• 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.

Tinto Talks #23 - 31st of July

Hello everyone to another Tinto Talks, the Happy Wednesday, the day of the week where we discuss details about our super secret game with the codename Project Caesar.

This week we will delve into the glorious world of logistics and sieges. You all know the saying “amateurs talk tactics, professionals talk logistics”.

Leader Assignment
First of all, one thing we have added is what we refer to as commission time. If a character has been assigned to lead an army or navy, you can not remove him from command before at least 12 months have passed. This removes the “teleport a leader around the world” exploit, and also makes it more of a choice of how to deploy your characters.


Reinforcing Regiments
While your levies do not reinforce, your regular regiments will attempt to reinforce if you still have manpower, and get access to the goods they require. A regiment that is part of an army that is retreating, is in combat, loaded on a ship or currently taking attrition losses will not be able to reinforce.

A regiment can only reinforce in your owned locations and in a location owned by someone you are fighting a war together with, when that location is currently not occupied.

reinforcement.png

Not many soldiers, but 5 a month is enough here …


Army Movement
When people talk about logistics it is usually intrinsically linked to the movement of armies, and movement of armies in Project Caesar has some changes in it compared to what you may be used to.

One thing that has taken its inspiration from the Hearts of Iron series is the fact that when an army is moving they will slowly be losing morale. This creates the natural flow of armies marching and then resting, and not just marching across Europe and immediately joining a battle, like the march has had no impact at all.

We also have added the fact that an army that is beyond a certain size will be marching slower, where the size is based on its total frontage it is fielding. While you can attach units to other units, this makes the attached units move slower, as military organization in the late medieval era was rather limited. In later ages you get advances that reduce this penalty significantly, completely limiting it in the Age of Revolutions, and speaking particularly about that age, we have an advance there that makes multiple corps combat more interesting, making them to ‘March to the Sound of the Guns’. This advance allows an army to automatically react, if another army of ours in an adjacent location enters combat, and then quickly march to join that battle.


advances_AoR.png

Guess which is my favorite advance from this part of the Age of the Revolutions tree?


Food and Armies
Now you are wondering, that is fine, but an army can not march on an empty stomach? That is entirely true. Each army has food it needs to consume every month, else they will start deserting and dying. If you run out of food during a siege, you are basically forced to abandon the siege very quickly as your army evaporates.

A standard infantry regiment can usually carry a few months of rations with them, but when they are gone, they are gone. Here the new category of units comes into place. One major type of the Auxiliary Category is the Logistic units, which can carry far more food than any other type of unit.



camp_followers.png

They might be bad at fighting, but they will provide some food…



So how do you get food for your armies then? Well, if they are stationed in your own locations they will take food from the local provincial supplies, so you sometimes have to be careful about where you station your armies, so as to not cause the local population to starve. If you want to get the food from your allies or countries you have military access with, you need to negotiate a treaty that allows you to take their food supplies. This is not always something every country will accept. Your subjects have no say in this though, as most types of subject give this access implicitly.



food_supply.png

Maybe we should have more than a single A’Urughs…


Food Supply
When you are at war, you can steal food from occupied provinces. If you control the capital of a province, you can steal the food of the local populace there to feed your armies.

If your army is at an hostile location, where you can not get local food, you can try to trace access up to 2 locations away, through controlled locations to get the food. If you can’t reach your own locations at that distance there are two ways to get food to your armies.

First of all, if there is a Supply Depot within that range, your army will draw food from it. A Supply Depot can be created by any army and you can deposit food until its maximum storage capabilities, and any army within range can withdraw from it. Any army can gather food from their homeland and deposit it into the depot if there's space. There are advances increasing the capacity of your depots as well.

You also have capacity for the navies to provide logistic support as well. There are two unit abilities that can be done for them, gathering food and distributing food. Gather food will take food from any adjacent province you own, and your fleet can store food depending on the food carrying capacity of the ships. Distributing food allows a navy to act like a floating supply depot that your armies can get food from.

