Anti-invasion tactic: destroy your ports!

[kalauer]

We know that the first Thing you'll want to do in a naval Invasion is securing the ports to ship supply in until you have a strong enough territorial base to get at least Basic supply "off the land". And evenafter that, you will Need them.

Thinking of the Atlantikwall, wouldn't it be THE tactic for Germany to just destroy all ports and by this effectively hindering or at least strongly discouraging all invasions in France (or any other coast where they do not Need ports immediately)?

Should't there be a drawback on this? I mea, yeah, you will have a harder time invading britain because of this. But if you do not intend to do so but rather face the threat of being invaded yourself...

Opinions?

 

[BestOfTheWest]

The drawback should be that it would make the local population very unhappy, as they loose their jobs at the harbor or those in businesses who rely on it.
Should result in increased partisan activity.

Anyway, if you want to use submarines effectively in the Atlantic, you still need some habours in France, I guess.

 

[Baron Jukaga]

A guaranteed 'scorched earth' button would be too exploity, but there should be a way for the defender to hinder the attacker's infra. Maybe something like a timed build that destroys port and airbase levels in a selected province. If the attacker takes it before the build timer is up then the attempt wasn't successful. Destroying a port is a pretty big job after all.

 

[Mannstien]

Would be a glorious ending if Daniel is left on the Main Island stuck destroying his ports LOL. I don't think I've seen anyone destroy anything yet in the streams though I'd assume you should have that ability especially for shared structures spaces which cannot be increased any further but you want to build something else.

 

[Denkt]

Don't think you can destroy ports, you can build new ones but not remove old ones as ports are not considered to be factories.

 

[kalauer]

Don't think you can destroy ports, you can build new ones but not remove old ones as ports are not considered to be factories.

Yes, that is still open. I also haven't seen an Option to do so. And maybe this is for the better, given the Scenario above.

 

[Thanik]

Yes, that is still open. I also haven't seen an Option to do so. And maybe this is for the better, given the Scenario above.

If player can destroy naval or air bases, and infrastructure, it can be really overpowered mechanic to prevent attacker from moving forward.
SImilar issues was in HOI 3 custom mode

 

[Nicolas I]

Historically, the destruction of ports like Cherbourg and Le Havre in Normandy seriously hindered the supplying of the Allies after D-Day.

This should be feasible, but as it has been said it should cost something significant enough and have a limited duration to avoid exploits.

 

[Sharp163]

A somewhat interesting suggestion... But no self-respecting player would ever destroy their own ports

 

[panzerzombie]

A somewhat interesting suggestion... But no self-respecting player would ever destroy their own ports

I just asked my self-respect and he was totally ok with it ( after I beat him senseless ofc )....

 

[The_Meme_Man]

"All right, we destroyed the ports! Now they can't invade our precious island......what's that? We are run down on our oil? Wait, HOW MUCH of that was being imported you said!? *tanks magically disappear*"

 

[Mannstien]

Surely there will be DLC called "The Nero Order"

 

[Athan.]

Sure, they could make it so you could destroy or otherwise disable ports, since it was extremely difficult for the Allies to get one until 6 months after D-Day. But then you'd also have to add new methods to pump supplies from sea, again just like during the invasion of Normandy. The Allies setup Mulberry Harbours as temporary ports and later PLUTO oil supply, to get around the fact that they did not have access to a major deepwater port.

It's probably simpler for game design to prevent ports from being destroyed, and require that supplies always go through them.

EDIT: The person below me said it more succinctly.

 

[Ryltar]

In that case the invader needs an option to bring their own ports like it happened in 1944 (Mulberry harbour). And if they get air supply to work you could supply your units that way.

Edit: Wouldn't have posted this if I would have read all entries before posting, as the person above me had already mentioned the harbours. =)

 

[Damiani]

It makes sense to implement it. Cherbourg is a great example of this.

 

[Nicolas I]

"All right, we destroyed the ports! Now they can't invade our precious island......what's that? We are run down on our oil? Wait, HOW MUCH of that was being imported you said!? *tanks magically disappear*"

I greatly doubt your enemies will allow supplies or oil to reach you from their occupied ports to thank you for not having destroyed them thus facilitating their invasion !

 

[LordOfWar16]

You cant destroy state-level buildings, which ports are part of. You can only destroy factory-type buildings.

 

[The_Meme_Man]

I greatly doubt your enemies will allow supplies or oil to reach you from their occupied ports to thank you for not having destroyed them thus facilitating their invasion !

I also greatly doubt I will be stupid enough to be in a position where I allow my enemy to raid my shipping by not having a guarding navy.

If I have to burn my ports down for "survival", the war is already lost. It would be best to surrender and save the lives of millions rather than keep fighting.

 

[Denkt]

You can build new ports in provinces you controll but they cost 3000 each.

 

[Murmeldjuret]

You shouldnt be able to completely destroy ports, only damage them for a small price and time investment so the occupier has to repair them.