Assigning Generals to Forts

[metallicania]

Since we have a new fort system it would be cool to have more options to do with them.

So what about assigning generals and admirals to forts? Their stats would perfectly match the defencing system:

Fire: increases attriction to enemy forces

Shock: increases damage given to enemy while enemy is assaulting

Maneuver: decreases chances of deserting, suppy shortages etc.

Siege: counters the effects of enemy generals siege (can't be below zero)

Addictionally, you should be able to assign admirals on coastal forts, which lets maneuver decrease blockade effects. Admirals shouldnt be assigned to any inland fort.

Furthermore, it would be more challenging if AI properly defends forts with generals, while moving its army in unreachable provinces by enemy (such as capital) instead of suicide in one battle than wait for 2 years to sieges to finish. That way it can preserve its army while hurting enemy manpower and use generals to have a shot against stronger enemies.

 

[Mattius]

I saw similar ideas posted earlier, but these are the best I've seen so far.

 

[ozyhuboi]

Naturally, the problem is that we would need more generals. Also maybe larger garrisons such that the besieging force would actually have a serious chance of losing/giving up.

 

[Danfish77]

I love the idea of assigning an admiral to an inland fort. He swaggers around the ramparts for a few hours, silently, then shouts for his men to bring him stout timbers. A few weeks later, they've kitted out the entire fortress with masts and sails, and it slowly grinds its way to the besieging army...

 

[metallicania]

I love the idea of assigning an admiral to an inland fort. He swaggers around the ramparts for a few hours, silently, then shouts for his men to bring him stout timbers. A few weeks later, they've kitted out the entire fortress with masts and sails, and it slowly grinds its way to the besieging army...

I thought everyone in this forum had enough brain cells to understand that admirals would be for coastal forts only. I've never been so wrong.

Anyway, cleared the information in the first post for trolls and people with no common sense, thanks

Naturally, the problem is that we would need more generals. Also maybe larger garrisons such that the besieging force would actually have a serious chance of losing/giving up.

I agree. I saw someone else suggesting there should be more generals -unlocked with tech- so don't see any reason not to combine these two ideas

 

[perhje]

I support the idea but it should be one downside. Generals can die, and the chance for it to happen when the fort is occupied should be big.
Maneuver should give the general a chance to get away when the enemy occupy the fort though.

 

[t6.28]

The increased attrition could get very annoying with the way that attrition works for AIs and your allies constantly pointlessly giving you attrition.
But once that's fixed it could be nice.

 

[ozyhuboi]

t6.28

I heard thats getting fixed in 1.13.

 

[metallicania]

I support the idea but it should be one downside. Generals can die, and the chance for it to happen when the fort is occupied should be big.
Maneuver should give the general a chance to get away when the enemy occupy the fort though.

Totally agree, there should be other variables as well, like if there is a friendly army near the fort the chance of dying reduces or dying chance increases during siege if enemy has certain amount of artillery.

For attrition, if the annoying things get fixed in basegame I don't see how this suggestion hurt the situation.

 

[Danfish77]

I thought everyone in this forum had enough brain cells to understand that admirals would be for coastal forts only. I've never been so wrong.
Anyway, cleared the information in the first post for trolls and people with no common sense, thanks

I didn't realize the ability to make absurdist jokes came with a decrease in brain cell count; thanks for the random insult, though.

 

[metallicania]

I didn't realize the ability to make absurdist jokes came with a decrease in brain cell count; thanks for the random insult, though.

One of the reasons "Suggestions" forum being created is to make absurd-joke-making, trolling, non-contrubuting people stay out of the suggestions, so that way suggestion topics be effectively useful to developer team rather then pages of randon arguements.

Note that lack of brain cells doesn't prove anyone's stupidity, just ability to remember and understand so it is not an insult.

I'd like this suggestion to be expanded by users so if you like to comment pros/cons or how to improve the suggestion that would be cool.

 

[SignedName]

It does make some sense, especially now that we have the sortie mechanic.

 

[lolada]

Nice idea, gief also more general slots or split land and naval general slots.

 

[BrokenSky]

I support the idea but it should be one downside. Generals can die, and the chance for it to happen when the fort is occupied should be big.
Maneuver should give the general a chance to get away when the enemy occupy the fort though.

Only if the fort is assaulted.

 

[Durnilhas]

I think there is something to do with military leader. Multiple them with feature like your or flanking one, or another system that need to split army. Currently fort are cool but not effiencient. The constantinople Castle is weak compared to the one previous Common sense. Ottoman needed times to siege it.
And having one general is... restrictive. We rely on random and only rely on 1 general. But there is often more than one general and more than one army commander. Having Half of europe and only 2 military leader is really odd...