Concerns about fortifications (and to a lesser extent infrastructure)

[Zookie]

Does anyone else feel that fortifications could be improved on a little? Here are my concerns:

Area covered:

If I am not mistaken that cost of building fortification was unchanged from HOI2. It seems to me this fails to reflect the change in providence size. It cost the same as before yet only effects an area ¼ to 1/6 the size (I feel that infrastructure has a similar flaw). This means that is cost 4 to 6 times more to fortify the same area as it did in HOI2

Cost:
Build fortification seem far too expensive to be practical for most nations and the nations that can afford it are often so large it is impractical to invest the resources to even fortify at risk areas.

Time:
The time it takes for fortifications to be built is so long that once fighting begins it is impractical to try to construct them. In some respects this is historical as nations usually prepare for defense in peace time, but a good deal of fortifications were constructed during the war; the Atlantic wall, in Finland and on Japanese occupied islands are just a few examples.
I had some ideas on how to solve these issues and make fortifications a more viable part of the game:

1. Reduce cost:
If there cost was reduced to reflect the changes in province size that would help. Perhaps a base cost of 1.5 or 2 IC

2. Introduce a feature called conscript labor/public works:
I believe this would be a very historical and balanced way to reduce the time of building fortifications and infrastructure (I think this ability should only apply to these two structures as building the other types of buildings would require more technical knowledge then an average volunteer/conscripted worker would have). This feature could be turned on by hitting a button like the “reserve button” when building units. It would abstract a nation’s use of the civilian labor population to work on public projects (As was done by most nations involved in the war, civilians cleared rubble, dug anti tank ditches, and dug trenches for air raid shelters). The way it would work would be this. For ever project that was assigned as a public project there would be a slight manpower drain (the rate of drain could depend on which laws are enacted) per IC of the project. Additionally the effect would be related to nation’s national unity and that would provide the percentage of how many days would be subtracted from the cost. Here is just a basic formula of the top of my head so the numbers are a bit arbitrary, so of course it might need changing for game play balance but this is the basic idea:

For this formula I am going to use the IC cost that I purpose of 2 and assume that the nation is at full mobilization and let’s say with that law it would provide a conscript labor/public works bonus that allowed for a manpower drain of 0.05:

IC * manpower drain * national unity % * conscript labor/public works variable (which could be affected by a doctrine tech maybe?)= the percentage of build time reduced.

So for example

Cost IC of2 * manpower drain 0.025= Drain of manpower of 0.05 per day * national unity of 90% * labor/public works variable (10) = 45%
So this would mean that the time to build one level of fortification for this nation using conscript labor/public works would be 45% less so to build (so it would cost 2 IC for 99 days) and drain a total of 4.95 manpower.
I think this would make constructing infrastructure and fortifications more feasible and add an interesting historical element to the game.

Whew! That was long! What do you think? Or are there any other recommendations on building forts?

 

[Kuciwalker]

With practical it ends up costing substantially less than in Hoi2.

 

[GLENN]

We don't want cheap forts.

Thats all we need. Level 6 forts in every province when playing the AI of multiplayer

 

[unmerged(148761)]

Well, as the one guy said it, it is easier for a big country to fortify a long area because of practical. For any construction project you can just spam build infrastructure to pump up your practical and it becomes much easier. But I generally agree with you, I think the area fortified is probably too small. I also think it is silly that fortifications aren't directional- it should be possible to outflank them which it isn't right now.

 

[fflaguna]

I like it! I am always frustrated by the build times of fortifications. 1 fortification NOT built means a brand new Heavy Cruiser in the same time frame!

 

[Zookie]

I understand the concern about fort spaming but I would like to see minor nations that cannot afford to get there tech skills up to be able to build some forts. I am sure there is a happy medium.

 

[SkitchiePockets]

With practical it ends up costing substantially less than in Hoi2.

Yeah I'd have to say construction practical make them fairly viable. More realistic cost and time IMO compared to HOI2. Makes it possible for Germany to build the Atlantic Wall or other fortress cities in Eastern Europe. It was nearly impossible to build mutliple mid-level costal forts in France or fortress cities like Breslau and Koenigsberg in HOI2.