While we do understand that not every player may enjoy caring much about logistics, for those you can assign logistic objectives to supporting armies and navies, and then they will solve it for your main armies.

You also steal food from your enemy in a battle when they are defeated, as a defeated army can not protect their entire baggage train as they try to escape.

Sieges and Occupations

Now let's turn to the second part of this talk, where we will talk about how sieges will work. First of all, there are two different types to talk about here, as not all locations are equal. Locations without any fortifications will not have any long siege, but an army with a single full strength regiment is enough to take it in a few weeks. A location with some sort of fortifications requires a full siege though.

siege_progress.png

Having an offensive societal value is not ideal to defend your sieges..

Food has a significant impact on how you plan your military campaigns, as it affects how long you can sustain a siege. The key thing here, and this is something I am a big fan of, is that sieges are gambles. You don’t know when a fort will fall, and now with the fact that if you run out of food you will run the risk of actually losing and failing a siege. About every 30 days there is a chance for something to happen in the siege, with chances of it getting worse for defenders or another month of holding out.

siege_outcome.png

It won’t surrender immediately, but maybe we can avoid disease amongst our troops..

With these changes, the assault is now a more potentially viable option, as either you win, and save time and food, or you fail the assault, and have taken casualties and thus preserving your food supply longer.

While besieging a coastal location, it is not only important to blockade it making the siege faster, it can also at the same time supply your army with food.

Automatic Control
As the map is more granular than in previous games we have made, warfare would turn into a massive slog to manually siege or occupy every single location. Now while we have automation systems, it still would not be very fun. Project Caesar has two different ways to automatically gain control over several locations at once. First of all, if you take a fort, all locations in its zone of control will start changing control to you. This is also valid for forts owned by an enemy if we have taken it. Secondly, if you take the capital you will start getting control over all locations in that province. Of course, this is blocked by hostile armies and forts.

As mentioned in previous posts on the forum, we have the zone of control system in Project Caesar as well, but the one with far less complicated rules that was used in Imperator Rome. As you might have noticed earlier, there is an advance in the Age of Revolutions that allows you to ignore Zone of Control. While that may be useful to chase down enemy armies, you often want to take forts and cities anyway to get your logistics sorted out.

Recruitment Options
One thing that has not been mentioned yet about the military is that we have different recruitment methods for regiments, where you can either rush the training so a regiment can be ready much quicker, but at far less strength, or spend more time in training and start with higher experience.


recruit_methods.png

So training does pay off!


Next week we will talk about ships, and some aspects of the naval part of the game.
 

