• 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.
 
Bold changes to gameplay! It looks interesting, and I'm curious to see how it plays out. Probably a bit slower altogether, which is fine by me.

Am I right in my interpretation of the FL screenshot that - due to changed calculation mechanics - the army sizes will be smaller?

Also: is there already a name for the new expansion? Can't remember having seen one...

Good job, guys!

Oh, and I'm soo going to play England. Amphib unfortified provinces + parliamentary system + possibility to go tall = sweet!
 
And one should remember that while forts are tactically defensive, they can be strategically offensive ;)

Tactics and strategy are one and the same, there is no difference.
Also, π is exactly three. :D
 
  • 2
  • 1
Reactions:
My reading of the DD is that larger forts could have a garrison of 25000 or 35000, which are huge garrisons compared to the previous system. Even if you defeated the enemy army you'd need a large doomstack just to siege one, so I'm wondering if we'll also see some changes to siege mechanics?
 
  • 3
  • 1
Reactions:
Just me who thinks the Burgundian situation is not reflective of it's actual game state on patch release?

Assuming normal mechanics, there's no real way Burgundy can hold that amount of vassals, and to my knowledge, Burgundy was not inherently different from any other European feudal state, so it wouldn't warrant a special government like Shogunate.

I think. Feel free to correct me.
 
  • 4
Reactions:
A slightly more realistic solution rather than having ZOCs prevent movement is to severely reduce the supply limit within the ZOC to such an extent that taking the fort would basically be essential to keeping your forces in supply. Unfortunately this would probably mean manpower death for the AI. So stopping movement seems like a fair compromise.

I still think an extra penalty to supply limit might be a good addition. Being able to reduce supply to your enemy by controlling fortresses would add to the depth of strategy. Leaving forts behind undefended would be risky.

As I suggested earlier being able to garrison fortresses you have taken would also be desirable.
 
  • 3
Reactions:
My reading of the DD is that larger forts could have a garrison of 25000 or 35000, which are huge garrisons compared to the previous system. Even if you defeated the enemy army you'd need a large doomstack just to siege one, so I'm wondering if we'll also see some changes to siege mechanics?
also, assaults are suicidal even on level 1 forts
 
  • 6
Reactions:
"Overseas will provide -2 land and -2 naval forcelimit"
I assume that this is on top of the bonuses they have from development? It would suck if they reduced your FL :/

High level forts are great, especially with that fancy zone of control, but there'll have to be some changes to attrition surely.
I look forward to the next dev diary!


Also, Burgundy!
EDIT: Speaking of Burgundy, why don't they get FL from vassals? That sucks.
They'll be easy pickings for France now. :(

EDIT2: What is "The Devout"?
 
  • 3
Reactions:
The growth of FL with development should be large enough to produce enough force limit to conquer forts for relevant time frame. There wouldn't be sense in HRE for example to have forts with 10-15k garrison and OPMs with force limits of under 10k. They wouldn't be able to conquer anything and they would have more troups in fort than they could field in battle o_O. I think this won't be the problem, wealthier OPMs can even in current version produce quite large armies for their size. Its not unusual to see for example 3-province Hansa with 30k stack.
 
  • 2
Reactions:
and it sounds like you can just wander around in the new world and africa and capture everything instantly.

Correct me if I'm wrong but I don't remember reading of sieges in the New World or Africa that lasted for months, which is what the current system entails unless the attacking force is vastly superior in numbers and/or tech. The proposed change may not be the ideal solution but the status quo certainly isn't either.
 
  • 4
Reactions:
Read please fragments I am quoting. As far as I understood, Whiskey Glen asked if Hanseatic level 3 fort will on day one take control over level 1 fort in SLesvig. Johan said yes.
It has nothing to do with moving army and sieges.

no. thats not what i said
 
  • 4
Reactions:
Correct me if I'm wrong but I don't remember reading of sieges in the New World or Africa that lasted for months, which is what the current system entails unless the attacking force is vastly superior in numbers and/or tech. The proposed change may not be the ideal solution but the status quo certainly isn't either.

Depends. Mali and Ethiopia certainly would have forts.

Incans and Mesoamericans would likely have forts too. Well, at least the Incans would.
 
  • 2
Reactions:
Tactics and strategy are one and the same, there is no difference.
Also, π is exactly three. :D
of course it is exactly 3, the bible said so!
 
Sweet! Looking forward to this changes, gj Paradox.

So I could now somewhere in narrow area in mountain range build a nice fort or two, place an army there and voila, you shall not pass! : - ) Increased garrison is also great, no more 2000 people taking Paris.

Belgrade in 1941 was taken by 7 men of SS.
 
Love the new fort changes that gives them more importance and life!

If you like forts, travel along the Rhine river, they are everywhere along it. This will be greatly represented in example for the German minors with the extra fort level in capitals I think.
 
Let me ask...

war!
I got 50k troops my enemy 45k. I cant go into his country cuz first I need to siege his fortress (25k). his army is hidding behind the fortress, I can't get to it. and now:

I start sieging this 25k fortress my 50k => he uses SORTIE => battle starts: 25k vs 50k => his army join to the battle => 70k vs 50k => I go back => his army is hidding behind the fortress => result? impasse?
 
  • 3
  • 1
Reactions: