By - Impressive_Wheel_106
From what I know maneuver is even more important in naval where it determines how many ships are active at a time
Yes, it increases engagement width. It also allows your ships to travel farther outside your supply range and reduces the time at sea debuff.
Also improves trade ship efficiency
Also increases the chance of capturing ships.
This one is news to me
it also speeds up the process of your parents getting divorced
That actually uses envoy travel time modifier, common misconception :v
I think both my parents rolled 0 pips , because all they do is argue instead of a divorce.
War enthusiasm too high. Have you tried occupying their forts?
They picked the wrong CB and can't conquer anything.
POV: you have a royal marriage with your longtime rival, and you picked “Humiliate Rival” as CB and don’t care about penalties because Stability is already at -3
Nah pretty sure they both rolled a 1 when they had you
Better than starting Spain ruler lmao
Have you tried restarting the game? It might be a bug.
They are probably waiting for reformation since that's an Anglican only mechanic.
After 1000s of hours you still learn new mechanics
It’s honestly probably the best stat for an admiral
It has to be. Could you imagine if each maneuver pip on a General added 10% combat width? You'd be techs ahead just based on a single Pip difference.
Kinda- land combat width is symmetrical so it's harder to compare.
Manoeuvre is underrated, then?
And manoeuvre has multiple spellings? Thanks America for making it forgettable that the UK version looks like it has all of the vowels in one line and the US version simpler.
In naval it's probably the most important stat (unless you're so dominant at sea that only siege matters).
Army maneuver is decent, but shock, fire and siege are all just *so* good. Very early maybe fire less so, late maybe shock less so.
If you are so dominant at sea you should have enough ships to full blockade anyone anyways.
Manoeuvre would still be the most important because you can get your ships around faster
Maneuver is my favorite stat, towards later in the game attrition kills way more men then battles ever could and maneuver directly limits that.
I'm British but I always spell it maneuver because it's easier
The British spelling comes from the French "manœuvre", itself composed of "main" and "œuvre", ultimately descending from Latin "manus" and "opera". There are plenty examples in French of seemingly bizarre spellings, through which the etymology is apparent, and of course many of those ended up in English.
Let your colours fly!
Our spelling is lazier, truth. I always figured all the Brit accents were from people trying to fit in all the vowels, which is how the "h" gets lost.
Definitely. I have 63 heavies, so having a 4 maneuver admiral makes a huge difference over even a three maneuver admiral.
And trade power
Tbh I think the flagship upgrade that let's your admirals improve on-mission is massively underrated. Stats on admirals feel massive
Yes, maneuver is the single most important stat in naval combat
Yes. Maneuver pips are definitely not useless. They're actually quite use*full*.
Would be even more useful if attrition was a thing,sadly u can only make a province have 5% max
Even at 5% it's pretty punishing for AI. I did the baltic crusader achievement few days ago and i just spamed forts along near border and let ottoman siege with their doom stack. Russian winter plus defensive idea plus edict of resistance destroyed their army. I just occassionaly attack them once they get around 20%.
Province edits are very op
Never liked when they changed that (before either there was no cap or the cap was much higher), claiming it allowed exploitation of the AI. Well then fix that aspect of the AI, dont kill a viable strategy of defense.
Maybe the system was better, maybe not, but either way it’s not ideal. Both CK3 and Imperator provide actual supply that you have to mindful off. Heck, in Imperator, you can actually run supply caravans to and from your territory. In CK3, overwhelming numbers for a siege actually matter. I feel like these things could be improved in EU4.
Yea CK3 really does show why castles were so incredibly important in Europe
>Both CK3 and Imperator provide actual supply that you have to mindful off.
*Laughs in HoI4*
Yeah, I thought best not mention it since that’s it’s own thing, and armies don’t work the same way. Really interested to see how the frontlines system in Vicky 3 compared to HOI4
Isn't there a mod which "fixes" that?
