Dismantle forts at the negotiating table

[Riekopo]

I think that we should be able to force our enemies to dismantle their forts at the negotiating table. Anyone else agree? This is a function that is in Victoria 2, but it would also be historical and relevant for the EU4 timeframe.

Edit: I'd like to add another idea to my post. Along with being able to force your enemies to dismantle their forts. I would like to be able to force them to limit their army and navy size through a "disarmament" or "arms treaty".

 

[masterpaul666]

Everyone? in the late game the bigget complain is how people carpet their countries in lvl 8 forts, making wars insanley slow.

How about increasing base manpower, but in exchange, make garrison use manpower? Sure, you can have land that is near impossible to conquer, but, can you supply an army to go with it?

I'm sure the numbers could be balanced toward something interesting, plus, it makes not sense that garrisson of 8k are just magicaly free spawned out of nowhere, non stop. Fight an enemy long enough, and they'l run out of troops in their forts, makes sense to me.

 

[Granathar]

How about increasing base manpower, but in exchange, make garrison use manpower? Sure, you can have land that is near impossible to conquer, but, can you supply an army to go with it?

I'm sure the numbers could be balanced toward something interesting, plus, it makes not sense that garrisson of 8k are just magicaly free spawned out of nowhere, non stop. Fight an enemy long enough, and they'l run out of troops in their forts, makes sense to me.

This is very good idea actually. 1 fort level = 1k manpower "frozen". But mothballing should "unfreeze" these just like cancelling recruitment.

 

[lolada]

Just nerf fort levels from 1-2-4-6-8-9 to 1-2-3-4-5-6 and wars will be much smoother and faster in lategame. Early on you can carpet siege and conquer land quite quicky. You are limited by overextension and warscore. Lategame forts are the biggest obstacle, but admin efficiency goes crazy - might need an adjustment or two here. Lvl8 - lvl9 forts are actually very artificial and crude as implemented - there are often lots of them and every one of them locks 25k+ soldiers for a long time. And to be worse, without lots of artillery those 25k men can sit there for years without conquering forts.

Administrative efficiency or warscore lategame might need some change - world conquests might be too easy if the forts are nerfed, but nerfing those ridiculous forts would be good move anyway.

 

[Granathar]

Actually a little boost to AT generation of forts would be nice. It's really hard to pump AT this way. For bigger countries it's actually impossible.

 

[Gratak]

Just nerf fort levels from 1-2-4-6-8-9 to 1-2-3-4-5-6 and wars will be much smoother and faster in lategame. Early on you can carpet siege and conquer land quite quicky. You are limited by overextension and warscore. Lategame forts are the biggest obstacle, but admin efficiency goes crazy - might need an adjustment or two here. Lvl8 - lvl9 forts are actually very artificial and crude as implemented - there are often lots of them and every one of them locks 25k+ soldiers for a long time. And to be worse, without lots of artillery those 25k men can sit there for years without conquering forts.

Administrative efficiency or warscore lategame might need some change - world conquests might be too easy if the forts are nerfed, but nerfing those ridiculous forts would be good move anyway.

Don't think that changes much about WC. The last 200 years are only about optimizing admin and diplo points. Forts are only a problem if someone large is still alive when lvl 8 forts come, which you tend to avoid if you go for WC.

 

[Czone]

When you reach lvl 8 forts there are no smaller nations on the map in MP, and anyone below 200k standing army is irrelevant as a military power.

Forts slow down the game a lot in general, to be fair. The best way to handle forts, in my opinion, would be to have supply lines to your armies. Forts would not block movement on adjacent province, but block supply lines. This means you cannot walk over a fort, but you can walk past it (just like in real life), at the risk of getting cut off from supplies and dying horribly. It would add some skill to PvP, which has been made less and less skillbased with for example the removal of lowered combat width on mountains and removal of stack cycling (one of the silliest decisions made). It would also make it possible to have some actual momentum in wars, instead of each war in multiplayer boiling down to who has the most manpower until lategame, at which point it is more who got to the mountainous wargoal first or who has the better economy for supporting mercenaries.

 

[shinshin variety]

Like a seperate maintenance cost set in the building?

Yeah.

My MP mod nerfs forts to 2/3/4/5 which is a good temporary fix, but because that then reduces their maintenance it cause more forts to be built. But at least you can actually siege them I guess.

 

[Van der Gent]

Denmark in the time frame had a different strategy regarding Swedish fortresses, they quite often either ransomed key forts or burnt and teared them down before handing them back.

 

[durbal]

I suspect, that at least part of the problem isn't forts in itself, but that money supply and costs aren't properly balanced throughout the game.

In the early game you are somewhat encouraged to manage your money, so you can use your surplus to develop your country with buildings. You are also conquering already developed provinces. But in the late game, the game would be over before your can get your return of investment on buildings. And there are also the very profitable trade nodes, which are well known to all players and they have migrated to one of them in the late game.

So you have this stupendous amount of money to burn, and what do you burn them on? Canals! No... You burn them on level 8 forts and mercs.

So before working on forts (and mercs), I would suggest that someone looks at the money problem, which I think is the root of the problem.

So I have no definitive suggestion on how to solve this, but things to consider:

• nerf to production buildings, which can currently quadruple production and trade income (+300%, while tax income is only +60%)
• add a mechanic for "monopolized" trade nodes, which significantly reduces trade value there (not only for collection nodes, but also pass through nodes).
  
• reduce the amount of money people can make lategame through a new modifier: bureaucracy, which starts roughly at 1700 and ramps up until the end of the game
  
• tweak the cost increase over time for advisors, ships and army maintenance

The economy is problematic for sure. The problem is very simple -- money supply increases while costs stay the same. Only advisers and improved buildings rise in cost and not relevant to global or regional money supply either. Army costs stay the same, leading to massive merc spam.

 

[Stormbringer]

Perhaps it would make sense to have the option to demand that forts within, say, two provinces of your borders be dismantled. You can weaken your enemies for future wars, but you can't just demand that a large country dismantle all of their forts. It makes wars on your border easier for the future, but does not guarantee that you can steamroll a huge country in the next war? Just 2c.

 

[grommile]

Forts slow down the game a lot in general, to be fair. The best way to handle forts, in my opinion, would be to have supply lines to your armies.

Sure, if you want to lose literally every player that understands period logistics.

 

[Czone]

Sure, if you want to lose literally every player that understands period logistics.

Please enlighten me.

 

[grommile]

Please enlighten me.

The cost in livestock fodder of shipping an army's worth of food any significant distance is prohibitive. (Unless you happen to be clinging to a riverbank or coastline.)

Province supply limits and looting, on the other hand, go some distance towards being an abstract reflection of the effect of an army being in an area.

 

[Tavior]

I was talking from a multiplayer perspective.

In my opinion and experience. Level 8 forts are way too cheap, and as a player you place them everywhere.

I don't know how you play!

I struggle to field a level 8 fort for each 50 development I have. I usually end up with MORE military development than tax or income. If I am really lucky enough to be able to create a HUGE trading empire then maybe even then I usually spend more on army and adviser than fort to be frank with you.

I don't know how you are spamming level 8 fort everywhere. I have over 3000 hours into EU 4 and I certainly don't lack the knowledge to make money.

 

[Zephyrum]

As much as I'd love to have a force-to-disarm option on peace (I mean, it's been done many times), I think I'd still prefer a peace option that forces the nation to give you maps of regions and maybe an 60% WS option "take all maps" or something.

 

[lolada]

As much as I'd love to have a force-to-disarm option on peace (I mean, it's been done many times), I think I'd still prefer a peace option that forces the nation to give you maps of regions and maybe an 60% WS option "take all maps" or something.

You can't take maps while in a war ugh peacefully or militarily ...what a nonsense. Lots of weird mechanics..

 

[Sfan]

Well, the map mechanic is the most silly in Paradox. Especially when you got this Portugal under 100% warscore, you want to full annex them but you have no freakin idea where their last province is, because they have a random colony in Northern America, so you spend 2 years with a conquistador looking for the province to actually NOT find it and not get their colonial nations for free. Loads of fun.

 

[Gratak]

I was talking from a multiplayer perspective.

In my opinion and experience. Level 8 forts are way too cheap, and as a player you place them everywhere.

I don't know how you play!

I struggle to field a level 8 fort for each 50 development I have. I usually end up with MORE military development than tax or income. If I am really lucky enough to be able to create a HUGE trading empire then maybe even then I usually spend more on army and adviser than fort to be frank with you.

I don't know how you are spamming level 8 fort everywhere. I have over 3000 hours into EU 4 and I certainly don't lack the knowledge to make money.

In my opinion this shows the problem very well. If you build as many forts as the games suggest as "ideal" (in terms of getting the full AT bonus, which the AI seems to be kind of going for if they have the money), this may work alright with lvl 2 forts, but in late game with lvl 8 forts it's insane. E.g. France is like 1k dev. That's 20 lvl 8 forts alone. Even worse in regions that get heavily developed by small nations...

 

[Czone]

The cost in livestock fodder of shipping an army's worth of food any significant distance is prohibitive. (Unless you happen to be clinging to a riverbank or coastline.)

Province supply limits and looting, on the other hand, go some distance towards being an abstract reflection of the effect of an army being in an area.

Supply is not just food, though? Besides, this would simulate very well the way protecting against nomadic incursions worked. You cannot stop them from getting into your land, but you can stop them from getting out by combining forts with light cavalry.
I also recall there being this huge supply line from Spain to the Low Countries during the Dutch Revolt.

Regardless, the realism argument holds little water if someone can block movement over areas of hundreds of kilometres of steppes by building a fort in one province.

 

[Martynios]

Supply is not just food, though? Besides, this would simulate very well the way protecting against nomadic incursions worked. You cannot stop them from getting into your land, but you can stop them from getting out by combining forts with light cavalry.
I also recall there being this huge supply line from Spain to the Low Countries during the Dutch Revolt.

Regardless, the realism argument holds little water if someone can block movement over areas of hundreds of kilometres of steppes by building a fort in one province.

Building a wall to keep the nomads out was exactly what the Chinese did.
The Spanish Road was a route bring armies to the Low Countries, not supplies.