Attachments

  • siege_outcome.png
    siege_outcome.png
    282 KB · Views: 0
  • 228Like
  • 191Love
  • 11
  • 10
  • 7
Reactions:
You mention that an army will be able to draw on the local food supply of a non-enemy / allied in war nation if you have a particular treaty with that country which allows for this, my question on this matter is will you be able to do so even without a treaty? I think it would be a little silly if my army was starving on the march and I had absolutely zero agency in whether or not they could choose to ignore the country which they were marching through's unwillingness to allow us to use their local food supplies. A starving army likely wouldn't respect such a decision and would loot it anyway. It would be nice if you could draw on the food supply regardless of the permission of the government of the country your army was in, albeit incurring a heavy relations penalty and certainly giving a casus belli to the nation to who you've done this. My second question is in regards to the baggage train, you mention that you can steal supplies/food from an enemy army when you defeat them in battle. That's fantastic, however, a huge part of why baggage trains were so zealously looted was money, they often held great wealth. There are many many examples throughout history of battles being lost because the cavalry or other elements of an army broke through and instead of aiding in the battle went to loot the enemy camp/baggage train before leaving with the booty gained from it. Will you get any money from looting camps/baggage trains post-battle? If not, will the soldier pops get wealth from it? My third query is about sieges and supply, you mention that blockades are impactful in part because they can supply your besieging army. That's great, but can you supply a fortress under siege, especially a coastal fortress under siege? Will it be more difficult to supply a fortress under siege if it's not coastal? Will blockading a coastal fortress that is under siege prevent naval resupply? I think it would be an oversight to implement the mechanics to supply armies enacting a siege but not implement the ability to attempt to supply a fortress that is under siege. Fourth and final question, you mention assaults being more in the cards. In EU4 fortresses being assaulted practically didn't capitulate until you completely annihilated the defending force, will there be more of a realistic morale implementation for the defenders of a siege so that you can actually take the fortress by assault without needing to slaughter them to the man? Many times throughout history you saw situations where after a few assaults an agreement was formed where the defenders would be allowed to leave with honor and safe passage, surrendering the city. Two more things, not really questions just notes. You mention that it will take a few weeks to occupy a location. I think that was more passable in EU4 because of there being fewer locations, but with the density of locations and the reality of how quickly territory could be occupied historically by a campaigning army, to me personally, it seems quite silly to say that it would take almost an entire month for an occupying force to control such a small stretch of land as an unfortified location. Perhaps implement a different base length of siege phase for fortified and unfortified locations, that way you could keep it being the few weeks that you want but allow for someone such as myself to easily adjust/mod the occupation time for an unfortified location without adjusting the siege phases for actual sieges. My other note is that I personally would really like to see more diversity in the siege events, the ones shown are basically just carbon copies of the EU4 siege events, and those are good, but in my opinion not diverse enough. Interesting things happened in sieges, sometimes you saw stratagems like the siege of Antioch in the first crusade leading to a rapid capture of the city. I suppose there's a case to be made that a lot of people wouldn't like it if there was a small chance that your fortress is captured in the first few weeks because of some brilliant tactic by the enemy force, and that for them it would feel unpredictable in a negative way, but to me having there be a degree of unpredictability that could either swing the course of the siege significantly towards one sides favor or the other feels much more interesting and realistic. Another event that could be added other than various stratagems for a rapid capture of significant progression of the siege could be sorties which could significantly damage the numbers and morale of either the besieging or defending force. In EU4 sorties are a button where the whole force sallies out for a battle to fight to the death, and it's only ever used on the day before a relief force arrives to add extra numbers to the battle. While sorties were occasionally used in this way, to support a relief army in battle, and this should be kept as a possibility because it is indeed something that happened and is indeed something that you can do in EU4, this is certainly not the normal way sorties were done. It was more of a constant thing, with frequent small-scale attempts from the garrison to wither down the enemy force, sometimes to damage the force itself, sometimes to damage their siege efforts by for example destroying trebuchets. You could add stratagems as events, you could add sorties, you could add sapping attempts as well as counter-sapping, you could add events such as the besieging or defending force executing prisoners in broad view of the opposing force to damage morale. Perhaps if a besieging force is large enough there could be a particular chance based maybe upon the total control of the location/province the fortress lay within for the defenders to carry out essentially a perfunctory siege? You saw this often enough in history, where a defending force would essentially walk the fine line of holding out long enough to not be treasonous and to buy time, but not so long that the besiegers become angry and would sack the city. Sometimes you saw defenders come to an agreement with the enemy commander, things like "If no relief force comes in the next two 18 days we will surrender the fortress/city. To me, it would be a little silly to have things like this be a complete implausibility and to have the defenders always hold out until their morale or numbers are exhausted. I would just like a see a little more variety in regards to siege events. Speaking of sieges, when you capture a city will you have the option to sack it? Will it be sometimes out of your hands? Perhaps if it's a mercenary force it's out of your hands and is RNG based on things like supply? There are many cases of things like this, the sack of Rome during the Italian Wars for example. If you do sack a city will you get money for it? If not, will the soldier pops get money for it? Great dev diary as usual, love from a fan :)
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
@Johan, Havent been on the forums since maybe late EU3 and early EU4 times. Just want to start by saying that I am really hyped for PC and it seems to be forming into an amazing game.

Been watching updates on PC watching Lambert's videos.

Chain of command and promotions when spots are available, would fit nicely. If your general dies, the next in command takes over leading the army. Maybe we can even have captains for each row of engagement. This makes sense from a historical point of view.

