• 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.
Today is thursday, the day of the God of Thunder, so what is a more appropriate way to celebrate than with a development diary for Europa Univeralis IV. We’ve talked about development and politics the last few weeks, so now its time to talk a bit more about warfare again, before going back to more peacetime-related activities.

All of this mentioned in this development diary will be in the free update accompanying the next expansion.

Fortress Rework
Connecting a bit to the previous reveal of our change to how building works, we have overhauled the fortress system.

There are now four different forts, one available each century, providing 1, 3, 5 and 7 fort-levels each. A newer fort makes the previous obsolete, so you only have 1 fort in each province. Each fortress also provides 5000 garrison per fort level, so besieging a fortress now requires a large investment.

Forts now also require maintenance to be paid each month, which currently costs about 1.5 ducats for a level 1 fort per month in 1444. Luckily, you can mothball a fortress which makes it drop to just 10 men defending it, and won’t cost you anything in upkeep.

Garrison growth for a fort is also a fair amount slower than before, so after you have taken a fort, you may want to stick around to protect it for a bit.

What is most important to know though, is that forts now have a Zone of Control. First of all, they will automatically take control of any adjacent province that does not have any forts that is adjacent and hostile to them. If two fortress compete over the same province, then the one with highest fort-level wins and in case of a tie, control goes to the owner of the province. Secondly, you can not walk past a fortress and its zone of control, as you have to siege down the blocking fort first.

Each capital have a free fort-level, but that fort will not have any ZoC, as most minor nations can not afford a major fortress.

fH0WehV.jpg



Looting
As we promised, we have now completely revised how looting works. Now there is a “pile” of possible loot in a province, which is directly tied to have developed the province is.

At the end of each month, all hostile units in a province attempt to loot, and the amount they loot depend on how many regiments you have there, and what types they are, where cavalry is by far the best. Some ideas and governments increase the amount you loot each month, where for example Steppe Hordes gains a nice boost.

A province starts recovering from being looted when 6 months have passed since last loot, and it takes up to a year until it has fully recovered.

Of course, the penalty on a province from being looted is still there until it has fully recovered, but it is scaled on how much have been looted.

Ea5YCKh.jpg


Committed Armies
One of the major complaints we have had on the combat in Eu4, has been the fact that you can fully abort your movement whenever you liked. This have been changed, and now you can’t abort your movement if you have already moved 50% of the way. After all, its just common sense that a unit that have already moved halfway between the centers of two provinces is already in the second one.

Force Limits
We felt that the calculations of forcelimits where far too hidden from the player, Players saw stuff like “+25.87 from Provinces”, which based based on projections of base-tax amongst other things, and sometimes those dropped for no obvious reasons.

Now you will be able to see in each province how much it provides to your forcelimits, and we have cleaned up the logic.

Each level of development gives 0.1 land and naval forcelimit.
Overseas will provide -2 land and -2 naval forcelimit
Inland provinces will not provide any naval forcelimit.
However, a province will never be able to provide negative forcelimits.

A nation also have a base value of +3 land and +2 naval force limit, and there are some other ways to get direct forcelimit increased, that are not just percentage increases.

IRmTjoZ.jpg



Next week, we'll be back and talk more about The Devout.
 
Yes!!! zones of control !! What I've been praying for.
 
Will there be move progress (percentage) indicators?
 
there also the possibility that, because you are allowed to do infinite amount of adjacent moves you have this misconception that adjacent does not mean strictly bordering.
As in you move your dices once province multiple times, of course in the actual game, to save time you wouldn't do that, you i think you know what i mean.

I am going to concede you are right. I pulled out my old set of RISK instructions and you are right that the teleportation move was a house rule that was included in the manual. Although it does not appear to a be a house rule in the online manual. The word "adjacent" was only used in the main manual where it implies you can only move troops to a next door territory.

Not to mention that I had a misunderstanding of the word contiguous. My mistake. I am 0 for 100 tonight on everything!
 
Last edited:
  • 3
  • 1
Reactions:
I beg you to reconsider your answer/idea.

Why fort on one/my side of border should automatically get control over terrain on the other/enemy side of border? IMO it should not work like that even with provinces without fort, and especially not against any fort.
Forts are defensive feature, unless they have access to rocket launchers and orbital weapons - but that is outside EU timeframe. They should not project anything across border or fort 100 km away.

Capture of fort should allow control (or maybe even give control) of its Zone, and Zones should not overlap.




Example 1 (re provinces over border): country without fort, I build fort 1 on border, dow and instantly get occupation of all country except capital?
Example 2 (re smaller vs larger fort): I capture enemy fort level 7, why should forts level 1/3/5 in neighboring provinces auto-surrender?

Forts do not auto yield to other forts, however if two forts overlap in their ZoC than the higher level fort wins out,

I don't really see the complaint anyway, is the argument that because we have a dedicated and well manned and armed military base in a region does not mean that upon declaring war with another nation in that region the forces of said military base should not use their strategic position to control the near by lands and prevent them from sending further aid to the enemy government particularly if there is no enemy military presence in the region?
 
