• 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.
Welcome to another development diary for Europa Universalis IV and today we focus on warfare. Yes, you knew this dev diary was coming, didn’t you? It’s really quite difficult to play the game without understanding how the armies work.

Warfare is one of the most important aspects of Europa Universalis IV, and over the almost 400 years of gameplay, armies and navies will be your prime instruments of power when you go to war. You need to be aware of the different units of your armies and their strengths and weaknesses.
So, it is time to build some armies and go to war! In times of war, you will have to raise and maintain armies and fleets, conquer nations and project your power onto the world. You see them standing, moving and fighting on the map.

Battlefield casualties and general attrition will naturally reduce the number of men or quality of ships available to you as you play, but armies will be slowly reinforced and navies in a safe port will slowly be repaired. As you upgrade your technology, you will unlock different types of these units, each with different offensive and defensive characteristics. Some have attributes that favor the attack, some favor the defense, and others are suited for a more balanced approach. Each approach has its advantages and disadvantages depending on your circumstances, and it will be up to you to decide what kind of army you want.

Land Units
Just as in earlier Europa Universalis games, land units are divided into infantry, cavalry and artillery. As you move through the ages, your armies will evolve from men-at-arms and armored knights to advanced musketmen and dragoons, and everything in between. The specific types of unit available to you, and its offensive and defensive abilities, are also dependent on your culture. Asian countries can get samurai cavalry, for example, but you won’t find these guys riding around Spain unless you send them there.

You select your preferred unit type of your land units, as you discover them through technology. This interface allows you to select the focus of your military forces. Each unit you build represents a force of 1000 men.

Infantry will be the bulk of your army. They are your cheapest units, and don’t take long to recruit. Your cavalry are the force you rely on in a battle to hit the flanks of an outnumbered enemy or chase down those that can’t stand against you. They cost about double what an infantryman does. Artillery only become available at Land Technology Level 7 (Limber) and they are most important for their firepower on the battlefield and their effectiveness during sieges.

When you build your armies, keep in mind that an army that is more cavalry than infantry loses the “combined arms” advantage. Cavalry could be very powerful and fast at times in this era, but rarely outnumbered foot soldiers on the battlefield.

In the military menu, you can see four columns with data on the land units. First there is the power, second the ability during fire, third is ability during shock, and finally the number of regiments you have of that category.

Naval Units
There are four types of ships: heavy ships, light ships, galleys and transports. Unlike armies, each construction represents individual ships and have a strength measured in a percentage – a ship at 100% is in perfect health. Ships take damage in battles, of course, but also if they are in the open sea for too long. (This is naval attrition.) Ships only repair when in port.

Each naval unit has characteristics, just like army units. There are no longer any separate fire/shock values per ship type, as a ship-based gun is basically a gun. However, every type of ship has a different number of cannons, and a different hull size. There are also ideas that improve your ships ability to fight, or as we call it, the ships’ power.

The four different ship types have different purposes. Your main battle fleet will be composed of heavy ships (carracks, galleons, etc.). Light ships (barques, caravels, frigates, etc.) have better speed and are OK in a fight but will mostly be used to protect and project your trade power. Galleys (and later galleases and chebecks) are designed for fighting in inland seas and enclosed bodies of water. Your transports (cogs, flytes, merchantmen, etc.) are, as the name suggests, your lightly armed vessels intended to move troops across the water.

In the military interface, ship types have four columns, first there is the power, second the amount of guns, third is hull size, and finally the numbers of ships you have of that category.

attachment.php


Leaders
Any military situation calls for extensive knowledge and leadership, and, for a monarch like yourself, how to choose which of the leaders at your service will serve what purpose in the war you just happened to find yourself in. (Clearly this war is not your fault.)

Though you can always put your monarch or a mature heir at the head of your army, you will hire most of your leaders from the general population. You can recruit generals, admirals, conquistadors and explorers as leaders. Generals and conquistadors, as land leaders, cost you 25 Military Power. Admirals and explorers, as naval leaders, cost you 25 Diplomatic Power. Once you’ve hired a leader, it can be assigned to lead any army or naval unit. As expected, generals are used to lead armies and admirals are used to lead navies. Assign conquistadors and explorers to units you wish to send far away or to uncharted lands – these are the only units that can venture into unexplored parts of the map (those sections covered by a white fog).

The skill of a leader determines how good he is at performing different strategies and tactics in combat. Leader skill is partly related to your nation’s military or naval tradition; countries with a history of warfare will be more likely to notice these talents among soldiers or general citizenry.