Each of the leaders having their own skills and unique traits as well, meaning each row will be slightly different from the other. That helps with making armies more unique and battle more umpredictable, which is realistic I would say.

If you still want to have the one leader per army thing, maybe we can add chain of command at a later date, If not from the start date, it can be added as an advancement that everyone gets after 100 or so years into the game or whatever time period you guys like. Although chain of command was used by the Romans, well before the 14th Century.

Looking forward to the rest of the Tinto talks. I may pop back to leave some more things in the future.

Keep up the innovation and the realism aspects. Loving it. <3
 
Some people don't like dice rolls for battles and sieges. I don't like them either, but I like the alternatives even less. The problem with dice rolls is that it's rng, you have no way of influencing the results once in battle aside from bringing more men to the grinder. For people who like to roleplay as a warlord rising in power or smth like that, the dice is extremely frustrating. Battles fail to be the RP goldmine they are meant to be.

A way to mitigate this would be to keep the dice rolls, but also add a mechanic, or mechanics, that have a very small impact on the actual outcome of the siege/battle. What important isn't that the player decides the outcome, it's purely that he FEELS like he does influence it and then you just made the day of all RP enjoyers in the community.

This mechanic could be events where smth happened during the siege and the player must choose the best option befitting the situation. I think that there is a ck3 mod that does that. It can be a bit annoying if you don't care about it siege so it woold be good to have a way to "delegate task to subordinates" aka automate it/not making the events happen in the settings at any time. Maybe the events, or whatever other mechanic, become available only if the ruler leads the army? Maybe a new game rule related to that? Also, if I am not mistaken, there is also a "formation" mechanic where the player can directly decide how to organize its troops in battle, wich I find to be a step in the good direction, if I have not hallucinated this information of course, in which case it would be cool to have. I'm farely sure there are other potential good mechanics I haven't tought of, all that remains to figure out is their feasibility and if my fellow future players are in for it.
 
  • 2
Reactions:
Thats how it works, but you need to have control over the province.
If I understand correctly, you cannot forage while you are sieging the capital of the province, even if you control the other locations of the province.

Would you consider allowing some foraging when you control a location? Armies often pillaged the countryside while sieging.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
:+: Spark's Note #10: Rome and Candle :+:

This occasional forum goblin was quite prepared to retire his EU trivia answer to, 'What Europe Universalis feature is largely unchanged from EU1?'

The answer is sieges.

I'll share, constructively, the exact moment Imperator lost me as a player. As Sparta sieging down Corinth, it dawned on me what I was playing was nothing like the ancient wars of the city states. Field battles aside, the Corinthian League used their walls to protect their armies. This, of course, was common through history, especially among little principalities like the Archbishop of Cologne rebelling against the Salians, or the Marinid army tucked away in the satellite city of Algeciras, or the Parliamentarians holding out in Bristol, or Napoleon's dramatic siege of Mantua.

I'm going to assume Darth Johan the Wise has experimented with this feature, but I would like to visit the concept of using forts to block automatic battles. Perhaps stacks have stances to auto-engage on friendly forts or not. I can foresee a number of issues, like passive AI, lack of clarity on the result of player actions, ZoC & movement trap problems. But I do think something like this is worth exploring to add strategic complexity and more accurately model warfare of the time.

A related concern is the power of siege mechanic abuse relative to the AI, where a good strategy is to out-siege them and avoid the cost of battle. With so many more locations and a pick-and-choose approach to empowering siege strength technology, I expect this strategy to perform quite well. It would be good to introduce some element to offset concentrating forces where the enemy is absent. The threat of an enemy army parked behind walls rather than just ZoC means the end of 1 regiment detachments securing siege progress and chasing stack wipes through prescient movement & transport.

Overall, war mechanics appear in-line with predictions and the commitment to supplies to model the pulse of the campaigning season sounds delightful.
 
Regarding the food capacity UI, maybe you could have the word control in green and when they don't have access, you could have "lack" in red.
 
