Hey,
In my games since HOD France, Germany and Great Britain build forts in all there (European) provinces. Its silly..
In my games since HOD France, Germany and Great Britain build forts in all there (European) provinces. Its silly..
Forts
- Thread starter ijzervuist
- 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.
That is not the case. What is important is that it is very easy for GP to create defensive lines not only on its borders, but on its whole territory, which is just silly.
Essential this represents building military installations in provinces. Don't see anything silly about that.
Sure you can just not build a new Bracks in a province to station your military. So you can protect the citizens. But than occopying forces have it easy with taking it.
I don't see any problem in beeing able to fortify every province if you have the resources for it.
Even in today Germany there are quite alot of military installations and we constantly reduce them. If you look for them you can find them all over.
I'm doing it to increase demand on the goods you need to build them. And added benifit my provinces hold out much longer.
Sure you can just not build a new Bracks in a province to station your military. So you can protect the citizens. But than occopying forces have it easy with taking it.
I don't see any problem in beeing able to fortify every province if you have the resources for it.
Even in today Germany there are quite alot of military installations and we constantly reduce them. If you look for them you can find them all over.
I'm doing it to increase demand on the goods you need to build them. And added benifit my provinces hold out much longer.
I don't think the forts are suposed to represent military infrastructure, but rather fortifications. I imagine high level forts to be comparable to the Maginot, it would make no sense for them to exist in every province. ( Although in game they don't really act as forts ).
The gameplay impact's of forts hint to Military infrastruckture.
- Longer occupation time
- greater troop supply in province
- only the tactical bonus in battle are debatable not hints to increase infrastructure but could still be argued for that.
- Longer occupation time
- greater troop supply in province
- only the tactical bonus in battle are debatable not hints to increase infrastructure but could still be argued for that.
How is losing less of your troops a debatable bonus? That's undeniably good unless you're suffering from extreme overpopulation (which doesn't really happen in V2)
Last edited:
Debatable that it doesn't hin to better miltary infrastructure like road's and Garrisons.
Would be rather explained as Bunker's and 'real' fortifications. maginot line type stuff.
I ponder how the A.I. comes up with the money for all of their forts. No wonder they always go bankrupt.
Doesn't really bother my armies as I keep an engineer in every stack. Looks sort of silly on the map though.
Doesn't really bother my armies as I keep an engineer in every stack. Looks sort of silly on the map though.
This.. A defensive line across the border, ok. But this is just silly.
Unless-and-until the mechanics are changed to make internal forts unviable, the AI should build them - because the player certainly will!
Forts delay province occupation, that alone is a very good reason to build them everywhere, specially if the AI cheats and gains free or extra money. Does it?
It was better when forts behaved like HoI instead of EU. There isn't much rational in structures slowing down occupation when the defending army is gone, unlike in medieval times when a fortified city could make a difference.
I can't find any definitive info on what forts do now, if anything for battles.
I can't find any definitive info on what forts do now, if anything for battles.
Fourth HoD dev diary explicitly states they act like a bonus to tactics and lower damage to the defender's soldiers.
Also, forts WERE heavily armed and thus could delay armies. See Fort Douamount and the others that covered Verdun, or the belgian forts. They aren´t wooden palisades. "Well they didn´t work well in real life". Sure, because they were against an army with 280mm rail guns. Others wouldn´t be as succesful as fast.
If the AI has nothing to do with its money, building forts IS a good investment.
If the AI has nothing to do with its money, building forts IS a good investment.
And, like an earlier poster said, the AI knows we're coming for them. It also knows other nations are coming for them. It's defense in depth and makes it to where you have to have evenly-balanced stacks to get good traction in occupations - no more wiping out their army and then spamming single mobilized brigades to mop up the nation.
For player better idea is to not build forts in his own territory and wait for enemy to come, and attack them there, to avoid these defensive nasty modifiers...
I understand forts in borders but not in every single province...
I understand forts in borders but not in every single province...
The problem is that late game armies capture provinces quite fast even with the higer/highest fort levels. In my recent Italy game i invaded GB and it didn't have many forts build in its mainland (only in very few port provinces). I think that i needed only a day or two to successfully besige any province...
An idea would be to make middle and high level forts stronger and more expensive (so early/early mid game would be unchanged) and than the better later mid lvl forts could be 'spammed' over the entire land of GPs, while the best (and of course most expensive) forts would only exists on border and important provinces.
Why buffing the mid level forts? So that occupations take a reasonable time without needing the best fort for for it.
Just my 2 cents.
EDIT: another thing we must keep in mind is stuff like the impact on the economy if forts aren't build that much. I guess that especially cement might be hit hard by any change which makes us build less forts...
An idea would be to make middle and high level forts stronger and more expensive (so early/early mid game would be unchanged) and than the better later mid lvl forts could be 'spammed' over the entire land of GPs, while the best (and of course most expensive) forts would only exists on border and important provinces.
Why buffing the mid level forts? So that occupations take a reasonable time without needing the best fort for for it.
Just my 2 cents.
EDIT: another thing we must keep in mind is stuff like the impact on the economy if forts aren't build that much. I guess that especially cement might be hit hard by any change which makes us build less forts...
New exploit: Build cement factories in every state. Trust me, they're like goldmines... 
I peeked into defines.lua and found "CHANCE_BUILD_FORT = 0.5". That looks like a fun number to play with.
I peeked into defines.lua and found "CHANCE_BUILD_FORT = 0.5". That looks like a fun number to play with.
New exploit: Build cement factories in every state. Trust me, they're like goldmines...
I peeked into defines.lua and found "CHANCE_BUILD_FORT = 0.5". That looks like a fun number to play with.
Well in my Italy game they were really profitable, though i was building forts for the entire game over more than half of Africa (and of course in Italy), so i guess some of the demand was 'forced' by myself