The four different attributes of leaders are scored from 0 to 6. “Fire” is their ability to direct the use of gunpowder or missile weapons. “Shock” measures how well the leader is at assaults, charges, whatever happens when ranged combat turns to man-to-man action. “Maneuver” is the ability of a leader to move his troops through land safely and get his forces into the right position for battle. Finally, the “Siege” attribute is most important for quickly taking down enemy cities. Paying close attention to these may be the difference between defeating an army twice your size or getting crushed.

Every leader (except your current ruler or heir) costs one military power each month to maintain. This puts a soft cap on the amount of leaders a nation can have at the same time. This also means that a monarch with low military skill and a poor selection of military advisors could find himself running a deficit in military power if he has too many generals. If you find yourself running low on military power, you can always dismiss your leaders, but this means you lose their services permanently.

Mercenaries
Every country has its own pool of mercenaries which replenishes over time, but the number of mercenaries you have already recruited impacts how many there are available for you. This isn’t an endless pool of soldiers for you to draw from. There are ideas that increase the size of the pool, as well as reducing the maintenance or cost of mercenaries. There are only mercenaries on land – you can’t hire renegade naval forces to fight for you.

Mercenaries do count against your land force limits – they are not a way to get around the costs of having to field an army that is already stretching your budget. But they do have a couple of advantages in certain situations. First, they are faster to recruit, so if you have seen your main force destroyed but can afford to get new men, mercenaries will get you back in the fight faster. Also, mercenaries fight just as well as regular troops and can be led by your generals and conquistadors if necessary. The best part is that they don't cost any manpower to reinforce, so while they fight and die, you can rebuild your own population for a later war. They are a vital part of any nation’s armed forces, and rich countries can benefit from them quite a lot.

ps. And in case you haven´t read this yet:
Paradox Hands-On Special: Master Class – Europa Universalis IV at Strategy Informer
“After crushing their main army, I then had a sudden wave of conscience as I felt bad for betraying my former allies, so I quickly ended the war in exchange for one of the core provinces I needed.”
http://www.strategyinformer.com/editorials/21807/paradox-hands-on-special-master-class
 

Attachments

  • eu4_3.png
    eu4_3.png
    2,7 MB · Views: 36.673
Last edited by a moderator:
A few ideas:

1. Armies should stack. I'm not sure wherefrom the anti-stack sentiments, but concentration of forces in wartime was the prevailing rule throughout this entire period. It is true that in major conflicts, or large empires, multiple armies were necessary, but within a single theater or on a single front bringing all forces together for battle was one of only two viable strategies (the other being avoiding battle). So army stacks are not the problem in the EU IV timeframe, unlike in, say, HOI. Naval stacks obviously are, but that's for another diary.

The real problem is that battles between stacks aren't sufficiently decisive (that is, that there are multiple stacks in time). My hope is that the very, very promising shatter/undisciplined mechanics (defeated army has to retreat a distance and regains morale very slowly, while stuck; winning army may not be able to move until it reorganizes, encouraging siege), as well as higher casualties and slower manpower regain, will solve this, or at least be moddable into a solution.

But I do think much of this will depend upon how high attrition is (should be much higher than EU III) and how well it's modeled (supply lines must matter or no system will be realistic/fun), as well as, to some degree, how warscore works (taking and holding border provinces/defeating armies should be enough to win limited wars-if it's total war every time, we're just back to pingpongs and attrition will have to be low).

2. Uber leaders are a problem, though, or create the problem of weakened leaders (EU III leaders are much less decisive than EU II leaders, presumably for this reason). To correct it, what if leaderless armies suffered massive morale penalties, essentially breaking even at high numerical superiority (say, breaks on average up to 5:1)? And given force concentration for major battles (which should be encouraged), let's say leaderless armies cannot lay siege or assault, so that more generals are necessary to cover the field.

3. I would like to see real skirmishes, though, so that we have real positional warfare. Apart from map changes (impassable borders used much more, mountainous and other rough provinces murder on large forces, including friendly large forces) and supply lines (must have covering armies or occupied/friendly provinces to be in supply) this could be done with a multiplier to attrition based on army size when an army is on the move, especially through rough terrain. This would mean that one battle army covering a bunch of little siege armies would become very costly in manpower (and perhaps even money-moving armies would ideally cost more than stationary armies), on both sides, so that siege armies would need to be able to defend themselves and lifting sieges with smaller relief forces would be feasible.
 
I'm sick of the people saying this is just EU 3.5. That was easy to believe when the game was first announced, but since then, we learn about the huge impact of monarch points on administration, limited envoys instead of a renewable resource, minor countries are far less likely to colonize, wars will be more limited (they will have a chief war goal), and more.

Just because we get a diary covering an unchanged aspect does not mean this game is just another expansion. There will not be a complete revolution in every aspect of the game, and neither is EU4 lacking in innovation. Besides, the devs still have much time to release more information, information so don't think it will all be the same as EU3.
Not a revolution, not even an evolution, but at least address the weakest parts of the current system (double penalty for non western european countries, teleporting leaders, etc.)
 