Very disapointed that the siege mechanic is basically a copy-paste of EU4 sieges. I would have much more prefered a CK3 style of sieges with a max siege time. It could be increased / decreased depending on supplies tricking in (naval not blocaded) with garissons.
Also curious to know if supply stations can supply another supply station, forcing to build supply station chains?
And what happens to the supplies in the depots once peace is reached? Do they just dissapear? Does the army have to backtrack out from the invasion path, picking them up and their ressources?
 
  • 3
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Very disapointed that the siege mechanic is basically a copy-paste of EU4 sieges. I would have much more prefered a CK3 style of sieges with a max siege time. It could be increased / decreased depending on supplies tricking in (naval not blocaded) with garissons.
Also curious to know if supply stations can supply another supply station, forcing to build supply station chains?
And what happens to the supplies in the depots once peace is reached? Do they just dissapear? Does the army have to backtrack out from the invasion path, picking them up and their ressources?
Have you even read the talk & dev answers?
 
Sieges should be RNG, as you can't really simulate the mindgames.

The EU4 design with explicit siege phases and dice rolls does not work well from a psychological perspective.

1. To have a set and explicit siege phase duration creates a negative waiting situation. In such a situation you know that nothing can happen during the wait and it just becomes a drawn out and slightly frustrating time. It can also create hopes and expectations that regularly gets quashed when the dice rolls happens. The design leans into frustration and disappointment. It would just take a small change to avoid this, to create a situation where siege events happen intermittently for example.

2. Explicit dice rolls can create bad beat feelings. The game needs RNG, but when the rolls are explicit and in your face so to speak they can create unnecessary negative reactions. Again, the design leans into frustration and disappointment. An easy change to avoid this would be to embed the rolls in the mechanic. No difference result-wise, but better for the human psychology.
 
  • 1Like
  • 1Haha
  • 1
  • 1
Reactions:
The EU4 design with explicit siege phases and dice rolls does not work well from a psychological perspective.

1. To have a set and explicit siege phase duration creates a negative waiting situation. In such a situation you know that nothing can happen during the wait and it just becomes a drawn out and slightly frustrating time. It can also create hopes and expectations that regularly gets quashed when the dice rolls happens. The design leans into frustration and disappointment. It would just take a small change to avoid this, to create a situation where siege events happen intermittently for example.

2. Explicit dice rolls can create bad beat feelings. The game needs RNG, but when the rolls are explicit and in your face so to speak they can create unnecessary negative reactions. Again, the design leans into frustration and disappointment. An easy change to avoid this would be to embed the rolls in the mechanic. No difference result-wise, but better for the human psychology.
I guess hiding the dreaded percentage can help psychologically. Some other display would be nice, a display that shows a general progress in terms of losses to attrition, supplies, morale, the state of the sieging army and the state of the defenders. Of course, when not actively checking, it can a small bar of sorts and when you hover over and click on it, it expands showing more info.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Feels kinda weird to still have "Food Shortages" as a possible Dice Roll from a Siege, when Food is no longer abstracted as much as in EU4.
 
  • 4Like
Reactions:

Enhanced Grazing Mechanics with Climate Variations

Proposal:​

Integrate a comprehensive climate system into the grazing mechanic to reflect various environmental factors that affect cavalry units, including seasonal changes and natural events. This will add depth and realism to gameplay, influencing strategic planning and logistics throughout the game.

Detailed Implementation:

1. Grazing and Climate Effects:

  • Winter:
    -
    Grazing availability is significantly reduced or halted. Cavalry units stationed in affected areas will face increased attrition and reduced morale.
    Strategic Option: Halting the army and waiting for spring becomes a viable strategy to avoid severe penalties.

  • Monsoon Floods:
    -
    Heavy rains can lead to temporary loss of grazing lands due to flooding.
    Effect: Increases attrition and reduces cavalry effectiveness.
    Strategic Option: Players can seek temporary shelter or use supply depots to mitigate effects.

