Directional building of land forts

[krieger11b]

For the heavy stuff they definitely had direction, there should be bonuses to defense from all angles but at a reduced level for those not facing the enemy, the rear being the most vulnerable.

A counter down would be cool, the longer a defense was unsupplied the worse it got, the Maginot line did have a lot of food rations, but it was considered a level 10 fort, so for simplification purposes, it will loose it's bonus over time.

I am also in heavy favor of a fort having to have a special kind of Garrison. At least for the higher level forts. Not every GI JOE can properly man a fortified 105mm Howitzer.

Come to think of it, it doesn't make sense to give a standard defense bonus to any units normal stats for higher level forts. Any troop or panzer would benefit from nice sets of trenches or dugouts. However, not from a fortress. There should be a break off point where it goes from being nicely prepared defenses to an all out fortress. Extra troops help, but you are not going to have a division sitting inside a fortress helping that much.

 

[Czert]

firestorm
Yes, maginot have turning towers - but IIRC mainly for artilery in forts, not for machineguns - they was stable "under concerte".
Yyou second picture show stable cupole - and I cant say if it was observing with ability to employ machinegun or if it is cupole for selfdefence.

Vulf
You told it perfetly - maginot (and so like) is strong from one side, but weaker from another.

Timmie
Mayny i write it wrong, with flanking fort I meaned "flanking fire (side fire) on advancing enemy troops atemping to break line".
And I know how are defensive lines construced in booths ways (tactical/technologiclal)
If you interesed I can here few pictures of lines which I have.

I believe a defensive line could be converted towards the other side. --yes, I can be converted, but at price of time and money - and how big - it depend of project of line itself.

But during an attack I believe a defensive line would even prove a major negative effect when attacked from both sides.--and here you go to my main point of direct fire/flanking lines - for direct (one side) - it is big penalty (look at attack on maginot line from rear), but for flanking it is litle comlication (look at fall grun - peacetime exectution - this showed that attack of paratroopers/sudetengerman freikorps from rear to help attacking wermacht will fail - thanks to flanking.).
Everything the line is designed for would work against the defenders.- no for flanking , until they have enough ammo/supplies - of course, suppliing is imposible in this situation.

If I will have time and find pictures (but need help how to put them here), which nicely show why you in first case doomed from two sides attack, and not in second.

 

[Czert]

krieger
you spek directly from my mind - normal units will benefit from fortification up to certain level (e.q. 25%), and forts will have special garison units - with stashed supplies to fully fight -even if they are encircled and cut of supply - and time of full efectivnes (and firepower of units) depend on level of fortification.
Of course, here will be option to deactivate them (but not disband) - if you are on offensive and need manpower in another place )).
And actualy operating of forts weapons was easy with much easier reloading for bigger bores. Which was heavy was to live with many peoples at small room (submarine disease - to prevent this it was common that fort was half maned at peace time - second having training/rest at barracks, fully garisoned only at mobilization/war).