  • 3
Reactions:
Regarding Burgundy, I second the motion that Breda should be owned by Brabant and not Holland. This region was and is still called north Brabant for a reason. ;)

Also, I'm not sure about the Picardy part of Burgundy (it seems like it from the flag). Artois would seem to be a better new country for this region, as this has a much more detailed history: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/County_of_Artois
Picardy could instead be given directly to Burgundy instead as this region changed hands between Burgundy and France lots of times in the second half of the 15th century (see cities of the Somme). :)
 
  • 5
Reactions:
I am going to concede you are right. I pulled out my old set of RISK instructions and you are right that the teleportation move was a house rule that was included in the manual. Although it does not appear to a be a house rule in the online manual. The word "adjacent" was only used in the main manual where it implies you can only move troops to a next door territory. I still think based on definition, it could be either way, but I am starting to believe you are likely right.

Not to mention that I had a misunderstanding of the word contiguous. My mistake. I am 0 for 100 tonight on everything!
it's OK, it takes courage to admit fault, you're alright.
 
  • 3
Reactions:
Very interesting and cool changes, I have a question though.

Will there be a peace option comparable Victoria 2's "Dismantle Fortifications" where you can demand the loser's forts in a province or even region to be downgraded or even destroyed? This would be a pretty viable peace demand for long term conflicts in strategic regions.
 
  • 11
Reactions:
Read please fragments I am quoting. As far as I understood, Whiskey Glen asked if Hanseatic level 3 fort will on day one take control over level 1 fort in SLesvig. Johan said yes.
It has nothing to do with moving army and sieges.
I think you misunderstood the question.

The question was:

If there is a level 3 fort in Lubeck, and a level 1 fort in Slesvig, when the Hansa (owner of Lubeck) and Holstein (owner of Slesvig) go to war, will the Hansa get control of Holstein (the province between Slesvig and Lubeck, which Holstein also owns)?

The answer was yes. Which would be no different from the Hansa simply moving a unit into Holstein.
 
  • 5
Reactions:
Being able to garrison a fort with nearby regiments up to it's level would be great.
 
  • 7
Reactions:
Okay can I get this clarified:

If a fortress is overlooking a non-fortress non-fortress-adjacent province and you go to war that province will be sieged down? Meaning controlled but not owned by the fort owner?

Meaning a war could start and 5 instant sieges could happen?
 
  • 5
Reactions:
Is the new fortress system going to change the way army tradition is gained through successful sieges? Like getting more tradition for high level fortresses and less for provinces without a fortress?

However, I really appreciate the changes!
 
  • 6
Reactions:
Okay can I get this clarified:

If a fortress is overlooking a non-fortress non-fortress-adjacent province and you go to war that province will be sieged down? Meaning controlled but not owned by the fort owner?

Meaning a war could start and 5 instant sieges could happen?
This is indeed possible by the looks of it. However this mechanics would likely strongly incentivize stationing troops on the border, to prevent such a "sallyforth" occupation, which i think is realistic.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
This is indeed possible by the looks of it. However this mechanics would likely strongly incentivize stationing troops on the border, to prevent such a "sallyforth" occupation, which i think is realistic.
I'm all about cold war.

I just think it might throw the AI off if you rush a levl 5 fort and declare war and suddenly his entire front is sieged.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
Had to look up "thursday" on Wikipedia to see if it was named after Thor......wow I did not know that...

Also what happened to the "other" BBB (big burgundian blob)?

And damn, those fort changes are going to make battles a bit more complicated...
 
Okay can I get this clarified:

If a fortress is overlooking a non-fortress non-fortress-adjacent province and you go to war that province will be sieged down? Meaning controlled but not owned by the fort owner?

Meaning a war could start and 5 instant sieges could happen?

Yes it looks like that - basically "free" control of the enemy province that has no adjacent fort. You can get ticking war from the start which is good, wars are needlessly prolonged in current version, forts are mostly useless and carpet sieging is dumb. Still enemy just needs to walk a unit over it and you lost the province and all of your warscore, you still can't get far if you can't fight against enemy army.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
Will zones of controls affect supply limit for hostile forces?
 
I'm all about cold war.

I just think it might throw the AI off if you rush a levl 5 fort and declare war and suddenly his entire front is sieged.
But that's all right, as they could just move some units and immediatelly get them back.

I would assume there will be some sort of delay before the control switch happens.
 
Read please fragments I am quoting. As far as I understood, Whiskey Glen asked if Hanseatic level 3 fort will on day one take control over level 1 fort in SLesvig. Johan said yes.
It has nothing to do with moving army and sieges.
Read what Johan said again yourself, the question was what would happen if there was a level 1 fort in Schleswig and a level 3 fort in Lubeck when Denmark and the Hansa go to war, the answer to this was that the fort in Lubeck would win and take control of Holstein because it was a higher level fort

Edit: Ninja'd
 
So what Johan is implying is that if Lübeck has a fort 3 and Schleswig has a fort 1, then once war breaks out, Holstein will go to The Hansa or whomever controls Lübeck.
Yes

So does that mean I can insta-win wars against OPMs by having a big fort standing next to them?

Also, can slighting become a thing?
 
  • 3
  • 1
Reactions: