• 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.
Not acceptable. If the army would replenish like in EU3, then it would be only a matter of time when that stack was 100% on the other side.
That's something EU2 did much better anyway. I always hated replenishing armies in EU3, but I guess they're here to stay.
 
I'm pretty sure there hasn't been a single case of an army crossing the Amazon rainforest or Sahara desert (outside the one route already present in EU3) in the time period.

still let's not forget how hannibal and his elephantes crossed the himalayan
 
Originally Posted by Pied-Noir
That's something EU2 did much better anyway. I always hated replenishing armies in EU3, but I guess they're here to stay.

Wow, no. That was horrible, despite it being more realistic.

I don't have an issue with replenishing armies, it saves a huge amount of tedious merging and deleting of understrength units. In EU3 when units replenished they lost some experience to simulate the effects of fresh recruits. Provided checks that this, and limits on where units can replenish and how quickly the can, are in place I think the replenishing armies should stay.
 
I don't have an issue with replenishing armies, it saves a huge amount of tedious merging and deleting of understrength units. In EU3 when units replenished they lost some experience to simulate the effects of fresh recruits. Provided checks that this, and limits on where units can replenish and how quickly the can, are in place I think the replenishing armies should stay.

What?
 
If you check out the image gallery that comes with Destructoid's EUIV article you can see an American Revolutionary War soldier. That means the game extends to the 1770s/1780s.

Good catch.

I think the four agents are merchant, colonist, spy, missionary (or spy, colonist, merchant, missionary). The army, administrative and diplomatic points make diplomats and magistrates redundant.