• 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.
 
I would like to design boats.
-Thickness of bulkheads
-number of cannon
-number of boat decks
-etc etc

Being able , detail , design the boat.
With its price according add things and their pros and cons

Something similar to what is being done now to HOIIV
It's quite appropriate that Paradox is Swedish, because Swedish history actually offers an example of how it goes when the ruler tries to design a ship, rather than leaving it to the shipwrights.

Hint: Look up what happened to the Vasa.
 
  • 7
Reactions:
The problem with the ZOC idea is that forts were not capable of blocking an entire province. We're talking at least 100km frontage per province and it's not physically possible for a fortress to block all access. Even with artillery a fortress can't cover more than about 4km. Sure they can dominate major routes but armies of this period were not as road bound as those of 20th century. Even in Napoleon's Italian campaign, with more advanced logistics than existed in the 1400's & 1500's, he was able to slip an army past a small but strong fort blocking the route out of the Alps.
God some of you people... this is a game, and a rather abstract grand strategy game at that. The game simply cannot simulate the level of detail of real world events, so they have to make do with what they can. And on top of that, they have to program the AI to be able to handle it.

I love the potential of this. Some of you are looking at it too bleakly. Forts are pretty expensive, 7 gold sink in 1444 for 4 forts? If the Ottomans can't afford enough forts to block their borders, it goes to show that it's going to be really tough exploiting this. We'll see how it goes for the default EU map, but for mods that add a ton of provinces? Oh man, my mouth is watering at the mod potential of this.
 
  • 7
  • 1
Reactions:
It would be great if you added the current max combat width in the military tab under defensiveness or something like that, it's not like you don't have the room to spare :)
Real excited to see the new forts in action!
 
  • 2
Reactions:
The problem with the ZOC idea is that forts were not capable of blocking an entire province. We're talking at least 100km frontage per province and it's not physically possible for a fortress to block all access. Even with artillery a fortress can't cover more than about 4km. Sure they can dominate major routes but armies of this period were not as road bound as those of 20th century. Even in Napoleon's Italian campaign, with more advanced logistics than existed in the 1400's & 1500's, he was able to slip an army past a small but strong fort blocking the route out of the Alps.
As far as I understand, it's not intended to represent actually blocking the passage, rather it is keeping you from doing something that you technically could, but would be an incredibly stupid idea. Napoleon doesn't count for reasons illustrated below.

After the Middle Ages, as army size grew (and therefore the required food), logistics were required and living off the land became unsustainable for new larger armies. The period also saw fortified noble's homes replaced by actual military installations, which meant that their power projection beyond their actual walls grew. End result: armied need supply lines, and the new forts were incredibly good harassing and threatening supply lines. Going past a fort left in enemy hands, would mean complete starvation and disintegration of the army not terribly long after.

As someone mentioned previously in this thread, later in the period agriculture improved and by Napoleon's time even the immensely large armies of that period could live of the land for a while, rather than relying on maintaining supply lines. But this was a technological development, not a strategic one.
 
Last edited:
  • 4
Reactions:
That fort zone of control thing is something I've wanted since I first started playing EU4. Without it fortifying your border always just seemed pointless as you could just walk right past it. When all of this change was first announced I was somewhat skeptical, but these past few diaries have shown that y'all are prepared to make major structural changes, and I am impressed (all that's left is to remove MPs! :D). Good job Devs, hiring a modder is always a good idea!
 
  • 1
Reactions:
Without it fortifying your border always just seemed pointless as you could just walk right past it.
In real life not everyone fortress were capable to block movement deeper into country.
The more is garrison, the greater its ability to interrupt communications with the army of the enemy, which is passed the the fortress and headed inland.

With requisition supply system, as in the armies of revolutionary France, the role of forts has reduced almost to nothing.
 
In real life not everyone fortress were capable to block movement deeper into country.
The more is garrison, the greater its ability to interrupt communications with the army of the enemy, which is passed the the fortress and headed inland.

With requisition supply system, as in the armies of revolutionary France, the role of forts has reduced almost to nothing.

While a supply line system would be the most ideal, I think this fort is the best way to simulate it and revolutionary France is basically the end of the game so it isn't a big deal
 
In real life not everyone fortress were capable to block movement deeper into country.
The more is garrison, the greater its ability to interrupt communications with the army of the enemy, which is passed the the fortress and headed inland.

With requisition supply system, as in the armies of revolutionary France, the role of forts has reduced almost to nothing.

I don't view it as the fort blocking the men, I view it as the army's supply lines being broken by the other nation's military. It wouldn't make too sense in the extreme late game years, but that is a pretty small part of the game.
 
Late game?
Systematic use of requisition supply system as the main system started with Wallenstein during the Thirty Years War.
The next step was a using of magazines, introduced by Louvois.
For the era of the Napoleonic wars typically were used a mixed system including both magazines and requisition.
 
I thought that this originally meant for the El Dorado expansion, but apparently not, since my game certainly doesn't have this. I'm somewhat excited, but I'm a bit worried: won't forts make combat too static? The combat system entirely revolves around maneuvering between provinces, and it sounds like forts will make the attacker a sitting duck.

Oh, and thank god for committed armies. It always frustrated me when small enemy armies would sit indecisively because I started to stir.

EDIT: Okay, yeah, with the amount of money that it's going to cost to keep those forts going, it may not be that big of a problem. I can just imagine the potential of fortifications in the Pyrennes, or of one in Savoy...
 
Last edited:
God some of you people... this is a game, and a rather abstract grand strategy game at that. The game simply cannot simulate the level of detail of real world events, so they have to make do with what they can. And on top of that, they have to program the AI to be able to handle it.

I love the potential of this. Some of you are looking at it too bleakly. Forts are pretty expensive, 7 gold sink in 1444 for 4 forts? If the Ottomans can't afford enough forts to block their borders, it goes to show that it's going to be really tough exploiting this. We'll see how it goes for the default EU map, but for mods that add a ton of provinces? Oh man, my mouth is watering at the mod potential of this.

Thanks for actually replying with why you disliked my post - I'm finding it quite frustrating when people click that they disagree with a post but don't say why.

Something I said in my earliest post on this topic was that armies should be able to move through provinces with enemy forts but at a slower rate than normal (because they can't use the main road because its dominated by the fort) and that if an army can't trace a line of provinces free of unbesieged enemy forts back to friendly territory then it can't replace losses (this reflects not having a valid supply line). These shouldn't be too difficult to code and they allow a more realistic approach to warfare in this period. I'll advocate for more realism every time where possible and I don't think that the proposals outlined in the DD are realistic or necessary due to AI limitations.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
Why can't we have both this new mechanic and supply lines? :D
Let armies move past forts but massively increase attrition rate if they do so, to stimulate supply lines being harrassed/cut off
 
I would love if in future patches they make it so that a generals mobility ranking affects their abilities in ZOC's, like being able to slip through one to attack at the unprotected provinces.
 
Well prior to Napoleon (change to army organisation, army move in small units, they all meet just a while prior to battle), even talented commanders couldn't just go around fortress. They need supplies for their armies. Maybe ZoC could be ignored if you block province - you have way more troops than garrison to prevent them from sorties against your supply train (or use massive forces to protect them directly). If enemy manage to lift siege, your armies not in ZoC all die or something. AI won't handle this. BTW it would be good if low morale would generate attrition.
You really think it would be good to allow movement away from ZoC, but give something like 25x normal attrition + -100% max morale (let's be generous: -2 times normal attrition and +10% max morale per maneuver point of leader)? How it change anything? In 99% situation nothing..
 
Thanks for actually replying with why you disliked my post - I'm finding it quite frustrating when people click that they disagree with a post but don't say why.

Something I said in my earliest post on this topic was that armies should be able to move through provinces with enemy forts but at a slower rate than normal (because they can't use the main road because its dominated by the fort) and that if an army can't trace a line of provinces free of unbesieged enemy forts back to friendly territory then it can't replace losses (this reflects not having a valid supply line). These shouldn't be too difficult to code and they allow a more realistic approach to warfare in this period. I'll advocate for more realism every time where possible and I don't think that the proposals outlined in the DD are realistic or necessary due to AI limitations.


I'm with you on more realism but I'm worried AI manpower would just tank as they seem pretty poor at attrition management.