Making the DEADLIEST Fort in Eu4

[@kitchaos1118]

its silly how weak attrition is in this game, and how much stacking you need for it, when it did serious damage to many campaigns

[@LemonCake101]

Well, given how often I forget a 40k stack in Tibet during SP, maybe that’s a good thing

[@aluminiumknight4038]

True. Manpower is too easy to manage in this game compared to reality

[@inyourwalls-q6p]

​@@aluminiumknight4038would you rather having maluses added to your country for having low manpower?

[@safs3098]

The problem is manpower not attrition. The current rates of attrition would be devastating if Manpower was slightly realistic. You'd be scared to death sieging a problematic fort if it could cause your manpower to pool to lag for decades

[@LemonCake101]

@@safs3098 That's fair. The quantity nerfs did a lot for making manpower not super free, but its still reasonably easy to get a bunch of it.

[@Tho-ugh-t]

i wonder how medival people would supply and build a fort on a glacier, and how it would help to defend stuff, sometimes eu4 is something else man

[@LemonCake101]

... Don't worry about it, it just works!

[@Viktorvelat95]

There are many unrealistic things about EU4 such as Faithful adherences in muslim nations - reducing corruption by 2 points; but I still think that this game is the best one that has ever been created by humanity so far

[@kylewright7596]

I have to say: the 5 idea groups, 3(?) culture shifts, and 2 formable tags is far more reasonable then the insanity the other recent videos have required

[@LemonCake101]

That’s fair, honestly this is among the most doable. Well, Inca needs a religion flip too.

[@janbiel900]

​​@@LemonCake101quick question. Is your halflife math wrong? The manpower Recovery rate is based on the size of the stack, so Always 50 in your case and attrition IS based on the current stacksize, isnt IT?

[@LemonCake101]

@@janbiel900 well, the math does account for the attrition being a percentage of the current army strength, but it doesn't account for it properly when it drops so low that the manpower recovery effect changes as it where. So partially correct math.

[@janbiel900]

​@@LemonCake101 I dont exactly understand what you are saying. Isnt your formula always wrong except for the case where the stack is exactly full? Or am i missunderstanding the mechanic. In your calculation. A stack with 500 remaining manpower and 10 percent attrition should take 100 attrition? I believe in actuality it takes 50 attrition, right? Because the modifier is multiplicated with the remaining manpower in stack and not with the maximum (1000) of the stack, right??

[@LemonCake101]

@@janbiel900 well, activation order is important. The game sends re-enforcements on the same day, but before it takes attrition into account, so first re-enforcements happen, then the attrition does. Meaning the re-enforcing troops always take the attrition. The formula I used looks at the current troops in the stack as well as taking into account the re-enforcement attrition.

[@pileofcheese5017]

Attrition is always difficult to stack by hand when you're just going about your business, because half the time you end up focusing on raising the cap, and then you don't even reach the cap. This will be a useful reference.

[@LemonCake101]

Glad to be helpful!

[@robertalaverdov8147]

It would be easier to skip becoming Incan by shifting to a Caucasian culture group. Georgia has 25% fort defense and caucuses cultures have a government reform called "Reinforce the Sygnakhs"; which gives another 15% fort defense, +20% garrison size, +1 max hostile attrition, -25% fort maintenance, +1 attrition for enemies and -20% recruitment time.

[@LemonCake101]

Interesting, I will need to take a look at those again but I believed those where incompatible with being Korean

[@karlgunther1176]

Sadly this doesn't work, since the Korean "Righteous Army" reform is on the same tier. Some additional defensiveness would be much appreciated.^^

[@dustin9289]

Would it be possible to attain the fastest army troops possible and then convert that percentage into a real world velocity by dividing the real world distance between any two provinces by the time it takes to travel between them at that fastest possible speed? Can EU4 troops go faster than cars?

[@LemonCake101]

That’s gonna involve some maths, namely figuring out the shortest in game distance vs irl distance, and then using the modifier stacking speed from earlier, yes we could get to a number.

[@DylanSargesson]

​@@LemonCake101One thing you'd want to consider is that in order to maximise speed you actually want to have high distance in a short time. So after your in-game movement speeds are in effect, presuming there are multiple provinces you can transit between in 1 day (the hard floor) you'd want to look at the one province in that set that has the largest real-life distance.

[@eventuel4987]

Going to that other Lemon Cake video where he sets up a race between the +165% speed stack vs the normal speed stack, we can see that in the same amount of time it took for the normal one to go from Paris to Valois in 6 days, the speed stack went from Paris to Valois to Amiénois to Artois and is halfway to Cambrésis. I took approximately cities in the middle of each province (it's hard to do without a clear reference) and calculated using Google Maps. On average, the normal stack would travel 18 kilometers a day while the speed one would travel 58. If you divide that by 6, meaning they walk 6 hours a day (they have to rest, carry stuff etc. and it's a logical amount to avoid being too tired), the normal one walks at about 3 km/h and the speed one at 10 km/h. The average walking speed of a human is between 4 and 5 km/h, so EU4 troops are actually slower than normal humans, while the speedboosted ones have the speed of someone jogging constantly. Of course, the road system wasn't as developed by then compared to nowadays, but this at least gives us an estimate.

[@LemonCake101]

@@eventuel4987 oh damn, you really did the math's there!

[@marcinkusmierzak991]

@@eventuel4987 You can check Mamluks or maybe something further south - e.g. there is 941km from Cairo to Damascus and in-game you need 44 days traveling through the desert. India or Indonesia can have interesting results too

[@LemonCake101]

That was a fun one, and certainly a very popular request. Hopefully more coming soon too.

[@gabrielperez-ze9tk]

In real life, when you landed 40k troops in the New World from Europe, two thirds of them died before ever firing a bullet. Marching 100k European troops into the Kongo would be a death trap, it used to be called "Seasoning" (Those that survived could do alright from then on). In Eu4, I will see Korea landing 80k men to siege a fort in Indonesia, as you said 40K marching into the Himalayas, and so on and so forth. Curiously, one of the few places where you see some consistent attrition is when sailing, so weirdly enough if I sailed 10 thousand men from Europe to asia they would be devastated upon landing, however if I marched for twice the time from Paris to Delhi they would take very little attrition. Of course, the weirdest part of this whole ordeal is yet to come, as upon reaching your destination reinforcing does not stop. If you land in Haiti with 100k, they will consistently be reinforces nebulously every month, the hard part of getting there only has to be accomplished once. I suppose that 10k has a baggage and reinforcement train leading all the way back to the home country. It both is needed to ensure that Europeans actually go and take land across the world, and yet completely unrealistic to the period of the game. It is more powerful in my opinion to show how high European casualties were on different continents, however that they pushed on regardless is incredible. I suppose it is hard to explain how it was possible that so few Europeans in general were able to make such a big colonial impact across the world, for example how administrations of only a few hundred men governed large colonial administrations in Africa. I leave it all to Eu5! Great vid as always :)

[@LemonCake101]

I mean as a history enjoyer on the side, I agree. Attrition from a historical point of view should be insanely more punishing. But here I have to stand with paradox: because is attrition… fun? And honestly no not really. It trivialized a lot of activities sure but having it too high would also make the game a lot more static and discourage aggression and bold plays. But good write up!

[@gabrielperez-ze9tk]

I completely agree, planning to land 80 thousand men in the new world knowing that 10k will be usable upon landing is not fun at all, and would definitely kill the enjoyment of new players. People already lose their mind when a siege goes to 80-90 percent (Side thing: I LOVED your fort demonstration with the Ottomans--the fact that BYZ was shooting themselves in the foot and that the Ottos could not take it made it hilarious!) and I can only imagine that if "disease outbreak" actually meant that the entire army you were using would now be completely unusable, people would probably just quit the game. Maybeeeee you get no reinforcements from a certain distance from core territory, but not alongside outrageous attrition? Idk but I love the game so not really complaining lol@@LemonCake101

[@LemonCake101]

@@gabrielperez-ze9tk thats fair, I like the idea of maybe not removing but scaling re-enforcement size based on how far away you are from your core territory! Glad you enjoyed the fort sieging one, that was certainly an event to record.

[@blede8649]

I always considered reinforcements in other continents not as soldiers arriving from the faraway homeland, rather local recruits, like the Tlaxcalan allies of Cortés and the EIC sepoys. It kinda sorta makes sense that way, if you squint hard enough.

[@LemonCake101]

@@blede8649 It does, that's why 'local' recruitment sends a message back to your home country to sacrifice any soldiers they have at home in a 1 to 1 ratio...

[@CKyIe]

@1:29 "We're going to be restrained by the gay base game cap."

[@LemonCake101]

Not the best auto captions, what can I say…

[@CKyIe]

@@LemonCake101 lol!

[@eventuel4987]

I was surprised by how realistic this one is. It doesn't require you to form 30 nations in less than 20 years, you don't need to unlock all idea groups or become tech 30, you start with the respectably strong Finland, you can sinicize your culture to not blow up... great video, I'll probably try to do this run just for fun!

[@LemonCake101]

It’s definitely up there for most doable to be fair, but you still make your way around the globe

[@eventuel4987]

@@LemonCake101 Nothing is impossible with exploration ideas 😏

[@LemonCake101]

@@eventuel4987 indeed. Lets go buff Naval ideas again, for good measure.

[@njalsen]

Anyone who wants to "experience" this playstile, it is acutally quite different and fun, you can try it in Anbennar. Get mod: Anbennar Find nation: Greenscales (or red or goldscales) These are kobolds, shit at fighting but good at attrition. You HAVE to rewire your "war" breain, but once you get the hang of it its actually really cool

[@LemonCake101]

I find Ogres are better for it then the Kobolts to be honest…

[@sadolftalin1016]

​@@LemonCake101 You're probably thinking of trolls, I don't believe ogres get any benefits. Trolls are better at defensiveness and garrison size, but kobolds are better at attrition. Obrtrol is best at this, they get 1 attrition and 15% fort defense from their religion, 15% fort defense from their racial military, 50% garrison from their special nation, 1 attrition and 15% fort defense from their formable's ideas, 30% defensiveness on several provinces from their mission tree. You also get -20% fort maintenance from racial, -20% from final reform, and 1 attrition from a different mission. This is in addition to the fact that most of their provinces experience winter (2) and are arctic (1). They also get 100% garrison damage. Their provinces are mostly forest (-1 dice roll for attackers) with some mountains (-2 dice roll for attackers and 25% defensiveness) There are a bunch of dwarvern ideas for all the different holds, so I can't be bothered to list the bonuses of the best set here. Dwarvern administration gives -50% maintenance on border with rival and +10% defensiveness. Ancestor worship gives 15% fort defence. Dwarvern provinces are centred around holds, surface or not (-2 dice roll for attackers and 25% defensiveness) connected by dwarvern roads (-1 dice roll for attackers and 20% defensiveness) with caverns (-2 dice roll for attackers and 25% defensiveness) on the side and connecting out of the Serpentspine. They don't have any winter. Hold levels provide bonuses to defensiveness themselves but I can't find the location of the files describing it, sorry. Kobolds get 1 attrition from pop, 7.5% fort defense from religion, 1 attrition from religion, kobold military gives 2 attrition, potentially locally 3 attrition and 100 defensiveness from a mission, 15% fort maintenance and 2 attrition from ideas. Half of their provinces are mild winters (1) and half are normal (1 or 2). Most of their provinces are highlands or hills (-1 dice roll for attackers and 10% defensiveness) although they have some caverns (-2 dice roll for attackers and 25% defensiveness) Troll pops provide no bonuses. Ogre pops provide no bonuses. Harpy pops provide 2 attrition. Harimari provide 1 attrition. Kobold pops provide 1 attrition. Dwarvern pops give -15% maintenance. I believe that they all need to be accepted majorities for this to trigger. There's also the expand the fortifications privilege for 10% garrison, 10% fort defense and -10% maintenance for provinces with ramparts and forts, and the modifier is applied twice if both are there. Manpower each gives 1% garrison per dev. Defensiveness edict gives +33% defensiveness. Ramparts give 1 dice roll (except on mountains? not sure) 15% defensiveness and 1 attrition. Expanding infrastructure gives you 5% defensiveness. Defensive ideas gives -10% maintenance and 25% defensiveness, 33% garrison size, alongside 1 attrition and 1 max attrition. You can get polices for 15% defensiveness (defensive + espionage), -33% maintenance and 10% defensiveness (defensive + inno), 50% garrison damage (defensive + influence), 1 attrition (religious + defensive) and 1 attrition and 25% garrison size (defensive + infrastructure) Sorry for repeating a lot of what you said, and for being so long-winded in general, I just wanted to be thorough.

[@LemonCake101]

@@sadolftalin1016 Amazing write up, and indeed, I was thinking of Obtroll. I did a playthrough of them a while back, but I pissed people off in the Anbennar discord since I switched my primary administration into Human, and then used the mission tree to gain a lot of buffs that where meant to just counter the nerfs from Troll administration but you know I was a human. They changed the mission tree now :(

[@sadolftalin1016]

@@LemonCake101 You changed your racial administration in one of the two troll nations in the game? So based.

[@LemonCake101]

@@sadolftalin1016 I mean it was objectively a good idea to do so. You could also take the event to enslave all the humans to get goods produced on your iron mines and stuff, but since the Humans where primary culture you got the enslaved Humans AND kept them on integrated level.

[@derAlphabet]

still not as bad as CK2 attrition. by miles.

[@LemonCake101]

I love accidentally stepping into Pagan land before mil organization 3 and deleting my army

[@blastification2]

Hey, rewatching the fort videos and i had a thought for something that could be fun: Garrison size. Just skimming the wiki, you can easily get +200% in permanent modifiers alone, and the final number of defenders would probably be hilarious.

[@LemonCake101]

Might be a fun idea to revisit for sure. The fort videos do end up doing well, so clearly it’s a popular topic.

[@pelinalwhitestrake3367]

Napoleon: *Invades Russia* The entire Russian Empire:

[@LemonCake101]

Look, we don’t even need winter. The attrition is the same, the max, all the time.

[@FredrikLagerstrom]

Can we have a playthrough of this "Finland-Inca-Korea-Qing"-campaign? I sense many, many, many hurdles before actually getting this to work for a Average Joe-player :-)

[@LemonCake101]

Is it possible? Yes. Is it easy? No. Do I want to do it? Eh? Could be fun, but could also really not.

[@far_above]

I like this experimental kind of eu4 content

[@LemonCake101]

Glad you enjoyed!

[@LiezAllLiez]

There used to be a time, when "scorched earth" would reduce the supply limit of a province to almost nothing, while at the same time increasing the maximum attrition to 20 (or somewhere around there - it was in EU3). Those were the golden years of Europa Universalis, where a OPM could destroy the Ottomans. Now? Using SE only reduces the movement speed of whoever passes through and increases devastation. The explanation that "the Ai doesnt understand attrition" is not good enough - do better Paradox.

[@LemonCake101]

I mean scorching is still used in MP frequently, and early game SP it has its uses for letting stacks 'escape' fights with AI in bad places, but yeah, the rest of your point stands. Although I can also see the argument that an OPM should not really be able to defeat the Ottomans by burning down a couple local farms.

[@A-i-d-an]

Sorry to be a pain. When you are talking, particularly over the gameplay, there seems to be a semi-obvious background noise through headphones. It sounds like vibrations, but I'm not sure. Good video though!

[@LemonCake101]

Oh yeah I’ve been investigating it, congrats on having nice headphones! It certainly exists but it’s not something trivial for me to fix I am afraid, but hopefully I will get there.

[@Michaelonyoutub]

Napoleon is known for losing 300k, roughly half of his army, to attrition in Russia in just less than 6 months, so this is actually accurate levels of Russian attrition. Kinda wish attrition was more extreme in EU4.

[@LemonCake101]

I don't deny it, but I am working with what the game gives me. But if I was to give an opinion, there has to be a line drawn somewhere to keep the game fun, and losing 300k in 6 month ticks to 'attrition' isn't fun.

[@Tho-ugh-t]

gonna try this in single player

[@LemonCake101]

Go for it, do report back!

[@Flemmi]

the audio is a bit wonky, a weird distorted mechanical echo. it kinda makes it hard to listen to, luckly its standable for 10 miuntes.

[@LemonCake101]

Thanks for the feedback, I am aware, but its not that easy to fix it.

[@С.Н0]

This method is the closest to EU3/EU2 attrition numbers we can get in EU4.

[@LemonCake101]

Happy to help!

[@Oujouj426]

EU4 does have leap years, you can see the appropriate years hit Feb 29th

[@LemonCake101]

Oh, according to the wiki, they don't! Feel free to update it!

[@NoName-xb1rm]

Still falls at 0% when sieged by AI

[@LemonCake101]

*7% but yes

[@hiptoptoe4847]

So what you’re saying is the LD 50 of an adult male for sieges is 5 months and 28 days?

[@MateusVIII]

It is also worth noting that it is quite good to match attrition modfiers with fort defense, since even a lower percentage will do more damage if you can make the enemies drag sieges for ages.

[@LemonCake101]

Absolutely, getting good forts is a fun way of playing.

[@michatarzan7595]

Nice channel, gave a sub

[@LemonCake101]

Glad you enjoyed, thank you for the support!

[@PavltheRobot]

Cool ideas for video. You've earned a subscriber, Sir.

[@LemonCake101]

Thanks for the support, and welcome!

[@RMadaraPlay]

Im currently doing a Max attrition custom nation rn, you van get a 10% max attrition just from a single custom idea, that's gotta be the most overtuned custom idea in the game

[@LemonCake101]

Yeah, well I don’t use custom nations in any of my runs and I didn’t plan on starting here…

[@theredtechnician]

Custom ideas are just silly sometimes, I played a Millennialist Theocracy with -100% cost to enforce religion, look up Millennialist Theocracy if you want to work out how broken this is.

[@LemonCake101]

@@theredtechnician I have collabed and I watch the Student, yes.

[@xXxMonkeyBoomxXx]

Mad lad has done it ❤ finally thank you good sir.

[@LemonCake101]

Happy to deliver!

[@p.a.g.playes5396]

What is the highest amount if monuments you can be able to have in a run? If you allow everything that dont in clude mods or console commands

[@LemonCake101]

Interesting shout, I will take a look. My guess is Shia Mughals would be the way to go.

[@siritio3553]

I do think you need to include the "end result", so to say, in your videos. I wanted to see what all of this will actually do to enemy armies.

[@LemonCake101]

I mean I did the maths version of that, but again, already started a fort kill like 2 million Ottomans for 4 hours of my life, so I really wanted to avoid that :(

[@BigDap1625]

Amazing video. I cant play much but I’ve been wanting to try something like this. Thanks for sharing

[@LemonCake101]

Glad you enjoyed, thanks for the support!

[@xzardas541]

Aaaaaand after all those decades stacking atrition enemy just barrages the fort and asaluts it in 3 days xD. EU4 realy needs supply lines similar to HOI for atrition to be anything more than early game speedbump, if let's say your reinforcement rate would gradualy drop when you dive deep into enemy territory and be disabled if enemy ocuppies provinces your supply lines pass wars would be something more than just: "Yolo, let's just rush those forts and war is won""

[@LemonCake101]

yeah, especially in Vanilla, its very much an assault meta ATM. Thankfully MP mods tend to buff forts base garrison strength so its OK

[@carltonleboss]

Unlike most of your videos, this one is feasibly possible to pull off!

[@LemonCake101]

I wish you the best of luck!

[@fyfef]

Pro tip: make this more deadly by stacking garrison size along the way, taking percentage based attrition on a 70k stack doesnt hurt as much as a 100k stack ;)

[@LemonCake101]

That’s fair, but don’t worry, it’s AI, they will also walk off the fort half way through

[@tomhoni9642]

this video basically: winning each battle isnt true excellence. true excellence is winning without fighting :)

[@LemonCake101]

The British strategy, lose every battle, win the war.

[@tomhoni9642]

@@LemonCake101 only if there is enough tea ^^

[@arthasmenethil4399]

I'm a bit confused here. The enemy would never get down to 6k remaining Soldiers, right? The reinforcement ticks are per regiment, so 50 Soldiers per regiment for 100 regiments is the 5000 you used, but attrition is calculated on the current amount of soldiers remaining, for 6k troops and 16% attrition, that's about 1k, so we're far below equilibrium in this example. If my math is correct, the equilibrium should be at 30k troops.

[@LemonCake101]

No you are correct, I just had it as a graph and failed to account for reality.

[@arthasmenethil4399]

@@LemonCake101 Alright, then I'm at least not super stupid :D Really love your content, modifier stacking is just amazing, even if Paradox seems to try to curb it a little :(

[@LemonCake101]

@@arthasmenethil4399 eh, I appreciate the challenge. Thanks for your support!

[@l0lLorenzol0l]

Reminder that Paradox had to nerf atrittion to near non-existance because the AI would commit self-kill so easy it made the game trivial for human players with even mildly realistic attrition numbers

[@LemonCake101]

At the same time, I tend forget stacks in the middle of jungles and the step loads of times myself, so maybe it’s a good thing…

[@zoetje9817]

I’ve done a similar (though slightly less insane and more practical) build a LONG time ago, and you’ve left one import thing out: armies that have been in battle suffer from a major reinforcement penalty (-40%!) until the end of the month. I’m not entirely sure, but I believe this can be exploited by suiciding single regiments into them. This technique, while costing a bit of manpower, would bring down the half life of hostile armies to ~3 months. Or, in other words, forts become entirely unsiegeable until you run out of manpower. Which you won’t, because your forts do the dirty work for you.

[@LemonCake101]

You do have to avoid getting your 1k stack 1:10 wiped, and you can run into issues of those battles draining your own warscore in the process.

[@zoetje9817]

@@LemonCake101 oh, yes, almost forgot about 1:10 stackwipes. How embarrassing.

[@Jamie-st6of]

you should really look up "significant digits" lol

[@LemonCake101]

no

[@machiavelliwd4155]

You gotta show it in action. this sucks otherwise.

[@LemonCake101]

There's a 40 min video of it in action, I just didn't want to sit through another 4 hours of looking at AI dying in a fort again :(

[@Tom-oj7si]

AI/TTS are for cowards Stop.

[@LemonCake101]

Damn, good to know my voice is considered good enough to be TTS or an AI!

[@rubo009]

tolerance of the true faith next?

[@LemonCake101]

I dunno if I will end up doing that one

[@amilavxilmen5632]

I wish attrition was more useful

[@LemonCake101]

Eh, it’s not as useless as people make it out to be, in MP especially it can really add up.

[@AR0ACE]

Awesome vid! Thanks!

[@LemonCake101]

Glad you enjoyed!

[@IronWolf123]

Literally the Wall in GoT

[@LemonCake101]

👀

[@gudmundursteinar]

Way back in the pre- fort defender is always defender days in a PVP campaign, my athens turned greece turned crusading order turned byzantium with optimized fort ideas had 150% defensiveness on my mountain forts in persia fighting off the punjabi and ethiopian hordes.

[@LemonCake101]

Sounds like a fun MP game, a lot of tag switching though, which you normally don't end up doing in MP, but yeah it can definitely be an effective strategy, even if its somewhat annoying for the others.

[@sergisanz6501]

The best attack is a good defense

[@LemonCake101]

Naturally!

[@LemonCake101]

Naturally!

[@GastropodGaming2006]

i have sorbscrobed

[@LemonCake101]

Excellent

[@ScipiPurr]

This video is great, but I think I'd like to see it taken even further. What does it look like when you stack attrition and fort and local defensiveness along with max fort level in order to make a siege last as long as possible for the attacker? If we're making the deadliest fort possible, then it should take as long as possible to siege as well

[@LemonCake101]

The issue is mentioned before: who am I to judge for example and extra 2% max attrition vs say an extra 50% fort defensiveness? Its quite an arbitrary thing to make the 'best' fort.

[@Salv2137]

This is how i feel siegeing regular korea

[@LemonCake101]

Ouch, but yeah they can be a pain on recent patches

[@Salv2137]

@@LemonCake101 it costed me more man to 100% 1m army ottomans than to siege down Korea, for separate peace. That was insane.

[@LemonCake101]

@@Salv2137 3% cap and extra already go a long way...

[@Jamie-st6of]

i love attrition stats.... every italy campaign i've played involved letting the ottomans melt in the alps

[@LemonCake101]

that's never a bad strategy!

[@cagataygedik7700]

now do it

[@LemonCake101]

👀

[@amilavxilmen5632]

Fun !

[@LemonCake101]

Glad you enjoyed!

[@sergeantmajor_gross]

How about doing it by starting as a custom nation with custom ideas?

[@LemonCake101]

Nah, I don’t like custom nations.

[@bobvanmeijeren8891]

IDEA! maybe instead of just focussing on attrition try to make the calculated best fort: combining attrition, fort defence, low supply limit, amount of defenders etc. to get the literal godfort somewhere

[@LemonCake101]

Not a bad idea, the issue is I will not be able to hide behind objectivity. What's better, an extra 2% attrition cap, or 50% more fort defense? How does that compare to 33% extra garrison size?

[@bobvanmeijeren8891]

I guess average time to actually take a fort compared to the amount of troops invested? maybe too much to calculate :{D more of an theoretical approach i guess, compared to your usual videos.@@LemonCake101

[@LemonCake101]

@@bobvanmeijeren8891 that's fair, I mean I see your point, have it be a total casualties necessary to take on average. I mean I have three fort videos already, so I don't know how entertaining a forth video is going to be especially since it would involve repeating myself for a bunch of the routing, especially given the math necessary in the process too.

[@MrTohawk]

But how high can you get Fort defense in that province with max attrition?

[@LemonCake101]

I’m not stacking that, trade offs are wierd. Is 2% more attrition better then an extra 50% fort defense?

[@MrTohawk]

@@LemonCake101 you're the guy doing the maths. I am sure there is a mathematical answer to that question in regards to the mean time to actually siege that fort. The goal should be to inflict maximum casualties. And no matter how high the attrition value it matters little if the fort falls before the month can tick.

[@Total2Gamerz]

This is all well and good for mp, but i m pretty sure the ai has capped attrition to 4 or 5 % no matter what, and they also don t take land attrition while being on transports ships. I once tried to stack attrition for enemies and fort defence in a modded campaign with idea variation as yazd and sadly even tho i had very strong modifiers the ai still took very little attrition

[@LemonCake101]

Nope, AI will take max attrition here. The AI Cap is the human cap. Maybe the mod changed it?

[@Total2Gamerz]

@@LemonCake101 i researched it and it looks like ai used to receive half of the attrition the player receives, but it was back in 2015, so that vague notion of "AI cheats with attrition" stayed with me since.

[@LemonCake101]

@@Total2Gamerz ah, that's fair. AI also used to not pay any fort maintenance, and in fact in the game defines file you can still 'mod' in that feature by changing a 0 to a 1.

[@fullhouse4999]

Isn't the attrition the ai takes capped at 5%?

[@LibertyMonk]

That's why we spend half the video raising the cap. They do cheat a bit with supply-limit, they're only effected by their own units there, but that doesn't really matter here.

[@LemonCake101]

I don’t believe so, no?

[@bobthepervyuncle]

Here by asking for stacking max monthly autonomy reduction

[@LemonCake101]

Noted!

[@myballsgetlikd2330]

Attrition used to be really strong, especially whenyou had on arrival attrition.

[@LemonCake101]

It can certainly still be a killer now too…