• 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:
What does power exactly do for land regiments?
 
Neato.

One question though: is the province layout already set in stone? Or are you gonna leave the final fine-tuning (exact borders, names) of the map to the last stage?
 
I am being unobservant but isnt it all the same as ue3?

Not entirely, in Eu3 leaders cost tradition, now their skill is only based on tradition. Mercs have also been changed. Seems like some really nice tweaks, but not a complete overhaul. :)

Edit. nevermind
 
Last edited:
Don't mean to be rude or anything but apart from mercenaries this DD doesn't really tell anything new...at least not something that was not already seen in EU3.

Lots of it is spelling out what things will be familar, but knowing what isn't changing is important.

For example when you combine this with the trade dev diary, it looks like transport ships and galleys won't help you control trade nodes (I was hoping that light ships included was a new term which included both of them).
 
"Asian countries can get samurai cavalry, for example, but you won’t find these guys riding around Spain unless you send them there."

Mongolian Samurai? I can feel the irony palpating in waves off the very surface of my monitor.
 
"Asian countries can get samurai cavalry, for example, but you won’t find these guys riding around Spain unless you send them there." Mongolian Samurai? I can feel the irony palpating in waves off the very surface of my monitor.

Mongolia and Japan weren't in the same tech group in EU3, and probably still aren't. The Mongols were in the nomad group and the Japanese were in the Chinese group.
 
Well almost everything.Why we could only have one type of unit at a time (tercio, carracole etc) and as said earlier what is the point of having multiple leader, just stock up your tradition and recruit one or two super generals so as to swap them between armies at every major battle...I really don't see why they are bothering themselves with a new game as all what has being revealed as of now can be introduced to eu3 as an expansion or a patch
 
what has being revealed as of now can be introduced to eu3 as an expansion or a patch

This is just wrong. For one thing, EU4 runs on Clausewitz 2.5, basically a super powered version of the engine that EU3 runs on. I don't think any PI expansion has ever altered a game's engine. For another thing, EU4's monarch point and trade systems completely turn the game on its head. Just because they didn't do much on the warfare side of things, don't believe that they're not doing a lot of cool, new things with the series. They are. Read the other DDs.
 
This is just wrong. For one thing, EU4 runs on Clausewitz 2.5, basically a super powered version of the engine that EU3 runs on. I don't think any PI expansion has ever altered a game's engine. For another thing, the EU4's monarch point and trade systems completely turn the game on its head. Just because they didn't do much on the warfare side of things, don't believe that they're not doing a lot of cool, new things with the series. They are. Read the other DDs.

Never altered the game engine? The nomadic system? Cultural Tradition? Heirs? Have you ever played vanilla EU3? As for the trade system, nodes are just COTs on water with some tweaks, monarch power could easily be introduced to the game engine as they have already done with cultural tradition etc. CK2 warfare system (with some tweaks and adaptation) is ten folds better than this.
 
Never altered the game engine? The nomadic system? Cultural Tradition? Heirs? Have you ever played vanilla EU3? As for the trade system, nodes are just COTs on water with some tweaks, monarch power could easily be introduced to the game engine as they have already done with cultural tradition etc. CK2 warfare system (with some tweaks and adaptation) is ten folds better than this.

That's not altering the game engine. Not in the sense that I mean anyway. Adding in new government types isn't the same thing as putting in a new engine altogether. Give me a break. You can use this kind of zero substance complaining on any game. Don't believe me? Watch!

"They could have just made a patch for Crusader Kings 1 instead of making a new game! All they did was add an extra title tier and put in more traits, bla, bla, bla." If you want to make excuses for complaining, then you'll always find a way.
 
Never altered the game engine? The nomadic system? Cultural Tradition? Heirs? Have you ever played vanilla EU3? As for the trade system, nodes are just COTs on water with some tweaks, monarch power could easily be introduced to the game engine as they have already done with cultural tradition etc. CK2 warfare system (with some tweaks and adaptation) is ten folds better than this.
Trade routes and tech system are completely different, you need to rewrite most of the code to get that implemented right. Also you forget the NI system which is very different. New UI is also much clearer, which again is something you cannot just implement, you need to rewrite significant parts of the code.

The "it's EU3.5" argument generally reveals quite a lack of insight in programming and gamedesign.
 
Overall im satisfied, this is of course pretty much what EU has always been about, nothing goes out of the line.

However, Balkanite in me is restless, and so i have to say this: im a bit disappointed that it seems that you have already decided not to expand the unit system, just a bit. Maybe its not EU, maybe its me (i fully accept that possibility), but it feels like the unit system of EU (particularly 3rd one) is a bit too abstracted, possibly a bit too much. The 3 unit types that we have are, like i said, too abstracted, and too, how to put it, free for interpretation. I would really like to see EU game where all of this goes into detail, for once. For example what you have in CK2 is a good example of the kind of system id like to see. Just having generic "infantry" means nothing, but having "heavy infantry" and "light infantry" (localized differently across different tech groups obviously) suddenly gives you something new, a strategic choice (different performance in different terrains for example, etc). Same or similar story with cavalry and artillery. The current system is just too abstract, and i feel it wouldnt hurt the game to give it some complexity/detail.
 
I have a couple of questions:

1) Do Mercenaries replenish themselves with their own Manpower pool like EU3?
2) Galleys have less cannons and hull than the average transport; are they insanely cheap to be built in hosts, or do they have a clear bonus while fighting in enclosed bodies of water?
 
Overall im satisfied, this is of course pretty much what EU has always been about, nothing goes out of the line.

However, Balkanite in me is restless, and so i have to say this: im a bit disappointed that it seems that you have already decided not to expand the unit system, just a bit. Maybe its not EU, maybe its me (i fully accept that possibility), but it feels like the unit system of EU (particularly 3rd one) is a bit too abstracted, possibly a bit too much. The 3 unit types that we have are, like i said, too abstracted, and too, how to put it, free for interpretation. I would really like to see EU game where all of this goes into detail, for once. For example what you have in CK2 is a good example of the kind of system id like to see. Just having generic "infantry" means nothing, but having "heavy infantry" and "light infantry" (localized differently across different tech groups obviously) suddenly gives you something new, a strategic choice (different performance in different terrains for example, etc). Same or similar story with cavalry and artillery. The current system is just too abstract, and i feel it wouldnt hurt the game to give it some complexity/detail.
The specific details of an army are in the unit type, I guess. But indeed, some more detail would be nice. Then again, I was never sure in EU Rome or CKII if those extra unit types really add something to the game, or that the game would be pretty much the same with 3 types of units.
 
The specific details of an army are in the unit type, I guess. But indeed, some more detail would be nice. Then again, I was never sure in EU Rome or CKII if those extra unit types really add something to the game, or that the game would be pretty much the same with 3 types of units.

Is it the same if you attack Switzerland with light/heavy infantry or the same mix of cavalry?

Walking into Arabia, is it the same with light infantry and cavalry, or heavy infantry and cavalry?

Fighting in jungles of Asia, in India etc.

If terrain really mattered, then there would be a huge difference.