  • Drought Events:
    -Prolonged dry periods can reduce grazing lands' productivity.
    Effect: Applies penalties to cavalry units and can lead to higher attrition.
    Strategic Option: Implement emergency measures like enhanced forage storage or trade agreements to maintain supplies.
2. Climate Variations:

  • Spring Thaw:
    -After winter, thawing can temporarily make some areas marshy and difficult to traverse.
    Effect: Slows down army movement and affects grazing until the terrain stabilizes.
    Strategic Option: Plan campaigns to avoid early spring movements or use specialized units for navigating difficult terrain.

  • Heatwaves:
    -Extreme heat can reduce grass growth and increase the need for water.
    Effect: Penalties to cavalry effectiveness and higher water consumption.
    Strategic Option: Establish additional supply depots or negotiate water access with allies.

  • Storms and Hurricanes:
    -
    Severe storms can damage infrastructure and temporarily disrupt grazing lands.
    Effect: Short-term disruptions in grazing availability and increased logistical challenges.
    Strategic Option: Reinforce logistics and adapt strategies to account for sudden disruptions.
3. Grazing Map Mode:

  • Dynamic Map Mode: The Grazing Lands map mode should reflect real-time changes due to seasonal variations and natural events. It will highlight areas with current grazing availability and update based on environmental factors.
  • Forecasting Tools: Integrate forecasting tools within the map mode to predict upcoming climate events and their potential impact on grazing lands.
4. Technological and Strategic Adaptations:

  • Technological Advances: Developments in logistics and technology will help mitigate some climate effects, such as improved forage storage and mobile grazing units.
  • Adaptive Strategies: Introduce new strategies for managing cavalry units during adverse weather, such as using specialized units for different climate conditions or implementing temporary fixes like mobile supply units.
5. Strategic Planning:

  • Custom Routes: Utilize the Grazing Lands map mode to plan routes that optimize grazing availability. Consider seasonal and climatic changes when planning military campaigns.
  • Emergency Measures: Prepare for climate-related disruptions by having contingency plans, such as pre-positioning supplies or negotiating resource access in advance.

Possible Benefits:​

  • Realistic Gameplay: Reflects the impact of diverse climate conditions on cavalry logistics, adding authenticity and challenge.
  • Strategic Depth: Encourages players to consider a variety of environmental factors in their strategic planning, enhancing the complexity of gameplay.
  • Dynamic Challenges: Provides players with evolving challenges throughout the game, keeping the experience engaging and immersive.
By incorporating these climate variations and strategic options into the grazing mechanic, players will face a more nuanced and realistic set of logistical challenges, influencing their strategies and decision-making throughout their campaigns.

Now, what do you think?
 
Last edited:
  • 2Like
Reactions:
I don't want CK3 sieges. I just want EU5 to not carry over bad mechanics from EU4. And I hope Johan takes another look at the design and tries to evolve it a couple of steps.
EU4 sieges aren't bad mechanics. They're a successful attempt at including a bit of randomisation to the lengths that sieges will take, which is a good thing. Can it be frustrating when you fail multiple 42% chances in a row? Yep. But frustration doesn't make the mechanic bad.
 
  • 4
  • 2
Reactions:
I find it baffling that people want the downgrade that is the CK3 sieges over EU4s...
Why? CK3 sieges are far more logical. What is a siege? Usually it's surrounding a fort/castle until the people starve and must surrender. How long a people can survive a siege has a finite timeframe that can be estimated. Various factors such as deaths and spoilage can extend or decrease the length of the siege. It's not "oh, another month has passed... You all ready to surrender yet? No. Okie dokey."

Nothing more annoying than you and an opponent both having a siege going on at the same time and knowing whichever one is lucky first will not only win the fort, but also get a defensive battle on their opponent's fort. It's why artillery barrage was such a powerful mechanic in EUIV. Just take an all infantry merc company, keep a few cannons with it, breach the walls with mana, and assault. Forget about all the luck nonsense. Thankfully that is being removed.
 
  • 2
  • 2
Reactions: