.png){kind=avatar}
Do am I right in assuming that if Poland captures Zemplen fort and has an army standing in Lika, that army can effectively ignore Zagreb Fort, go through it and invade Varasd and further?
This doesn't feel right.
This doesn't feel right.
Fort ZoC - Discussion + Suggestion/Idea
- Thread starter Zwirbaum
- Start date
-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
If armies coming currently from both direction north and south, can combine, and still leave in to one direction (in the current formula) maybe being able to use southern army to invade cross the southern Hungary, because we can trace 'supply lines' etc, wouldn't be so bad? And if anything I would probably leave one directional arrows rule in the case of northern fort (allow to 'retreat' through ZoC, only if there are no friendly adjacent etc)
Also you can't tactically block the armies inside enemy land.
Say, while Poland was besieging Pest, Hungary recaptured Zemplen. Now Polish army has any possible ways to retreat or perform tactical move through all southert Fort line.
i.e.
Say, while Poland was besieging Pest, Hungary recaptured Zemplen. Now Polish army has any possible ways to retreat or perform tactical move through all southert Fort line.
i.e.
Last edited:
Also you can't tactically block the armies inside enemy land.
Say, while Poland was besieging Pest, Hungary recaptured Zemplen. Now Polish army has any possible ways to retreat or perform tactical move through all southert Fort line.
Good point. I may need to go back to drawing board or scrap it all-together. And this is why it is good to share the 'idea' to others
P.S. You couldn't retreat to the south. Sea is 'hostile' can't trace way there.
Oh and of course you couldn't move southern fort to the most eastern etc. and ZoC before that.
So three eastern provinces would be red as well.
Last edited:
This is a modification of an image uploaded earlier in the thread by @Dominion.
Red for non-ZoC, orange for forts, yellow/blue for different ZoC.
Unfortunately, what it shows is that you can't ax the "return province" and move to a simpler movement system based only on "origin->destination" without change to how ZoC is projected. Any proposed change based on "go/no-go" states would have to account for that as well -- just as they tried to do in the 1.19 beta.
Back to the drawing board I guess
Edit: At this point I'm even willing to consider severe movement speed reductions in ZoC/fort provinces [-60%/-80%].
Red for non-ZoC, orange for forts, yellow/blue for different ZoC.
Unfortunately, what it shows is that you can't ax the "return province" and move to a simpler movement system based only on "origin->destination" without change to how ZoC is projected. Any proposed change based on "go/no-go" states would have to account for that as well -- just as they tried to do in the 1.19 beta.
Back to the drawing board I guess
Edit: At this point I'm even willing to consider severe movement speed reductions in ZoC/fort provinces [-60%/-80%].
This is a modification of an image uploaded earlier in the thread by @Dominion.
Red for non-ZoC, orange for forts, yellow/blue for different ZoC.
View attachment 301515
Unfortunately, what it shows is that you can't ax the "return province" and move to a simpler movement system based only on "origin->destination" without change to how ZoC is projected. Any proposed change based on "go/no-go" states would have to account for that as well -- just as they tried to do in the 1.19 beta.
Back to the drawing board I guess
Edit: At this point I'm even willing to consider severe movement speed reductions in ZoC/fort provinces [-60%/-80%].
Ok, I don't think I understand picture you're showing and what it is supposed to show? Could you explain what exactly you mean here?*
Because I don't I see what exactly is wrong in this case
This is a state-based approach (not the EU4 kinda state, but the technical state). Looks almost identical to the one proposed in this thread except for different treatment of sea zones: https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/foru...state-based-fort-system-with-pictures.981993/
Johan shot that idea down because:
Johan shot that idea down because:
Right now my brain is a little bit fried to come up with some solutions, but afaik/iirc - it is different idea.
Mine tries to 'emulate' standard ZoC rules, with some 'tweaks'
That is an image with a working ZoC - it prevents Albania from reaching to other side of Russia due to 3 fort ZoC.
Does it stay somewhat the same with the suggested changes? For example, can I get to Samara**?
**I'm currently on 1.21 with default names so province name might be off.
So does that...it's the same idea.
How would your idea allow units to move if a fort is captured behind them?
Depending on which fort captured behind them - but it could result in a) allowing you to still return to your territory/move back b) you would need to siege down that fort to move back to your territory c) move inside enemy territory according to the ZoC rules and what/not.
In my proposed version, I do currently have one small problem that was 'noticed' by the Afdch that it in some cases it allows to return back to your territory where in normal case it shouldn't be possible. So there is no 'problem' as you mention above.
point (b) is frequently true with the current ZoC system - when would this system be worse?
But point b is not a problem because that's what you can achieve in current ZoC system as well and is trapping the enemy inside your territory... Seriously
The problem with your system is that if you're taking a fort and the provinces adjacent to the fort in addition to their adjacent provinces get retaken it gets you stuck on the fort you're sieging. You can't even get back to siege the fort behind you with your system since you're now in ZoC and the fort behind you appears exactly as if it's a fort deep in enemy territory. This is caused by the lack of a return province.
Correct me if I'm wrong here...