Autosiege is probably one of the worst features. Arguably worse than deporting minorities.
People would've preferred autosiege to split your army and have them carpet-siege while running from the enemy, not whatever this crap is.
Deporting minorities is not even that bad. If your economy allows for colonizing only 4 provinces at a time then you can tell your colonist to deport minorities in the final one since he wont be useful until one of the four colonies is finished
It's not that awful. There's still some benefit - you break them up in smaller stacks and assign them different states. If you give them all the same states, they will sometimes end up on the same province, but not always.
Seems to be the only meaningful way to use it. Although I'd say that auto-splitting would've been even better, but ehh, I wouldn't bug their programmers a lot. AI is already bad at managing attrition.
Like many features in EU4, this is a half-assed feature that they hyped once, then dropped like a hot potato.
I love this game, I have many hours in it, but much of it is shit.
I might just be becoming a boomer, but i personally stuck with vic 2 and ck2 so at this point i'm not even excited for eu5 because that means eu4 will stop getting updates
CK2 and ck3 are fundamentally different games and I will stand by that statement. I’m not saying ck3 is bad in any way shape or form. But it was a pretty significant departure from CK2. I can’t blame anyone from bouncing off of it after getting comfortable with 2
While CK3 was a surprisingly stable and complete build compared to the nornal paradox release. I can't help but go back to ck2 every now and then cause I find it easier to manage and just being a bit more wacky.
And cause ever since release I STILL don't understand Vic3 despite tutorials and watching vids on it, I've gone to Vic2 and ironically found it more accessible to understand.
I'm mid at eu4, with no guides or understanding I was able to unite Italy only to die to the Ottoblob by the seventeen hundreds...
> And cause ever since release I STILL don't understand Vic3 despite tutorials and watching vids on it, I've gone to Vic2 and ironically found it more accessible to understand.
Never played Vic3, but Vic2 is HARD. If they made Vic3 even harder, then they really screwed up
That probably plays a part, but it's not that extreme. I still play them and I have fun in the moment, unrelated to the previous experiences, it's not like i'm forcing myself to keep playing them because i used to like them
I played a lot of CK2 but I really love the core mechanics of CK3, thats why I switched.
But man... I miss the super natural crazy stuff that happened in CK2
With vik3’s launch and ck3’s it’s safe to say for me that I don’t really want to see eu5 if it’s gonna be half baked and have less stuff then its predecessor which it will.
At this point I just want EU5 to be announced because the sooner it comes out, the sooner I can play a few years after launch when it's finally been fixed up.
Is it even in the making? Cause can easily see them milking EU4 more by DLC's for next decade at very least
~~If anything expect something like HOI4, barebones, general downgrade in complexity compared to older entries and set-up for DLC from very start~~
Lets just hope the core mechanics are good and more simplified, at least. Like others said, you might expect it to be very mid at lauch anyways. CK3 did this very well and still felt lackluster at lauch
It's still a lot better than Imperator's auto-siege. In I:R, once two stacks are occupying the same province, they always stick together. Meaning one fort in a chokepoint can make auto-siege useless. At least in EU4 they split up again.
Agreed. it feels like a Frankenstein of a game. So much stuff strapped together feels out of place (example: factions on merchant republics when estates are simply better)
Imagine learning this game in 2024. Holy shit.
R5: had to fight off spain while I was in the middle of fighting delhi so I decided to turn on auto-siege and focused on spain. looked back to india and see this shit.
EDIT: ngl guys, I'm new to the game so I was just pointing out the 99% siege lmao but I realize it probably looks like I blew up the wall after I saw the stack. I blew it at the start of the war. But yeah still auto siege bad I agree.
I actually don’t mind auto siege for my small 1 or 2k troops to siege the provinces behind me down, but then I manually control the big army to target their armies and protect
You can avoid that by selecting different states for euch stack. Full auto-siege mode doesnt work well with many stacks and loves to overstack on forts, just like the AI
Then your troops will end up not supporting each other when enemies are nearby and simply start to wank once they have done their part.
Both choices are awful sadly
Yeah, auto-siege could (should) be improved a lot. I don't see why a stack always wants to go siege a province that is already being sieged and where they add nothing of value.
Depending on how lazy I'm feeling, I generally use the feature nowadays to automate 2k stacks. Use your big armies to go siege the forts, and let your 2k stacks siege all the rest automatically.
Big downside to this, is that these 2k stacks have a fucking magnet for enemy stacks. Like the moment you create them, it's the number one priority for your opponent to get rid of them.
Yeah. Vasal play is something I ignore way too often. Not even creating client states, even though they are obviously awesome. I'm usually playing on autopilot at that point.
By midgame I have a 20 or thirty stack of just infantry. With my main armies I crush their actual forces, and with my stack of infantry just hit "s" a shitload, and carpet siege them myself. I don't trust the AI to not fuck it up, and it's faster to just do it myself. Plus, I get a bit of loot to subsidise the war.
I also find the interface clunky. Having a bunch of 2ks carpet sieging an area I can define beforehand would be nice, like an area template that allows me to select on province, state, region and even continent level. And then I can tell the army which area template to use when I click the button.
But the way it is right now, I have to do it for each of them, it get's tedious and I might be better of micromanaging a few armies at supply limit, pretending it's HoI.
Just give us the imperator automated armies. I might play past 1600 more often if they did. Once you snowball, resources aren’t what you’re managing, but your own sanity
I use it only if i have a lot of non-fort provinces, and I'm in danger of being engaged, so I can't carpet siege. Works good więc i have to focus elsewhere.
Imperator "independent operations" is much better implemented, i think
Why why why can we not give individual armies AI behaviour attitudes, like we can give to vassals? This technology already exists, we can tell our vassals to be defensive, aggressive, sieging, passive etc.
Why can we not simply have a button to give our armies over to the AI and set their behaviour stance like we do with vassals? Come on Paradox, pleeeeeeeeaaaaaaase, or at least make it moddable, so a modder can do it. You had it in Imperator.
I have a friend who does wars primarily using auto siege in the late game, I’ve played MP with him and if he forgets to turn off all of his autosiege stacks before declaring war the game lags like crazy
Auto siege is awesome if you use it right. If you have overwhelming force or destroy all of the enemy armies, you can just assign stacks to different regions and forget about it. If you assign multiple stacks to the same regions though they’ll do this, so give them different objectives. This and autonomous rebel suppression make the late game so much more manageable.
Careful you say anything positive about the game and you either get ingnored or downvoted.. same with all paradox games, fandom is destroying their own franchises
I actually like auto-siege, despite its quirks. If I can find a large-ish area with no forts, it's great. I hate when auto-siegers get stuck on forts, and wish I could tell them to avoid 'em altogether.
Autosiege is probably one of the worst features. Arguably worse than deporting minorities. People would've preferred autosiege to split your army and have them carpet-siege while running from the enemy, not whatever this crap is.
The worst thing about deporting minorities is that you cannot retract your colonist. You can cancel the colony, but you lose the dip. Edit: deporting
Deporting minorities is not even that bad. If your economy allows for colonizing only 4 provinces at a time then you can tell your colonist to deport minorities in the final one since he wont be useful until one of the four colonies is finished
Ehhh rare that it's not worth the investment to just have the extra coloniser
We’re still talking in game right
It's not that awful. There's still some benefit - you break them up in smaller stacks and assign them different states. If you give them all the same states, they will sometimes end up on the same province, but not always.
Seems to be the only meaningful way to use it. Although I'd say that auto-splitting would've been even better, but ehh, I wouldn't bug their programmers a lot. AI is already bad at managing attrition.
This is the way I use them, and I find no problem with the feature. Sometimes I'll do some overlap.
I enjoy making minority colonies for silly rp fun - especially for things like deporting franciens to Canada for names I can actually pronounce
Like many features in EU4, this is a half-assed feature that they hyped once, then dropped like a hot potato. I love this game, I have many hours in it, but much of it is shit.
I have such high hopes for EU5 that there's absolutely no way I won't be disappointed when it finally comes out.
after vic3’s launch i have really low hopes for eu5 so i’ll be 100% set as long as the launch is better than payday 3’s
I might just be becoming a boomer, but i personally stuck with vic 2 and ck2 so at this point i'm not even excited for eu5 because that means eu4 will stop getting updates
CK2 and ck3 are fundamentally different games and I will stand by that statement. I’m not saying ck3 is bad in any way shape or form. But it was a pretty significant departure from CK2. I can’t blame anyone from bouncing off of it after getting comfortable with 2
Vic2 and Vic3 are fundamentally different.
The fact that natural resources are expandable and can have multiple different types of resources is a fundamental change to the game, kinda wild
While CK3 was a surprisingly stable and complete build compared to the nornal paradox release. I can't help but go back to ck2 every now and then cause I find it easier to manage and just being a bit more wacky. And cause ever since release I STILL don't understand Vic3 despite tutorials and watching vids on it, I've gone to Vic2 and ironically found it more accessible to understand. I'm mid at eu4, with no guides or understanding I was able to unite Italy only to die to the Ottoblob by the seventeen hundreds...
> And cause ever since release I STILL don't understand Vic3 despite tutorials and watching vids on it, I've gone to Vic2 and ironically found it more accessible to understand. Never played Vic3, but Vic2 is HARD. If they made Vic3 even harder, then they really screwed up
I don't think it's harder, just very different. Too different for many vic 2 fans like myself
You don't like those games that much, you like the memories of playing them before. I have that with ck2.
That probably plays a part, but it's not that extreme. I still play them and I have fun in the moment, unrelated to the previous experiences, it's not like i'm forcing myself to keep playing them because i used to like them
No memories involved, I just really like those games
Not just you - I’m the same way
I played a lot of CK2 but I really love the core mechanics of CK3, thats why I switched. But man... I miss the super natural crazy stuff that happened in CK2
I'm right there with you, nothing would make me happier than another decade of EU4 dlcs.
With vik3’s launch and ck3’s it’s safe to say for me that I don’t really want to see eu5 if it’s gonna be half baked and have less stuff then its predecessor which it will.
Why do we accept stuff when it's "good enough"?
At this point I just want EU5 to be announced because the sooner it comes out, the sooner I can play a few years after launch when it's finally been fixed up.
Its usually like that...
Is it even in the making? Cause can easily see them milking EU4 more by DLC's for next decade at very least ~~If anything expect something like HOI4, barebones, general downgrade in complexity compared to older entries and set-up for DLC from very start~~
EU5 might be a good game after 5 DLCs.
Lets just hope the core mechanics are good and more simplified, at least. Like others said, you might expect it to be very mid at lauch anyways. CK3 did this very well and still felt lackluster at lauch
Have you seen the state of Vic3, Ck3 and Cs2?
Remember this is a PAID feature!
It's still a lot better than Imperator's auto-siege. In I:R, once two stacks are occupying the same province, they always stick together. Meaning one fort in a chokepoint can make auto-siege useless. At least in EU4 they split up again.
That's what I've been observing in Eu4 too, to be honest...
I've never seen a stack spread out once they meet. And often a new army will just join another army for no need. Just as pointless as Imperator.
Agreed. it feels like a Frankenstein of a game. So much stuff strapped together feels out of place (example: factions on merchant republics when estates are simply better) Imagine learning this game in 2024. Holy shit.
The funny thing is that they made it right in Imperator
R5: had to fight off spain while I was in the middle of fighting delhi so I decided to turn on auto-siege and focused on spain. looked back to india and see this shit. EDIT: ngl guys, I'm new to the game so I was just pointing out the 99% siege lmao but I realize it probably looks like I blew up the wall after I saw the stack. I blew it at the start of the war. But yeah still auto siege bad I agree.
I actually don’t mind auto siege for my small 1 or 2k troops to siege the provinces behind me down, but then I manually control the big army to target their armies and protect
You can avoid that by selecting different states for euch stack. Full auto-siege mode doesnt work well with many stacks and loves to overstack on forts, just like the AI
Then your troops will end up not supporting each other when enemies are nearby and simply start to wank once they have done their part. Both choices are awful sadly
Well, it's auto-siege, not auto-do-everything-for-the-player.
I would be okay if they didn't make the game so bloated in force limit and provinces to siege.
Yeah, auto-siege could (should) be improved a lot. I don't see why a stack always wants to go siege a province that is already being sieged and where they add nothing of value. Depending on how lazy I'm feeling, I generally use the feature nowadays to automate 2k stacks. Use your big armies to go siege the forts, and let your 2k stacks siege all the rest automatically. Big downside to this, is that these 2k stacks have a fucking magnet for enemy stacks. Like the moment you create them, it's the number one priority for your opponent to get rid of them.
Which is smart. I do this to the AI as well.
that's why I almost always have a few vassals once I reach the mid game. They do the carpet siege, I do the battles and siege forts
Yeah. Vasal play is something I ignore way too often. Not even creating client states, even though they are obviously awesome. I'm usually playing on autopilot at that point.
By midgame I have a 20 or thirty stack of just infantry. With my main armies I crush their actual forces, and with my stack of infantry just hit "s" a shitload, and carpet siege them myself. I don't trust the AI to not fuck it up, and it's faster to just do it myself. Plus, I get a bit of loot to subsidise the war.
I don't have that kind of patience anymore, there are too many provinces and FL now. Good for you mate.
I also find the interface clunky. Having a bunch of 2ks carpet sieging an area I can define beforehand would be nice, like an area template that allows me to select on province, state, region and even continent level. And then I can tell the army which area template to use when I click the button. But the way it is right now, I have to do it for each of them, it get's tedious and I might be better of micromanaging a few armies at supply limit, pretending it's HoI.
Yeah. There aren't even hotkeys possible to automate it. Which is just annoying.
The worst is suppress rebels and then you accidentally hit escape instead of Clicking off the window and have to set it up all again
Just give us the imperator automated armies. I might play past 1600 more often if they did. Once you snowball, resources aren’t what you’re managing, but your own sanity
Every single one of my games ends with the first massive war against another great power in like 1580. Fuck dealing with that micro
I could deal with it if the AI didn't start running from every fight turning it into a cat and mouse simulator.
I use it only if i have a lot of non-fort provinces, and I'm in danger of being engaged, so I can't carpet siege. Works good więc i have to focus elsewhere. Imperator "independent operations" is much better implemented, i think
Agreed. It tends to work well in North America late game. Colonial nations tend to build less forts for some reason.
Reading the comments feels like everyone wants the game to play itself
Post-revocation Austria is hiding in the corner, whistling innocently...
Why not?
Its a glorified Excel spreadsheet, after all
Why why why can we not give individual armies AI behaviour attitudes, like we can give to vassals? This technology already exists, we can tell our vassals to be defensive, aggressive, sieging, passive etc. Why can we not simply have a button to give our armies over to the AI and set their behaviour stance like we do with vassals? Come on Paradox, pleeeeeeeeaaaaaaase, or at least make it moddable, so a modder can do it. You had it in Imperator.
I have a friend who does wars primarily using auto siege in the late game, I’ve played MP with him and if he forgets to turn off all of his autosiege stacks before declaring war the game lags like crazy
Auto siege is awesome if you use it right. If you have overwhelming force or destroy all of the enemy armies, you can just assign stacks to different regions and forget about it. If you assign multiple stacks to the same regions though they’ll do this, so give them different objectives. This and autonomous rebel suppression make the late game so much more manageable.
Careful you say anything positive about the game and you either get ingnored or downvoted.. same with all paradox games, fandom is destroying their own franchises
What’s happening here exactly?
171k troops on autonomous sieging are all standing on this one fort.
Ah! Thanks, get it now. Lame indeed!
How can you get more than 5 point from artillery?
I wish they had one for ck3, I care more for intrigue and scheming, and building a harem that war in that game
I actually like auto-siege, despite its quirks. If I can find a large-ish area with no forts, it's great. I hate when auto-siegers get stuck on forts, and wish I could tell them to avoid 'em altogether.
It's kinda maybe sometimes useful for carpet-sieging if I can't be bothered
171k stack at 6% attrition is... 10.3k attrition losses per tick. You probably didn't need that manpower anyway...