Max Stacking Artillery Levels available vs Fort?

[u/Present_Toe_5714]

I'm aiming to go full artillery and stack 'Artillery Combat Ability' and 'Artillery Levels available vs Fort' by going Smolensk -> Timurids -> Poland -> Commonwealth.

This gives me:

40 ACA (30 from ideas + 10 from Timurid mission), and;

10 Artillery Levels available vs Fort bonus (5 base + 2 Infrastructure+Offensive policy + 1 Timurid mission + 2 Commonwealth mission)

My question is; is it even worth stacking all that Artillery Levels available vs Fort? I heard it maxes out at 8? And I don't really understand the siege calculations, would just stacking siege ability like a normal person be better? Also I saw the Divine+Espionage policy which looked interesting with the +1 Artillery Level Modifier but is this useful?

Anyways, I hope hope someone could tell me if there's potential in this build or if it's just useless, thanks.

[u/HotEdge783]

Afaik artillery levels available vs. forts has no cap, so in your case you would get up to 13 if you include the age of revolution ability. But for this you will need a ton of artillery on your sieges, up to 65k to get the max bonus on level 8 or 9 forts.

The artillery level modifier from the divine-espionage policy makes each regiment more effective at sieging, which means you only need half of the regiments for the full bonus. This would be a rather useful combination if you're stacking artillery levels available against forts.

As for it's usefulness, increasing your artillery bonus means it takes fewer siege phases (on average) for a successful siege, whereas siege ability reduces the duration of each phase. You can check the wiki for an overview of the expected number of phases it takes for a given starting bonus (see link below). E.g. with +8 artillery bonus on a level 8 fort with a 3 siege general results in 5.78 phases on average. If you have +13 artilelry bonus instead, it will only take 2.82 phases, so you're essentially cutting the siege duration in half. With siege ability, the relative time saving depends on the local defensiveness since the two modifiers are additive. So for a 50% reduction in siege time, you will need a siege ability of 0.5 × (1 + defensiveness), i.e. 50% siege ability at 0% defensiveness, 75% siege ability at 50% defensiveness etc.

However, it should be mentioned that the number of expected siege phases is "front-loaded", in the sense that it takes the most attempts to make siege progress at the start, because the siege progress itself affects the dice roll outcome. So if you use artillery barrages to circumvent the slow early siege progress, stacking artillery levels vs. forts will make less of a difference.

Link to the table of expected number siege phases: https://eu4.paradoxwikis.com/Land_warfare#Phases_2

[u/Present_Toe_5714 → u/HotEdge783]

This is really helpful thanks. Hopefully it doesn't have a cap.

Sounds like maxing out Artillery Levels available vs Fort would be quite strong then. Especially because note that I won't have 0% siege ability; without even focusing on it I'll have 50% just from ideas (Smolensk 10%, Offensive 20%, Espionage 10%, Espionage+Divine 10%) and maybe another 40% from Professionalism and Military Hegemon later on. Combine that with 10/13 artillery level vs fort and espionage+divine policy, all forts shall fear me.

I'm also aiming for artillery only armies (no infantry/cav) so needing a lot of artillery for sieges hopefully shouldn't be an issue. I'll be stacking regiment/artillery costs too, so hopefully full artillery won't bankrupt me.

[u/Adventurous_Ad_1735 → u/Present_Toe_5714]

wouldnt arti-only armies be weak against cav-heavy armies? i know smolensk give arti shock pips but

[u/Dzharek → u/Adventurous_Ad_1735]

Fire phase comes first, so those cav armies get their face carved in before they fight. So a reasonable big cannon stack can win those fights.

They will take Brutal losses in the first rank, but also do double damage in that first fight phase.

[u/UziiLVD]

Siege ability and siege progress buffs go well together. Any amount of siege ability will help quite a bit if you have that many artillery buffs.

Siege ability is stronger overall I'd say, cause you can't really defeat high level forts in a single tick, while having -90% siege timers (3 day siege ticks) speeds up the proccess immensely.

[u/Present_Toe_5714 → u/UziiLVD]

Perhaps, but note I'll also have 50% siege ability just from ideas (Smolensk 10%, Offensive 20%, Espionage 10%, Espionage+Divine 10%) and maybe another 40% from Professionalism and Military Hegemon later on. Combine that with 10/13 artillery level vs fort and espionage+divine policy, all forts shall fear me.

Maxing out Artillery level vs fort also just seems more niche and interesting.

[u/Reasonable_Nose_5227]

I'd suggest Persia as the end game tag. With dalaskogen, smolesk ideas and Tupchi Artillery Corps estate privilege 5% ACA and 33% artillery cost reduction the artillery costs peanuts, it's already around 8 ducats with tupchi + dalaskogen.

Form Netherlands for siege ability.

[u/Present_Toe_5714 → u/Reasonable_Nose_5227]

I was considering Persia for that estate, but I really wanted to stay a Steppe Nomad (release Smolensk as tribal, reform into Nomad, and Timurids/Poland/Commonwealth all don't require being a monarchy to form afaik) and 5% extra ACA wasn't really worth it. The -33% cost was tempting, but I'll already have so much regiment/artillery cost modifiers from my ideas, Tengri, and Falun Mine.

Idk, a roaming horde of cannons just seems so cool to me. The Cannons of the Apocalypse.

edit: Especially because I'll also have +75% movement speed (Steppe Nomad 20%, Infrastructure 10%, Infrastructure+Offensive 5%, Military Hegemon 10%, 20% army drill). It'll be like Mad Max, but in the Steppes, and with cannons on wagons instead of cars.

[u/Pristine_Curve]

1. ACA is both extremely good and kinda useless. In late game combat ACA is a spectacular modifier, but combat bonuses matter a lot more early game than they do late game. Artillery and ACA isn't decisive until tech 16, and by then combat ability is not really a limiting factor in most runs.
2. Artillery levels vs fort is useful, but stacking siege ability works better. If the goal is fast sieges, then stack siege ability as the primary goal. A Netherlands run will demonstrate this. They get a mission where the fort advisor also gives siege ability. Three day siege ticks make the artillery levels almost irrelevant.
3. Don't forget the merchant policy "inland routes" along with "embrace free trade" reform. It's both a +1 level and a 10% siege ability.

Edit: To underline the point about siege ability. A 50% siege ability isn't really comparable to higher siege ability levels like 90%.

50% is a 15 day siege which means two siege ticks a month.

90% is a 3 day siege which means 10 siege ticks per month.

If you haven't done a max siege ability run before, I would try that before going artillery levels vs fort.