Last edited:
Sounds almost exactly like EU3. Not that that is a bad thing, since this stuff was done pretty well in EU3. I was just expecting something new I suppose since I assume most people who read this are EU3 players and know most of this already.
 
Definitely hoping for some additions in this area, this DD very nearly reads like it was for EU3. That being said, the warfare changes that were posted last month have the potential to make warfare more engaging and less of a ping-pong annoyance.
 
So am I right to think that the problem with the obsolete units staying on is gone? Will the constant replenishment of the merc pool kick out the old units ? It's hard to tell from the text so I just wanted to be sure :eek:o
 
Because this one was a boring let down?

lol... I know some people seem interested in this DD but i too am a little dissapointed with the great similarities of eu3. I was deffinately hoping to finally see some engaging naval aspects but alas.
 
This is an area where I'd have liked to see more evolution. I like the merc changes though.

This being said, thanks for the quote from the article at the bottom. Perhaps it's a coincidence, but it answers very clearly a question we debated not long ago about war goals.
 
Last edited:
Good DD, but I have a few questions:

What does land "power" and sea "power" represent? Why is it described as a percent?

Without a naval shock value; how is a ship's melee value represeneted, especially in the case of galleys which had far more melee strength than gunnery strength?

Do galleys also protect and project trade power?
 
My guess is that land power is the new discipline.

From what we've been told, trade power is all about light ships. Galleys Vs Big ships depends on what kind of navy you want. A sea power like Venice would go Galleys+light ships while a sea power like England would prefer Big ships + light ships.

I do have a question of my own; how has naval combat lethality been tuned exactly? In Eu3 as of the latest patches, naval engagements are overly lethal, especially when large fleets meet.
 
Your navel model is inaccurate

Please do some more historical Navel research before you commit to that model please.

There are some glaring errors in that navel war model.

During most of your game period, there was almost no class of ship that was thought of as "Transport" or a heavy ship. The only difference between a war ship and a transport were how many guns got loaded onto the ship. For example: during the Dutch English wars, both sides simply converted there merchant galleons into war galleons simply by adding guns to them. Yes the Flyte was more of a dedicated merchant ship, but this was the exception rather than the rule. Another example of this was the Carrack, the Iberians used the carrack as both a transport AND a war ship.

Even in terms of the merchantman and flyte, the number of guns these ships would carry varied significantly depending on the perceived danger level expected for their journey.

Another error is that heavy ships remain the main ship of battle throughout the time period. This is also a huge error. Heavy ships started and ended the era as main battle ships, but for period of about 100 years for much of the 16th century and early 17th century, Iberian heavy ships were being completely outclassed by English and Dutch "race build galleons". These ships were specifically built to be lighter and it wasn't until the 17th century did these ships start to become big again.

As for the Caravel, it was both a big ship and a light ship. Caravel refers to type of ship design that was build in a wide range of sizes. For example, the Portuguese took control of the trade headed from India to the middle east using a fleet of large "War Caravels".

Finally no realistic simulation of world navel history would be complete without a nod to advanced Chinese ship design. Some of the Chinese warships actually had metal hull and completely outclassed European ships until the 17th century.
 
navel :wub:

naval :cool:

On the substance, you're partly right, but nothing in a Paradox game has ever been as boring as the naval system of "Rome" where there is only one type of ship. Diversity brings about good gameplay. 4 types of ships with different roles adds some spice and flavor. Thats probably what matters most here. In fact, people who voiced disappointment with how similar the system is to Eu3 would have probably welcomed a new type of land or sea unit.
 
And what is the mechanism to depict that infrantry is becoming more and more important after hundred years war? Is that just specs of higher tech level infantry units?
 
And what is the mechanism to depict that infrantry is becoming more and more important after hundred years war? Is that just specs of higher tech level infantry units?
I`m not convinced infantry became "more and more" imporant. It was very inportant in medival time, it remained important in napoleonic warfare.
Cavalry also, was important for both.
 
Seem curious that you can't recruit both heavy and light cavalry types but only one type of cavalry at a time. From many battles I've read about in EU3 time frame, they maintained both types, sometimes only one types of those cavalry were present. Though I'm not sure if the British Army had heavy cavalry at all during the Napoleonic Wars as they're very expensive and their Royal Navy, their first line of defense against invasion of Great Britain, was already eating up most of their military budget at the times, forcing it to have smaller army.

Also, are galleys able to traverse the Atlantic Ocean as it did in EU3? It seem rather odd to be seeing galleys crossing such deep oceans and I'm not aware of any such ships ever crossing it in RL history, suggesting it's very unsuitable for deep waters.