As of now they fall despite being pretty well fortified, unlike in real life where they held out for longer than a few weeks, or would have in the case of gibraltar, or singapore if the brits had been better equipped.
- 7
- 2
Gibraltar really isn't defensible from the spanish side though. You could park an artillery battery on the opposite bank and pound anything that sticks its head out into rubble, and it would be difficult to bring ships in defense if land based air from spanish airfields were brought to bear. Really given modern technology, it only is difficult to take from the sea.First off, Gibraltar should only be attackable from one province only. Part of it’s defensiveness is that it’s on a really narrow peninsula that’s a death trap to attack. It shouldn’t be able to be surrounded and attacked from all sides like it can be now. The two provinces thing actually is a decent idea, at least from a gameplay perspective. To be defensible, defenders need a tile they can retreat to to re-org. It also allows it to be naval invaded and supplied from both sides (which isn’t the case currently). Also, could borrow a page from March of Eagles and make it in-assaultabe if the enemy has naval superiority around it.
The issue with Leningrad is that the defenders have nowhere to retreat to in order to re-org. Supply can be an issue too. It’s a bit harder to solve. The new supply system might help with the latter, but otherwise the only option would be to do something like split the city into multiple tiles or something similar.
Gibraltar really isn't defensible from the spanish side though. You could park an artillery battery on the opposite bank and pound anything that sticks its head out into rubble, and it would be difficult to bring ships in defense if land based air from spanish airfields were brought to bear. Really given modern technology, it only is difficult to take from the sea.
Yeah, so there's no reason to add a second province to it, since it's about as defensible in game as it would be irl.If Britain puts its navy up to block access to Gibraltar, then it’s vulnerable to land-based air, so that’s already modeled.
As for artillery, I mean, there would be defensive artillery too, and firing from a pretty commanding position at that. Plus the Rock is pretty fortified and basically built into a mountain, so it isn’t going to crumble anywhere close to as much as a city would under a similar barrage.
Yeah, so there's no reason to add a second province to it, since it's about as defensible in game as it would be irl.
Gibraltar being two provinces is beyond ridiculous. Especially if it touches the Atlantic.
I don't think most people realise how tiny Gibraltar is, and where exactly it is (100% inside the mediterranean).
Discussing Gibraltar is probably pretty much irrelevant as the game simple doesn't have the capability to realistically model very small patches of land.
There's no gameplay issue with Gibraltar falling at the speed it does in game though. The argument being made by people for two provinces is that it would be more realistic if it could hold out longer, but people disagree with that claim.well its more for the sake of gameplay, rather than for the sake of 100% accuracy.
Weren't both Malta, Gibraltar and few other Small, but extremely important locations marked on the map as "zoom ins" on the map in Hoi2? with the map having specific graphics to show that they're a zoom of the location in question where they are located? or was in hoi3?
gibraltar is almost impossible to take in vanilla MP, barring total axis air AND naval superiority.
i'm happy with it being 90% impossible to take. it feels historical enough and doesn't really unbalance the game too much either way. having to have completely bomb out the ports is expensive and time-consuming, and gives the UK plenty of time to start guarding their coasts and prepare for SeaLion.We struggled to make Gibraltar balanced for both sides. I'm not sure it's possible with the mechanics at a fundamental level (division and tiles).
Either we allow Spain to be violated/join the Axis, making taking it trivial, or the port gets bombed to death by Axis air, making supplying defenders impossible, or the RN makes a naval landing impossible, or the forts are impossible to blow up, or a two province Gibraltar makes it possible to rest divisions, and so on.
Its not hard at all to take in vanilla. As someone was trying to explain above because it's one provence your divisions cant retreat to regain org so they just get deleted when they have no org. You can literally take Gibraltar with 10 width cavalry naval invasions with zero airsupport if you want.i'm happy with it being 90% impossible to take. it feels historical enough and doesn't really unbalance the game too much either way. having to have completely bomb out the ports is expensive and time-consuming, and gives the UK plenty of time to start guarding their coasts and prepare for SeaLion.
Ever heard of the Battle of Stalingrad? Because you seem to be implying there were no significant sieges in the war, which is not true.Gibraltar was never under attack, so how exatly would you prove that it needed to be better at holding out?
It survived because a land-attack through Spain wasn't allowed, and it was way too far away to support a naval or air landing.
Leningrad was never really under direct attack either. It was cut off, and under artillery fire and air bombardement. There was no attempt to actually take the city, and the one time the Germans planned for it, the Soviets pre-empted them with their own attack, causing the German troops that were planned for the attack to be used for fending off the Soviet offensive. Afterwards, they lacked the strength to go on an offensive. You could say that the Soviet AI should be better at recognizing its importance, but any issues come from a general problem with defending important areas, not because of anything being wrong with Leningrad.
The issue at Singapore wasn't a lack of equipment. The British had superiority in numbers and more than enough equipment. They just had incompetent leadership, a lack of communication between the branches of the military, and faced a breakdown in moral after suffering loss after loss in the battles of Malaya.
If anything, Singapore should be less of a fortress, as its defense was set up mostly towards the sea. While the guns could be turned around to face the land-side, they weren't all that useful for it. It had basically no defenses against an attack across the channel, and the main reason to defend Singapore in the first place - its important naval base - was unusable if the enemy controlled the other side of the channel, as it wasn't placed towards the sea. Singapore's defenses against a land-attack lay in holding forward-positions in Malaya, not in holding the island itself. Once the British were pushed back onto the island itself, they were done for, and it was only about when Singapore would fall, not if.