Forts do seem a little out of reach for minors due to practical, ok with me. Finland seems to already have most of the Mannerheim(?) Line, maybe could get a few extra (aslong as they're not Allied in '39). IMO its good where it is, any lower and I could see lots of exploits.

 

[unmerged(84132)]

Well, as the one guy said it, it is easier for a big country to fortify a long area because of practical. For any construction project you can just spam build infrastructure to pump up your practical and it becomes much easier. But I generally agree with you, I think the area fortified is probably too small. I also think it is silly that fortifications aren't directional- it should be possible to outflank them which it isn't right now.

Star Forts were not directional. All trying to outflank one of those forts got you was more big guns aimed at you .

 

[unmerged(26764)]

The real concern with the smaller provinces is that irritating mechanic of actually adding forts to a million provinces. Same for infrastructure. I really wish they would have implemented the idea of having these improvements on the regional level to spare my poor fingers.

 

[unmerged(84132)]

The real concern with the smaller provinces is that irritating mechanic of actually adding forts to a million provinces. Same for infrastructure. I really wish they would have implemented the idea of having these improvements on the regional level to spare my poor fingers.

My production menu would always slow to a crawl whenever i tried to build hundreds of infastructure at once. I would definately not mind for improvements to be build at the regional level (In fact, I would not mind there just being regions ).

 

[morganja]

In some respects this is historical as nations usually prepare for defense in peace time, but a good deal of fornication were constructed during the war;

This is absolutely true. Both my parents were born in November 1940.

 

[unmerged(148761)]

This is absolutely true. Both my parents were born in November 1940.

:rofl:

Star Forts were not directional. All trying to outflank one of those forts got you was more big guns aimed at you .

Thinking of the Maginot Line, there were layers of defense that designed against an attack from the German side: a line of tank obsticals followed by a line of anti tank guns followed by larger artillery etc. If I hit this from the back, starting with the reserve shelters, the telephone wires, etc it should not be as effective as if I attack from the front.

 

[Zookie]

sorry fix that

 

[plasticpanzers]

would be nice to have an arrow (that you could see again later by clicking on the province) showing the direction of the defence line. adding further "sides" and "rear" defences would be cheaper. That way a West Wall / Maginot could be built or a fortified city province like Moscow in 1941. Fort flanking would be a real nice
effect.

 

[unmerged(84132)]

would be nice to have an arrow (that you could see again later by clicking on the province) showing the direction of the defence line. adding further "sides" and "rear" defences would be cheaper. That way a West Wall / Maginot could be built or a fortified city province like Moscow in 1941. Fort flanking would be a real nice
effect.

I think forts are abstracted well enough. If you un-abstracted them to that point I think you would have to allow for seperate mono-direction forts, poly-directional forts, and all direction forts. Other than historical accuracy, I would not see much benefit to forts that were not all direction (in game), as I do not think the game really allows for the depth necessary to simulate why some forts were built the way the do.

I get you could get an encirclement bonus for attacking an all-directional fort and not others, and you could get a flanking bonus for attacking a fort that does not cover a certain direction. Other than that, I do not see much else you can do.

While attacking from the front of a mono-directional fortress would be suicide, attacking an all directional that has killing fields set up is not that much better (I guess that is what airplanes are for ).

 

[plasticpanzers]

One of the great things about forums is the ability to throw ideas out there. In a game that has alot of detail like the HOI series its kinda fun to see how far into detail it can be taken. Seeing other folks responses in this
and other posts helps focus your ideas and perceptions.

 

[Grenville Coney]

I don't think forts are too expensive. Yes they seem that way at first but usually as Germany I build 1 or 2 maginot lines on my eastern front and I've seen the IC cost come down to about 1! The same with Infrastructure builds. OK you build a lot and so far it's been pretty pointless as Russia has been crushed quickly.

The other good reason is that despite a few examples forts were not particularly important in WWII. The maginot line was bypassed. The dutch forts were taken in a day or so. Brest-Litovsk and Sevastopol were historical relics and Stalingrad and Monte Cassino were products of the environment rather than fortbuilding in the HOI sense.

A better argument is to add field defenses. Think of the defenses laid out in North Africa and Kursk - minefields and tanktraps designed to channel attackers. These are partially reflected in the digging in - but probably don't have the same impact in game as IRL.

