ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 6 ม.ค. 2023
- I mainly wanted to talk about unit pips, but I decided impromptu that I'll mention a few things about army composition. I would say the bit on unit pips are far more interesting and have more important messages.
Tl;dw:
1) Cannons are mostly for sieging in single player. You should mainly focus on sieging and try to fight enemies with lower than combat width -- that is to say, fighting those multiplayer style big battles in single player is almost always a waste of resources. Once you are more comfortable with the game and have some space to think about these things, you should stop adhering to the usual "at tech X, I will have compositions of A/B/C" style guidelines that people put out. You should instead scout the enemy and come up with the right frontline size and backline size on the fly. Try to have (enemy's frontline + 2) frontlines on your end and "enough cannons" in the backline.
2) Unit pips are FAR over emphasized in strategic value/depth for the game. 99.999999% of EU4 players in single player do not need to concern themselves with the so-called optimal unit type, which does not exist as a blanket notion. Calculations for that rely on way too many assumptions that makes it useless as a dogma to follow without understanding the underlying nuances. Also, most people don't seem to understand unit pips anyway when they make these calculations, so a lot of resources you can find online are indistinguishable from picking a random latest unit type.
Tl;dr for the tl;dw:
1) Best army composition is "enough to beat the enemy." Be dynamic and adjust based on the enemy you're fighting instead of whatever mil tech you are on.
2) Don't think about unit pips if your goal is to be good at the game. Just pick whatever latest type available and that's good enough.
---- - เกม
![เปิดบ้าน เปิด Supercar อั๋นโอกิ เคยเอา rolls Royce เเลกพระ องค์ละ 100 ล้าน l [Nickynachat]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/FeGwJwXauZ0/mqdefault.jpg)
I love these comfy little podcasts. I could listen to you theory craft or deep dives into eu4 mechanics for hours
Note: read description to avoid wasting time. If you want good to knows or fun facts, tune in.
I await MP experts players to correct any misinformation. I say this without sarcasm. Please do. I'm not a great authority on combat, though arguably, I'm an authority on winning wars in SP (which as I stressed rarely requires knowledge of combat). So my lack of knowledge in combat should give some clues on its relative value in single player.
Errors:
- I mention that cannon upgrades are linear. I forgot that there's one where you get to choose between small/large bla bla, so what I said there is just wrong.
About the cannon upgrades I would also mention that half of the cannon pips are added to the unit in front of them, so it's "more optimized" if you pick a cannon that has an even number of defensive pips
Also, an easy way to compute the number of cannons for the siege bonus is that you get 1 bonus per 2 regiments of cannons per fort building level, where fortless capital is lvl1, castle is lvl2, etc until star fort which is lvl5. So with a star fort you need 10k cannons to get +2 and 25k cannons to get +5
Please
make more of these, they help me sleep. They’re very relaxing
Your content is sooo good, very underrated
If army management was less tedious maybe I'd put more thought into optimizing it. Just following the spreadsheet (with some tweaks here and there) works just fine for me, at least in normal mode single player.
What spreadsheet? Ravens one?
Oh, the thing about defense pips being "wasted" by exceeding attack pips actually is huge for unit selection. Is that really how it works? It creates some interesting best-in-slot units if you know your match-ups, although they're definitely not intuitive since you have to know the pips of what you're going up against (for example, Tech 2 Africans vs other Africans want the more defensive spearmen instead of clubmen, since the infantry match-up is a wash either way but using spearman causes AI cav to "waste" a defense pip).
Man, cav as a Siam (+1 cav fire) horde with horde ideas a bit more expensive than infantry, but allowing you to easy win 2X size armies. You just need to reverse the rule 4 cav for army, and do 4 inf for cav army :)))) So cav is very useful in some scenarios. Polish cav is nuts, so you need it definitely. But you are right, for most countries cav is really not worth it, 4 regiments per army if you really want it :)
I agree, but I think there is a lot of opportunity cost lost in choosing SIA NI over other NIs suited for growing your country (i.e. ones with CCR).
interesting MP fact. it is especially used for Spain , where cannons have +1 pips. in late game cannons do more damage then infantry so you can use unusual composition with cannons in frontline and backline. in this situation you will do and get more usual and morale damage so it increase chance to stackwipe enemy reinforces
whats the background app called that youre using in the video ?
this is OneNote
what the f is this type of content.... I love it.
Regarding the "enemy frontline + 2" thing, don't you mean + 4? For example if enemy stack is 16 units, wouldn't I deal the most casualties if I engage with 20 units(16 inf 4 cav) instead of 18 units(14 inf 4 cav)?
I think if the enemy stack is 16 units, he is recommending 18 infantry. that would be enemy frontline + 2, you would have the larger frontline. this is because he is seeking to conserve resources: adding cavalry, whether 16/2 or 16/4, would be 210 ducats or 260 ducats (and 2k manpower) vs 180 ducats for pure infantry. Now he is relying on a heuristic/assumption here. That is: I only need to win battles by "just enough." And so while I will lose fewer troops and money by winning by a larger margin, it wont pay for the increased build/maintanence cost, or the manpower saved by spending the money wont be worth it. He has decided from his practical experience that he has something else better to spend his money on.
@@desideriuserasmus9158 Makes sense. Thanks for the explanation.
On this patch you build cannons on tech 16 (or 17 i can't remember but the one that gives you +1 artillery fire)
you can build a full backline of cannons at Tech 13 but it's really committal and expensive
I would argue you should not build full backline of cannons even on tech 16 in single player. Because you just don't need it to win battles. If your advice was meant for MP, then I trust you. I don't have any experiences to say better or worse.
Spain and Aragon get +1 artillery fire, for Spain it’s a tradition and comes later for Aragon. In that circumstance it viable to build infantry to combat width and a full backline? I find that lucky nations scale their armies more quickly than I do.
@@KuhulAjawMapGaming What do you mean viable? Unless cannons were so overtuned that they can say, just stomp in an unrealistic situation like 10k infantry vs 1k cannon, the point is that there is no need to use them for combat early on. Sieging is the priority for winning wars against AIs, not stomping the AI in battles. +1 fire does make them insanely strong relative to other nations early on (and even towards the end, +1 is still quite big), that is true.
I don't know what you mean by AIs scaling their armies quickly. Ideally, you match the AI at least in strength. If you can't, then I would try my best to find wars against weaker targets first.
@@lambdaxx1 Well, I understand the complaint about the early tiers of cannons (large bronze, houfnice, pedrero, culverin) is that the fire damage does not make a substantial improvement in combat effectiveness. The extra fire would make destroying enemy armies easier. I figure if a country loses manpower quickly then I could focus on sieging. I would also want some overkill with armies to reduce casualties and conserve manpower.
Granted, if you effectively carpet siege you could avoid enemies being able to recruit new regiments. Merc companies also circumvent manpower limits.
I usually prioritize defeating enemy armies, sieging forts, then occupying provinces. If you defeat the armies they can’t unsiege forts, but if you lead with carpet sieging provinces they can retake them. Taking the war goal is usually a good idea. I usually play minor countries, so force limit and economic differences are often a concern. In Europe I mainly see Italy, Ireland, and some parts of Eastern Europe as east targets. With major countries you need to use alliances.
I think when wars have the superiority war goal, winning battles is quite effective to demand more provinces. You still need forts occupied, however.
Maybe do one about mercs?
I Might have missed you saying it but cannons give their defensive pips to the units in front of them. As you said in sp it really doesn't matter but it does happen.
Wait what?! Seriously?
Only half. Which means fewer than 2 pips in any defensive category is a waste for artillery (assuming you don't let them see the front line).
Your wife helped you with an EU4 podcast? she's a keeper
What sells me on the no-cav doctrine is how messy those massive late game battles become once you can't avoid them and they do happen after all. It starts with small stacks engaging each other and then once both the sides pour in hundreds of thousands of troops, the front line becomes a random mess of infantry and cavalry regiments and all cavalry is doing better than infantry is being shot at.
Also, Western unit pips seem to favor infantry for the most time?
Just a small note - you've started rambling a lot around ~45 min in. I'd strongly advise to break such videos into series. 1. How combat works 2. What are morale pips 3. What is the optimal army comp 4. Should you use cav etc. each ~10 min long. This way it would be much more digestable, the knowledge would be findable, and you'd ramble and lose topic much less.
The how many arty regiments per fort mod is pretty easy, it's fort level regiments per bonus ignoring capital fort level. So to get a 2 mod vs a lv6 fort you need 12k arty, for a 4 mod vs lv4 you need 16k arty.
Ignoring that you get 1 bonus for any amount of arty ofc.
+2 vs lv 6 fort needs 8 arty though
Honestly the reason i go for the big fights is, once i destroyed his army i can siege his forts down in peace and don't have to fear to get ambushed. Destroy his main force, check how much the enemy has left and than i will go siege without getting disturbed. But i am also notoriously inpatient and i don't want to stay at war for years with the same guy, better get those sieges started.
Yeah, while having big army on fort, so he won't kill you there, costs you manpower as well
Once I understood that infantry also flanks, I never kept horses till the end of the game ever again. Ironically, I'll keep them at the very beginning, when I need to hit force limit or manpower goals (think, say, Castile needing full FL and 60% manpower). After that, bye bye, horsies, back to the Middle Ages you go. As the man here says, Infantry FL +2 is more than enough.
I just don’t buy into that “”cav is always bad”” thing. You never mentioned how cav is more manpower efficient in most cases. Further on, in some situations it ends up being more cost efficient than inf (even without any cav cost modifiers). There are situations in the game where you are forced to use horses if you want to achieve your goals.
>> how cav is more manpower efficient
Mercs are better ways to convert money into manpower.
>> it ends up being more cost efficient than inf (even without any cav cost modifiers
no
>> There are situations in the game where you are forced to use horses if you want to achieve your goals.
no
For the last two, can you give concrete examples?
For SP any defensive war vs much superior opponent as nation with decent cav like VH Wallachia pre 1500.
For MP tech 6 war as Mams vs Tur. Especially with that sweet sweet +100% cav shock merc company.
@@artemmovchan2265 Wallachia in VH SP: no. In fact, you're making it harder for yourself by spending extra money on cav instead of mercs.
I don't care to talk about anything MP though I should mention that tech 6 is literally the worst example to bring up since tech 6 inf beats cav 1:1.
One hour...
Me: a ZAP -> POL, Sich Rada, Cav enjoyer 👀🦄🪽🇮🇩 Chaaaaarge!!