a regiment has been through) will play into professionalism/readiness of an army.

 

[Oahkoah]

If we lose manpower by disbanding troops without enough Professionalism is it possible to retrain troop types infantry -> cavalary and back and visa versa etc.

 

[Kissing2]

As far as i understood, the best armies were the battle-hardened and experienced armies. Yes, some of them had some kind of traditional training, but doesn't army tradition cover all that stuff? Aside from my main complaint (superpowers getting best troops now, in large quantities), this is also something to think about. I was hoping that experience (i.e. battles that a regiment has been through) will play into professionalism/readiness of an army.

I don't really believe the Superpowers are gonna be the ones with the best troops, since you'll need large part of your Land Limit to make training relevant once you're done building +1 land limit and some random barracks. I kinda see it as a buff to medium sized countries with middle of the road Limit and good MP and the economy to sustain their land limit at peace time (Tuscany, France, Burgundy, Hungary comes to mind).
(my exception being Russia which can forget The drilling given how much Provinces she has and even more if Stretlsy can be drilled. I do hope you CANNOT Drill Stretlsy OR Banners for that matter.

Of course that's a Multiplayer View. Solo player you'll always have better drilling than any AI so it's kinda enabling any Player an easier warfare.

 

[TheDungen]

Wait..Quantity? Strong? In Solo game maybe then nearly everything is strong in Solo Player. I've yet to see people in MP grabbing Quantity except when they cant develop anymore and already picked Offensive / T2 Land Limit buildings.

I'm really half / half on that professionalism thing, on one hand it looks like a buff on countries with good MP reserve and "middle of the road" Land Limit, on the other hand, I really wonder how will anyone will stand any chance at stopping a Russia now...Since everybody with a bit of sense is already building land limit everywhere and Russian MP allows them to basically say "what? mercs? what's that?" for most wars.

By the way, I wonder, does professionalism affect Stretlsy and Banners? Didn't see anything on that.
And how will countries with little MP (Spain comes to mind) will be able to wage anything else than a defensive war, I really wonder.

Well who cares about multiplayer? The majority of the player bases plays singleplayer.

 

[Guthuk Gaming]

Well who cares about multiplayer? The majority of the player bases plays singleplayer.

The majority of the player base never plays ironman and has the highest achievement of conquering spain with france.

The majority of the hardcore playerbase is in MP.

 

[Kissing2]

Well who cares about multiplayer? The majority of the player bases plays singleplayer.

Because Singleplayer is overall "easy". (overall of course, there are still close calls sometimes but outsmarting the Ai isnt that hard)

When was the last time you really really had a close call in a war? Or when didnt you outscale AI by putting buildings where they shall be and enough developping to put manufactories on every province that matter? (Hell, each time I tag on a country, his estate are a mess and nearly unused, they nearly never get rid of bad heirs and their Idea group picking are usually mediocre)

All the tools give us an easier game but I've yet to see AI actually using said tools, that's why I'm only looking on a Human vs Human situation.

Ps: I'm not saying "Paradox FIX AI Please", if it was that easy they'd already done so. I'm not saying "why put stuff AI can't use?" aswell, I'm merely looking at those mecanics where they matter, in human hands vs other human hands.

 

[TheDungen]

Because Singleplayer is either easy either "After the 257th restart, I finally rolled a 2 stars first general and that country didnt rival me while that other is willing to ally me, yeah!".

When was the last time you really really had a close call in a war? Or when didnt you outscale AI by putting buildings where they shall be and enough developping to put manufactories on every province that matter? (Hell, each time I tag on a country, his estate are a mess and nearly unused, they nearly never get rid of bad heirs and their Idea group picking are usually mediocre)

All the tools give us an easier game but I've yet to see AI actually using said tools, that's why I'm only looking on a Human vs Human situation.

Or they could you know improve the single player game instead of catering to multiplayer which is played by what at most 1/10 players?
And truth be told it's fairly easy to build an unbeatable AI.`

The majority of the player base never plays ironman and has the highest achievement of conquering spain with france.

The majority of the hardcore playerbase is in MP.

So? What makes you more important than them? I should say us I don't think I've ever played ironman, and I thus have no achievements (Ok hyperbole I have played ironman a few times I think I have the achievement for getting a royal marriage).