 

[unmerged(43759)]

Instead of a fortification, perhaps someting along the lines of a fortified line, which was a bit different...kind like digging in like Rommel did at El Alamein. But then where would the cost come from and limitations be on somethng like that...perhaps less speed or manuverbility.

 

[Solon]

Cost:
Build fortification seem far too expensive to be practical for most nations and the nations that can afford it are often so large it is impractical to invest the resources to even fortify at risk areas.

The Maginot line was so expensive that it actually strapped the French National Budget for years, and was a major reason why the French armed forces (air force in particular) were so far behind the Germans when the rearmament race started in 1939.

Time:
The time it takes for fortifications to be built is so long that once fighting begins it is impractical to try to construct them. In some respects this is historical as nations usually prepare for defense in peace time, but a good deal of fortifications were constructed during the war; the Atlantic wall, in Finland...

The French fortifications took decades. If you are familiar with them, they had internal railroad systems, complete barracks with mess halls and medical facilities--all well underground. As for the Atlantic Wall, the Germans began planning that project shortly after Britain rejected their peace offers in late 1940. Hence, they were building the Atlantic Wall (in 'fits-and-starts') from 1941 to 1944. The AW was still a 'work-in-progress' at the time of the Normandy invasion: completed at the Pas-de-Calais, but only about half finished in the Normandy area.

...and on Japanese occupied islands are just a few examples.

The Japanese dug in and poured some concrete, but never reached the level nor sophistication of fortification represented by the Maginot Line, the Siegfried Line, the Atlantic Wall, nor Norwegian coastal defenses prepared by the Germans. The Japanese had to bring everything to those islands by ship, and they never had the shipping, engineers nor industrial production to make major fortifications a reality IRL. Not to say that HoI3 players, as Japan can't rectify that oversight?

1. Reduce cost:
If there cost was reduced to reflect the changes in province size that would help. Perhaps a base cost of 1.5 or 2 IC

I will leave this to others who have commented already. I feel, as mentioned below, that these should be expensive and time consuming, and thus a 'luxury' item for major powers.

2. Introduce a feature called conscript labor/public works:
I believe this would be a very historical and balanced way to reduce the time of building fortifications and infrastructure (I think this ability should only apply to these two structures as building the other types of buildings would require more technical knowledge then an average volunteer/conscripted worker would have). This feature could be turned on by hitting a button like the “reserve button” when building units. It would abstract a nation’s use of the civilian labor population to work on public projects (As was done by most nations involved in the war, civilians cleared rubble, dug anti tank ditches, and dug trenches for air raid shelters).

This is an interesting concept, and dovetails with another post about "extensive" field fortifications. Digging in in front of Moscow and Leningrad come to mind. But I think with the big cities that PI already gives bonuses for defending the key cities which covers this aspect of the war already IMO.

I could see a use for Infrastructure, although I think that it might be better worked out by means of an Event.

Thinking of the Maginot Line, there were layers of defense that designed against an attack from the German side: a line of tank obsticals followed by a line of anti tank guns followed by larger artillery etc. If I hit this from the back, starting with the reserve shelters, the telephone wires, etc it should not be as effective as if I attack from the front.

According to my father, who was involved at Metz, attacking the Maginot Line of fortifications from the "rear" was just about as difficult as attacking it from the front. The US Army came to a stop for months up against the 'backside' of the ML. Bombs and artillery had no, I repeat no effect on those massive, buried bunkers whose larger guns swung all the way around with a 360 degree arc of fire. And anti-infantry firing slits were emplaced on all sides of the ML.

Since warfare in HoI is based on capturing whole provinces, there is no point in putting the fortifications up against one 'side' of a province. Technically you could just work around to the 'weak' side and walk in...thereby capturing the province and it's provincial 'garrison' which I guess would then just be a standard army in the field? I would argue that the decrease in the size of provinces makes the case even more compelling for calling the entire province a fortification!

In short, I think that "Fortifications" in HoI are designed to represent those massive, well-engineered and expensive monuments listed above, hence should take a lot of time and resources to build. Anything else falls into the category of 'field fortifications' and is adequately covered by troops "Digging-in".

Solon

 

[Parabola]

I don't think forts should be changed. But I do think more urban area's should be added. Urban area's are harder to conquer after all and more them would be a bit more 'realistic'.