I think the issue why people think it's bad is the name. If you think about maneuvering skills you really don't think about logistical mechanics being a part of this too. Gotta say I've only heard about those a couple of weeks ago too and I've played for years now :D
No man pls not I still have nightmares from ck2 when I fought 6 or 7 fast moving 300k stacks in mountains of Tibet losing 20-40k troops per months against AI Chinese stacks that were immune to attrition.
Edit: i off mean losing 20-40k troops per month to attrition alone.
I still hate those 1/1/6/1 generals I get from time to time.
I mostly use them to avoid attrition or reinforce quickly, if I feel like micromanaging everything.
I use those also for capturing solo marauders i missed somehow
But what about useempty
It still needs to be filled with use.
R5: maneuver pips (the 'useless' ones), apparently increase reinforce speed.
Nothing is ever useless in EU4, it is just niche mechanics.
The one person who uses corruption to control unrest agrees.
Have done so
Had literally every province at .2 unrest with 0 war exhaustion, zero overextension, 100 legitimacy, rebel progress 90%
Was gonna be 2x my own army of rebels, so I decided to debase
There were some time sensitive achievements where you basically had to do it a while ago.
Transport ship combat ability.
The true s-tier idea.
You joke until you do a Third Odyssey Elysian game where your transports are ripping up the Spanish or Ottoman fleet with greek fire transports.
Facts. Fuck my economy up to deal 10% more infantry and naval fire damage? Hell yes!!!
Sometimes you gotta play with the hand you're dealt.
He isn't saying it's useless. He is just saying that manuever is known to be the most useless out of the four pips by the community, until now atleast
I mean - it still is, right? Winning fights and sieges matters more to me personally
maneuver can help you ignore/enforce terrain penalties though, which can completely change the tide of a battle.
I learned by watching Arumba, he used to always designate a "maneuver bitch" for this reason.
Yup, I learned it from his tutorial series with Filthy Robot.
It's generally not as useful as fire shock or siege, but I love catching up to or running away from enemy stacks with a 6 maneuver general
Everyone probably knows this but I don't see it in the picture you listed so I'll mention that high maneuver means your army marches faster.
It's quite useless for SP. Tho they can be a life saver in MP
isn't this even a load screen tip?
Never useless. Not only this, but it also removes river crossing penalty if attackers maneuver is greater than defenders
Manouver is heavily underrated.
Also when you have 4 or higher maniuver on a general he will ignore crossing penalties.
Edit: i was wrong you only need higher maneuver than the defender
The requirement to bypass crossing penalties is : All crossing penalties are removed if the attacking leader has a higher maneuver rating than the defending leader.
Ex: Your general and ennemy general got both 4 Maneuver pips, you attack him, crossing the strait, you'll have penalties cause you would need to have one more than him.
Oops, checked the wiki and you are right
no , its simply if you have higher manuever you ignore crossing penalty
Wtf didn't know this.
Does it also affect the terrain penalties when attacking?
Terrain penalties are not effected just crossing
No, only crossing penalties
Im not sure, but i think it was a thing in many patches before. Proinces had % of terrain type, i think maneouver let attacking general choose the most favourable terrain
I am not entirely sure, but wouldnt be surprised if it did.
Yeah it’s a pet peeve of mine to react to the countless “0/0/6/0” general posts with listing the advantages of high maneuver. It’s really not as useless as people think.
I wouldn't say that maneuver is useless, more like it's just a nice bonus to other pips. And in my opinion, if general has nothing but maneuver he is useless, the only use you can have of him is either assigning him to a relatively big army just for it to not suffer from attrition or move your troops from one point to another, which is still nice. This general can negate -1/-2 dice roll debuffs in some situations, but how often does it happen? This general can't be used in battles, have no impact on sieges. You can use this general to lure your enemy in some terrain (and maybe even apply additional debuff to enemy's die if they attack over straight/river but it would be quite hard to do), but just scorching earth would be way more effective.
And again, maneuver pips are cool if they are just addition to other actually useful pips, like being able to recover faster on enemy's territory, lose less manpower with your big armies in mid/late game and especially up to 30% additional movement speed are insane bonuses but not as good if your general can't give a proper fight.
Yeah I pretty much only hold onto a maneuver only general for movement or drill purposes.
I mean really though...what's the point of having a general who can move and reinforce faster if they're still just going to lose every fight they're in and can't finish sieges quickly? Maneuver is nice but it's just nice-to-have. The others matter more for winning wars
Agreed that manoeuvre is the least useful. If I have a general with a high manoeuvre rating, I’ll have him lead the reserves army so that the zero manpower regiments I cycle out of my main armies following big battles reinforce faster so that I’m ready to have major engagements sooner.
So maneuver is not useless, having the other three at 0 is useless. Yet in those posts it’s all blamed on maneuver.
Maneuver is not useless, but if you have 0 in every other pip then maneuver may as well be useless. All that army will do is lose troops more efficiently, due to their faster recovery between what are statistically likely to be losses.
no, got 2k hours
Yes, Manouver is a underrated pip. Helps make sure your armies are in the right place and fully reinforced. It is the least useful pip but still.
It would probably overpower Maneuver but I always thought that when combat starts there should be a Maneuver check (with the defender getting a bonus, or maybe rolls twice and takes the better roll). Winner is considered the defender for terrain penalties.
A lot of ancient battles were really skirmishes until one army (general) could force his enemy into disadvantageous terrain and then attack for real. My idea would represent that and make combat more dynamic.
This is how it used to work years ago. Rather than fixed terrain, every province had percentages of terrain... so a province might be 75% mountain 25% plains for instance. This weighted the terrain that a battle was fought in. Having a maneuver pips advantage gave extra weight to whatever favored the more maneuverable army. An attacker with maneuver would shift the odds towards plains, a defender would shift it towards mountains.
It was neat in concept, but got scrapped in favor of the current system, as the old system made maneuver overpowered and combat less predictable... a 6 maneuver general was basically a god that could make mountains disappear and rise at will, so long as some low % of the terrain in a given province gave them an advantage. I rather liked and would have preferred they just reduced how large the maneuver bonus was rather than scrap it entirely, but it wasn't that big a deal.
It was well before my time but I knew terrain used to be based on percentages. I had no idea Maneuver affected those percentages though. Thank you for sharing that!
I'd love to see something similar to the old system reintroduced. Your comment reaffirms my belief that it would over power Maneuver but that's just a detail to work out. I feel like terrain is the last area of gameplay that hasn't gotten the depth of field it deserves.
I agree, numbers and quality was very often less important than this
The attrition is very useful I find as I typically encounter manpower issues. The reinforce trick is news to me though.
Maneuver keeps showing how underrated it is.
Yes of course. Manoeuver is the most useful pip in early game after shock and siege. Not only does it help with supply limit, it also reduces penalties from river crossings if high enough.
early game fire pips are about as good as shock pips on infantry only armies, shock is only better in the early game thanks to cav.
I believe one shock equals two fire in early game for European infantry.
The fire value and the shock value is nearly equal on infantry early, making the first shot value of fire equal it out.
Remember that the unit pips do not matter for general pips.
As such they have the same value unless you have cavalry or artillery...
ok 2000+ hours with the game and i didn't know that lol, all i knew from maneuver was that it makes you faster at moving and can negate the negative effects in battle from river crossing.
It also has bonus about river pass
I knew that but forgot about it!
EU4 is that phrase "he forgot more about *thing* than you'll ever know" made real for me.
I always had a hunch this was true and pretended it was but now I have proof lol
I'm a bit confused, 100% is not the base value? (I mean, is this buff usefull if you are in a negative?)
100% may be the value in owned terrain, so in that sense being in unowned terrain (where this buff is active) puts you in a negative.
Oooh i get it, thanks!
I've kind of always felt like you got more reinforcement rate with a general on the army, but now I know why you do.
Yes, we knew. And a buff to movement speed is one of the strongest military bonuses.
Didn’t known about reinforce speed
Yep, it is part of why Defensive ideas are such a good group (in addition to the attrition reduction and extra 33% reinforcement speed)
What is even less known is that reinforce speed increase amount of troops you regain each month but doesn't increase cost of doing so which essentialy makes reinforcement cheaper, because you gain more troops for same money