• 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 want to tell the guys with the weapons that they have to starve so the people without the weapons get their food?
The issues are that local people, who know the area, hide food away and, when things get desperate, ambush the foragers. Ideally, it should be some sort of sliding scale of speed malus and/or attrition as the food gets depleted below what the population need.
 
It does look promising, though i cant say the same about the systems currently presented. If you only have a set amount of food for your army and you besiege a fort, why should RNG be the deciding factor if it goes through or not? If it supposedly is a gamble for the siege to succed or not, then it can either last longer than your food supply or not, thus screwing your planning regardless of your actions.

This is one of the weaker aspects i think, nothing tangible is really in the hands of the player as far as i can see. Whats the point of having good Leaders, good logistics and siege capability when the game can arbitrarily just say "No". All that effort for naught.

Forts should have their own internal supplies, not just randomly holding out forever because the hidden dice said so.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
A majority of people find reading it in rows easier though.

Not really for me, 84/100 is perfectly clear with all the relevant info right there in one focus-point, not two. If you want maximum clarity, it would think splitting & centring on one row so it says 'Strength 84/100 Max' would be clearest, if maybe redundant. Maybe use a tooltip?
 
  • 6Like
  • 1
Reactions:
Not really for me, 84/100 is perfectly clear with all the relevant info right there in one focus-point, not two. If you want maximum clarity, it would think splitting & centring on one row so it says 'Strength 84/100 Max' would be clearest, if maybe redundant. Maybe use a tooltip?
Yeah max isnt even needed i think

I like rows but here they use 2 rows when 1 is needed:
Strength 84 / 100

Perfectly clear I think
 
  • 3Like
  • 1
Reactions:
no, you need to have auxiliary units moving up and down to them.
Wouldn't that already solve the permanent siege mode? If this was a constant thing and your armies had less supplies on hand then you would starve if your enemy kills the supply trains, if this is automated to some extent it would be engaging than frustrating to deal with I think.
 
From what I can see, automatic control in Project Caesar seems to be very similar to Imperator. I have a few questions and concerns about this system, just based on my experience with Imperator's control system.

One of the most frustrating things in Imperator is how, for some reason, the state capital is never automatically controlled, even though you have occupied all the forts in the state. This doesn't matter much for your own territory, since you can move the capital to a fortified territory, but this is incredibly frustrating when fighting an opponent, and they're able to send a group of 500 men over there to siege down the province capital, which means you cannot take it in the peace deal, since in Imperator you can only take occupied territories. This means you need to send an entire army back to go an occupy a tiny village which doesnt get automatically controlled by the nearby fort unlike all the other neighboring villages because it's the "capital". Please tell me that forts in Caesar actually occupy all the land in their province, even if it's the province capital.

Or at the very least we dont need to occupy land in order to demand it for peace (an eu4-style "occupy a nearby fort" requirement still makes sense obviously)

Another minor, but pertinent question I have is regarding unfortified provinces, since those are controlled only by the province capital. These were also frustrating in Imperator, since the AI could and would send tiny 500-1000 stacks to go siege these while you were busy sieging other stuff. It would be cool if you could spend money/resources/manpower to build some sort of "field fortications" in controlled enemy provinces, basically a cheap crappy fort that a real army could siege down or assault pretty quickly, but deters the AI from sending tiny stacks over while your main army is off sieging some fort.
 
  • 2Like
Reactions:
I love what you are saying regarding naval control and coastal sieges. It absolutely makes sense that naval control for the defender would mean the defender is constantly resupplied, causing the siege to take forever or require an assault. In previous games, it was far too easy to take Candia, Ragusa, or Constantinople with no fleet. This change will make naval gameplay much more rewarding, and enable better gameplay as tags like Ragusa, Venice, or Riga being able to fend off larger armies by maintaining a navy while playing tall. It will also make holding scattered colonial ports in places like Africa much more practical.

This may not be in the cards, but I also think it would be a great change to allow regular armies to hold up in fortresses (to some reasonable limit). In previous games, if a 4k stack gets caught by a larger stack, it is just doomed. It would be a very interesting change to allow armies to hole up in forts for sieges. This would massively boost keeping smaller armies as they could hold out for reinforcements, or for things to change. The drama of rushing to save your small army, hoping against hope for an ally to save you, or waiting only to see the enemy call off the siege for one reason or another would be an improvement. The food system would synergize well with this new feature. It is also fairly common historically for armies to hole up in forts, especially fortified cities.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
1. I would like to ask will we able to annex parts of a province aka "locations" or if we'll only have more "granular" map painting if the nation itself that we want to annex is little ? (HRE states for example)
2. I would like to ask if it's possible to have/make a city state /marchal or somekind of vassal with parts of our territory ?
3. As for Army, will we have more unit types ? Can new decisions, policies or gov reforms give new unit types ? Like dithmarschen's people rep or swiss guard
 
Yeah, a "travel time" before bonuses apply might be best..

I disagree. I feel like this is where experience would shine.

Armies that had experience tended to be well disciplined. If their leader died, they could still fight in the battle. They should take a morale hit, however experience would impact their ability to continue fighting as a cohesive unit without the general.

Experience would also abstract the army’s ability to function with a “field promotion” until a new general arrived.

That would open the ability for techs to impact fighting ability without generals as time goes on. Example - army without general gets +x% to morale. The bonuses wouldn’t be huge, but would be more realistic.
 
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.

While your levies do not reinforce sounds very logical in a medieval war because most of the levies were raised at the start of the war. But I was thinking about GOT wars where even during movement on the map, if there were sufficient "population" in a location, some would have been recruited, as levies, support reinforcement or even professional regiments. Not much, but like 10 (at the start)-100 (more later) levies / month extra in each location? Causing devastation or whatever penalty a moving army does in a location besides food.
In GOT they still got like prisoners and extra people that would fight for the passing army, even after the levies were raised by the enemy.
This would further increase the war consideration, tactics and types of combat styles. ie You might conquer a large portion of the enemy locations but by the time you end the war and return "home" you realize your entire country was sacked and end up in rebellion because of the guerilla tactics.

I have been watching this thread since the first one and I am getting more and more excited. It seems that there is a depth and strategy in this project that will set the stage for a new Era in that GSG, even for Paradox.
 
Yeah, a "travel time" before bonuses apply might be best..

Another possibility might be to have an option to assign a second general to army as the next-in-command, to take over if the first general is reassigned or killed. This way the army could, for the price of occupying two leaders, deal with losing a general in the field without entirely losing all leader bonuses, or having to wait for a new leader to arrive and get settled in from scratch.
 
food access yes

If you have an army deep in enemy territory when peace is made and there is no way for that army to march back to your lands without going through neutral territory, is there any way to get military and food access from those neutrals through the treaty? Can hostile neutrals just refuse and effectively bar your army from returning home forever? Will there be any exile mode for armies?
 
Polesie Admiral said:
can your army go thru neutral country without access and this will starve them(and also severe the relations)?

I think there should not be any restrictions on army movement as long as there is no geographical obstacle and ZoC. Since we have food supplies and logistics concept now, I think this is something that can be considered.

If the army enters the neutral territory that they have no military access, this can severe the relations with them, and even give the other country a CB and/or option to join the war depending on the army's length of stay, foraging the local food, etc.

It was extremely annoying to play the military access granted/revoked game with the AI. Having exiled armies in the middle of the war because of that abstraction was neither fun nor realistic.