For sure. I wouldn't mind going back to a CK2 style tech system (more, less impactful techs) not tied to culture. To be honest, CK2's tech system is probably my favorite from any PDX game.
- 2
- 1
-
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.
A serious linguistic question: can we call 'horse-manpower' – 'horsepower'?
- 1
- 1
I thought about it. It would make perfect sense semantically, but "horsepower" has already different meaning (a unit of measurement of power) so it could be a bit misleading.
- 2
Yes, I think Herd mechanics could be adapted to Feudal and other Government types for this purpose.
- 1
Cont. after having slept on it.
If going with the 'combination of buildings' option, here is how I would have it roughly work:
Archery grounds = Archers
Archery grounds + blacksmith = Crossbowmen
Barracks = Pikemen
Barracks + blacksmith = Heavy infantry
-> OR Just blacksmith = Heavy infantry
Stables = Light horsemen
Stables + blacksmith = Heavy horsemen
Stables + archery grounds = Horse archers
Remaining levies = Skirmishers
Cultural troops could be handled the way CK2 did it: via cultural buildings.
Considering the average/'default' amount of building slots in CK3 is 4, this would mean that you'd need at most 2 slots for the stronger troops like heavy cavalry and crossbowmen, making them a slightly bigger investment. But, this also means you 'progress' towards them. You would first build and upgrade stables, netting you light cavalry, until you're rich enough to upgrade to heavy cavalry. This means you won't have to 'backtrack' your buildings when you can finally afford more expensive units. A slight balance problem is heavy infantry vs pikemen; and I'm not sure whether heavy infantry should be necessary better -- and thus more expensive than -- or on roughly the same ground as pikemen, with whichever is stronger depending on the situation. This issue kind of stems from the fact that there's no difference between a well-equipped pikeman and a 'less-equipped' pikeman, while 'heavy infantry' is obviously always well-equipped.
Aren't well-equipped pikemen technically heavy intrantry though?
If going with the 'combination of buildings' option, here is how I would have it roughly work:
Archery grounds = Archers
Archery grounds + blacksmith = Crossbowmen
Barracks = Pikemen
Barracks + blacksmith = Heavy infantry
-> OR Just blacksmith = Heavy infantry
Stables = Light horsemen
Stables + blacksmith = Heavy horsemen
Stables + archery grounds = Horse archers
Remaining levies = Skirmishers
Cultural troops could be handled the way CK2 did it: via cultural buildings.
Considering the average/'default' amount of building slots in CK3 is 4, this would mean that you'd need at most 2 slots for the stronger troops like heavy cavalry and crossbowmen, making them a slightly bigger investment. But, this also means you 'progress' towards them. You would first build and upgrade stables, netting you light cavalry, until you're rich enough to upgrade to heavy cavalry. This means you won't have to 'backtrack' your buildings when you can finally afford more expensive units. A slight balance problem is heavy infantry vs pikemen; and I'm not sure whether heavy infantry should be necessary better -- and thus more expensive than -- or on roughly the same ground as pikemen, with whichever is stronger depending on the situation. This issue kind of stems from the fact that there's no difference between a well-equipped pikeman and a 'less-equipped' pikeman, while 'heavy infantry' is obviously always well-equipped.
Aren't well-equipped pikemen technically heavy intrantry though?
The economy buildings providing the levies is also a really good idea. I was at first wondering how levies would be provided but yeah, economy buildings seems like the most obvious choice. But I wouldn't call levies in this system 'manpower', since it's not exactly that. Manpower in EU4 acts as a sort of 'pool' solely for recruiting and replenishing troops, that is theoretically infinite, although there is a manpower cap; here the amount of troops you can have is dependent on the force limit, though you can exceed it. I think levies should act more like a force limit than as manpower, limiting how much you can recruit, but being replenished during war as they are now. A fully adequate manpower system would, I truly believe, require a population system, however rudimentary. I doubt Paradox would implement a population system a la Sinews of War.
As for horse-manpower, I think this would be a bit too much, and just having stables convert levies into cavalry would be adequate enough -- and realistic for the CK3 team to add.
As for horse-manpower, I think this would be a bit too much, and just having stables convert levies into cavalry would be adequate enough -- and realistic for the CK3 team to add.
- 2
- 1
Wouldn't heavy cav be Barracks + stables + blacksmith?
Barracks is where the man sleeps, stable is where the horse is stabled and blacksmith is needed to equip both.
Barracks is where the man sleeps, stable is where the horse is stabled and blacksmith is needed to equip both.
- 1
I think with that, we're getting into territory where we'll soon be asking where the blacksmith gets his iron from; which I don't think fits with the devs' vision for this game. EU5 release when?
And wouldn't that mean that every troop would require a barrack or camp? In my opinion, these things can be abstracted away, with 'barracks' in this situation serving the same function as in vanilla: flavour title for buildings that have something to do with pikemen and heavy infantry.
- 1
Levies were expected to go to war with what they had. Common weapons used were spears, bows, and other missile weapons like javelins. They would not have the protective equipment to make them heavy infantry. And crossbows would have been too expensive for the average levy to provide, not to mention the nobility wouldn’t want the lower classes armed with basically a prototype gun.
- 1
By 'levies' I mean less the specific "peasant" militia, and more the general fighting forces of a realm: some peasants, but also, or primarily, the well-to-do freemen, and even some nobles. I suppose for less confusion the term 'levy' could be substituted for something else.
- 1
My idea: instead of using buildings, the player create an army with a template, and the manpower will be used to fill the army, like in HOI4.
You can even copy Total war and have the army gain experience, unlock special skills, etc... like an accolade.
- 1
- 1
But how is this different from vanilla except with the addition of a manpower pool?
- 1
Crossbows were very expensive and not something that a non semi professional warrior could afford. The levy consists of these men who assist the more professional soldiers.
- 1
Another day, another post I make about why CK2 had a better levies system than CK3.
This time I'll say that CK3 eliminates the feudal aspect that the game is built upon from warfare. It makes the entire army a resource personally owned by your ruler, devoid of representation of your vassals. Your vassals merely provide the gold and "levies" to replenish your personally owned army - which makes your vassals ignorable.
CK2's levies were a portion of your vassals' armies, represented as different units. Each of these units came with their own personal commander. For a game centered around feudal relations and characters it makes absolutely no sense to eliminate this system in favor of a system where the army has no representation of the vassals that comprise it. On the contrary - as the "successor" to CK2 I'd expect CK3 to have a system where you can have more interactions with the vassals and commanders that assemble your army.
This time I'll say that CK3 eliminates the feudal aspect that the game is built upon from warfare. It makes the entire army a resource personally owned by your ruler, devoid of representation of your vassals. Your vassals merely provide the gold and "levies" to replenish your personally owned army - which makes your vassals ignorable.
CK2's levies were a portion of your vassals' armies, represented as different units. Each of these units came with their own personal commander. For a game centered around feudal relations and characters it makes absolutely no sense to eliminate this system in favor of a system where the army has no representation of the vassals that comprise it. On the contrary - as the "successor" to CK2 I'd expect CK3 to have a system where you can have more interactions with the vassals and commanders that assemble your army.
- 5
- 2
- 1